10.26.2004

Ghastly sights, infill abuses and Martin Rubalcaba redux. What a meeting!

Proclaiming the Limits

Have you ever wondered how the proclamations get chosen each week? Well, me, too, folks, because week after week we get proclamations like this one:

1. HALLOWEEN HAPPINESS WEEK

It seems to me that there have to be more valuable proclamations. And who gets to pick which proclamations make it and which get cut? Well, this week I posed that question to City Hall and I received a very prompt response from exiting Public Information Officer Mark Matthys (who, by the way, I hear is movin’ on and will be heading up a non-profit. Sid genuinely wishes you the best, Mr. Matthys. That means, folks, that the job is open, and it is my hope that the City finds a bilingual replacement to Mr. Matthys http://www.elpasotexas.gov/personnel/employ_communications.asp). Matthys forwarded my question to one of Mayor Wardy’s assistants, Delia Cortinas. She has yet to explain the process to your old friend Sid (or even give a basic response like “hey, I got your question, give me time”), but I guess that’s too much to ask from another highly paid mayoral staffer. If I ever get an answer from Cortinas, I’ll be sure to share it with you.

Back to the meeting and the all-important proclamation: “Halloween Happiness Week.” As Richarda Momsen announced the proclamation for Halloween Happiness Week, Cushing and Cobos—my favorite ghouls—played the roles of happy-go-lucky Councilors.

Cushing, the man with the rapier-like wit, got the joy started by asking the pressing issue of the day, “Is there anyone here who’s happy about Halloween?” He bellowed with laughter, the laughs seeming to come deep from his joy-pocket.

Anthony Cobos asked if there were any “Trick or Treaties…uh…Treaters?” No, Mr. Cobos, unlike the U.S. Senate, El Paso’s City Council does not have the power to approve or disapprove international treaties. Thank God. Can you imagine if Wardy & Co. had that responsibility? Cobos later cautioned the public to look out for “all those little goblins out there.” (I agree…as your resident City Council columnist, I always keep an eye out for all the ghouls who rise from their graves on Tuesdays to suck the blood out of the public purse!)

And this week, like last week, Martin Rubalcaba happily made himself available for comment. Mr. Rubalcaba was just as “on” this time as he was a week before.

Cobos interrupted him and said, “Before you get started, I would ask that you be very selective with the items that you’re gonna speak on this morning, we will not offer a blanket approach.” Ah, yes, that time-honored “blanket approach” (usually only offered to developers, corrupt ex-politicos and cronies).

“Thank you for singling me out,” responded Rubalcaba, who didn’t have much to say, but who, as he did last week, politely gave his commentary and then sat down.

Without Consent…Again

Most of the minutes were approved on the consent agenda…except for the minutes of 9/21/04. Guess who asked that their approval be postponed again? A reader asked me why Vivian Rojas insists on postponing minutes every now and again…who knows? Maybe I’ll ask Ms. Cortinas about that, too. I’ll pass on her response to that question when I get it in a year or two.

3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: [Municipal Clerk, Richarda Duffy Momsen, (915) 541-4127] Approval of Minutes for Regular City Council Meetings of September 21, 2004 and October 19, 2004 and reconsideration of the Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of October 5, 2004.

(Attachment) - Regular City Council Meeting Minutes 09/21/04

(Attachment) - Regular City Council Meeting Minutes 10/05/04

(Attachment) - Regular City Council Meeting Minutes 10/19/04

Passed on Consent

Remember that debate Cushing had a couple of weeks ago with Pat Adauto, the Deputy City Manager for Building Services, regarding the Memorial Park Library “extras” that Cushing was so opposed to?

