B and B

Texas Observer runs down the good and the bad in the parks funding bill

The blog of the Texas Observer magazine has an informative rundown of the good and the bad in the state parks funding bill passed out of the Texas House by a 141 to nothing vote yesterday.

Parks advocates are now closer to achieving one of their main goals of the session: busting the cap on the sporting goods tax, which could potentially free up an extra $80 million a year for the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department.

However, some troubling provisions remain in in the bill. For starters, HB 12 taps more inmates to do the grunt work on Texas state natural areas, picking up trash or digging foundations for new buildings, as Hilderbran explained today.

...

Also left in the bill is the controversial transfer of historic sites from TPWD to the Texas Historical Commission, an agency headed by Craddick crony John Nau III. A wholesale transfer of historic sites, such as Sebastopol House in Seguin and rock climbing mecca Hueco Tanks near El Paso, is opposed by parks advocates, visitors, and many of the local communities.

“It’s unfortunate that there are some sites that do not want to go to the historical commission that will be going,” said Beth McDonald, president of Texans for State Parks. McDonald fears that the Historical Commission will not have sufficient state money to maintain the sites - some of which receive few visitors - and will turn to outsourcing, increased entrance fees, and privatization schemes to generate revenue. Of course that may be the whole point of Nau’s - and Craddick’s - gambit: starve the sites of funding and then turn them over to private sector control.

Even with these concerns, 141 to nothing is a pretty impressive margin.  But exactly how much cash our legislators will provide in the end remains to be seen.

Bill to remove funding cap on Texas parks is on the move at last

The state parks funding train may be moving again, after apparently being stalled for months.  The Texas House finally gave "preliminary approval" to Rep. Hilderbran's bill to remove the cap on funding for our parks via the sales tax on sporting goods -- a bill which amassed the vast majority of representatives as co-authors months ago.  I'm not quite sure what "preliminary approval" means exactly, but apparently full passage at this point is a mere formality.

From the Houston Chronicle today:

Texas' crumbling public parks system could get a much-needed financial boost under a bill given preliminary approval Wednesday by the state House that frees up millions of dollars lawmakers have spent elsewhere in recent years.

State parks officials and environmentalists have lobbied for months to ask lawmakers to pump more cash into the state's 600,000-acre parks system of lakes, rivers and trails.

The bill still needs a final vote Thursday before it is sent to the Senate for consideration.

Parks officials want the state to spend all of the estimated $105 million collected annually on sporting goods sales taxes to revitalize the parks system.

The sporting goods sales tax fund for parks was created in 1993, but lawmakers limited how much money could be spent on parks at $32 million and spent most of the money elsewhere. Just $20.6 million from the fund went to state parks last year.

The bill passed Wednesday removes the $32 million cap, allowing lawmakers to spend more of that money on parks.

How much money still depends on House and Senate budget negotiations, although leaders on both sides have said it will be substantially more than what parks get now.

Unfortunately, current funding is so pitiful that "substantially more" could still mean nowhere near enough. 

King Ranch v. Big Wind

The famous King Ranch, down near the Gulf coast south of Corpus Christi, has been waging a battle against wind power farms planned for its area 

As a proponent of wind power and other sources of energy that reduce global warming emissions, that should make me an opponent of theirs.  Then again, they are also waging a battle against Texas' tradition of unregulated development--the kind of tradition that has led to dynamite blasting in residential areas and to the Helotes mulch fire.  As a witness to the damaging consequences of this tradition, perhaps I should be a supporter of the King Ranch in this case. 

Indeed, wind power should not have an exemption from sensible regulation, so I am sympathetic to the King Ranch's proposed legislation--at least based on my understanding of it from this article in today's Austin American-Statesman:

King Ranch Inc., the agricultural holding company that owns the South Texas ranch and other properties, is backing legislation that could choke off the boom in Texas wind energy by requiring new state regulations of wind turbines.

The state does not require permits in most cases for wind farms, which consist of hundreds of enormous turbines that generate electricity.

That would change under House Bill 2794, sponsored by Rep. Robert Puente, D-San Antonio. The bill would require the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to establish a permit process to take into account the environmental consequences of wind turbines and whether the noise they create — or just the fact they're part of a once-unspoiled view — interferes with the property rights of nearby landowners.

