What's Next with the NW Master Plan

After a discussion in City Council last week I voiced the concern that the NW Master Plan could be in danger of becoming a conventional development and its arroyos just a memory once the bulldozers started up. I wondered whether Council was ready to jettison their agreement with the 2011 petitioners, the PSB, city staff and many others who worked for about a year to forge the Plan as part of a win-win solution.

This past Sunday, the El Paso Times published a story about the same concern by investigative reporter, Cindy Ramirez. 

Mayor Leeser invited me to a meeting at his office yesterday. Also in attendance were John Balliew, Lupe Cuellar, Kristen Hamilton and Taylor Moreno. The Mayor said that he had no intention of changing the plan. His main concern was to sell some land. He stated and Balliew confirmed that Balliew had said that the Plan must not be violated. I told the group that I was delighted but that it would be good for the City Council to follow the Mayor's lead and reaffirm the NW Plan and its use of smartcode.

A number of us had met at my home on Sunday evening and agreed that I should ask Council to place on its agenda an item reaffirming the NW Plan and its use of smart code. In addition, we agreed that Council should show good faith by placing PSB Open Space in the NW Master Plan under a conservation easement.

With a large group behind me, I made these requests at Council this morning. Rep. Ann Morgan Lilly said that she would place our requests on the City Council agenda.

Here is the text of my words to Council this morning:

I was the author of and principal organizer for the 2011 initiative petition to save 900 acres of natural open space associated with the Transmountain scenic corridor.

We successfully gathered the necessary signatures from over 1600 people. 

Rather than voting on the petition wording, City Council members, along with petitioners, agreed on a process which culminated in a new NW Master Plan. During that process a vote on the petition was routinely postponed and then finally deleted when we agreed on the compromise. 

Approximately a year of work went into forging a deal. Dover Kohl conducted well-attended workshops, charrettes, and meetings with the community, the PSB, City Planning, Engineering, Parks and Recreation and other staff.

This plan, which cost $600,000, included smart code, state-of-the-art Green Infrastructure/Low Impact Development techniques for stormwater conveyance, and infrastructure designed to maximize arroyo preservation, open space, and the scenic corridor.  The PSB approved the plan and City Council adopted the NW Master Plan.  It was an example of a true collaborative ‎effort. 

The NW Master plan was and is an expression of the will of the people as was Plan El Paso that took two years and 2 million dollars and the input of thousands of El Pasoans.

 

‎I was shocked and dismayed when I watched this City Council at its March 17th meeting take action seemingly to begin to dismantle the agreement by removing smart code as well as  other agreed upon development  restrictions, and explore the sale of the land in small parcels for conventional style development.   Along with many others I noted with dismay that there are similar intentions with the NE Master Plan including Painted Dunes. There seems to be a material breach of all of our prior agreements and promises. 

If carried forward, action that would in effect scuttle the NW Master Plan would overturn the real, democratic, grassroots decision-making we did with Plan El Paso, the 2011 Transmountain petition and the NW Master Plan. 

 

I want to thank the Mayor who has given me his personal assurances that no changes to the NW Master Plan will be made. I ask for the same assurance from City Council. It would go a long way toward restoring trust and good will if City Council will put on its agenda an action item reaffirming the NW Master Plan. We would like the City Council to affirm the following at next week’s meeting:

1. First, that you are still committed to the NW master plan as adopted, and

2. Second, that you support the current smart code zoning and will not try to remove it, and finally

3. That as a sign of that reaffirmation, you direct staff to place a conservation easement over all of the Public Utility Open Space in the NW Master Plan.  

Without assurances, we may have no other choice except to get more signatures for a ballot referendum and/or pursue other legal means.

It's Official!

News Release

Media Contacts: Rob McCorkle, TPWD, (830) 866-3533 or robert.mccorkle@tpwd.state.tx.us

Corky Kulhmann, TPWD (512) 389-4590 or corky.kuhlmann@tpwd.state.tx.us
March 28, 2013

Franklin Mountains State Park to Grow by More Than 600 Acres
AUSTIN -- The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission at its Thursday meeting approved the acquisition of approximately 658 acres to expand a state park in El Paso that already ranks as the largest urban park in the continental United States.

The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department will purchase a parcel of land that straddles Loop 375, also known as Trans Mountain Road, to further extend the Franklin Mountains State Park’s western reach into the surrounding high desert country. The acquisition will bring the state park’s total acreage to more than 26,000 acres.

The El Paso Public Service Board offered the desirable property to TPWD at a bargain sale price. The tract of undeveloped land will provide a buffer from pending new city growth and increase public recreational opportunities through the possible future expansion of the park’s trail system.

After much land use discussion about the environmental impact due to encroaching development on the western flanks of the Franklin Mountains, the El Paso City Council this past summer agreed to the sale. The TPW Commission’s vote was the final action required to consummate the land deal.

Hike the Lost Dog Trail into the Heart of the NW Master Plan

There are many great hikes and events this weekend and next.  Please check out Celebration of Our Mountains,  El Paso Hiking Group, GeoBetty, Guadalupe Mountains National Park Meetup Group,  Las Cruces & El Paso Adventurists, Peak Fitness Challenge,  High Desert Hikers and Las Cruces Hiking Meetup. For solid information about hiking bookmark  El Paso Ridgewalkers.

Click on image to enlarge.

I want to call to your attention one extraordinary event next Saturday, October 27^th, at the Lost Dog Trail Head (also known as the Redd Road Trail Head). (Map) The Borderland Mountain Bike Association and benefactors have completed improving the trail head with gravel, parking spots and native Honey Mesquites donated by the West Texas Urban Forestry Council from a grant from the Koontz Fund. Many of you know this trail head well. What you may not know is that it takes you into one of the very arroyos which many have fought to preserve in the Northwest Master Plan. Keeping that arroyo – that critical riparian corridor – natural is very important not just to environmentalists but to El Pasoans who love and take advantage of the recreational opportunities of our outdoors.  You can get a sense of the interconnectivity of these trails by viewing mountain bike maps and GeoBetty.com maps.

If one of the other great hikes next Saturday does not entice you, then plan to hike the Lost Dog Trail from 10 to Noon and then join the dedication ceremony of the trail head concluding with some good eats.

I also suggest that you plan to attend Coffee Time with Archaeologists this Saturday evening, October 20^th, from 7 to 9 p.m. in McKelligon Canyon.  This is a Franklin Mountains State Park/Celebration of Our Mountains event not to be missed. Ranger Adrianna Weickhardt says,

“We have a great panel of Archaeologists all from different organizations lined up for a Fun and Free event this Saturday night at McKelligon Canyon!  Check out the posting for the event if you haven't already.  It'll be from 7 to 9 p.m. with free coffee, cocoa and pastries.  Learn a little more about this important field of science, how it affects you, and come loaded with questions for the Q&A session of the program! We have plenty of room for more reservations,  We hope to see you there.  (If you don't want to sit on a metal chair, bring a nice comfy one with you as well as your jacket and blanket in case it gets a little chilly).”

