Corinth currently offers an "on demand transit" service to seniors and the disabled of any age. Initially a small low cost program, it has become a small extremely expensive program. From a few thousand dollars a year, it is now projected to be over $55,000 for 2010 serving only 12 residents that use it. Per person served, it is over $4,500, compared to just over $640 per person served by all the rest of the city services (police, fire/ems, community services, etc).
With the current budget issues, reduced revenues from sales tax and property values going down, it is hard to justify continuing this expense in my opinion.
You can find out more at my website.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
A Glance at the budget evolution for 2010
At a budget workshop in February the City staff began preparing estimates for the 2010 budget based on information available and current in February. At that point we were expecting sales tax to be down 14% compared to budget for the 2009 fiscal year (runs from Oct 2009 to Sep 2010). That would be a drop of 12.3% compared to the 2008-09 year. We were also expecting a 1% drop in property values, and given the same property tax rate, a similar drop in property tax revenue. Licenses, permits, interest income were all expected to be down. In all we expected revenue for 2009 to be down by almost $217,000 or about 1.68% compared to what was planned.
Using that as a starting point, we were expecting revenue for the 2010 fiscal year to be down $354,000 compared to 2009, or about 2.74%. Assuming the same expenditures for 2010 as were budgeted for 2009, that would leave a gap of about $497,500 that had to be made up.
By May 20th, the next budget workshop, the picture had changed, and for the worse. While the sales tax picture had improved from -14% change to -9.77% compared to the 2009 year, the property tax values were now predicted to be down by about 3.5%. Property tax makes up almost 49% of the tax revenues the city generates - sales tax about 7.7%. So you can see that a percent change in property value (and thus property tax) has a much greater impact than a percent change in sales tax revenues. Now projecting $12.3 million in revenues for the 2010 fiscal budget, we would now be close to $900k short. At this point the staff made the first moves to reduce the budget.
The 2009 budget had been adopted at ~$13.2 mil. The city manager and staff had made efforts to begin reducing the spend during 2009, and on May 20, the projected expenses for 2009 were at ~$12.9 mil. By May 20, staff had shaved about ~$17,000 from the budget (net) over 2009. This left us still about ~$600K short for 2010.
The July 8th meeting was little different: at that point, we projected ~$12.4 mil in revenues, had shaved expenditures to ~$12.6 mil, still about $196k short. So some discussions ensued around methods to make up the deficit including a tax rate increase to the effective rate (more on that later), a water franchise fee, and some additional cuts, possibly including the on demand transit service, our part of the Lake Cities library, and various printed communications the city sends out.
By the way, this is all referring to the General Fund. There are several other funds maintained by the city, including utilities, the EDC, Hotel Tax, etc. all of which are "in shape" meaning that there are no deficits in those budgets.
More Later.
Using that as a starting point, we were expecting revenue for the 2010 fiscal year to be down $354,000 compared to 2009, or about 2.74%. Assuming the same expenditures for 2010 as were budgeted for 2009, that would leave a gap of about $497,500 that had to be made up.
By May 20th, the next budget workshop, the picture had changed, and for the worse. While the sales tax picture had improved from -14% change to -9.77% compared to the 2009 year, the property tax values were now predicted to be down by about 3.5%. Property tax makes up almost 49% of the tax revenues the city generates - sales tax about 7.7%. So you can see that a percent change in property value (and thus property tax) has a much greater impact than a percent change in sales tax revenues. Now projecting $12.3 million in revenues for the 2010 fiscal budget, we would now be close to $900k short. At this point the staff made the first moves to reduce the budget.
The 2009 budget had been adopted at ~$13.2 mil. The city manager and staff had made efforts to begin reducing the spend during 2009, and on May 20, the projected expenses for 2009 were at ~$12.9 mil. By May 20, staff had shaved about ~$17,000 from the budget (net) over 2009. This left us still about ~$600K short for 2010.
The July 8th meeting was little different: at that point, we projected ~$12.4 mil in revenues, had shaved expenditures to ~$12.6 mil, still about $196k short. So some discussions ensued around methods to make up the deficit including a tax rate increase to the effective rate (more on that later), a water franchise fee, and some additional cuts, possibly including the on demand transit service, our part of the Lake Cities library, and various printed communications the city sends out.
By the way, this is all referring to the General Fund. There are several other funds maintained by the city, including utilities, the EDC, Hotel Tax, etc. all of which are "in shape" meaning that there are no deficits in those budgets.
More Later.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
A bit of Good news... and some not so good
The finance staff has published the financial report for the Month of May, 2010. As I last mentioned, February and March both had increase sales tax year over year. April did also, albeit a modest gain. And that was the good news.
Unfortunately, May 2010 was drastically down in sales tax collected compared to May 2009. For the year, sales tax collection is down 3.5% compared to last year. Unfortunately, budget projections planned on a modest sales tax increase - so the sales tax compared to budget is off by 5.4%.
This of course has implications for the 2010-11 budget. Over the next few weeks I will delve into that some.
Unfortunately, May 2010 was drastically down in sales tax collected compared to May 2009. For the year, sales tax collection is down 3.5% compared to last year. Unfortunately, budget projections planned on a modest sales tax increase - so the sales tax compared to budget is off by 5.4%.
This of course has implications for the 2010-11 budget. Over the next few weeks I will delve into that some.
Monday, May 17, 2010
A Bit of Good News on the Budget - for now
Both the February and March 2010 sales tax receipts were up compared to those months in 2009. This appears to be the first time in a while. Since January 2008 the sales tax had been steadily dropping compared to the prior year (same month), so this is a welcome change from a budgetary point of view. Obviously it would be nice if this change in direction were to continue, even if only by a modest amount.
This change alone will not correct the budget issues we have been monitoring all year - still, every bit helps.
This change alone will not correct the budget issues we have been monitoring all year - still, every bit helps.
Sunday, May 16, 2010
what part of Illegal do people not get?