15. BUDGET TRANSFER: [Office of Management and Budget, David Almonte, (915) 541-4011] BT2005-031 BUILDING AND PLANNING SERVICES

Building and Planning Services proposes to establish appropriations for the Memorial Park Library Renovation. Funding source is Texas State Library grant. (District 2)

Increase $59,808.29 to 31255001/P50155227679/508027 Construction

Increase $59,808.29 to 31255001/P50155227679/407002 Est Rev (Attachment)

The increase in funding was passed on the consent agenda, much to the Halloween happiness of Cushing’s constituency, I’m sure.

Fry It Up in a Pan

For yet another meeting (I’ve lost count…maybe it’s happened six or seven times now?) Wardy was absent. That meant Cobos got to sit in the big chair (and what a sight it always is…Cobos, dwarfed by Representative John Cook to his right, always looks like a Wardy mini-me):

4. REQUEST TO EXCUSE ABSENT CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS

Cobos, sounding like a proud and giddy wife, announced that Mayor Wardy wouldn’t be in attendance because he was in Washington, D.C. A beaming Cobos announced, “He’s bringing home the bacon!” (Yeah…I got the heebeejeebeez, too, in case you’re wondering.) And people make fun of Kerry and Edwards. Yuk.

Anyway, based on what I’ve seen from Wardy thus far, that “bacon” Wardy is supposedly bring home must be comin’ from one skinny pig.

Unwarranted Obstacles to Progress

An important item, which was placed on the public portion of the agenda by Stuart Mitchell of the Mountain Arroyos Neighborhood Association, merits lengthy discussion:

2. Resolved: Whereas there is need for clarity and consistency in the enforcement of Code section 19.16.050 (H); the deputy director for building services shall not grant any waiver of preserving the natural state of arroyos in the city for public health, safety or welfare or any other reason. The Planning Department shall not recommend for approval any planned development that may require such waiver. All waivers to preservation of the natural state of any arroyo shall require approval by the City Council. Pending further definition of an arroyo by this council, all questions of whether a particular area is an arroyo or not shall be resolved with the presumption that it is an arroyo and approval of council shall be required prior to disturbance of the natural state. [Stuart B. Mitchell, Mountain Arroyos Neighborhood Association]

This is not the first time Mr. Mitchell has come before Council, and he’s quite familiar with the ongoing arroyo debate we’ve been having in El Paso of late. Mr. Mitchell, like many concerned citizens, wants to preserve arroyos and this week, that topic would focus a bit on the Wildwood Arroyo on the west side. (http://www.borderlandnews.com/stories/borderland/20041027-186646.shtml)

Cobos thanked him for putting the item on the agenda and, acting as if he didn’t already know the answer, asked Lisa Elizondo if the item was properly posted for Council action; she answered that it was not. (That little move of theirs was as pre-planned as it gets, folks.) Anthony Cobos, it seems, is innocence itself. When I see his act week after week I just have to laugh.

Mayor pro tem/Wardy mini-me Cobos announced he would allow each side five minutes to plead their case.

Mr. Mitchell challenged the City Attorney’s ruling on the posting issue and reminded Council that they have amended agenda items in the past and asked that Council revise the language in his item to include “discussion and action.” Cobos said they would not.

Mitchell, who is clearly a student of Anthony Cobos in action, said, “I understand that…when you have an issue you don’t wish to address you create a distraction.” He went on to explain that he personally believes there should be a moratorium on arroyo development, “particularly,” he said, “when Council doesn’t know what an arroyo is.” But putting his personal feelings aside, he said, “there is an existing law on the books of the City that says ‘arroyos shall be preserved in their natural state’…and all the City has to do is enforce it.” Mitchell believes that the Planning Department has violated the ordinance claiming, “The planning people have been requiring developers to concrete line arroyos instead of preserving them.”

The Chambers were packed with people there to support Mitchell and they clapped loudly. Almost acting as if the applause was for him, Cobos looked around and said, “Thank you!” I’m not sure if he was trying to be funny—if he was, he failed.