Reservations are required so contact Adrianna Weickhardt at 915-566-6441 or Adrianna.Weickhardt@tpwd.state.tx.us or just RSVP at El Paso Hiking.

Know that Scenic Drive is closed every Sunday morning now through March from 7 to Noon.   This is a change in hours for this 4.1 mile hike from one side of the drive to the other and back. This walk takes in a dazzling panorama of El Paso and Juarez and a display of 500 million year old fossils! It’s a good recreational walk and can be done in an hour and a half.

If you are on Facebook, check out and like Friends of the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks.

Finally, multi-kudos for the Guru of Geology, Dr. Phil Goodell, Professor at UTEP since 1975. He and his lovely wife, Kathy, just donated $1million to the University for a new Center of Entrepreneurial Geosciences at UTEP.  The Executive Summary reads in part: “Exploration for natural resources, oil/gas and minerals, is a unique activity. Success means discovery.”  

Excelsior!

Statements about the City Council Vote

After Tuesday's vote, I sent an email to the Mayor and City Council and issued a statement for the next Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition. Here they are:

Mayor and Members of Council,

Thank you so much for your vote to preserve the land in the NW Master Plan. Given all of the circumstances, I believe that you took the wisest and most prudent action. It has become very apparent that you and staff (both City and PSB) were trying very hard to respond to the citizens of El Paso who signed the petition. As the author of the petition and the coordinator of the petition drive, I am sincerely touched by your caring and your solid efforts in favor of conservation.

I also strongly support the PSB recommendation of Alternative 1 as a new access into the State Park. I very much appreciate your added endorsement of a separate animal corridor near the current entrance.

All of us in the conservation/environmental community look forward to working with you collaboratively in the future. We have more land than water and no land without water is or will be of any value. Therefore, preserving land as natural open space maximizes the economic value of the remaining land. May we as El Pasoans be as prudent, judicious, deliberate and conservative with our land and water management as you were with your decision about the preservation of land in the NW Master Plan. May we be faithful stewards of our land for our grandchildren’s grandchildren and may we not ever be lured by any need for instant profit and gratification.

Sincerely,

Jim H. Tolbert

Proud El Paso Citizen and

Publisher, elpasonaturally

www.elpasonaturally.blogspot.com

And to the editor of the Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition newsletter:

As the author of the petition and the coordinator of the petition drive, I hope we all see the tremendous achievement which came from our dedicated work.  On July 17, 2012 City Council voted unanimously  to preserve land in the NW Master Plan in perpetuity by deeding and donating the land to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department to become part of the Franklin Mountains State Park. Language in the deed will contain very strict covenants that will forbid the property from ever being used other than as recreational natural open space. If for any reason the land comes back to the City, a conservation easement will be created and the land will be dedicated as Parkland. The conservation of this land in perpetuity is just one of many benefits created by our successful petition drive.  The NW Master Plan was redone as Smart Growth/Smart Code.  Moreover, City Planners are now seeking to incorporate Green Infrastructure/Low Impact Development into the engineering tools and building codes of the City.  Also, conservation and smart growth have become the goals of the City of El Paso rather than conventional growth and sprawl. The City’s Planning Department is now led by progressive, Smart Growth, New Urban, conservation advocates. Finally, a better working relationship between the conservation/environmental community and the PSB/EPWU has begun and needs nurturing.

The way is clear for all of us to begin wrestling with the bigger issue of scarcity of water as we face more years of drought and global warming/climate change.  As El Pasoans we need to realize that we have more land than water and no land without water is or will be of any value. Therefore, preserving land as natural open space maximizes the economic value of the remaining land.  Much of City-owned land managed by the PSB should be declared inexpedient not to sell to developers but to preserve as natural open space.  May we as El Pasoans be as prudent, judicious, deliberate and conservative with our land and water management as City Council was with its conservation strategy to preserve land in the NW Master Plan. May we be faithful stewards of our land for our grandchildren’s grandchildren and may we not ever be lured by any need for instant profit and gratification.

Jim H. Tolbert

Publisher, elpasonaturally

www.elpasonaturally.blogspot.com

Easy to subscribe to the elpasonaturally e-letter.

Just email and say “Subscribe elpasonaturally”

In Perpetuity!

On the whole issue of how to preserve the land in the NW Plan as natural open space, City Council today adopted the plan presented by staff – specifically by a joint City/PSB committee that worked on the strategy. The plan deeds and donates the land to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department to become part of the Franklin Mountains State Park. If for any reason, the covenants which are placed on the land are not followed (use as natural open space and recreation in such an area), then the land reverts back to the City. (Fat chance as a TPWD official from Austin told City Council today.) If it reverts back to the City, then it becomes a City park and a conservation easement will be created with a land trust company at that time. Is the deal perfect? Many argue that a conservation easement should be placed from the very beginning or, at the least, the terms of such an easement should be worked out now. That may have been the best of all possible worlds – but what was proposed was what this Council could accept now. The bottom line for me was stated by Attorney Risher Gilbert in answering concerns that the land might not be preserved in perpetuity if it comes back to the City. Ms. Gilbert said: “It [the land] could be sold, but not developed.” It just doesn’t get more perpetual than that. In fact, the mere fact that Council members were wanting assurances of preservation forever, was in and of itself a sign that this proposal will work. Gilbert even gave assurances that she would add language to the contract that clearly states that the City’s intention is “never to develop the land.”

The team that made the proposal did hear what we were saying as conservationists and environmentalists. They incorporated our thoughts into a plan that would pass PSB and City Council – a huge task. Here's their presentation:

Conservation Strategies

As conservationists and environmentalists, many of us can choose to be unhappy because we didn’t get extra salsa with our chips. But let’s count blessings. First, if the proposal was what could pass and the proposal assures perpetual preservation (with an easement should it come back and plenty of language upfront to define covenants and intentions), then shouldn’t that be acceptable?  I think so and I choose to be happy about it.  Second, we have as conservationists – indeed as all El Pasoans – reaped some benefits from this whole process. We got a better NW Master Plan which utilizes Smart Growth/Smart Code. City Planners are now excited about Green Infrastructure/Low Impact Development and issues about rainwater capture and development strategies that help conserve water – an issue bigger than how to conserve several hundred acres just in the NW Master Plan. The entire concept of conservation easement is acceptable now to PSB members and part of the vocabulary of Council. One year ago and just up to a short while ago we could have all been at odds. Now we can shake hands and walk away as friends no matter what rhetoric or tactics were employed in debate.