People are still talking about the Arizona law directing police to investigate persons that they believe might be in the country illegally. There are many articles discussing this, including one from Time on April 26, 2010. From what I can tell from reading peoples' comments and media polls, Americans are very supportive of the stance that Arizona is taking. I know I am.
The argument most used by opponents is that Arizona (and any other state) has no standing to enforce federal laws on immigration, based on the contents of the constitution of the united states, specifically Article 1 section 8, fourth clause "To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;". Section 8 enumerates the powers of congress.
I would posit that the opponents of the Arizona legislation are wrong for the simple reason that the Arizona law does not seek to establish any rules setting who can and can't immigrate and become citizens. The Arizona law establishes a directive to Arizona law enforcement officers and other Arizona officials empowering them to investigate a suspect's legal right to be in the united states (and thus Arizona). Congress has established the rules of entry into the nation; those rules include the possession of a passport/visa or permanent resident card (green card). Only the federal government can issue or rescind visas or green cards. If you are in violation of the rules, you can't be here.
Since the Arizona law makes no attempt to authorize anyone in Arizona to issue or rescind visas or green cards, it is in not in any way in conflict with the national laws. What it does is, using the proper power of the states, authoriz law enforcement to detain people and render them to the federal authorities if they are in the state illegally.
Obviously, this is a contentious matter for many. I think people often fail to understand just what illegal means in any context, and specifically in the context of "illegal aliens". Illegal means to "not be in accord with the law". Congress determined what it takes to be in accord with the law. Arizona is just authorizing their sworn officers to execute the law. As far as I can tell, there is no prohibition to the states on enforcing laws.
In fact, when officials are sworn in to their office, even at the city level (here in Corinth), the official is required to take an oath to support and defend the constitution of the US as well as the state and (in our case) the city charter.
The argument most used by opponents is that Arizona (and any other state) has no standing to enforce federal laws on immigration, based on the contents of the constitution of the united states, specifically Article 1 section 8, fourth clause "To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;". Section 8 enumerates the powers of congress.
I would posit that the opponents of the Arizona legislation are wrong for the simple reason that the Arizona law does not seek to establish any rules setting who can and can't immigrate and become citizens. The Arizona law establishes a directive to Arizona law enforcement officers and other Arizona officials empowering them to investigate a suspect's legal right to be in the united states (and thus Arizona). Congress has established the rules of entry into the nation; those rules include the possession of a passport/visa or permanent resident card (green card). Only the federal government can issue or rescind visas or green cards. If you are in violation of the rules, you can't be here.
Since the Arizona law makes no attempt to authorize anyone in Arizona to issue or rescind visas or green cards, it is in not in any way in conflict with the national laws. What it does is, using the proper power of the states, authoriz law enforcement to detain people and render them to the federal authorities if they are in the state illegally.
Obviously, this is a contentious matter for many. I think people often fail to understand just what illegal means in any context, and specifically in the context of "illegal aliens". Illegal means to "not be in accord with the law". Congress determined what it takes to be in accord with the law. Arizona is just authorizing their sworn officers to execute the law. As far as I can tell, there is no prohibition to the states on enforcing laws.
In fact, when officials are sworn in to their office, even at the city level (here in Corinth), the official is required to take an oath to support and defend the constitution of the US as well as the state and (in our case) the city charter.
California ban on violent video games unconstitutional
At the end of April of this year (2010), the Supreme Court of the US (SCOTUS) agreed to hear an appeal from the 9th Circuit court of appeals on the issue of California's ban on the sale of violent video games to anyone under the age of 18. See the AP article about the courts and violent video games
It never ceases to amaze me how governments at all levels continually attempt to impose their will on people's freedom of speech and expression and on their freedom of choice. The California law in question is yet another attempt to legislate "morality" and define what is okay for people to participate in. Luckily the 9th circuit court struck down the law. Now we get to hear SCOTUS weigh in on the issue.
To me this is very simple. The writers of the video games have freedom of expression, like anyone else. If people want to buy it, then they should be able to sell it. End of story. Just as important, if you want to buy a violent video game, that is your choice - and the government has no business telling you otherwise.
Now, as for people under 18 - it is the parents' responsibility to determine the suitability of any game, TV show, movie, or other activity their kids might participate in. And in fact, it is their freedom of choice to do so. If you don't want your kids to play violent video games, don't let them. Exercise a little parental control, rather than expecting the state to do it for you.
I will be interested in what SCOTUS has to say, probably sometime this fall or next year.
It never ceases to amaze me how governments at all levels continually attempt to impose their will on people's freedom of speech and expression and on their freedom of choice. The California law in question is yet another attempt to legislate "morality" and define what is okay for people to participate in. Luckily the 9th circuit court struck down the law. Now we get to hear SCOTUS weigh in on the issue.
To me this is very simple. The writers of the video games have freedom of expression, like anyone else. If people want to buy it, then they should be able to sell it. End of story. Just as important, if you want to buy a violent video game, that is your choice - and the government has no business telling you otherwise.
Now, as for people under 18 - it is the parents' responsibility to determine the suitability of any game, TV show, movie, or other activity their kids might participate in. And in fact, it is their freedom of choice to do so. If you don't want your kids to play violent video games, don't let them. Exercise a little parental control, rather than expecting the state to do it for you.
I will be interested in what SCOTUS has to say, probably sometime this fall or next year.
Consideration of a Moratorium on issuing Gas Well Permits in the City of Corinth
At the last council session (May 6, 2010), at the end I requested that discussion of an ordinance to enact a moratorium on Gas Well Permits being issued be added to the May 20, 2010 Council Session agenda. I went so far as to poll the council - if at least 2 other council members agreed it would have to be put on the agenda per City Code 30.085(B). However, I was unable to get even one other council member to throw in on it - so it was up to the mayor and/or city manager to decide if that would be on the agenda.
Apparently one (or both) did decide to place it on the agenda - which I believe is very important for us to at least discuss. After the last month of discussions on the XTO request for a gas well permit, I felt that we should review our well permitting ordinance. During that review, it would be in the city's (and the residents') best interests to not allow any new permit requests.