Rick Bonart (please forgive any misspelling) said “the people who worked on this ordinance knew what they meant by arroyo; it is a community standard…other southwest cities have passed and enforced similar laws…in 1997 this ordinance was passed and reflects the first sign of change in attitude towards development in our community and I think it should be obvious at this point in time that this attitude is growing in momentum. If we are to be considered a progressive city, there needs to be a change in the mindset of our leaders.” He then said that the community expects the City to uphold that ordinance.

It was Cushing’s turn and he said, “There have been two statements made…that we are not upholding or enforcing the ordinance. Could you elaborate on that?”

Bonart’s answer was pretty simple: The ordinance has never been applied.

A Yankee Comes to Town

Cushing said, “I’m somewhat at a loss as to how you can make the quantum leap to say that the language of this means that you can’t touch one of these water conveyance channels.”

BOB-O, THEY’RE ARROYOS! This asinine refusal of yours to use the term arroyo doesn’t help your cause. It just makes you look more ridiculous, pompous and tendentious than usual. “Water conveyance channel” is a meaningless phrase anyway. There are a lot of things that could be considered “water conveyance channels,” such as, oh I don’t know, rivers, canals, ditches, straits, seaways. You may have contempt for how we southwest folks refer to our “water conveyance channels,” but you ain’t from around these parts, so maybe you, sir, should adjust to our terms. It shouldn’t be the other way around.

Bonart politely responded and said, “I tried to make the point that my position is that…not all development should be curtailed…but the purpose of the law is clear that arroyos should be preserved in their natural state.”

“Your interpretation of this would be to really change the language,” argued Cushing.

Mr. Bonart said that the City could look at other cities that have worked to preserve arroyos and he further recommended that if Cushing has questions about what an arroyo is that he look at the FEMA map, “you can look to a higher authority, our federal government.”

Cobos, the Historical Figure

Cobos, who (like Cushing) likes to give the appearance of caring about one thing then destroying it the first opportunity he gets (see “Infill Gone Awry” later in the column) then said, “I think that this Council’s actions and position is very clear in the preservations of these water conveyance channels or arroyos. It was evident with our desire and action in the Resler Canyon issue… this is the first Council in history to assemble a task force from the private and public sector to address this issue; unfortunately it was road-blocked to an extent by some neighborhood association members. Now I understand that they’re concerned, but this Council’s actions have been very clear and that is our goal, is to address these natural conveyance channels, so I want to make that clear, it’s on the record, our votes are historical, and again, this is the first council in the history of El Paso to take such action.”

Historical indeed. Please, reader, don’t be fooled by Cobos and Cushing. The only reason Cobos and Wardy opposed the Resler Canyon Arroyo was because it was arch-enemy Woody Hunt’s development (Hunt is the local bigwig who, for his own selfish reasons, helped kill Wardy’s Towne Center mall boondoggle).

Frank Ainsa, representing Wildwood Developers (the developer in question), spoke. “I think that Mr. Cushing hit the nail on the head here,” said Ainsa.

When he said that, I knew the arroyo preservationists were in trouble.

“You’ve heard complaints that the City is not enforcing the existing ordinance; quite the contrary is true,” argued Ainsa. “The existing ordinance simply says that arroyos shall be left in their natural state except that the Deputy Director of Building Services has the authority to make certain exceptions in the form of improvements and modification, and that is what has been done in most of the cases involving development of arroyos. What these speakers are really complaining about is they don’t want the Deputy Director to have the authority to do anything but leave the arroyo in its natural state.”

He argued that the City’s task force will review the use and the definition of the “water conveyance channels,” and said it would be “inappropriate” to do anything until the developers…er…the task force reports back. Uh-huh.

Susan Austin asked what a “subdivider” of an arroyo required to do that isn’t required in other parts of town. “I don’t see what else we’re asking a developer in an arroyo to do; that, to me, is the problem,” she said. “How are we using this statue?” Good question, Ms. Austin.