Make no mistake: those of us in favor of preserving more land and protecting the environment must remain vigilant and engaged. There is much more to accomplish. Those in the conservation community have a big task ahead to do more educating. This is not to say that those who are not card carrying greenies are dumb. Quite to the contrary, they are thinking people who try to see not just a year from now but a hundred years from now. That more people are talking in terms of conservation means that what got started as a petition signed by 1,600 El Pasoans has been taken to heart by many more people. That heart and mind needs to be nurtured and it won’t be if some are seen as enemies and not the caring, thinking people that they are.

In my mind there is still one big issue outstanding: the preservation of the arroyos (which includes bridges not box culverts). The Low Impact Development engineering is yet to be worked out. The City is working with one of the best firms for doing this: the Crabtree Group. Still will we end up with concrete canvasses for taggers? Also, will we have a plan that takes into consideration the width of the arroyos in a 100 year flood scenario and not just a 50 year or less scenario?

City Council also recommended  Alternative 1 for a new access to the State Park. In addition, after hearing from Dr. Richard Bonart, they recommended a safe animal passage near the current entrance to the Park. The new access road which follows the small development area north of Transmountain and the proposed resort/park headquarters would be built as a Low Impact Development project (another leap forward) and can be configured in a way that is acceptable to the State Park protecting any sensitive areas. This alternative allows for money to remain on the table for a safe (and useable) animal corridor, hike and bike paths and the construction of a deer fence. I’m in agreement with Representative Niland and City Planner Gallinar that the small developed area north of the highway can be a place for outdoor supplies for hiking, biking, mountain climbing, etc. Again, the idea is to invite people into the outdoors – a sure way to make a conservationist and environmentalist out of anyone.

Of course, all of the above is my opinion and many of my readers will disagree in whole or in part. Your frank (but respectful) comments are always welcome. My attitude is this:  You celebrate if you get a touchdown but perhaps don’t make the extra point. You keep playing to score more points and, at the end of four quarters and a long season, you win the game and then the championship. Much more than that – you have a helluva fun time playing.

Finally, one last hurrah for El Paso sent to me by the guy who probably loves the lore of El Paso better than anyone – Jackson Polk. Read a July 2012 Chicago Sun-Times piece written by Laura Emerick: Architecture, art and history all meld in El Paso.

Breaking News on Conservation Fronts

Three pieces of breaking news:

City staff will present a "springing conservation easement" proposal to City Council tomorrow.

The PSB's recommendation for an alternate entrance to the State Park will also be presented and acted on.

The Mayor's Blue Ribbon Committee may have handed the development community a green light to build, build, build no matter how limited our water resources are.

Once again, City Council takes up tomorrow (Tuesday, July 17) the entire issue of preserving acreage in the NW Master Plan in perpetuity. The debate has centered around the best way to do that. After further consideration, the committee tasked with presenting a plan to City Council will present the option recommended by the PSB: transfer the land to the State Park with a reversion clause that requires a conservation easement should the land return to the City. If the State Park decides to sell the land or use it for another purpose (which would be counter to their mission statement), then the land returns to the City for Parkland Dedication. Everything about this plan is solid except for the fact that the City might as well put a conservation easement on it now rather than depend that an election might overturn the perpetual preservation of the land.

Do see the attachment to City Council Agenda 10A-1. It is the presentation that staff will give with the above recommendation. Without a doubt, the new recommendation is very good news.

Add to this good news the following: There has been some question about the reliability of Texas Parks and Wildlife not to keep the land - to sell it instead. In an email dated July 15, 2012 to Risher Gilbert from Scott Boruff, the Deputy Executive Director of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, assurances are given about TPWD to preserve land in perpetuity to fulfill the mission of the department. Concerns that there have been previous examples of sell-offs are addressed. Here's the email:

From: Scott Boruff <Scott.Boruff@tpwd.state.tx.us>
Date: July 15, 2012 7:20:35 PM CDT
To: Risher Gilbert <RGilbert@gilbertlf.com>
Cc: Deirdre Hisler <Deirdre.Hisler@tpwd.state.tx.us>, Corky Kuhlmann <Corky.Kuhlmann@tpwd.state.tx.us>, Ted Hollingworth <Ted.Hollingsworth@tpwd.state.tx.us>, Jeannie Munoz <jeannie.munoz@tpwd.state.tx.us>
Subject: Review of TPWD land transaction list
To Whom It May Concern
Thanks for the opportunity to review the land transactions referenced in the document titled "The 837-acre West Transmountain Scenic Corridor Land: Why a Conservation Easement Is Necessary".  All land transactions move through the Executive Office, and are subject to intensive review and analysis to insure that each transaction is consistent with the agency's mission " to manage and conserve the natural resources of Texas and to provide hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation opportunities for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations".
This list does reflect 57 land transactions completed by the Texas Parks & Wildlife Department over the past 17 years.  Each of these transactions resulted in a net gain for conservation, except for those very few that resulted from previous deed provisions or legislative direction.  Examples include the transfer of 12 acres to the Union Pacific Railroad (an old abandoned rail track at Lake Mineral Wells State Park), pursuant to a deed provision that allowed the railroad to reclaim the track at any time.  The Texas State Railroad was transferred by the Legislature to a newly created Railroad Authority.
The overwhelming majority of these transactions represent overall improvements for both conservation and recreation, and result in ongoing protection from development.  Although rare, in those instances where TPWD transfers land to private ownership, strict protections are put in place to preclude development and other impacts to natural resources and view sheds.  TPWD does not sell land that is contiguous to a park, and on those occasions where it makes sense to trade parcels to increase conservation and recreation value, once again, the trade envisions protections that preclude development.  Most of the transactions on this list represent transfers and sales to other public or NGO entities that insure continued protection of the land, usually via reversion clauses or other deed mechanisms.  At least a few represent extremely significant additions to the State Park system, such as the Big Bend addition of the 7,000 acre McCormick parcel.  To suggest the 180 acre parcel transferred as a deed without warranty is a sale of parkland is just one example of using this data out of context.
In short, the agency's mission and strategic plan are very clear about the handling of our land inventory.  We have a robust and thorough process to insure that we protect any land in perpetuity that we have owned and then transfer to improve conservation.  On those rare occasions when we sell or transfer land out of the public domain, we do so with strict restrictions on development that comport with our mission to protect the State's natural resources.
Any suggestion that TPWD sells State Park land to use the money to support operations is not supported by the agency's long track record of stewardship and land protection.  We are quite proud of these transactions, and would gladly provide more specifics.  The fact is that any thoughtful and thorough review would dispel any perception that the agency sells parklands for development or to support operations.
Sincerely,
Scott Boruff
Deputy Executive Director
Texas Parks and Wildlife Department
512-389-8595

Finally, Carlos Gallinar told me today that the City has learned that the State Legislature does not have to approve the transfer - the Commission overseeing TPWD has that sole authority. With the strong recommendation of Dr. Cesar Mendez of the Franklin Mountains State Park, this recommendation is pretty much assured.