The moratorium would be temporary and would have an appeals process in place. During the moratorium, council and staff would be working on any revisions necessary to the Gas Well Ordinance. We obtained a tremendous amount of technical information related to Gas Wells during the recent application process. It is very possible that this new information could have an impact on what our ordinance needs to say.
This moratorium would only apply to new gas well permits - the permit that XTO requested (and was denied) would not be subject to the moratorium. You might remember that we denied without prejudice, such that they (XTO) could reapply in light of what they learned in the original permit process.
Apparently one (or both) did decide to place it on the agenda - which I believe is very important for us to at least discuss. After the last month of discussions on the XTO request for a gas well permit, I felt that we should review our well permitting ordinance. During that review, it would be in the city's (and the residents') best interests to not allow any new permit requests.
The moratorium would be temporary and would have an appeals process in place. During the moratorium, council and staff would be working on any revisions necessary to the Gas Well Ordinance. We obtained a tremendous amount of technical information related to Gas Wells during the recent application process. It is very possible that this new information could have an impact on what our ordinance needs to say.
This moratorium would only apply to new gas well permits - the permit that XTO requested (and was denied) would not be subject to the moratorium. You might remember that we denied without prejudice, such that they (XTO) could reapply in light of what they learned in the original permit process.
Disc Golf Proposal for Corinth
At the Corinth Parks and Recreation Commission regular session on May 18, 2010, Aaron Quisenberry will present a proposal for creating a disc golf course at community park. Since the commission session packet is not currently posted, we don't have any details on the proposal. However, at a meeting about 2 months ago I believe, the possibility of a disc golf course being installed west of the Community Park South parking lot near the maintenance building was introduced.
This session of the board will consider the plan as subsequently submitted by Quisenberry. If that plan is similar to the plan introduced a few months ago, I would expect it to meet with a favorable review. Both the council and the Parks Commission have stated in the past that Disc Golf would be a desirable amenity for the City. When the course in the North Community Park was rejected, that had more to do with the process (or actually lack of) in getting the plan going, than the plan itself.
This time around, the proper processes are being followed. And, frankly, I think the idea has great merit. It will certainly provide a recreation activity that anyone in the city can use. Today, the bulk of community park is dedicated to baseball, softball and football/soccer fields. You have to be a part of an organized league or other group to have access to these facilities. The addition of a facility that is available all the time to anyone in the city would be, in my opinion, welcome.
This session of the board will consider the plan as subsequently submitted by Quisenberry. If that plan is similar to the plan introduced a few months ago, I would expect it to meet with a favorable review. Both the council and the Parks Commission have stated in the past that Disc Golf would be a desirable amenity for the City. When the course in the North Community Park was rejected, that had more to do with the process (or actually lack of) in getting the plan going, than the plan itself.
This time around, the proper processes are being followed. And, frankly, I think the idea has great merit. It will certainly provide a recreation activity that anyone in the city can use. Today, the bulk of community park is dedicated to baseball, softball and football/soccer fields. You have to be a part of an organized league or other group to have access to these facilities. The addition of a facility that is available all the time to anyone in the city would be, in my opinion, welcome.
Saturday, May 1, 2010
for most, the story ends here
Now that the City of Corinth has denied XTO's gas well permit applications, most of the several hundred people who were attending meetings and speaking out will go back to their normal lives and probably pay little or no attention to what is happening.
Just couldn't happen at a worse time. As of now the Corinth Comprehensive plan is scheduled for public hearing and action by the Council on May 6, 2010. As important as it was for the public to come out and speak up at the XTO permit hearings, it is even more important to pay attention, get educated and speak up at the Comp Plan hearing.
The comprehensive plan if enacted will direct overhauls of many of our most important ordinances, including (but not limited to) zoning and subdivision, and will map the direction for our capital improvement projects for years to come. Some will remember the controversy around the Church Street reconstruction project - it was the comp plan from 2004-5 that set that in motion, and the contents of the infrastructure specifications in the comp plan that defined how the road would be built (how wide it would be).
The comp plan could be a significant instrument in defining how land gets used - and that can have a big impact on the Gas well situation. Or not, if no one speaks up about it.
So, where do you want the city to go? Stay involved, get involved with the comprehensive plan for the city of Corinth - read the plan, let us know what you think is important and come to the meetings/public hearings to have your voice heard.
Just couldn't happen at a worse time. As of now the Corinth Comprehensive plan is scheduled for public hearing and action by the Council on May 6, 2010. As important as it was for the public to come out and speak up at the XTO permit hearings, it is even more important to pay attention, get educated and speak up at the Comp Plan hearing.
The comprehensive plan if enacted will direct overhauls of many of our most important ordinances, including (but not limited to) zoning and subdivision, and will map the direction for our capital improvement projects for years to come. Some will remember the controversy around the Church Street reconstruction project - it was the comp plan from 2004-5 that set that in motion, and the contents of the infrastructure specifications in the comp plan that defined how the road would be built (how wide it would be).
The comp plan could be a significant instrument in defining how land gets used - and that can have a big impact on the Gas well situation. Or not, if no one speaks up about it.
So, where do you want the city to go? Stay involved, get involved with the comprehensive plan for the city of Corinth - read the plan, let us know what you think is important and come to the meetings/public hearings to have your voice heard.
XTO Gas Well Permits were denied
As many of you already know, the gas well permit applications from XTO energy were denied at the April 29 2010 Special Session of the Corinth City Council. One thing that everyone should understand is that the permits were denied without prejudice. XTO can reapply for the permit again. During the discussion on each variance and the permits, the Council's reasons for the rejection of the permit application were discussed and made clear.
So, for the time being, there is not going to be a gas well site on the Lake Sharon Christian Center. For now the gas well ordinance in Corinth stands... and it should for the rest of this year, and probably then next (2011). However, be aware that the state legislature is now getting pressure from the oil and gas industry. You can expect the states to preempt cities' authority to establish setbacks, air quality measures, road use, and anything else that gets in the way of the oil and gas companies. At the state level, tank setbacks something around 50 feet, and well set backs somewhere around 100-200 feet. So if we get preempted, our 600 foot setback will be gone.
