Whatever Bielek Wants, Bielek Gets

We may have to re-write the words of the popular Richard Adler and Barry Ross song "Whatever Lola wants, Lola gets" from the 1955 musical, "Damn Yankees".  It will go like this: "Whatever Bielek wants, Bielek gets."




In a recent email to Rep. Jody Pickett, Judy Ackerman wrote:

From: judy Ackerman [mailto:jpackerman53@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 8:26 AM
To: jill.breitinger@house.state.tx.us; joe.pickett@house.state.tx.us
Cc: Escobar Veronica Asst. Ruben Vogt; vgescobar@gmail.com; Escobar, Judge's asst Celeste A. Varela; CountyJudge@epcounty.com; TxDOT ProjectManager Tony Uribe; TXDOT Bob Bielek; Moody Campaign Daniel Mahoney; Moody, Joseph; Moody, Joe For El Paso; joe.moody@house.state.tx.us; ngonzalez@bowlawfirm.com; Gonzalez, Naomi District76; Rodriguez, Jose Asst Corinne ; Rodriguez, Jose for Senate; Rodriguez Leg Aid Sushma Smith; Rodriguez, Aid Cecilia Rodriguez; Teschner, Richard; mary.gonzalez@house.state.tx.us; naomi.gonzalez@house.state.tx.us; marisa.marquez@house.state.tx.us; Marquez, Marisa State Rep Dist 77
Subject: Move Project Forward, FMSP Entrance

Dear TX State Representative Joe Pickett,

We need your guidance on how to ensure a timely resolution to a safe and effective entrance to the Tom Mays Section of the Franklin Mountains State Park.  At the Apr 2013 meetings of the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), Transportation Policy Board (TPB), I understood that an entrance option would be selected (with public input) THIS FY so that funding would be locked in by the first quarter of next FY.  However, communication with Bob Bielek (below) indicates considerable delays. 

Note the original schedule:

Click on image to enlarge.

Thank you for your help.  I look forward to your suggestions on how to move this project forward.

Judy Ackerman

The communication with Bielek was this email:

From: Bob Bielek [mailto:Robert.Bielek@txdot.gov]
Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2013 2:15 PM
To: judy Ackerman
Cc: Tony Uribe; Eddie Valtier
Subject: Bielek Re: Entrance to Franklin Mountains State Park

Ms. Ackerman:

As I told you, we have a large number of projects that are letting this month and next which have our staff fully occupied. I have asked the project manager, Tony Uribe, to have the consultants look at Dr. Bonart's suggestion as well as any others that may be similar. I also requested that we ask the folks at TPW about migration/forage trails. I know we have asked for this information before without sucess but will do so again.

I expect that we will get heavily involved in this project again after the letting rush is over, probably in September. Should you have any further questions please feel free to contact me.
Bob Bielek sent from my Blackberry

He had previously called Judy and Judy reported that he told her that [h]is preferred option is #6 [option 4 is supported by the TPWD and local environmentalists] with no change to original plans for the expansion of Transmountain Rd, at grade entrance with eastbound vehicles using a left turn lane and crossing 2 lanes of traffic headed down hill, west.

"He talked at length about a short span bridge, under Transmountain Rd, for hikers, bikers, and animals that would be located between the old entrance and the 3 culverts at the bottom of the arroyo."

Conservation activist, Dr. Richard Teschner, offered this comment to other comments Mr. Bielek made and which Ackerman had written down and shared with Teschner in an email:

Cleverly, TxDOT District Engineer Bob Bielek is seeking to give the impression that we’re still in the early stages of discussing the Tom Mays Entrance. Some quotes from Judy’s notes: 'TxDOT received one suggestion.' False. TxDoT received dozens of suggestions earlier this year, including one long one from me. 

'After the end of year rush, the end of August, [Mr. Bielek] will look at the Park Entrance project and the related environmental process.' Misleading. This project has been being “looked at” since before Mr. Bielek assumed the district engineership at the beginning of September, 2012. 