In addition to the above, Item 10A-2 is discussion and action on an alternative route into the park. Again, read the attachment. Staff will recommend the PSB's Alternate 1 as this blog has previously reported. This route has some added advantages of securing "saved" money for a workable animal corridor where the current culverts exist east of the current park entrance and a deer fence that will help direct animals (particularly Mule Deer) to the corridor and away from Transmountain Road.

Bottom line: good things are taking shape.

One piece of news that may lead to some pretty grim results is that the Mayor's Blue Ribbon Committee on the City's relationship with the PSB over land management voted this morning to recommend a 5 member committee to determine whether land was inexpedient. This committee will consist of the Mayor as Chair, two City Council members (supposedly chosen by the Mayor with the blessing of City Council) and the Chairman of the PSB and one other PSB member. The decision seemed to spring from a desire not so much for better communication between the City and the PSB, but from an attempt to further the expansion and growth of the City no matter how limited our water resources are. Based on the 5% average annual growth of the City, water supply estimates are only 30 to 50 years. 30 to 50 years!!! Yet one Council member present exclaimed that she didn't care what resources aren't there, "if a billion dollar industry wants to come to El Paso, we will make it happen." There are going to be many thirsty people in 30 to 50 years. The motion for the new committee was made by Ted "TxDOT" Houghton (whose "soul" incentive is growth, growth, growth, money, money, money) and sadly seconded by Open Space Advisory Board Chairman, Charlie Wakeem. 

The excuse for this committee has been the lack of communication between the City and the PSB. I agree that something needed to be done. But the committee also recommended that the City's CFO and Deputy City Manager participate in PSB budget and strategic planning sessions. Communication is fixed by communication. Favoring development and developers with no concern for the rare (and getting rarer) resource of water is furthered by weakening the PSB, if they would only begin to be driven by the need to conserve the supply of water before being driven by maximizing land value (which they would do if they conserved more land and not fight conservationists as their CEO did with the NW Master Plan. The PSB and Archuleta should have been allies. Hopefully they will become more so and hopefully (though I doubt it) City Council will reject the Blue Ribbon Committee's recommendation for a new land management committee.

The best approach to the land management issue would have been the conservative one: maintain the status quo. The only thing needing fixing immediately was the piece about communication. That's solved by talking and by employing less autocratic leadership models.

Bye, bye bathwater. Bye, bye baby.

Only a Conservation Easement Will Preserve the West Transmountain Scenic Corridor In Perpetuity

On Tuesday, March 20, the El Paso City Council approved a plan which called for preservation, in perpetuity, of the 837-acre Scenic Corridor land just west of the Franklin Mountains State Park. The motion, made by Representative Niland and seconded by Representative Robinson, amended the Public Service Board’s Westside Master Plan and specifically mentioned “authorization to process a Conservation Easement by a third [party]” for the Scenic Corridor. The previous month this plan had been approved by the City’s Open Space Advisory Board. On Wednesday, June 13, the Public Service Board itself unanimously approved this resolution, made by Mayor Cook: “To approve the [Technical Working Group’s] recommendations that if the [Scenic Corridor] reverts to the City [after having been transferred to the Franklin Mountains State Park], it will come back with conservation easement if that is legally possible.”

A conservation easement is simply a legal contract. It binds the parties to honoring the contract’s terms in perpetuity—forever. The terms of a conservation easement are negotiated by the land’s current owner, the land’s new owner if any, and a third party—typically a land trust organization. (The world’s largest land trust is the Nature Conservancy, preserving land through easement or ownership in over 30 countries and all 50 states.) The third party monitors the easement while the land’s owner manages it. If the Scenic Corridor is transferred to the Franklin Mountains State Park (a frequently-mentioned possibility), the park would manage the land and a land trust (yet to be named) would monitor it, making sure that the terms of the easement were honored.

It’s indeed possible for a land trust to hold a conservation easement on land that is owned by the City of El Paso or by the State of Texas. At the present time, El Paso’s Frontera Land Alliance holds the easement on the 26-acre Thunder Canyon on the upper West Side, owned by the City through 2037 as a Public Improvement District. At present, at least five Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) properties carry easements in full or in part, including the Black Gap Wildlife Management Area near Alpine and the famous Government Canyon State Natural Area to the west of San Antonio. But it’s also true that state- and city-park land can be disposed of. From 1995 through now, TPWD disposed of 57 parcels previously forming part of Texas state parks. Seventeen were sold, fifteen were transferred, eight were exchanged and so forth. In El Paso itself, parts of the Mission Valley’s Blackie Chesher Park were disposed from parkland use so that a police station and a municipal court building could be built on them.

A very important reason why an easement must be deployed on the Scenic Corridor can be summed up thus: “frontage roads.”

A very important reason why an easement must be deployed on the Scenic Corridor can be summed up thus: “frontage roads.” According to TxDOT’s plans for Loop 375, frontage roads will run about 300 yards to the east of the Paseo del Norte interchange, on Scenic Corridor land. Frontage roads provide access to stores, restaurants and other commerce. The temptation—15, 30, 45 years from now—to sell off part or all of the 837 acres will remain strong. But with a conservation easement, the 837 acres will be preserved in perpetuity, just as City Council and the Public Service Board want them to be.

I strongly urge that when it meets next Tuesday, the El Paso City Council renew its commitment to a conservation easement on the Scenic Corridor land by voting in favor of one. 

Dr. Richard Teschner

PSB Endorses Use of Conservation Easement

MORE BREAKING NEWS: By a unanimous vote today, the PSB passed a motion made by Mayor John Cook to deed the open space land in the NW Master Plan to the State for inclusion into the Franklin Mountain State Park. There would be deed restrictions which would require the land to revert back to the City if it is not used for passive recreation, etc. Upon reversion, the motion states, a Conservation Easement will be put on the land. As one conservationist has already put it: “Thank you, PSB!” The motion is much better than one sought by the Risher-Adauto presentation which called for no conservation easement at all and rather pushed the concept of a “Utility Green Space”. 

Conservation Strategy - PSB 061312 Ppt


PSB’s recommendation still begs the question why there shouldn’t be a conservation easement put on the land from the very beginning. Now that all of the red herrings have been disposed of and it has been shown that Frontera does have money, a back-up is there as evidenced by a recent letter of support from the Texas Land Conservancy to Frontera, managing the easement is not an expensive proposition and Frontera would be glad to do the job if asked – there is no reason why a CE couldn’t be put on the land in the first place as PSB member, David Nemir, expressed in one of his questions. In fact, Frontera President, Mike Gaglio, praised the idea of deeding the land to the State while at the same time adding the CE. Hired PSB attorney Gilbert argued that a CE shouldn’t be accepted because it would be another layer of protection and bureaucracy. There really isn’t any bureaucracy involved but she is exactly right about the extra layer of protection – exactly the reason for a conservation easement.