I strongly suggest that all of you that were so vocal with the city now turn your attention to your state legislators. This is nowhere near done.
So, for the time being, there is not going to be a gas well site on the Lake Sharon Christian Center. For now the gas well ordinance in Corinth stands... and it should for the rest of this year, and probably then next (2011). However, be aware that the state legislature is now getting pressure from the oil and gas industry. You can expect the states to preempt cities' authority to establish setbacks, air quality measures, road use, and anything else that gets in the way of the oil and gas companies. At the state level, tank setbacks something around 50 feet, and well set backs somewhere around 100-200 feet. So if we get preempted, our 600 foot setback will be gone.
I strongly suggest that all of you that were so vocal with the city now turn your attention to your state legislators. This is nowhere near done.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Salt water pipeline variance request
Based on the information I am reviewing, I think a salt water pipeline may be a bad idea all the way around. The fallout from a pipeline break is far more horrifying to me than the possibility of a truck accident.
more information...
more information...
Temporary fencing
In an earlier post I discussed this variance request. Since then our Gas Well inspector has confirmed to me that the sound blankets are as impenetrable (or more so) than a chain link fence. So, I would be inclined to allow the operator to forgo the chain link fence where the sound blankets are.
The entire north side of the site is still open, so I really don't see how to grant this variance in its entirety. I am convinced of the necessity that the site be enclosed by a barrier that is difficult to penetrate or go around. The regulation is not for screening for scenic effect, but rather to ensure the safety of the public to keep people from inadvertently wandering in. I still need more information from the application.
more information...
The entire north side of the site is still open, so I really don't see how to grant this variance in its entirety. I am convinced of the necessity that the site be enclosed by a barrier that is difficult to penetrate or go around. The regulation is not for screening for scenic effect, but rather to ensure the safety of the public to keep people from inadvertently wandering in. I still need more information from the application.
more information...
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Tank Setbacks
There are two variance requests concerning tank setbacks. The first variance requested is for the rule of 114.12(A)(24)(j) which states that tanks must be located a minimum of 600 feet from any protected use. Another variance for 114.12(A)(32)(c) which sets the minimum distance of waste disposal tanks from any protected use to 600 feet also.
Reviewing the site plan, I believe there are locations on the site that would put the tanks in question (both types) at least 600' from any residences that have not already agreed to have the well or well support equipment at less than 600'.
The operator states that there is no alternative to the variance. I disagree, and will need the operator to prove that statement before I could agree to grant this variance.
The operator also states that 150' is an "industry standard" for setbacks from hydrocarbon tanks. While that may be true, that is a flammability/explosion safety issue, and does nothing to address adjacent property owner's rights, particularly to maintain the value of their property.
The operator does not address the hydrocarbon emission issue at all, and as recent TCEQ investigation of complaints around North Texas have shown, there are real issues with emissions of volatile compounds dangerous to human health.
Reviewing the site plan, I believe there are locations on the site that would put the tanks in question (both types) at least 600' from any residences that have not already agreed to have the well or well support equipment at less than 600'.
The operator states that there is no alternative to the variance. I disagree, and will need the operator to prove that statement before I could agree to grant this variance.
The operator also states that 150' is an "industry standard" for setbacks from hydrocarbon tanks. While that may be true, that is a flammability/explosion safety issue, and does nothing to address adjacent property owner's rights, particularly to maintain the value of their property.
The operator does not address the hydrocarbon emission issue at all, and as recent TCEQ investigation of complaints around North Texas have shown, there are real issues with emissions of volatile compounds dangerous to human health.
Monday, April 26, 2010
XTO Energy Compressor Requirements Variance Request
XTO Energy is requesting variances to most of the essential requirements of the Lift compressor regulations of 114.15 Corinth City Code. Since XTO has said during the public hearing that they probably won't need the compressor, it may be best to wait on this variance until they decide they do need it.
Some of the most important aspects of quality of life in any city, and certainly here in Corinth, are the sound level at night, and the visual aspects of the streets and building architecture. The variance seems to request a blanket exception that could change sound levels at residences a considerable amount - something that is really not in the public interest, or in the interest of adjacent property owners.
More Information
Some of the most important aspects of quality of life in any city, and certainly here in Corinth, are the sound level at night, and the visual aspects of the streets and building architecture. The variance seems to request a blanket exception that could change sound levels at residences a considerable amount - something that is really not in the public interest, or in the interest of adjacent property owners.
More Information
XTO Energy Letter Of Credit Variance Request
There was some new information about the letter of Credit variance request (new to me anyway) at the last session (April 15, 2010) during the public hearing on the Permit requests. XTO Energy does not sound included to use a Cash Escrow system in lieu of the letter of credit. The Bond does not give the city the same advantages as the Letter of Credit.
Something that many people may be concerned about is that the $25,000 per well required is "not enough" to repair the streets. XTO Energy is liable (per the agreement) for all damages - the letter of credit is to insure that if invoices are not paid, there is recourse for the City.
I have some additional information about the letter of credit variance request.
I have an earlier blog entry also.
Something that many people may be concerned about is that the $25,000 per well required is "not enough" to repair the streets. XTO Energy is liable (per the agreement) for all damages - the letter of credit is to insure that if invoices are not paid, there is recourse for the City.
I have some additional information about the letter of credit variance request.
I have an earlier blog entry also.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
My thoughts on the City's legal powers to regulate
I have been researching the Texas constitution, Texas Administrative Code, the Local Code, and such case law as I have been able to find, as well as some legal research works in law journals. The short story is that Home Rule Cities have far ranging authority to regulate. Yet they are subject to private property rules that can create takings claims.
I have put together my thoughts on this subject (at least the first part, our authorities) at my gas wells issue page.
I have put together my thoughts on this subject (at least the first part, our authorities) at my gas wells issue page.