King Ranch has been fighting a proposed coastal wind project in Kenedy County, just east of its ranch, that would place 267 turbines along the Gulf's Laguna Madre.

"People need to take a deep breath and think a little," Jack Hunt, CEO of King Ranch Inc., said about the Texas wind rush. "It's a frenzy."

I suspect that, in the end, such a permit process would still permit most of the wind farms to be built.  But it would allow ill-conceived plans to be prevented.

Like most land use regulation attempts in Texas, however, it looks like this bill stands little chance in our developer-friendly legislature.

Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson said opponents of wind energy won't succeed in the Legislature, either.

"The bill is dead because no one wants to pass it," said Patterson, who has leased state land for big offshore wind projects to generate more revenue for public education. "This is the King Ranch versus the rest of Texas."

...

Patterson said the idea of siting requirements for wind turbines "is not completely outside the realm of good public policy" and is worth studying.

"But this bill isn't about being reasonable," he said.

Patterson may be correct that this isn't reasonable legislation, though I suspect his reasons for thinking so are not the same as mine.

The problem is not that wind turbines are exempt from sensible land use regulations, but that virtually no one is subject to sensible land use regulation.  While in principle this legislation sounds like an excellent idea, wind farms strike me as far down the priority list on this matter.

Wildflower season is starting, after taking last year off

Will this be a good wildflower year in central Texas? 

"It is definitely looking promising," said Damon Waitt, senior botanist at the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center in Austin. "I'd say that based on the numbers I'm seeing and condition of the plants, it should be a really good year.

"The wet January was good for them, and the recent rains and warm weather has kept them moving along nicely," Waitt said. "We've already got a pretty good bluebonnet display here at the center."

Though the season is expected to peak in the first half of April, a scenic drive any day will turn up bluebonnets, Indian paintbrushes, mountain laurel, redbud trees and several other early bloomers.

Last year's show, coming almost a year into a drought that only ended in recent weeks, was virtually non-existent, and the previous couple were modest.  But based on what I've seen so far, this indeed could shape up as an excellent year. 

Bonilla got the OAS job

Following up on a post from a few weeks ago, it turns out that our defeated former Congressman Henry Bonilla's potential new gig with the Bushies has come through, as reported by the Houston Chronicle today:

President Bush has nominated former Rep. Henry Bonilla, a Texas Republican, to be the U.S. representative to the Organization of American States, the White House announced Thursday.

...

Bonilla said his responsibilities would include work on policies such as trade, immigration and energy sales. Bonilla dealt with those issues while in Congress.

His nomination must be approved by the Senate. The previous U.S. ambassador to the OAS, John Maisto, has resigned.

Will there be funding for new parks as Texas' population continues to grow?

One of the major ideas behind increasing our spending on Texas state parks above the starvation budget they have been on is to enable our state to acquire and develop new parks.  Maintaining the parks we have will not be enough to meet the needs of our state's growning population even into the near future.

But apparently, GOP state Rep. Warren Chisum, the chair of the House Appropriations Committee (and the same Chisum who was recently caught passing around  nonsensical anti-Copernican literature a few weeks ago), may not support this idea.  So Luke Metzger of Environment Texas claims in an email urging that parks supporters call our state representatives to urge them to ask Chisum to support funds for new parks.

Note that Chisum is one of the many, many co-sponsors of Rep. Hilderbran's bill to fully fund our parks system.  This fact emphasises, as Charles Kuffner recently pointed out, that Hilderbran's bill is only a partial solution--albeit a crucial first step.  We have to also make sure that the full amount of money actually gets appropriated--not just for this legislative session, but on into the future as well.

Otherwise, Texas' parks will continue to wither away, little by little. 

Vested rights: "treeless, dynamite-blasted hillsides," and a giant burning mulch pile

Land developers' abuse of "vested rights" has gone on far too long, with the support and encouragement of our state government.  So I am heartened to see that at least one of our state legislators understands the problem. 

From the San Antonio Express-News today (emphasis added):

With a nearly treeless, dynamite-blasted hillside as a backdrop, state Rep. Mike Villarreal said Saturday that he was taking a small step that could have a profound impact on developers who hoist the banner of "vested rights" while paying scant attention to the rights of others.