A Conservation Easement is the only means by which the land is preserved in its natural open state. The State of Texas can always sell land. With the current expansion of Transmountain by TxDOT and the planned expansion of Paseo del Norte, pressure will begin for commercial development. Look at any frontage road or any major thoroughfare especially in East El Paso.  Look at the shenanigans with Blackie Chesher Park property at the burgeoning corner of I-10 and Zaragoza. No wonder some want to conveniently lose, alter, challenge or whatever deeds that required the land to be used for a park. Had there only been a CE on Blackie Chesher, City Council Representative Eddie Holguin would not have to deal with evasion after evasion.

Additionally, some State of Texas parks have come with conservation easements. There is nothing new or illegal with placing that kind of easement on the land prior to transferring to the State.

The matter now goes to the City Council and is currently scheduled for their July 17^th meeting.


Another critical issue that still needs to be fleshed out is the preservation of the arroyos in their natural state. The arroyos should not be treated simply as stormwater flow paths but as the sensitive riparian corridors that they are. Unless green infrastructure/ low impact development tools are employed in the proposed Dover Kohl development, then the arroyos will have to be modified. The Risher-Adauto presentation doesn’t quite get it and it speaks of trying to save the arroyos as much as possible with hybrid channels and environmentally sensitive infrastructure. It seems that they are still coming from the perspective of maximizing development and doing the best one can with the arroyos. The real approach should be to maximize the preservation of the arroyos which the presentation seems to suggest as well by using LID goals (page 8 of the presentation). If you follow those goals and modify (if necessary) the development plan, then there will be no reason not to keep the arroyos completely natural – no modification. Nothing has happened yet - no bulldozer has scraped natural earth. Now is the time to assure complete protection. Here’s an idea: take a GIS map of the area, draw where the arroyos are and overlay where development structures (e.g., homes) will be. 

Elpasonaturally wants to see that map with the overlays.

Obviously there is much more to be said about all of the above including that today’s vote may be the dawn of a new era. The PSB/EPWU should be a natural ally with the conservation/environmental community. Because of so much animosity and distrust over power issues involving land, this is currently not the case. This vote begins to take us there – a new partnership among conservationists, City Planners and the PSB to conserve our beautiful part of the Chihuahuan Desert. Let us hope.

Finally, with the update of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan in progress much has been said recently about seeing Parks and Recreation in a different way than the current business model of turf, organized recreation and bingo. Parks can be a powerful tool for creating a more walkable community that connects people with Nature and each other. Please read Masters of the Master Plan from this month’s Parks & Recreation magazine. Oh – and I can’t help throwing in one more/last thing: please visit the City of Tucson’s rainwater harvesting page. If only . . .

Why a Conservation Easement Still Makes Sense

Frontera Hugs Its Cactuses but Also Lugs Its Load

Many people think of the Frontera Land Alliance as just another little cactus-hugging group. “Oh those people mean well, but …” It’s true of course that the current members of the Frontera Board of Directors—Mike Gaglio (president), Richard Teschner (vice president), Scott Winton (secretary), Charlie Wakeem (treasurer), Scott Cutler (at large), Doug Echlin, John Moses and Kevin von Finger, and our Executive Director Janaé Reneaud Field—never forget to hug their front-yard ocotillos as they head for work each day. But Frontera itself is somewhat more than passing prickly hugs. Thanks to the generosity of our donors and the wisdom of our investments, with $100,000 in the bank we are not “broke” (as our critics have contended). Thanks to on-going supplementary donations we routinely consult with our traditional law firm and also hire attorneys from smaller firms as the need arises. We are engaging in partnership with the Texas Land Conservancy for “back-up” and continuity in the hyper-unlikely event that Frontera blows away in the winds of April. Our fees for managing a conservation easement are not “exorbitant”; in fact, and as Janaé pointed out at one of the meetings of the Joint City-PSB Committee she was invited to speak and interact at, easement management costs depend entirely on the details of the easement, which she is asking the City to provide—such things as appraisal, survey, title, Environmental Phase One and so forth. To quote Janaé, “the direct cost to Frontera to hold a conservation easement is just the annual site visit, which on the average is $500. And if any violations occur then we’re also dealing with legal fees and staff time.” Janaé continues: “If Frontera were to manage the Scenic Corridor as a park for public use, the City must tell us what it wants—restrooms? Parking? Trails? Campgrounds? Picnic sites? Barbeque grills? Swings and slides, sandboxes and teeter totters? The City hasn’t told us that. That is why a partnership with Texas Parks and Wildlife is best: Frontera holds the conservation easement (thus guaranteeing that the 837-acre Scenic Corridor property remains conserved in perpetuity), while the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) manages and/or owns the land.”

And in light of the report (presented to OSAB just yesterday—June 6—by staffer Carlos Gallinar of the City Development Department) from the Joint City-PSB Committee, that’s what Frontera supports: a combination of Plan One (whereby the City enters into a partnership with the TPWD, dedicating and/or selling the 837 acres to TPWD for incorporation into the Franklin Mountains State Park) and Plan Four, which deploys a conservation easement to Frontera [the El Paso area’s only 501(c)3 non-profit land trust] so the land can be conserved in perpetuity. The problem with not deploying a conservation easement is that TPWD has sometimes sold its park land to private concerns, and this would set a bad precedent for the 837 acres. The problem with the Joint City-PSB Committee’s fall-back recommendation—that the land be dedicated as a city park—can be summed up in just two words: “Blackie Chesher.” That city park’s history is well known. Gifted to the City in the early 1960s with several deed restrictions, the Blackie Chesher Regional Park (of the City of El Paso) is now the home to several uses that the deed restrictions don’t permit. Had a conservation easement been applied to Blackie Chesher, none of that would have happened. Instead, the land would be preserved in perpetuity. As we insist the 837 acres be.