XTO amending their W1 with the Railroad Commission
XTO is choosing to amend their W1 permit application with the Texas Railroad Commission for the A unit of the Lake Sharon well site. This appears to be amending their original application for a permit, not a new permit. The amended application adds acreage south from the original permit. It also appears to move the north lease line 70 feet north from the original application. The actual well location appears to remain unchanged.
There are quite a few parcels of land that XTO does not have leases on in this new extended A unit definition. XTO is requesting a spacing variance to Railroad Commission statewide rule 37 for the revised unit as a result of the unleased parcels. One or more owners of properties in this revised A Unit have or are protesting the variance request. I understand that hearing is May 7, 2010.
There are quite a few parcels of land that XTO does not have leases on in this new extended A unit definition. XTO is requesting a spacing variance to Railroad Commission statewide rule 37 for the revised unit as a result of the unleased parcels. One or more owners of properties in this revised A Unit have or are protesting the variance request. I understand that hearing is May 7, 2010.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Useful information
To follow up on a previous post, some people are sending in useful pieces of information. Even if I already have the information, it is good to be getting useful input from people. Recently someone sent me a link to an article at the Vermont Law review that was very on topic for our Gas Well deliberations.
That is an excellent example of useful information. While I was reviewing that article with our Attorney days ago, that is no matter - you can't really know if I have seen your particular bit of information.
So, please, keep sending in the references to drilling related sites and documents - I very much appreciate them.
That is an excellent example of useful information. While I was reviewing that article with our Attorney days ago, that is no matter - you can't really know if I have seen your particular bit of information.
So, please, keep sending in the references to drilling related sites and documents - I very much appreciate them.
And the Texas Supreme Court Says...
The supreme court of Texas recently (well, in the last few months) made a ruling in CITY OF HOUSTON, TEXAS v. TRAIL ENTERPRISES, INC. D/B/A WILSON OIL COMPANY, ET AL. Of course the background of the case is important - you can read the opinion here. Basically Trail sued the City of Houston over a denial to drill a well claiming that the city had in effect made a regulatory taking. So there was a trial and the City of Houston lost and had a judgment of over 16 million dollars entered against them. But, the trial court (Harris county I think) agreed with the city that the complaint was not ripe and dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction.
Sounds great, except of course Trail appealed. The appellate court disagreed with the dismissal and ordered the judgment rendered. So the City appealed to the Texas Supreme Court and the court agreed with the Waco Appeals court that the dismissal was wrong. They also found that the appeals court erred in ordering rendition instead of remanding the case back to the trial court for further proceedings.
Essentially, this opinion just allows Houston to pursue additional procedural pleadings that had been denied by the rendition. So, it is still up in the air as to whether Houston's ordinance on drilling constituted a taking. The trial court thought so, to the tune of over 16 million dollars.
So, I am currently attempting to get (through our attorney) the facts of the trial in Harris county to use to review our ordinance. As to the judgment, we just have to wait and see what happens with Houston's other pleadings if any.
In simple terms, we are not out of the woods with respect to how we enforce our gas well ordinance, or if it is enforceable at all. While the courts have so far said we can in fact carry out regulation of wells in the city limits, they have not decided yet if it is a constitutional taking. This case at the trial court level says it is a taking. It is not finished yet.
Sounds great, except of course Trail appealed. The appellate court disagreed with the dismissal and ordered the judgment rendered. So the City appealed to the Texas Supreme Court and the court agreed with the Waco Appeals court that the dismissal was wrong. They also found that the appeals court erred in ordering rendition instead of remanding the case back to the trial court for further proceedings.
Essentially, this opinion just allows Houston to pursue additional procedural pleadings that had been denied by the rendition. So, it is still up in the air as to whether Houston's ordinance on drilling constituted a taking. The trial court thought so, to the tune of over 16 million dollars.
So, I am currently attempting to get (through our attorney) the facts of the trial in Harris county to use to review our ordinance. As to the judgment, we just have to wait and see what happens with Houston's other pleadings if any.
In simple terms, we are not out of the woods with respect to how we enforce our gas well ordinance, or if it is enforceable at all. While the courts have so far said we can in fact carry out regulation of wells in the city limits, they have not decided yet if it is a constitutional taking. This case at the trial court level says it is a taking. It is not finished yet.
Monday, April 19, 2010
To Consider is NOT an option - it is required
I suppose at this point I have reached capacity on the "how can council even consider this" comments.
Briefly, council must consider any application for a permit and any application for variances that is made. MUST CONSIDER - BY LAW. We are not allowed to dismiss without consideration. In a very short moment any person can go to http://www.dictionary.com and look up the word CONSIDER and find -> to think carefully about, esp. in order to make a decision; contemplate; reflect on. And that is exactly what we are doing.
We have had 3 sessions so far: 2 with public hearings and testimony, one a workshop for the council to consider and examine the information. There will be at least one more session. And, frankly, we'll have as many sessions as the majority of the council decides is necessary to arrive at appropriate decisions.
Luckily, besides the deluge of "how can you even consider this" emails, I have received a few thoughtful, insightful emails, offering information or documents to review and consider in the decision making process. These emails have been very helpful and enlightening - I hope they will keep coming.
Briefly, council must consider any application for a permit and any application for variances that is made. MUST CONSIDER - BY LAW. We are not allowed to dismiss without consideration. In a very short moment any person can go to http://www.dictionary.com and look up the word CONSIDER and find -> to think carefully about, esp. in order to make a decision; contemplate; reflect on. And that is exactly what we are doing.
We have had 3 sessions so far: 2 with public hearings and testimony, one a workshop for the council to consider and examine the information. There will be at least one more session. And, frankly, we'll have as many sessions as the majority of the council decides is necessary to arrive at appropriate decisions.
Luckily, besides the deluge of "how can you even consider this" emails, I have received a few thoughtful, insightful emails, offering information or documents to review and consider in the decision making process. These emails have been very helpful and enlightening - I hope they will keep coming.
