« Susie Byrd Strikes Again? | Main | Stones and Glass Houses? »

06/01/2018

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

JerryK

As a 25 year Sierra Club member I hear what you're saying and there is a kind of backpack elitism. The worst I saw of it was many years ago back in my home state of Wisconsin where there were public wilderness lands literally off-limits except for those with a "need" to be there, i.e., scientists, academics and their friends (I was one). There are still a lot of people who would like this to continue.

For Federal lands, there is a solution called the Wilderness Protection Act of 1964, if only we would follow it. Wilderness is a legal designation designed to provide long-term protection and conservation of Federal public lands. As defined by the Act it is “an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain..."

I read that and I think it was drafted by a poet and not a Congressman. But even these lands, and our local Otero Mesa has at least 400,000 acres that meet this criterion, are under pressure for development, mostly mineral leasing. That is why it is worth fighting to protect these lands because, once they are gone they are gone.

The consciousness here in El Paso is not unfriendly to preservation, it is just not really aware of it and so most people are not going to make it an issue. Then, too, most people here don't make voting an issue so we get the government we deserve.

I think of this when I take a hike in the wilderness after driving 200 miles in my SUV. We (me) can be very hypocritical about our use of energy. Until we figure out how those little gray guys got from Zeta Reticuli to Roswell NM on one tank of gas, this will remain an issue.

jerrykfan

Max, its the incentives I have a problem with the most and its always well they donate so much. Its called Bartering. You could say “Indian Giving” which would be bigoted, but it reminds me of the movie Val Kilmer was in called Thunderheart. The old Indian chief wanted to trade and took Val’s nice sunglasses and in return gave Val a blue stone. Val knew who got the better end of that deal. Its like when Foster donated the building downtown that was on the tax rolls for 400k and yet later his Jordon-Foster Construction was paid by the city somewhere around 1.8 mill for the Renovation. These people have great wealth because they are very smart and they don't take a shit without a plan. Lets watch what happens on the West side. Now if the land they want to develop was already approved in 2013 then they have every right to do it, but if land that was protected under that from being sold then it doesn’t. Im thinking these Tax incentives are only for the land that was approved in 2013, however, incentives ? There wasn't any incentives on the part next to it from what I remember. PSB owns most the land. We need to knock down our debt, but yet we want to sell it cheap and give incentives ? Actually, I hate that Monticello type infill. I like seeing development. Did Estancias Coronado developers get incentives ? That development to the right of Mesa Hills as you go up the mountain ? The area behind it that is literally on the mountain ? What about the Cimmarron area itself ? So why this area ? Help me here Jerryk. Your thoughts ? Was it the right time to ask because we have a mayor who would break the tie ?

I will do the same thing

El Paso. The political shitshow that keeps on giving.

Tim Holt

I love the wilderness and think it is important. With that being said, I will say that the "environmentalists" that live here are almost always wrong. Here are two cases in point that I can recall:

Back in the late 80s or early 90's there was a massive wildfire on the Northeast side of the mountains. So large in fact, that they called in those tanker planes to drop retardant. It was quite a site. I remember at the time, there were environmentalist on the news saying that it would take decades, maybe 20 or 30 years for the mountain to recover. Wow, I thought, thats a long time to regrow a bunch of mesquite bushes and tumbleweeds.
Well, long story short, the mountain recovered in about 2 years. Not the decades that the local enviromnmentalists had said.

Case two: When the CISD was wanting to build a school up on one of those "Ridge" streets in the Cimmeron, one of the environmental objections was that the students would be breathing in the asbestos produced at the Jobe plant about five miles north of the proposed school site. Never mind that the prevailing winds are east west and not North south. Never mind that asbestos is not one of the by products produced at the plant. So where are we now? Plant still there, no asbestos, no breathing problems associated with the Jobe plant.

The nature lovers, and I count myself as one of them, need to stop with the Chicken Little arguments and present better arguments, the economic benefits of nature, that kind of thing. Until their economic arguments match the business people's, nothing will change.

Who Cares.