The City Engineer, Rick Connor, didn’t clearly answer the question (at least not to my satisfaction) but said that the ordinance, put into context, is all about whether or not to line the arroyo with concrete – it’s not about preserving the arroyo.

Terry Cullen-Garney wanted to clarify that the developers have a right to develop their property, “so I don’t want to mislead you that the City would automatically exclude that arroyo from the development.” She, like the City Engineer, said she didn’t want anything taken “out of context.”

What good soldiers.

Alberto Rivas, speaking on behalf of the Five Points Neighborhood Association and Grassroots El Paso (a combination of 28 neighborhood associations) spoke in support of Mitchell’s efforts to save the arroyos. He made the excellent point that the arroyo issue affects many neighborhoods around the city.

Richard Schecter, a frequent visitor and speaker at Council, also spoke on behalf of the arroyo preservation. He wanted to quote what other elected officials said, but when he pointed out that the quotes are not verbatim, Cobos (probably a fan of Cushing’s non-deconstruction deconstructionism) said, “Perhaps you should not use the word quote then.” Schecter replied, “Okay, ‘comments,’ then.” Cobos responded, “Thank you for making that clarification; it’s very important.”

He shared “comments” made by State Representative Joe Pickett, City Representative Susan Austin and the City Attorney’s Office. He then said, “While I cannot be able to rely on City Council to do this job, I am announcing that we are going to be establishing an arroyo defense fund with a subtitle of “A Dollar for Defense of Arroyos” and in the coming weeks we will formalize this, but we will be asking all the residents and citizens of El Paso to donate $1 so we can preserve the arroyos.”

Mr. Rubalcaba was generously given only one minute by Cobos, who was clearly annoyed by Rubalcaba’s presence.

“Number 1, you have signed up on nine items today,” barked Cobos. “Last week you spoke on a dozen items…I would hope you would be sensitive to the time constraints of the other citizens…it is not practical that we allow every citizen to speak on every issue for an unlimited period of time…in fact, it wouldn’t be practical if every city representative spoke on every issue for three minutes…you, you have signed up on 9 items today. You will have that podium for more than any other citizen today…to say you are restricted, I take issue with that…I’m giving you one minute, if you don’t like it, don’t take it.”

Rubalcaba said he wanted it to be on the record that Cobos – his representative – went against a citizen’s right to speak.

Rubalcaba said that if a developer owns the property and wants to add to the tax rolls, the developer should have the right to build in that arroyo.

Bill Sparks, a candidate for City Council District 5, and a speaker who was allowed more than a minute to speak, said “Every time a piece of dirt is changed in the city it affects a neighborhood…you have places in the City code that talk about preservation of neighborhoods…we need to talk about growth and planning in those terms.

“No action on this item,” announced Cushing.

Before the vote was taken, Mitchell was given an opportunity to add some final words to his agenda item.

The Skinny on the “Task Force”

“We’ve created some false issues,” said Mitchell. “I’m not asking you to deny anyone the right to develop the land,” he argued that the ordinance should just be followed. He challenged Cushing’s interpretation of the ordinance, saying that it clearly states that “arroyos shall be preserved in their natural state.” He said to Cushing, loudly and clearly, that the ordinance is definitely not being enforced.

Cushing interrupted him and absurdly and almost threateningly asked, “To preserve the arroyo in the natural state, you and Mr. Schecter probably live on the edge of the Wildwood, uh, whatever you wanna call it, water conveyance channel…if we were to go to the absolute extreme on this to preserve them in the natural condition, would it be reasonable to exercise eminent domain to remove those homes which were already at the top of this water conveyance channel?”

Mr. Mitchell responded, saying, “You are beyond the scope of what we are discussing today. To establish a policy as to what we will do with arroyos in this city as a whole is something that this Council is very, very dilatory and has failed to do and has failed miserably.”

Then he addressed Cobos, “To pass this off, and Mr. Chairman, I have to take exception to your remark that ‘Council’s position on this is clear,’ like this Council has taken a position to protect arroyos, indeed all this Council did was put the fox to guard the henhouse. It created a committee that’s dominated by developers in order to define arroyos. That’s nonsense!”