'He [Mr. Bielek] prefers option 6 [which] is the do nothing, no change, no cost option.” True—and that is the option he’s supported since last fall. '  I asked if he was working with TPWD and got a vague answer about 'somebody should be talking with them.' There’s no “should be” about it. Scott Boruff, Deputy Executive Director for Operations, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, has been talking with equally-high-up officials at TxDOT about the Tom Mays Entrance since (again) before Mr. Bielek took on the job of El Paso-area District Engineer, and has continued to do so thereafter. 

'Mr. Bielek was particularly interested in any work TPWD has done on identifying ‘defined migratory trails’.' If he picked up the phone he could learn. I suspect, however, that “defined migratory trails” is a red herring, one that TxDOT may hope will delay further consideration of Option 4 until the time has passed for it to be funded. (Another way in which “defined migratory trails” can be used as an Option-4 killer: to hope that such trails lie either well within the Park and thus way to the east of the Tom Mays Entrance, or way to the west of the Entrance and thus within an area zoned “commercial” or “residential.”) 

'Mr. Bielek expects no problem with east[-]bound traffic entering the park by turning left across 2 lanes of traffic headed downhill, westbound' etc. This “expectation” conveniently—shockingly—overlooks the rationale that TxDOT repeatedly used three years ago when appearing before City Council in defense of its proposed West Transmountain Loop 375 freeway: that the Safety Of The Public is the primary reason the freeway must be built. Vehicles entering Tom Mays are not public maybe? 

'Mr. Bielek expects to hold a public comment after Aug 2013.' Fine: we’ll be as ready for this public comment as we were for the previous public comment, a public comments whose public comments somehow didn’t get recorded, let alone publicized, by the TxDOT folks who were running the show. 

'In the environmental process he will look for ‘categorical exclusion’ and a finding of no significant environmental impact[;] otherwise there will be extensive delays.' Of course “extensive delays” will enable any option other than Option 6 (“Do nothing; retain the Entrance as it—at grade level”) to get defunded.

I also note how far off mark the “Project Development Schedule” is, and how parts of it put paid to the notion that Schedule is a paramount concern by TxDOT. See especially “Anticipated Environmental Approval—Spring 2013” and “Construction Letting—May 2013.” I also note the “Public Hearing” bullet: “Dec 2012/Jan 2013.” The public hearing/public comment was held back then. To schedule yet another one (“Mr. Bielek expects to hold a public comment after Aug 2013”) is at best disingenuous, at worst cynical and self-serving (as in, “Whoops, this meeting came too late”).

Joe Hardy/El Paso Citizens: "We have to keep training and strict rules and all that."

Lola/Bob Bielek: "You can tell me all them rules!"

Joe/El Paso:  "You're making things very complicated."

Lola/Bielek:  "Then be good boy."

Joe/El Paso:  "I'm trying to."

Lola/Bielek:  "And do like Lola tells you to do."

Keystone Heritage Park Threatened by Proposed City Industrial Development

Click image to enlarge. All of the color blocks are the new proposed development. Keystone Park is in the upper left side of the diagram. On the diagram, you can see both the wetland and the Garden. The archeology site is above the garden. 

The orange colored block, labeled CCS (in small letters) is a recycling site. Sanitation trucks, city buses and city work trucks will be a constant coming-and-going presence. Note that the entire site will be either roofs or pavement which estimates suggest may add as much as 10 degrees of heat in the summer. As you approach the garden, the recycling trucks, buses and city trucks will be in your line of sight and to your right. 

The City of El Paso is proposing a concentrated heavy industrial area directly next to the archeology site and Botanical Garden of Keystone Heritage Park.  To say the least, this will not be beneficial to Keystone - its gardens, bird sanctuary/wetland and archaeology site. 

Ketystone board members, benefactors and supporters believe that the presence of buses, sanitation trucks and other heavy city equipment will be a detraction to the serenity and beauty of the  Garden and discourage the eco-tourism that Keystone is trying to develop. The plan can proceed without the approval of City Council. 

The Keystone Board requests that people please contact those they know at the City – staff or elected representatives – and ask them to help protect the Park. Time is of the essence! 