House Bill 1529, which he introduced in the Legislature in Austin last week, would allow cities to override developers' vested rights if the health and safety of neighbors is threatened or property is damaged.

"San Antonio passed a water ordinance and a tree ordinance and it can't enforce either one because developers changed the law in the Legislature," Villarreal told 40 supporters gathered in front of Toll Brothers Sonoma Verde development on Kyle Seale Parkway just beyond Cedar Creek Golf Course.

"Government is best when it is under local control," Villarreal said, "and this bill will insert specific, targeted language into the law to bring some of that control back to the cities."

Homeowners living next to Sonoma Verde pointed at the development that looks like a rock quarry and then pointed to juniper-covered hills across the street.

"That's the way this used to look," said Mary Schuetze. "They don't care about the trees. They'll be gone as soon as the market drops."

A request for comment was left at Toll Brothers late Friday. It was not returned.

Other nearby homeowners told of dynamite explosions 40 feet from their houses, walls and foundations that were solid for 15 years but suddenly developed cracks, and limestone dust that mixes with rain and dew to cover plants with a concrete cake.

I wish I had known about Rep. Villareal's event beforehand, as I would have added to the number of supporters present.  I have seen this Toll Brothers "development" first-hand, and the visual impact is truly disgusting.  Sadly, the impacts go far beyond the visual for those living nearby.

Carlos Guerra wrote about column late last week about one particular homeowner couple who has been severly affected by the actions of their neighbor.

As they detail the ordeal they have endured since May, Stan and Dorothy Miller's voices are amazingly calm. Perhaps they have accepted that the home of their dreams has been turned into an unending nightmare. Or perhaps they just have tired of the lack of response from government at all levels.

But signs in their yard speak of their frustration: "Toll Bros. bad for neighbors, nature," reads one that lists animals they no longer see. "Noise 12 hours a day, six days a week. Blasting; house damage," reads the other.

...

10 months after Toll Bros.' arrival, the once verdant hills around the Millers' neighborhood have been turned into an eerie moonscape of terraced limestone cliffs that are being covered with tacky brown brick. And on hills flattened — presumably to reduce foundation costs — dozens of densely built MacMansions are being hurriedly built.

"They denuded the whole property; they cleared all the trees, thousands and thousands of them," Stan says. "Then they started mulching the trees, and the air was full of cedar dust.

"And nobody has said a word about the destruction of the habitat of wildlife," he says. "They're gone because their habitat is gone."

It got worse.

It got worse!  Read the rest of Guerra's column to find out how.

Our state government needs to change their way and recognize that "property rights" is not about the alleged rights of land developers to slash and burn and dynamite and bulldoze as they please.

And if your're wondering if there is a connection between the actions of developers to turn vast expanses of Hill Country land into moonscapes and that gigantic burning pile of mulch nearby that is polluting our air and water, you are right on the money.

Public hearing on state parks bill, Feb 20

The Texas House committee on Culture, Recreation, and Tourism is holding a public hearing on Rep. Hilderbran's bill to fully fund our state parks system via the sales tax on sporting goods. The meeting is tomorrow, Tuesday, February 20 at 2:00 PM. "Or," as the schedule states "upon final adjourn./recess."

Meanwhile, Hilderbran's bill (HB 6) is up to 118 co-authors in the House, giving it a huge majority of 79%. Its companion in the Senate (SB 252), authored by Sen. Estes is up to 16 co-authors, giving it a slight majority of 17 out of 31—four short of the 2/3 typically required to get bills through the Senate.

Since the Lieutenant Governor, who presides over the state senate, and the Chair of the Finance Committee considering the bill still are not on board, though, our work is far from done. We need to keep the pressure on Lt. Gov Dewhurst and Sen. Ogden, as well as the other state senators, and not give them any excuse to bury this bill.

Ciro's next opponent?

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has put our new congressman, Ciro Rodriguez, on their list of the 29 most endangered Democratic incumbents for 2008.  This means that the DCCC will make sure that Ciro gets plenty of their support in the next election, to ensure that he can hold this seat.