Can someone say “Mitchell for Council?”

And he’s absolutely right. The City has gotten into the habit of talking out of both sides of its mouth so as to be able to proclaim itself a progressive group. Mitchell’s point is exactly on target. Another example is the mayor’s “neighborhoods first” initiative, which makes him seem like he’s the neighborhood mayor, but the initiative is now being weakened (http://www.borderlandnews.com/stories/opinion/columnists/20041024-185430.shtml).

Cobos interrupted Mr. Mitchell and asked him to conclude. He said, “And I don’t remember you here at all during the Resler Canyon thing.”

The other good soldier, Robert Cushing, said, “I don’t either.”

Mitchell concluded, adding that Council’s stacked committee is spending some of its time discussing how to make it cheaper to develop inside arroyos instead of how to preserve them.

Cobos interrupted him (God forbid that information get out!) and informed Council no action would be taken.

Mitchell said it was “It seems to me sad and unfortunate that this Council would permit procedural issues, which are not clearly stated in the page on the website about how to submit a matter to this council, to deny Council the opportunity to take actions on the items that are brought to this Council by the citizens. I believe you’ve breached your duty to the public.”

Someone from the audience called out “hear, hear!”

Austin asked legal to assist with helping her “understand clearly” how arroyos play a role in the City’s side of the development process and if that can be applied to a currently filed subdivision application.

A gum-smacking Elizondo nodded (I couldn’t tell if she even understood what was being asked of her but she nodded anyway – between chomps of her gum).

And that was that.

Movin’ On

Immediately after the sad discussion on the “water conveyance channels,” Cushing asked that item 22D be moved up because the applicant had been “sitting here.” Cobos seconded that (more on the applicant’s identity in a moment).

Cook said, “The people here on 19A, 19B, 19C, 20A, 20B and 20C also have commitments and they’re next on the agenda.”

“We’ll take a separate vote, Mr. Cook, “ said Cobos, proudly saying, “But I do want to point out that it is the City Council’s effort and goal to inconvenience as many people as possible…uh…as few people as possible.”

Cook responded, “What a Freudian slip,” as the arroyo crowd laughed heartily. They, more than most folks, know just how true Cobos’ initial statement was.

Council voted on Cushing’s request to move item 22D to the forefront (while folks waiting on all the other items had to be moved back); the only person voting against it was John Cook.

Special Privileges

It was no wonder Cushing wanted this item moved up. The woman who was applying for the zoning change is a close, personal friend of his as well as a woman whom he has appointed to two City boards (she’s his appointment to the Art Museum Advisory Board as well as the Community Development Steering Committee):

22D. An Ordinance changing the zoning of Westerly 42 Feet of Lot 17 to 20 and the Westerly 42 Feet of the Southerly 16 feet of Lot 16, Block 20, Alexander Addition, El Paso, El Paso County, Texas (501 East California Avenue) from A-2 (Apartment) to A-O (Apartment/Office). The penalty being as provided in Chapter 20.68 of the El Paso Municipal Code. Applicant: Jamie Barron. ZON04-00110. (District 8) (Attachment) [Planning, Research and Development, Jorge Rousselin, (915) 541-4723]

Rudy Valdez from City Planning explained that the rezoning would change the property’s zoning from residential to commercial (an office building). The photos show a beautiful red-brick home with a large front porch. There is opposition from the neighborhood.

The Day of the Iguana
Cushing sat watching the presentation and in an odd (and rather disgusting) lizard-like move kept moving his tongue in and out of his mouth. Actually, he looked more like a snake testing the air. Don’t worry, Bob, we all know which way the wind’s blowin’.

Acting is if the opposition would get a fair shake (the deal was done, folks), Cobos said, “Let’s take some public comment.”