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Information Gathering to Continue on Drill Permit Request
At the Corinth City Council Session on April 15, 2010, the Council voted to continue the public hearing and postpone consideration of the variances and permits requests until April 29th. A special Corinth City Council Session will be called for the 29th. This will provide us on the council with 2 more weeks of fact gathering opportunities.
I have discussed my thoughts on some of the variances - now I am going to finish up those thoughts on the remaining variances, and revisit the first ones over again. I will discuss them here briefly and in more detail on my website
I have discussed my thoughts on some of the variances - now I am going to finish up those thoughts on the remaining variances, and revisit the first ones over again. I will discuss them here briefly and in more detail on my website
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
XTO request for a variance to the Storage Tank Setbacks
XTO has requested a variance to Corinth City Code section 114.12(A)(24)(j) which defines the setback distance for a tank from any protected use as 600'. The tanks are not collocated with the well bores, so an entirely different set of residences are within the 600' radius of the tanks. Many of those residences have not signed any agreements with XTO to allow drilling or tanks or other equipment inside of the stipulated distances set down in the Corinth Code.
The lack of agreements may be moot since there is no special provision for tank setback distance reduction such as there is for the well bores (114.13(B)). It would appear the decision is left to council discretion.
Because of the reduced distances, the issues raised by residents, and the recent tank fires in the area, I would want to see additional safety measures in place in order to be willing to grant this variance.
More Information...
The lack of agreements may be moot since there is no special provision for tank setback distance reduction such as there is for the well bores (114.13(B)). It would appear the decision is left to council discretion.
Because of the reduced distances, the issues raised by residents, and the recent tank fires in the area, I would want to see additional safety measures in place in order to be willing to grant this variance.
More Information...
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Council to Discuss XTO Requests at Workshop April 8, 2010
Council will have a workshop session to discuss the XTO requests further. There will be no action taken. Action on the requests is currently scheduled for April 15, 2010.
There are two other items on the agenda - discussion of the bidding process for Corinth/Dobbs reconstruction, and discussion of the policies council directed the City Manager to publish concerning reuse of park property.
There are two other items on the agenda - discussion of the bidding process for Corinth/Dobbs reconstruction, and discussion of the policies council directed the City Manager to publish concerning reuse of park property.
Friday, April 2, 2010
Update on the XTO Gas Well Permit
Our council postponed action on the variances and the permits. I made the motion, and it was approved unanimously. I moved to postpone because I needed more time to evaluate all the information. I was in contact with the TCEQ that afternoon before the council session and in discussing the situation, was offered that they could provide technical resources to attend our meeting and discuss the air quality issues.
With that and the many good questions asked by the residents in the public hearing, I was convinced we needed more time to evaluate the situation. The mayor made it easy when he suggested that we postpone.
With that and the many good questions asked by the residents in the public hearing, I was convinced we needed more time to evaluate the situation. The mayor made it easy when he suggested that we postpone.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Drilling Permit First Variance revisited
I have had several people mention to me that $25,000 is probably not enough to repair our roads after the drilling trucks are done using them. To that end I have requested the cost of the road originally along with estimated life span and design traffic.
I am reviewing an ordinance from Burleson that attempts to put a value on the use by heavy trucks. I haven't finished reviewing that yet. I also believe the $25,000 is not enough - it is the ordinance though. We may have latitude under section 114.07(B)(10) to increase it, but I doubt it - that really deals with the technical requirements we can impose for safety reasons.
We may need ordinance revisions for the future.
I am reviewing an ordinance from Burleson that attempts to put a value on the use by heavy trucks. I haven't finished reviewing that yet. I also believe the $25,000 is not enough - it is the ordinance though. We may have latitude under section 114.07(B)(10) to increase it, but I doubt it - that really deals with the technical requirements we can impose for safety reasons.
We may need ordinance revisions for the future.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Gas Drilling Variance - Item 12 - variance concerning High weeds
XTO is requesting relief from the 300' radius around the well and tanks requirement for keeping the grass cut and trash picked up. About 173' feet north of the well bore is City ROW for the Lake Sharon Rd extension. North of that is a tract belonging to Pulte Homes of Texas.
Basically they need permission to enter those properties to do the cutting and pickup. I imagine the city can give them permission to do just that on the City Right of Way within 300' of the well and tanks. They can ask Pulte for permission for entry also - if they refuse we can grant them that relief. Otherwise I am not inclined to grant this. Fire safety is just too important near a gas well and its equipment.
More information>
Basically they need permission to enter those properties to do the cutting and pickup. I imagine the city can give them permission to do just that on the City Right of Way within 300' of the well and tanks. They can ask Pulte for permission for entry also - if they refuse we can grant them that relief. Otherwise I am not inclined to grant this. Fire safety is just too important near a gas well and its equipment.
More information>
Request for variance conerning the temporary fencing
Section 114.14(A)(1) requires a temporary chain link fence at least 8' tall with a locked gate. The fence is to surround the entire drilling site. The applicant is asking that the requirement for the temporary fence be dropped. The state that the sound blankets required by Section 114.12A(G)(3) on the three sides facing the protected uses are enough to screen the site. They are asking for no fence whatsoever on the North side.
The 16 foot tall sound blankets are required to help suppress noise from the drilling and fracing operation. They are in addition to the chain link fence. I am uncertain as to whether the sound blankets provide security. I intend to get that answer from our drilling inspector.
Unless the sound blankets provide real security to prevent casual intrusion, I am inclined to deny this requested variance. If the blankets actually can be relied on to keep intruders out, I would be willing to allow them to put the chain link fence on the north side. Under no circumstances would I be willing to allow the entire north side of the site to be unsecured.
My primary concern is kids, who will be very inquisitive about the drilling platform and the sounds and smells and such. They will go over there. The fence around the Christian center property as a whole is not going to keep them out in the least. The chain link fence and locked gate will keep out all but the most determined intruders - most kids won't fit that category.
Second gas well variance - Item 10 on agenda
XTO is asking for a variance to the 600' well bore to protected use setback requirement in Section 114.13(A)(4) of the Corinth City Code. XTO has acquired consent agreements and in some cases liability waivers from all land owners that have physical buildings within the 600' distance.