Now, some local Republicans are already thinking about being the one to take him on next time.  From Sunday's Express-News:

County Commissioner Lyle Larson said Friday he's seriously considering running in Congressional District 23 in 2008 — a clear sign that the aftershocks of last summer's court-ordered redistricting didn't end with Democrat Ciro Rodriguez's upset of Republican Henry Bonilla.

Despite Rodriguez's eight percentage point victory, Larson contends the district — which stretches from San Antonio to El Paso — remains winnable for the GOP, especially with the concentration of votes in his North Side stronghold.

"It looks like it's still a Republican district if you get the vote out," said Larson, the lone Republican on the Commissioners Court. "This is one that was lost that never should've been lost to the Democratic Party."

...

Richard Langlois, chairman of the Bexar County Republican Party, blamed the rout [Rodriguez's victory over Henry Bonilla in December] on GOP voters who stayed at home. He also said they'd likely turn out in droves in 2008 to oust Rodriguez.

This district is certainly competitive for the GOP if the right Republican joined the race.  I doubt Larson is that person.  He represents the highly Republican northwest part of Bexar County, Bonilla's old stronghold, and is far less well known.  (For example, I have lived in this area for seven years and know essentially nothing about Larson.)  As Larson is an anglo Republican from the wealthy part of town, I find it extremely doubtful he could gain  significant support in heavily-Latino, economically disadvantaged, south Bexar County.  And Bonilla, as a long-term incumbent, had many advantages that Larson, or another Republican, will not have in 2008.  So, it is unlikely he could do much better than Bonilla could against Ciro Rodriguez, no matter how much northwest Bexar County GOPers would like to oust Rodriguez. 

Still, we should not assume this district is a sure thing for Democrats in 2008.  That attitude, on the part of the GOP, is what helped to spell Bonilla's demise last year.  Fortunately, the DCCC has shown that they, at least, are not going to make that same mistake. 

Mulch fire water standoff resolved

After nearly coming to blows over how to extinguish the Helotes much fire, local officials finally appear to have convinced the state environmental agency, TCEQ, that they need to be extraordinarily careful with their use of water.

From Friday's Express-News:

A compromise was reached Friday on fighting the Helotes mulch fire that allows state contractors to use San Antonio Water System water on the pile on a test basis, with state officials agreeing to abandon that approach if contamination shows up during extensive monitoring of surrounding wells.

...

The SAWS [San Antonio Water System] board voted 6-0 to rescind its earlier decision to deny water to the site. Earlier firefighting efforts had contaminated wells more than a half-mile away in the Edwards Aquifer, the water source for 1.7 million people in the region.

"We want to reiterate that our position on this issue is to preserve the quality of our water supply and the protection of our aquifer," said SAWS board Chairman Alex Briseño. "The assurances agreed to by the executive director of TCEQ show that they have received our message loud and clear. TCEQ underestimated this community's love and commitment for the Edwards Aquifer."

The revised plan, which could be put in place as soon as both Shankle and Briseño sign a contract, calls for several million gallons of water to be put into the clay-lined quenching pit that's been constructed next to the huge burning pile.

If it hasn't leaked after 24 hours, then SAWS will provide up to 300,000 gallons a day for three days for firefighting efforts on the debris pile to cool equipment and its operators and to keep down smoke and ash. They'll move burning debris into the quenching pit.

After the third day, operations will cease for two days while the state agency and the Edwards Aquifer Authority continue sampling up to 31 wells around the pile twice a day, watching for evidence of contamination. If none is found, firefighting operations can resume.

"If any degradation to a water well is detected, all use of water in the site will cease immediately and they will actively pursue a new plan that does not include use of water directly on the pile," Steve Clouse, SAWS vice president of production and treatment operations, told the board.

It's quite amazing that it took so long for TCEQ to agree to a cautious approach such as this, especially given the well contamination discovered a few weeks ago after the initial fire-fighting efforts.  Late last week, Dig Deeper Texas pointed to an Express-News editorial that may partially explain this, as TCEQ officials reportedly were unaware that there are no treatment plants for Edwards aquifer water.  That such  plants are not necessary is one reason why the aquifer is so valuable.  Even with its chronic lack of funding, TCEQ has no excuse not to know such basic facts about their state.