Vivian Rojas asked why the neighbors opposed the project, and Rudy Valdez said the neighbors wanted to preserve the residential zoning to keep commercial encroachment to a minimum.

Noel Islas spoke and said that the neighbors wanted to preserve their residential and church neighborhood. He said the neighbors have been working together for many years to improve their neighborhood and this would detract from their quality of life. He also said, “If neighborhoods are to be first, then we should be heard by Council.” He said he had collected 73 signatures and even mentioned the conflict of interest between Cushing and Barron and asked that Cushing abstain. He pointed out that Barron is Cushing’s neighbor (I wonder if he knows that she’s been appointed to City boards by him). Lisa Elizondo said no legal conflict exists, but as I’ve said time and time again in the past, it’s best to abstain when there is any possible perception of a conflict.

“We’re in Central El Paso, we need houses…please help us,” said Beatriz Lynch, an elderly resident in that neighborhood. She and another resident, Esther Castro, said they have concerns about traffic and they are more interested in having families – not businesses – move in. “Please consider our voice,” she implored.

Jaime Barron, the applicant and FOC (friend of Cushing), said her son owned the property but she was the representative and also a member of the neighborhood association and is in favor of the change. I wondered how she could be a member of a neighborhood association so far from her home (remember, she’s Cushing’s neighbor)

The opponents submitted a petition against the zoning change, and John Cook accurately pointed out that Council should postpone the zoning change until Planning reviews the petition to see if it triggers a “211” (which means that if the number of people who oppose the project is large enough, a super majority would be needed in order to pass it).

Cook made a motion to postpone and the motion passed unanimously.

Jamie Barron asked that the supporters be heard, so Council reconsidered the item. Only Cook voted no.

Three folks were in favor, including Ms. Barron’s business partner Patricia Monardes (who doesn’t live near the property and another one of Cushing’s appointees and friends). Cobos pressured staff to hurry up and find out if the opposition would trigger a 211.

Monica Beltran said she “strongly supports” the zoning change and pointed out that she, like Barron, is trying to “preserve” properties and argued that Barron “isn’t hurting anybody.”

Well, folks, I “strongly support” the neighbors. Preserving central El Paso is important to a “progressive” City. This Council, which frequently touts itself as being “progressive,” should know that what we should be doing is exactly what Mrs. Castro said – getting families to invest in and live in our very beautiful and historical (but slowly dying) central area.

Two other folks spoke in support of the zoning change.

Beatriz Lynch, the opponent who said she is familiar with the area, said she had no idea who these supporters were.

The postponement passed again.

At the end of the meeting, George Sarmiento (the Director of Planning) told Council that he had determined there aren’t enough signatures of people living within 200 feet of the property on the petition to warrant the special “super majority” vote and Cushing responded, “Thanks for the good work!”

The item will be back next week, and I’m sure it will pass.

For Whom the Question Tolls

When Mr. Rubalcaba asked that the following item be taken off the agenda, Cobos announced, “You have two minutes!”

5L. That the Mayor, be authorized to sign a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of El Paso and the Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Border Patrol for reimbursement of overtime expenses from October 27, 2004 to January 22, 2005. (Attachment) [Police Department, Assistant Chief Paul Cross, (915) 564-7310]

While I completely support Mr. Rubalcaba’s visits to Council, Rep. John Cook accurately pointed out that Assistant Chief Paul Cross had been sitting for half a day to answer Mr. Rubalcaba’s question about the item. He also showed Rubalcaba that a name and phone number of someone who could answer his questions is on the agenda item.

Rubalcaba said it was a good thing that the City was receiving this grant.

Council approved the item unanimously.