--Richard Teschner

Public Meetings on Parks Master Plan Update + Breaking News on NW Master Plan

Elpasonaturally readers, please pay close attention: The City of El Paso is updating the Department of Parks & Recreation’s Master Plan, which is their main guide for what they do. The current leadership at Parks and Recreation is narrowly focused primarily on turf, club sports and senior citizen bingo.  These are good things BUT conservation, preservation of eco-systems, learning about nature and using natural open space are nether regions of monsters and abyss beyond their flat earth thinking.  There will be two meetings to present recommendations and receive public input on the Parks Master Plan. Please make plans to attend either meeting and provided your input for parks in El Paso.  Meetings are this Thursday, June 7^th at 6 p.m. and Saturday, June 9^th at 10 a.m. Both will be held at the El Paso Museum of Art, 1 Arts Festival Plaza, off Santa Fe Street downtown. (Map) Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition President Scott Cutler says, “In addition to more natural open space parks for people to participate in and learn about nature, there are a number of other new concepts for parks that the Parks and Recreation Department should consider.”  Dave Wilson of the Borderland Mountain Bike Association wrote: “I'll be attending the one on Thursday evening.  Hopefully I'll be able to present some ideas for Chuck Heinrich Park in regards to safe access, more parking, etc. for the mountain bikers and hikers trying to access the state park.” Please read some thoughts about the Master Plan at elpasonaturally.  Also read a great article from the April 2012 Parks and Recreation magazine and a great article about planting more trees. You can see the current Master Plan online.

Sample questions to ask and/or things to look for in the updated Master Plan: How much focus is there on conservation and conservation education? How well does the new plan connect people with Nature? Is bicycling, walking and hiking main considerations? What kind of connections are made between parks, neighborhoods and natural open space? What is being done to build the urban tree canopy? Do birds and other animals have a place in the plan? Are natural open space parks being given proper attention? (There are actually several of these properties in the Parks inventory and most are ignored.) How are Seniors and others connected with the outdoors and plant and animal studies? Any mention of parks programs with emphasis on the natural sciences? What about organic maintenance of our parks and recreational facilities, the use of rainwater harvesting? BTW, the Department of General Services now maintains our parks, ball fields and recreational facilities. What role have they played in shaping the new Master Plan? How will our parks program participate in the City’s new comprehensive plan, Plan El Paso? Will it help promote Smart Growth and Green Infrastructure/Low Impact Development? Will it seek to protect the environment, ecosystems and habitats?

Please make an effort to attend at least one of these meetings.

BREAKING NEWS: The City/PSB Committee charged with making final recommendations for the NW Master Plan has unanimously decided that the best way to preserve land in the NW Master Plan in perpetuity is through a partnership with the Franklin Mountains State Park. Their fallback position is to dedicate that land as a City Park. Mr. Carlos Gallinar of City Planning gave the presentation just this afternoon to the Open Space Advisory Board on behalf of a joint City-PSB Committee that has been charged to make recommendations to City Council regarding the NW Master Plan especially in the light of a successful petition drive that calls for preserving land in its natural state in perpetuity.  When asked about the “negatives” for choosing a conservation easement, Mr. Gallinar would not elaborate.

There have been recent attempts to undermine conservation easements based on falsehoodsabout Frontera Land Alliance: Frontera is broke, their fees for managing a conservation easement are exorbitant, and that there is no back-up should Frontera not be able to fulfill its duties as land trustees. All of these statements are false as an email from Frontera Treasurer Charlie Wakeem explains. (Link directly above.) 

No matter the committee has unanimously recommended a partnership with the State Park. You can see the presentation to OSAB.  I will post more at elpasonaturally and through this e-letter as I learn more.

Charlie Wakeem gave an excellent Annual Report about the Open Space Advisory Board to City Council yesterday. See the presentation.

Now that O’Rourke has ousted eight-term Representative Silvestre Reyes, what is next for the conservation of Castner Range?  This is an important question since Reyes’ office had worked closely with the Castner Conservation Conveyance Committee (“4-C’s” crafted from Frontera Land Alliance and the Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition) and had engineered a $300,000 earmark that funded a critical study essential for conveyance and a work in progress, the Castner CLUP (Conceptual Land Use Plan). It will take anywhere from 32 to 64 million dollars to clean up unexploded ordnance (UXO) on the Range. However, it isn’t all just a matter of money. Castner is somewhere in the middle of a Department of Defense list of properties that not only need this kind of clean-up but are actively seeking it. O’Rourke has made it clear that he supports the clean-up and preservation of Castner Range so that the natural open space can be enjoyed by all. A political-insider has said that O’Rourke “understands the wonders of the Chihuahua Desert ecosystem.”

Finally, if you have an interest in weather and would like to help your local community as well as scientists and others interested in precipitation, then there is a fun program for you: CoCoRaHS (the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail and Snow Network). Learn how you can get involved by becoming part of the backyard rain gauge brigade.

Joint City-PSB Committee Says NO to Conservation Easements

Below is a presentation given by Mr. Carlos Gallinar of the City of El Paso Planning Department to the Open Space Advisory Board this afternoon giving recommendations from a joint PSB/City Committee to City Council regarding going forward on the NW Master Plan. A critical component of their recommendations is to preserve land in the NW Master Plan area in its natural state through a partnership with the Franklin Mountains State Park. I will be discussing this matter more in depth probably in a post tomorrow. For now, here is the presentation:

NW Master Plan Presentation to OSAB with Recommendations 060512

Untruths Continue to Circulate about Conservation Easements

From a story (Saving water, preserving land) by Colin McDonald in today's San Antonio Express-News, is this strategy for ensuring clean water:

"Levels of a colorless solvent that the Environmental Protection Agency links to liver damage and possibly cancer recently spiked in a monitoring well of the Edwards Aquifer on San Antonio's North Side.

"San Antonio's only defense against this and other pollution reaching its production wells is dilution from the clean water flowing into the aquifer from the rural land west of the city.

"To ensure that there is clean water entering the aquifer, the city's Edwards Aquifer Protection Program is about to spend an additional $90 million from a voter-approved one-eighth-cent sales tax to buy conservation easements over the aquifer's recharge zone. So far, the program has spent $135 million from the tax, protecting more than 90,000 acres."

The italicized letters are my emphasis.


San Antonio has had this enlightened, progressive program going for a number of years now. When the President of El Paso's Frontera Land Alliance, Mike Gaglio, urged Mayor John Cook and EPWU/PSB CEO Ed Archuleta to consider a similar approach in El Paso, his response was no response. Gaglio tells us:

"A few years ago I sent an email to Ed Archuleta and Mayor Cook about San Antonio's Conservation Easement Purchase Program and urged them to consider something similarly progressive in El Paso.  I never received a response.   It would be nice to talk to them about this and use it to demonstrate the excellent use of CEs by public entities for the purposes of water protection.  Frontera has contacts and maintains regular dialogue with the folks that actually put this program into place."

Again, emphasis is mine.

One of the principal stumbling blocks for finally bringing the protection of the Scenic Corridor to completion is the issue of a conservation easement. Petitioners asked that land in the NW Master Plan be preserved in perpetuity as natural open space along with some other requests. Many, but not all, petitioners are at least willing to see a scenario presented by Dover Kohl and approved by City Council as a compromise plan just as long as arroyos are preserved and natural open space (including the arroyos) are preserved in perpetuity. 