Well said Tim. I drive daily to the Cimmarron area, NW PSB land. I do not see the tourists that the environmental groups say are there. Lost Dog Trail has an average of 10-15 cars parked there on any given day to ride the desert trails. I don’t see masses of bicyclists on the Resler Road hike and bike trail-actually those that go there ride in the street. I don’t see massive amounts of bicycle riders heading up Transmountain Road. The only place I have not visited is Tom Mays Park. Maybe they all go there. But that is the state park and it is protected.

Show me the people that actually hike, bike this area, excluding Tom Mays Park and then maybe I will listen to your argument. But banning private property owners from ever being able to develop their land is wrong. And as a taxpayer I will not entertain a vote via petition by the City to buy this land. As they said in the TIRZ presentation the drainage issues have not all been fixed from the 2006 flood. No matter what, they have to be fixed. It will happen again.

I would suggest the environmental folks find a sugar daddy like Grossman did and cough up $20 millions to purchase the PSB land. If you are not willing to do that then you must not be that serious. I am sure you could start a Go Fund Me Page.

JerryK

Who:

I thought we are talking about public (PSB) land that is not privately owned but soon will be privatized with tax payer subsidies (TIRZ) for its development. This taxpayer is sick of giving away our current and future tax revenues to developers and investors. Let them pay the full boat on their own and build it into the price of their lots and big box pads, as if we need more big box stores that are being Amazon'd anyway.

Who Cares.

Study the petition being distributed by the anti-growth group. It’s been circulating for a couple of years. It includes some privately owned land. No one has done a survey of the entire area, including the State Park. Go back to council video in 2012 or 2013. Ed Archileta said the PSB would not pay to have the area surveyed. The private owners should not be required to do that. So, the anti growth people need to verify and legally define the boundary of the area they are talking about and label what is private and what is owned by the PSB. They got their info from City planning years ago when Susie Byrd demanded planning give it to them (check out council video and Susie’s comments). It is not a legal document. It’s Google earth pictures with lines drawn on it to show different parcels. At best, it is an educated guess as to exactly what the boundary’s are for the different areas.

Just like groups today saying El Pasoans didn’t know what they are voting for in the 2012 QOL this will be another disaster if it makes it onto a ballot. Voters will not understand what they are voting for, and City legal gets to write the ballot wording with approval from the AG.

I believe the 2013 agreement will stay in place and nothing in that MP will be changed should there ever be a sale of the PSB land.

Question

WHO, like Jerry from I understood this is about the PSB(water ?) land that is to be sold to the city to be sold to developers ? The incentives would go to these people. Correct ?

Empty Spot😋🤑😋

Sometimes I wonder about the developers driving by driveways and parking lots. Do they salivate as they see the drive ways and visualize building a small structure? Eminent domain ?

For some reason they can't stand to see any open space. Power trip, greed, company going broke and need the money ?

What is it that drives these developers into conniption fits when they see any empty spot ?

knowledge is power

This is about PSB land that the city intends to buy and then sell to developers. There is no plan to take this to the voters. The city will pay, thru a TIRZ, for certain portions of the development (open space, drainage thru arroyos, parks, etc) that, because of the Smart Growth zoning, are considered to be prohibitive to development. The open space/ environmental crowd do not want the property developed. City Council voted to proceed with it with 3 council members voting against it. It's over. It's a done deal. I've heard there is a petition being circulated against the sale but it's too little, too late. And, BTW, there will not be any big box stores if the city follows the smart growth zoning restrictions.

By-Tor

I too enjoy the outdoors and the people I know don't mind paying National Park fees because they know that the money goes to maintain the parks.

El Paso logic

Interesting. Can't wait to sell open space but desire parks ? What a contradiction.

abandon hope

The City's own laws do not allow a TIRZ to be placed in an area without infrastructure. And why is it ethical to sell PSB land that El Pasoans have paid for to an entity without public bid? I am the first to defend private property rights, but this public property. It is not a done deal.

Old Fart

MAX, who is or are reliable source/s one can contact, if you want to sign that petition against the Westside TIRZ? I had asked on another forum, but unfortunately was given two possible names, both of which you could not find a reliable phone number. Can you help?

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)