Persons to contact:

Jane Shang, Deputy City Manager, shangj1@elpasotexas.gov
Matthew McElroy, Director of Planning, McelroyMX@elpasotexas.gov
Carlos Gallinar, Deputy Director of Planning, GallinarRC@elpasotexas.gov
Joyce Wilson, City Manager, WilsonJA@elpasotexas.gov
Your Mayor and/or City Representative

You can provide a link to this post in your message.

The Board of Keystone Heritage Park is charged with preserving and protecting all 52 acres of the park and for providing a sanctuary for the birds and animals.  The additional  noise and heat created by this development will have a negative impact on the birds that count on the wetland as a breeding area and may drive away some the rare species that have been spotted there. 

One wonders whether the City has done the necessary studies to understand the impact of the additional heat, vibration, air pollution and potential run-off on the 4000+ year old archeological site. This nationally recognized site has enormous historical potential and all El Pasoans should be actively engaged in its protection.  

"This is an agriculture drain and not a habitat"

"I am not interested in replanting native vegetation. The drain will be maintained the proper way, the way the City of El Paso and EPWU are required to do so, this is an agriculture drain and not a habitat." - Chuy Reyes

The quote above is in response to my message to Chuy Reyes just a while ago asking him about mitigation of the vegetation along the drain: "In a previous email I asked you if you would be interested in mitigating the clear cutting of the drain/canal by replanting native vegetation.  You have not responded. I look forward to your answer." His email was marked at 4:33 p.m. 7/8/2013.

I suggest that many of us request that the drain be mitigated now that he has destroyed habitat, killing animals and destroying nests.  Neanderthal attitudes such as Chuy's must be eradicated from El Paso culture.  His email is jreyes@epcwid1.org.

Quoting Mahatma Gandhi again: “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”

Reyes Claim about Wildlife Complaints Untrue

Finally the El Paso Times did a story on the widespread and extensive destruction of vegetation and habitat along the Montoya drain/canal in the Upper Valley.  Read Aaron Martinez's Clearing Canal is Harming Wildlife.  A slideshow from that report appears here.  One inaccuracy in the story is that it says that I am a resident of the area.  I am not.  When Rick LoBello was able to get a reporter to come see the damage, I called several people who do live in the area and they joined us in talking to Mr. Martinez last Friday.

The most glaring untruth reported in the story however was a statement by Chuy Reyes, the mis-Manager of the Water Improvement District which he gave to the reporter: "I have not received any complaints on any wildlife problems due to the cleanup."

Oh really? No complaints?  I've talked to numerous people who said that they complained.  One person even shared with me an email exchange (which I have saved) that he had with Mr. Reyes beginning July 2nd in which Reyes claims that his complaints about the bulldozing are exaggerations (see images attached to this story as well as EP Times slideshow mentioned above for visuals of the exaggeration) and sarcastically retorts: "Have you not heard about the fires all over the western United States? I am the person responsible for this decision, I am concerned with life and property since the fire 2 weeks ago."  (I'm sure that Mr. Reyes must advocate for clear cutting all forests in the country in order to prevent forest fires.)

FYI. I have just emailed an open records request to Reyes asking for the agreement between EPCWID#1 and the EPWU which required the involvement of the EPWU with the massive destruction of habitat along the drain and canal.  I also requested the same from Mr. John Balliew, CEO of EPWU, on July 3rd and, getting no response, made a follow-up request this morning and copied Bob Andron, EPWU attorney, and PSB member, Dr. Rick Bonart.  If the "no response" response continues, I'll take the matter to the Attorney General of the State of Texas. 

Where we met the reporter and where we have met previously is on the corner of Montoya Drive and Meadowlark Drive (map) - ground zero if you will as the initial complaint which sparked the destruction of habitat came from this area.  Southeast of there at West Sunset Road and River Bend Drive (map) you can see the destruction of habitat beginning south of the intersection and going north.  Here are pictures that I took last Friday: 

 South of intersection (Sunset and River Bend) showing bare drain. 

Click image to enlarge.

North of intersection where there is still vegetation and habitat. 

Click image to enlarge.

The "beast" looms over the same area in the picture above.

Click image to enlarge.

EPCWID#1 Worker. Motto on truck reads: "Thanks to the Rio Grande".