The Lake Sharon Christian Center has buildings between 200' and 300' from the well bores. They too have provided and filed signed consent forms to allow this variance.
With these agreements from the actual impacted land owners and referring to my earlier discussion on drilling rights, I see no real alternative to approving the variance.
We are allowed to impose additional requirements for the reduction in distance. As to what meaningful requirements we could impose that would insure safety, I am unclear.
Additional Information
The Lake Sharon Christian Center has buildings between 200' and 300' from the well bores. They too have provided and filed signed consent forms to allow this variance.
With these agreements from the actual impacted land owners and referring to my earlier discussion on drilling rights, I see no real alternative to approving the variance.
We are allowed to impose additional requirements for the reduction in distance. As to what meaningful requirements we could impose that would insure safety, I am unclear.
Additional Information
What we can and can't do concerning Gas Well Drilling
As I was researching information concerning gas well drilling in cities, since we have a request for a permit to drill a well in Corinth, Texas, just southeast of the Lake Sharon/Oakmont intersection, I found some good guidance. State and Federal courts have long found that preventing an operator from drilling to get at Natural gas within the city limits has constituted a regulatory taking. As such it has been found unconstitutional (at least that is what I read).
So, while we can set rules to be followed in drilling a well, just like we set rules for how to xeriscape or how tall your weeds can be, we can't deny access to drill for gas. So we have rules defining how far wells have to be from residents (unless the residents that might be closer waive that), what type of fences, sound levels etc.
Whether we can impose air quality rules remains to be seen. I certainly intend to find out.
So, while we can set rules to be followed in drilling a well, just like we set rules for how to xeriscape or how tall your weeds can be, we can't deny access to drill for gas. So we have rules defining how far wells have to be from residents (unless the residents that might be closer waive that), what type of fences, sound levels etc.
Whether we can impose air quality rules remains to be seen. I certainly intend to find out.
What I found out about Benzene
I spent some time over the last few nights reading information from the Center For Disease Control (CDC), OSHA, and NIOSH on Benzene. I was reading this because benzene has been associated with natural gas production in the Barnett Shale, and XTO energy is requesting a permit here in Corinth, Texas to drill a natural gas well. As it turns out, benzene is associated with both oil and gas production (not surprising), and as a result of our industrialized society, is floating around in the air we breathe.
According to the CDC people who smoke get a far larger dose of benzene than people who don't. Benzene in the cigarettes - another good reason not to smoke if you needed a new one. We have benzene around us in the house. What I gleaned from the CDC information is that benzene is occurring at something around 1.7 ppb (parts per billion) in our out door air - not associated with any particularly polluted location. If you are walking along behind your lawn mower, you are probably getting more benzene because that is a by product of internal combustion engines.
So - the first question becomes how much is too much? According to the CDC and OSHA 500 ppm (parts per million - contrasted to billion above) is life threatening. Immediately life threatening. 50 PPM is considered the highest level that a person can withstand for about 30 minutes or so to escape to clean air. OSHA sets the limit for occupational exposure (10 hours a day, 40 hours a week) at 1 ppm.
Now - the second question - how much benzene do gas wells emit? The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) is asking that question, and is actively setting up monitoring. The TCEQ has identified some wells where significant amounts of benzene (along with a long list of other petrochemicals) were found down wind in the air.
So, there is the potential for benzene to be emitted by a gas well (or an oil well for that matter). Because there is that potential, it seems reasonable to me that the city should take steps at least to monitor any wells we have in the city limits. Part of our permit process might need to include provisions for not only sound monitoring and insurance, but air quality monitoring also.
In fairness that is a big job. How do we do it? How much does it cost? Who should pay for it? I am interested in finding a way to tighten our drilling ordinances to include air quality monitoring and have to get the answers to those questions and more to try and introduce that change.
According to the CDC people who smoke get a far larger dose of benzene than people who don't. Benzene in the cigarettes - another good reason not to smoke if you needed a new one. We have benzene around us in the house. What I gleaned from the CDC information is that benzene is occurring at something around 1.7 ppb (parts per billion) in our out door air - not associated with any particularly polluted location. If you are walking along behind your lawn mower, you are probably getting more benzene because that is a by product of internal combustion engines.
So - the first question becomes how much is too much? According to the CDC and OSHA 500 ppm (parts per million - contrasted to billion above) is life threatening. Immediately life threatening. 50 PPM is considered the highest level that a person can withstand for about 30 minutes or so to escape to clean air. OSHA sets the limit for occupational exposure (10 hours a day, 40 hours a week) at 1 ppm.
Now - the second question - how much benzene do gas wells emit? The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) is asking that question, and is actively setting up monitoring. The TCEQ has identified some wells where significant amounts of benzene (along with a long list of other petrochemicals) were found down wind in the air.
So, there is the potential for benzene to be emitted by a gas well (or an oil well for that matter). Because there is that potential, it seems reasonable to me that the city should take steps at least to monitor any wells we have in the city limits. Part of our permit process might need to include provisions for not only sound monitoring and insurance, but air quality monitoring also.
In fairness that is a big job. How do we do it? How much does it cost? Who should pay for it? I am interested in finding a way to tighten our drilling ordinances to include air quality monitoring and have to get the answers to those questions and more to try and introduce that change.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
First of the requested Variances to the Drilling Ordinance
XTO energy is asking for a variance to our ordinance on drilling. In short they want to substitute a Bond or Check for the required letter of credit. In any case the value would be $25,000, and is only for securing repairs to the roads they use in the drilling operation.
Unless I find that the mechanics of using a Bond or Check is significantly different from our perspective of accessing the money to perform repairs, I can't find any reason to oppose granting the variance. I have some additional information at my website.
Unless I find that the mechanics of using a Bond or Check is significantly different from our perspective of accessing the money to perform repairs, I can't find any reason to oppose granting the variance. I have some additional information at my website.