From the very beginning of working out "compromise" there has been a steady misrepresentation of conservation easements by PSB (and elpasonaturally believes) City attorneys. Hired PSB gun, Risher Gilbert, made some inaccurate claims publicly especially that municipally owned lands can never be under a conservation easement. In fact there are examples of such all over the country and in Texas and in El Paso: Thunder Canyon.

Now there are a new set of blatant untruths about the conservation easement process making the rounds in an effort to assure that the final legal product employed is one by which the City and/or PSB maintains control enough over the land to take it out of preservation at a time of its own choosing. 

The lies (and let's not mince words) go like this: Frontera Land Alliance is broke. Their management fees are too high. They have no back-up plan should  they indeed go broke. In an email, Charlie Wakeem, Treasurer of Frontera, repied:

1. Frontera "isn't" in the red!!!!  I should know.  I'm the Treasurer.  There's over $100k in the bank and no liabilities.   
2. Frontera has no management fee for CEs.  There are costs associated with starting up the CE, such as a survey, appraisal, attorney's fees, title search, and an environmental assessment.  Those costs can be negotiated between the Grantor and Grantee.  After the conservation easement is in place, the land trust solicits donations for an endowment to manage the terms of the CE, and not management of the land.  The property owner may or may not choose to donate to the endowment.
3. What happens to the CE if Frontera folds?  The CE runs with the land and another land trust would take over, and could be specified in the CE document, but is optional.

That's the truth. The question is whether members of City Council will hear it or be led by those who really don't want to give up control of the natural open space in question. Just look at Blackie Chesher Park - land given with the clear, unequivocal understanding that the land be used as a public park. In attempt to undermine that perpetual desire, the PSB and the City seem to have problems coming up with a proper deed and cannot even answer Rep. Eddie Holguin's questions. 

One more question: what possibly can be accomplished by spending tens of thousands of taxpayer and rate payer dollars to come up with something that a conservation easement already does? Answer: the top brass will spend your money ad infinitum to get their bloody way.

The Petition, Transmountain and the Rio Bosque

Left alone, the natural environment provides us with many benefits including cleaner air and water, carbon sequestration, better soil, greater biodiversity which promotes human health as well. All of these benefits are called ecosystem services – one good reason to preserve open space in its natural state. Other reasons for preservation/conservation include human health and recreation, eco-tourist dollars, and quality of life. Natural open space is good for us mentally, spiritually and emotionally. So where do things stand with three key open space issues in El Paso – the Transmountain West project, the NW Master Plan and the Rio Bosque?

I get more phone calls about the Transmountain West TxDOT project currently than anything else. The extensive and quickening bulldozing is very disconcerting to say the least. So far the Judge overseeing Sierra Club’s lawsuit against TxDOT has not ruled on an injunction to stop work. The contractor plows ahead and many of you have reported the wide devastation including the removal of some foothills.

The NW Master Plan is a separate but related matter. The new plan is the direct result of trying to find a “compromise” with petitioners who seek to preserve in perpetuity 780 acres in the Transmountain Scenic Corridor along with keeping arroyos in their natural state and preventing any major road construction through the area (Paseo del Norte). I authored the petition and coordinated efforts to get the necessary number of signatures to bring it to City Council.  Where do things stand with the petition? Simply put: on-hold as City Planning and Attorneys work out further details of the City Council approval of a Dover Kohl scenario. Understand this: there is no time limit as to when to gather signatures to put the petition language to voters if what the City Council ultimately does is unacceptable. So far, there have been benefits as the City wrestles with the Master Plan so there is reason to be patient.

What are the benefits? First and foremost that a new NW Master Plan was even undertaken with smart growth/smart code in mind is a big benefit. However, smart growth/code is not enough when it comes to preserving arroyos in their natural state. Nature has created ways for water to flow “historically” through arroyos while still maintaining the ecosystem. Any kind of development near or along a development increases that flow rate.  Unless accounted for in some way, the velocity of stormwater can become quite destructive. We all know that rainwater washing off our roofs, sidewalks, asphalt and other impermeable surfaces races downhill. Our urban development has removed many features that can soak-up and otherwise handle stormwater: plants, natural ground, natural swales in the landscape and so forth.  Just like the development that has created urban sprawls of cul-de-sacs and strip malls, smart growth development (although it addresses density and quality of life issues while preserving more natural features) does not address stormwater management. So, whatever the development may be along arroyos, that development impacts water flow in the arroyos and engineers will all tell you that arroyos need to be modified in some way to provide flood control.

A tool for preserving natural features such as arroyos in their natural state is green infrastructure/low impact development which employs more pocket parks and linear parks and shallow depressions to manage stormwater rather than one big drain – the arroyo itself. Such a tool makes all the arroyo modification unnecessary. A benefit of being patient as the City works out issues: the City (at least the Planning Department) is learning about green infrastructure/low impact development. They are learning (as we all are) that before you can Master Plan and long before you can plat, you have to do a drainage study and you have to use your gi/lid toolbox.

Another benefit for waiting before considering moving the petition forward to the ballot is that the City is learning about conservation easements. The internal conversations have been happening. Unfortunately, elpasonaturally has heard that top City officials are still hoping to find a way to do a so-called “conservation covenant” which would ultimately give them an out with preserving natural open space in perpetuity. In the minds of petitioners, that’s the biggest deal breaker and the one that will send them back into the streets. The fox guarding the chicken coop?! Let’s hope the City gets real.

Seeing a potential for possible City equivocation, many, many petitioners have begun asking whether there shouldn’t be a whole new petition – one that calls for preserving all City owned lands on the west side including the NW Master Plan area and all properties north of it.

So, for now, the petition effort waits. There are benefits to waiting. Nevertheless, with the TxDOT behemoth moving closer to the State Park, pressure is being felt to take the next step with preserving land in its natural state.

Oh – one last goodie about the TxDOT project before moving on. An alternative entrance into the Park that would not create the huge interchange that TxDOT favors would cost $2 million. The TxDOT proposal is $7 million and TxDOT is already saying that is what they will have to spend – no modifications. Why should our government spend $2 million of our money when they could spend $7 million?

So what is happening with the Rio Bosque, a City of El Paso wetlands park managed by UTEP’s Center for Environmental Resource Management with huge eco-tourism potential (not to mention its value as a provider of ecosystem services) that only gets a paltry $10,000 from the City’s Parks and Recreation Department budget?  The Rio Bosque is a wetlands area drying up as Water District #1 pumps more water adjacent to the park while denying the park any access to effluent from the EPWU’s Bustamante Treatment Plant.  Possibly two good things are happening now. First, thanks to Rep. Eddie Holguin in whose district is the Rio Bosque, the City Council next Tuesday, June 5^th, will take up this resolution (Item 10A on the Agenda):

Discussion and action that the Mayor be authorized to send letters on behalf of the El Paso City Council to the President/Chief Executive Officer of El Paso Water Utilities/Public Service Board, (EPWU/PSB) the members of the Public Service Board, the members of the El Paso County Commissioners Court, and the General Manager of El Paso No. 1 expressing the City of El Paso’s appreciation for the efforts of each entity to help find a solution to meeting Rio Bosque’s water needs during the growing season and expressing the City’s strong desire that each continue to work diligently until such a solution is found and fully achieved. 