Infill Gone Awry

The following item confirmed my worst fears about Cushing’s infill ordinance, which he passed early into his tenure as Troikette…er…City Representative:

22E. An Ordinance granting Special Permit No. ZON04-00064, to allow for infill development on Lots 1 - 4, Block 76C, Logan Heights, El Paso, El Paso County, Texas (Flory Avenue & Stevens Street), pursuant to Section 20.14.040 (Zoning) of the El Paso Municipal Code. The penalty being as provided in Chapter 20.68 of the El Paso Municipal Code. ZONE: R-4 (Residential). Applicant: Windridge Properties. (District 2) (Attachment) [Planning, Research and Development, Kimberly Forsyth, (915) 541-4631]

Cushing wanted to move quickly to approve the item, before the public had its say, and even before City staff had a chance to explain the special permit.

Richarda Momsen had to remind him that there would be public comment (that’s right Bob-O, that usually happens at public hearings).

Rudy Valdez from the Planning Department explained that the owners of the property want to build 3 single-family residential structures on 12,000 square feet of property in Cushing’s district and the owner could receive a special permit because of Cushing’s infill ordinance.

As I mentioned, Cushing created an infill ordinance that he and the El Paso Times praised up and down.

Infill is generally a good thing (when used appropriately) – it allows for builders to build in the city’s core, slows down sprawl, and helps vacant lots become new homes in parts of the city where lots are smaller. It also saves taxpayer money because new infrastructure doesn’t have to be created where it already exists.

However, those of you who have been reading my column for the last year know that I cautioned celebrants about this ordinance. When I read Cushing’s ordinance closely, I stated that my fear was that there would be abuses that allow for developers to build multiple homes on small lots, potentially creating high-density blight.

As I often do, I’d like to quote myself. Here’s what I said last December when the ordinance passed:

I congratulate the Planning Department for their good work. I do have a concern regarding this ordinance, however, despite the fact that it's generally progressive. My concern is that Council has, essentially, allowed for infill development in the entire City! I'm no City Planner, but I carefully read through the backup material provided for this agenda item, and I remain concerned that this ordinance is over-inclusive. Pat Aduato, Deputy CAO for Building and Planning, stated that the ordinance allows the City to place "a special permit use overlay in all residential areas." While reduced parking and set back requirements, limited landscaping requirements and high-density building is good for the inner city, I don't believe it would be a good thing for all neighborhoods, especially newer developments. High density development has been criticized, and a new British report shows the pitfalls of such development because smaller homes mean less family space and more noise. More folks jammed into neighborhoods also means high traffic. Think about high density building in your neighborhood. If you don't like it, it's too late; this ordinance allows (with Council's final approval) infill development everywhere.

What made me further suspicious of this ordinance was that Ray Adauto, spokesperson for the El Paso Association of Builders, stepped up to support it. Whenever Mr. Adauto has addressed Council in the past, it has been to echo concerns and opinions of Bobby Bowling, Anthony Cobos' patron. In fact, according to Adauto, Bobby Bowling had direct involvement with the crafting of this ordinance. Remind you of a certain U.S. vice-president and the formulation of U.S. energy policy?

What confirmed my suspicions (and exacerbated my queasiness) was Cobos yelping out that this ordinance exhibited "excellent work!" When Cobos does this (and he frequently does) it's almost always a bad sign.

(http://www.newspapertree.com/newsletter.ssd?section=feature&c=bb8742f762c84756 Infill ‘Er Up!)

Back to the meeting. Well, three homes on 12,000 square feet sure sounds cramped to your old friend Sid (that’s only 4,000 square feet per home – yard, living space, etc.), and as could be expected, neighbors aren’t too happy about the fact that three homes will be built on such a small lot. Two of them spoke at this meeting.

The first was Sandra Martinez, who said Council would be “asking for trouble,” if they were to approve the ordinance, she stressed that she and the neighbors support building one or two homes, but three is too much. She expressed concern that her property values would decrease, and asked Council to reject the request.