Update on FMSP Entrance

From Judy Ackerman:

Park Entrance – Vigilance Needed

Expect more calls for action to ensure a safe and appropriate entrance to the Tom Mays Section of our Franklin Mountains State Park (FMSP).  As you know, TX Parks and Wildlife Department prefers TxDOT’s option 4 and El Pasoans agree.  That option would create an underpass to facilitate hikers, bikers, and wildlife crossing in addition to vehicular access and serve as a vital connection between north and south portions of FMSP.

At the 15 Apr 2013 Special Meeting of the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), Transportation Policy Board (TPB), members acknowledged hearing from you, the public, and discussed this topic at length.  The ball is in TxDOT’s court.  El Paso’s transportation expert, State Representative Joe Pickett, said, “… options are still being looked at since the environmental has not been completed.  The [TxDOT] district engineer [Bob Bielek] has committed to the project in 2014, but not sure what option would be proposed or at what cost….  At this point, it is up to TxDOT to provide the when, and how much.”

FMWC alert system will keep you informed on breaking news and ask you to contact elected and appointed officials as necessary.  For background information, see our website:  www.franklinmountains.org/. You can also subscribe to ElPasoNaturally at www.elpasonaturally.blogspot.com/.

Wildlife Habitats Destroyed in Upper Valley

EPWU and El Paso County Water Improvement District #1 Destroy Habitats along Montoya Drain

The trees and other vegetation which provided wildlife habitat, privacy for homes and shade to decrease water evaporation were recently radically removed by the El Paso County WID #1 with the help of the EPWU.  The destruction occurred during nesting season and while many mammals were still infants.  Elpasonaturally first reported this in a post on June 20th.  Subsequently, we called for a change in policy at the El Paso Water Utilities which would include an Ecology Officer and long range land planning taking into account ecosystems and habitats.  

After a fire burned along the Rio Grande and spread to the Montoya canal system, one neighbor (a prominent El Paso attorney) complained about the fire hazard.  Rather than removing dry brush or doing so over a programmed period of time or waiting until nesting season was over, the WID took the extreme measure of plowing out all the vegetation with the help of EPWU through a license agreement.  

EPWU CEO John Balliew has proposed that their Archaeology officer, Valerie Provencio, take on the added responsibility of assessing stormwater land for ecosystem preservation prior to a project.  Elpasonaturally believes that all EPWU land and projects should first be assessed before a project commences and that long-range land management include environmental and ecosystem criteria.  PSB member, Dr. Rick Bonart suggests: "The goal is environmental responsibility/sensitivity for all EPWU projects within the entire  EPWU service area, just as are archaeological  reviews are done now. The need should be assessed and coordinated by the new environmental officer. Hence the justification for the position."

Just how bad is the damage?  One woman who lives along the drain told about speaking to two of the bulldozer operators.  Both men were crying because they watched as foxes and other mammals were run over and others fled for their lives. Imagine how many baby birds perished as well. 

What may be even more outrageous is that the El Paso Times was totally silent about this story and remains so.  Of course we live in a culture where dogs are chained outside on hot summer days and other pets are abandoned in the desert and the State Park so why care about fox and squirrels and birds along an irrigation canal.

If you want our agencies and our media to defend wildlife habitat, preserve trees and privacy and reduce evaporation, let them know:

Chuy Reyes, Manager of the Water Improvement District, jreyes@epcwid1.org
John Balliew, CEO of El Paso Water Utilities, jeballiew@epwu.org
Bob Moore, Editor of the El Paso Times, bmoore@elpasotimes.com 

Water News of Interest

What if we are not in a drought?  What if, according to researchers, that over the past thousand years, this year of low rain is the norm, and "the past 50 years are the aberration."  That is what New Mexico State legislators recently heard.  If so, how do you plan for 1 to 3 inches of rain a year and not just 6 to 10 inches of rain?  All El Pasoans should be asking why large farmers with water rights (served by Chuy Reyes and the WID) are still growing water guzzling crops of pecans and cotton.  More to the point, we should all be asking why water isn't the right of all and water for those who wish to grow water-intensive crops should be sold at a premium or the practice of growing water-intensive crops should be regulated or banned.  Water laws must change because the right to water is a right we all possess. (Not an idea Nestlé likes by the way.)