 Secondly, at the next OSAB meeting, Mr. Rudy Vasquez will present the EPWU’s timeline from a feasibility study that would provide a long-term, sustainable supply of water to the Rio Bosque. That meeting will be held this Wednesday, June 6^th, at 1:30 p.m. in the 8^th Floor Conference Room at City Hall.

Two more things about the Bosque:

I have learned (but have not had confirmed from MCAD/Public Art) that the Heath Satow sculpture intended for the Bosque will now go to the Zoo. The Zoo is a better place to showcase this artwork and, perhaps, it bodes well that the City wants to spend money on the Bosque that will truly benefit the wetlands. As elpasonaturally pointed out before, the City was willing to pay $170,000 for a public arts project but nothing to help with the real issue of water at the Bosque.

Secondly, if you care about the Bosque (and other open space issues), plan to attend one of two public meetings Thursday and Saturday (June 7^th and 9^th) of next week regarding the updating of the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan.

Not on our discussion list today but certainly worth mentioning now and later is the space definitely worth preserving: the Vista Del Aguila National Wildlife Refuge Proposed for El Paso, Hudspeth and Culberson Counties. See Ramón Rentería’s El Paso Times story about the gathering support for this critical refuge just east of us. 

More later on the newly appointed and what seems to be conservation and environment-unfriendly PSB Land Policy and Revenue Sharing Blue Ribbon Committee in response to City Council’s wanting to review its relationship with PSB as its land manager/land designer.

Note one big thing (and I’m sorry it’s at the bottom of the letter):  Ed Archuleta, the CEO/President of the PSB/EPWU is really doing some good things regarding preserving open space. The El Paso Times editorial alluded to it today.  Elpasonaturally has been a critic of some of his policies and leadership style.  It’s time for praise and all I can say at this time is: “Thank You, Mr. Archuleta!”

Finally, although all of us have different religious convictions or none at all, I do think that you will find the Kabarak Call for Peace and Eco-Justice inspiring. I hope you will take just a moment to read this short but powerful statement.

Glad Beto Is Running

Most of you probably followed the excellent series in the El Paso Times about public corruption. You don’t even have to read between the lines to see the hand of current U.S. Rep. Silvestre Reyes in the midst of it. It’s good that Beto O’Rourke is running for that seat. Beto recently said how his support for conservation and environmental protection in our City and region is personal to him in an elpasonaturally blog post, Caring for the Environment and Conservation is Personal with Beto O'Rourke. Be sure to check out the Beto for Congress media page.

Silvestre’s brother is, of course, Chuy Reyes, the General Manager of the El Paso County Water Improvement District #1 that elpasonaturally has begun saying more about. The Reyes boys were behind a recent successful effort to pass a bill which disenfranchised 75,000 El Paso voters in the WID and placed the control of El Paso water into the hands of a few powerful farmers. Note the recent big donors to Silvestre Reyes: Skov and Stubbs.  Now see who is on the Board of Directors of the Water Improvement District: Skov and Stubbs. 

I recently was able to see a voting certificate of a member of the WID. This person registered late and yet has a low certificate number which probably means that no more than a thousand or less persons can now vote in the Water Improvement District as the result of Sen. Jose Rodriguez’s infamous bill. The voting card is valid for only one year and, after that, the voter will need to furnish ID and proof of ownership (water) in order to vote again. There are only two places for early voting. In short, the WID with the help of Sen. Jose Rodriguez and others has made it very difficult for the remaining voters to vote. I have emailed Mr. Jesus “Chuy” Reyes an open records request under the laws of the State of Texas asking for the current voting registration rolls. He has acknowledged receipt of my email.

Stay tuned to elpasonaturally for more on the large farmers who run EPWID and why your Public Service Board needs to be far more accountable to all of you – citizens of El Paso – the Public.

Still no word about the Sierra Club petition for an injunction to stop construction on the TxDOT Transmountain project. I say this with a bit of trepidation because, just as I say this, something might happen. I re-published the El Paso’s Sierra Club Chairman’s request for donations for the legal battle. What may have held up U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel from making a decision on this injunction is a ruling that he just made on a Planned Parenthood request for a preliminary injunction to allow it to continue serving women under a State of Texas program for low-income women.  Now that that decision has been made, perhaps action on the Sierra petition will come more quickly.

Also, no news to report about the NW Master Plan, methods to preserve the arroyos and a “conservation easement” to preserve the natural open space in perpetuity. Carlos Gallinar of City of El Paso Planning has been upfront always when reporting to the Open Space Advisory Board and when answering questions from the public. He has been very interested in Low Impact Development (LID) solutions for preserving arroyos. His interest and the Planning Department’s research about LIDs is just another good side benefit of the petition that seeks to preserve land in the Scenic Corridor of Transmountain.

In case you didn’t know, the City’s Environmental Services has a free mulch program. Mulch is a great way to conserve water by preserving soil moisture in your garden and with your landscape plants, shrubs and trees. Mulch is a great ground cover and will help control weeds. Also, over time as it breaks down, mulch will add nutrients back into the soil. Each of the Citizen Collection stations has mulch that you may pick-up. (Bring a shovel.) Environmental Services Director, Ellen Smyth, says that the mulch is free and that you do not need to show a water bill to get it. Environmental Services also has a great Mulching and Composting guide online. Be sure to read it.

Speaking about water conservation, there is still time to get a free water-efficient showerhead from EPWU. Details here. You must fill out the coupon sent with your water bill or download one from online.  Do visit, bookmark and surf EPWU’s Less is the New More water conservation tips page. There is great information here and a number of ways to save money.

I wish that I could visit the PSB/EPWU website and not find anything too egregious. Unfortunately, the current first entry on the home page describes land in the NW Master Plan/Scenic Transmountain Corridor as “PSB-owned land”. No sugar coating – it’s a lie and one they just can’t stop telling. It’s City of El Paso owned land – your land as a City – not the PSB’s but only managed by the PSB. Some of us hope that the day will come when managing City of El Paso land will be the prerogative of Planning and Development. Some of us hope that the day will come when we citizens stop subsidizing developers and sprawl by turning $500/acre desert land without water into $10,000/acre land with plumbed water and sewer.

Finally, congratulations to Judy Ackerman, this year’s recipient of the Frontera Land Alliance “Rock Award”.