The second speaker was Guadalupe Rodriguez who implored that Council listen to the neighbors. She had lived in the area for 47 years, and looking directly at Cushing said, “Bob, I wish when you put this before City Council…I wish you had come to our neighborhood and knocked on our doors…you represent us, not Windridge Properties.” (Actually, Mrs. Rodriguez, in his mind, Cushing really represents Luther Jones, David Escobar, the Jobes, the Bowlings and other developers, not you or your neighbors).

“I get this horrible feeling that…developers are getting the upper hand in this town. Developers will do anything to build on their properties at the highest profit…[the developer’s] not going to live in our area…we do not want three houses…I hope for once, the common man, the working person, the taxpayer, the ordinary people of El Paso are heard…and I hope you back us up Mr. Cushing.”

Well, you can guess whether or not Cushing backed them up.

Susan Austin said that infill development is intended to benefit the City as a whole because property is being used in the interior. While she’s right, there can be abuses to infill development, and this is a classic example.

The only person (again) to point out the abuse was John Cook. Speaking to Austin’s point, he said, “That may be true, Ms. Austin, but …I don’t believe the intention [of infill] was to squeeze as many properties onto lots as possible.”

Cushing, who clearly was only backing up the developer said, “I personally am very supportive...as I’m well aware, change is difficult,” and made a motion to approve, seconded by Cobos.

No, Mr. Cushing, it ain’t change that’s tough, it’s all the corruption that’s hard to swallow.

The motion passed and, as I could have guessed, the only no votes were Cook and Rojas.

What is Democracy?

Mr. Rubalcaba had pulled multiple items off the consent agenda and the following was one of them:

5G. That the Mayor be authorized to sign Amendment Number 1 to Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) Contract No. 582-4-64435 and all related documentation on behalf of the El Paso City-County Health and Environmental District. This amendment decreases the total compensation possible from TCEQ and amends the Agreement to allow it to be assigned or terminated upon the dissolution of the District. There is no additional cost to the City-County Health and Environmental District related to this amendment. (Attachment) [El Paso City-County Health and Environmental District, Dr. Jorge C. Magaña, (915) 771-5702]

Cobos, who has never before complained about keeping department heads around when Representatives have simple questions to ask, began lecturing (for Mr. Rubalcaba to take note) about the fact that it costs the City money to keep department heads waiting around to answer simple questions.

Mr. Rubalcaba took issue with Cobos’s lecture and said that as a citizen, he had every right to ask questions of his “leaders.”

Vivan Rojas rose to his defense, saying that more – not fewer – people should participate actively in municipal government.

She’s right. However, there is a tight rope to walk. Representatives have no excuse for not asking questions of department heads who work in the same building they do (now, they can just ask the City Manager their questions). Citizens, though, should be encouraged to participate in public meetings like this…but not when the questions can easily be addressed with a simple phone call or visit to their City Representative’s office. (Although, under Wardy’s tenure, he wants Representatives to stop dealing with citizens issues and wants to send those all directly to the City Manager…wrong move.)

I hope Mr. Rubalcaba keeps coming to meetings each week…that’s a whole lot more than most folks can (or want to) do. Activists play an important role. But if he has simple questions that require only a phone call, that’s good too. It helps him focus on asking the tough questions.

More Movin’ On

By the way, as I predicted a long, long time ago, Bill Chapman (the City’s Chief Financial Officer) will soon leave El Paso. http://www.borderlandnews.com/stories/borderland/20041029-187535.shtml

It’s a good thing he found another job because Bob Cushing had already painted a huge bullseye on Chapman’s back. I can’t say whether Chapman’s leaving is a good or bad thing. But I can say I don’t trust Bob Cushing to represent the best interests of the citizens of this community, and Cushing was itching to get Chapman out.

Until next week, I’m wishing you lots of very important Halloween Happiness.

Comments or questions: shmaven@yahoo.com

My commentaries are posted weekly at http://www.thestrelz.com/shm/shm.htm

Also, if any of my readers would like to add their own comments or thoughts, they can do that at

http://strelzbacktalk.proboards19.com/index.cgi?board=shm