Some farmers in the Texas Panhandle are now learning how to grow crops with minimal watering.  Perhaps they should learn something from El Paso Permaculture or the Permaculture Institute near Santa Fe.

And Trees . . . 

Former UTEP Centennial Museum Curator, Marshall Carter-Tripp, has said: 
"What I'd like to see happen is El Paso adopting the slogan "City of the Desert Oasis" and plant tens of thousands of trees which will change the on-the-ground climate (the reverse happens when you tarmac over everything) . . . the key to the survival of El Paso is more trees and more shade.  Use water for trees not swimming pools! No open irrigation ditches." [Especially drains and canals without shade as the EPWU and WID have now created in the Upper Valley.]

In the long run, trees actually reduce the need for additional water in an urban area.  Concrete and rock (from quarries which scar forever our beautiful mountains) collect and reflect heat keeping our urban environment hotter.  Trees reduce heat and the need for greater water use to cool our homes and work places. Planting trees during a drought can be done. And trees are good for business.  Spend a bit more for landscaping upfront and make more money as time goes by.

Finally,

Support Rick LoBello's plan for the Big Bend Rio Bravo International Park.


elpasonaturally, Vol. 4, No. 7, July 2, 2013

Neighborhood Associations Speak Out Against Proposed Walmart

There is a big elephant in the room and Walmart has launched an unprecedented political, marketing, and PR campaign to camouflage it under the guise of neighborhood and economic development.  The reality is that the proposed store at the corner of Montana and Chelsea accomplishes neither. No amount of marketing, television commercials, or political gamesmanship can circumvent the obvious code and site problems this location presents. Due process was undermined on June 18th at City Council chambers when Walmart influenced a postponement of the rezoning appeal case and turned away myself and over fifty other residents who were present to protect our inherent property rights. I think everyone can sympathize with rearranged work schedules, childcare arrangements, and even those with health issues making an effort to attend this meeting only to be turned away without a chance to speak. 

On May 16th, the City Planning Commission ruled overwhelmingly in a 6 to 3 vote to deny Walmart’s rezoning request. They ruled on the merits of the case. The site is simply too small and too congested for any supermarket of this size. Pretty architectural renderings and landscaping cannot disguise the automobile and commercial truck traffic flowing through our small residential streets. This store will turn Cardon Street into a “freeway” with thousands of cars trying to get back to Trowbridge and Chelsea Streets every week. The existing code designations do not allow a supermarket of this size to be built on any of these four parcels. Certainly, the owners of these commercial properties have the right to sell their land. But what Walmart is trying to do is buy these properties that already prohibit their proposed store and lobby their way into the City allowing them to put their elephant into a teacup. Sadly, the current property owners of these four parcels have been led down a path that Walmart knew had problems and chose to ignore them, assuming their influence would be enough to get their deal done.

We have property rights too. Collectively, we have invested millions of dollars in our homes and properties and have the inherent right to protect our interests. Due process should settle this issue like it did at the City Plan Commission, not Walmart’s strong arming.  All four surrounding Neighborhood Associations: United Neighborhood Association, Austin Terrace Neighborhood Association, Radford Hills Neighborhood Association, and the San Juan Neighborhood Improvement Association are all opposed to this rezoning.  The residents that would be most affected by this store are overwhelmingly opposed. Our voices are united and clear; we do not want our neighborhoods and streets serving the interests of the largest retailer in the world. 
Accordingly, our neighborhoods have formed a coalition, Neighbors Supporting Neighborhoods, to unite our efforts in preserving the quality of life the people in these neighborhoods deserve. Do you think Walmart will suffer if they don’t get their way?  No, but the homeowners will have to live with a 35,500 square foot 24-hour store thirty feet from their front doorsteps with constant noise, light, trucks, and cars. Other neighborhoods are taking notice and standing with us. Walmart has saturated our city. Be careful El Paso, because your neighborhood could be next. The former and newly elected District 2 City Representatives are also opposed to this rezoning. Hopefully our new Mayor and City Council will see through Walmart’s tactics and stand by the decision of the City Plan Commission to deny this rezoning request - 

by Madeleine Haddox, President of the Radford Hills Neighborhood Association