Monday, March 29, 2010
More on the Lake Sharon Drilling Permit Request
I've been reviewing our Gas Well Drilling Ordinance at Chapter 114 Corinth City Code. Section 114.07(B)(10) provides the latitude for the Council to add to or modify the technical regulations as the Council deems in the public interest. Whether or not the Texas Railroad Commission, or the state courts, will view the exercise of that latitude favorably remains to be seen.
Already I have received numerous requests to vote to deny the permit to drill from residents (and some non residents). Most of the requests are focusing on the emissions component of the gas recovery operation. Others are on the safety factor of having heavy construction equipment traveling the roads near our schools and paths our children take to school.
Suffice to say it is a very complicated issue. Both the energy company and the residents have rights. Ultimately, I believe that we should issue the permit if all reasonable safety precautions that we are aware of today are taken.
I have additional information at my council session web page, and also at a page dedicated to discussing the drilling permit application.
Already I have received numerous requests to vote to deny the permit to drill from residents (and some non residents). Most of the requests are focusing on the emissions component of the gas recovery operation. Others are on the safety factor of having heavy construction equipment traveling the roads near our schools and paths our children take to school.
Suffice to say it is a very complicated issue. Both the energy company and the residents have rights. Ultimately, I believe that we should issue the permit if all reasonable safety precautions that we are aware of today are taken.
I have additional information at my council session web page, and also at a page dedicated to discussing the drilling permit application.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Help with the Budget?
At the April 1st regular session of the City council of Corinth, Texas we will be considering appropriating funds to expend on projects that will be reimbursed by the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG). When all is said and done it may be possible to remove some budgeted expenditures for the fiscal year because they fall under this grant.
This is particularly good since we are facing a budget shortfall this year due to declining sales tax and permits revenue. At last check, we are expecting a $200,000+ shortfall for this fiscal year (2009-10). Any amount we could carve off of that without dipping into reserves would be a very good thing.
See More on this and the rest of the April first session.
This is particularly good since we are facing a budget shortfall this year due to declining sales tax and permits revenue. At last check, we are expecting a $200,000+ shortfall for this fiscal year (2009-10). Any amount we could carve off of that without dipping into reserves would be a very good thing.
See More on this and the rest of the April first session.
Friday, March 26, 2010
April 1st Council Session to be very busy
The April 1st Corinth City Council regular session will be a very busy one: there are 17 items on the agenda at this point, including 4 public hearings. At this time (the packet and agendas are not out) I believe that 3 of the hearings are related to action on the Dobbs Road Realignment. One hearing will be for the request for a drilling permit (with variances) for XTO energy for the the site southwest of the Oakmont/Lake Sharon intersection. Other business will include council review and action on the 2008-09 (last fiscal year) Audit, or Certified Annual Financial Review.
My understanding is that XTO is requesting 10 variances to our ordinances for their drilling permit. Some of the areas are in Tree Loss Mitigation, Salt water disposal, maintenance setbacks, well head to protected use distances, and letter of Credit requirements. All in all I expect a rather lengthy evening.
You can see more information at my Web site
My understanding is that XTO is requesting 10 variances to our ordinances for their drilling permit. Some of the areas are in Tree Loss Mitigation, Salt water disposal, maintenance setbacks, well head to protected use distances, and letter of Credit requirements. All in all I expect a rather lengthy evening.
You can see more information at my Web site
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Gas well Drilling permit will be controversial
As I mentioned before, there will be a public hearing for a permit to drill gas wells out near the Lake Sharon/Oakmont intersection. I have spoken with some of the residents near the proposed well site, and attended the first of the two XTO resident meetings (scheduled for March 24 and 25).
Some of the concerns that I heard there were drilling safety, traffic safety, Benzene levels, other chemical levels, waste products from the drilling and fraccing process, and seismic activity from drilling (and the effects it could have on houses and other structures).
All of these are definitely important considerations. And, there is the recent storage tank fire in Decatur Texas (just about 30 minutes or so to our north west) to consider.
I understand that XTO Energy will be requesting up to nine variances to our current drilling ordinance. As I do not have the subject of the variances yet, I can't speak to them. I hope to have some more information tomorrow (thursday).
Some of the concerns that I heard there were drilling safety, traffic safety, Benzene levels, other chemical levels, waste products from the drilling and fraccing process, and seismic activity from drilling (and the effects it could have on houses and other structures).
All of these are definitely important considerations. And, there is the recent storage tank fire in Decatur Texas (just about 30 minutes or so to our north west) to consider.
I understand that XTO Energy will be requesting up to nine variances to our current drilling ordinance. As I do not have the subject of the variances yet, I can't speak to them. I hope to have some more information tomorrow (thursday).
Dobbs Road Realignment moving forward
CoServ has already appeared before the Corinth Planning and Zoning commission to get the plats and site plans related to the Dobbs Road realignment approved. Because there were some technical/legal defects in the applications, P&Z denied the Plat and Re-Plat until some conditions were met. All of the conditions had to do with legal notes attached to the Plats. The site plan was approved with the same conditions as the Plat.
It sounds confusing, doesn't it? The plats are legal documents with specific purpose for zoning and development. The plats as submitted were acceptable - they needed the additional legal information added, and there is no recourse to force the adding of the conditions after the plat is approved. Therefore, the commission denied the plats; provided the conditions have been met by the time this is in front of council, council can then approve the plats. It's probably no less confusing after I explained it....
This is all part of the process to get the intersection of Corinth Pkwy and Dobbs changed; Corinth Pkwy will now continue south past Dobbs and then curve to the right (west) and loop back towards quail run.
It sounds confusing, doesn't it? The plats are legal documents with specific purpose for zoning and development. The plats as submitted were acceptable - they needed the additional legal information added, and there is no recourse to force the adding of the conditions after the plat is approved. Therefore, the commission denied the plats; provided the conditions have been met by the time this is in front of council, council can then approve the plats. It's probably no less confusing after I explained it....
This is all part of the process to get the intersection of Corinth Pkwy and Dobbs changed; Corinth Pkwy will now continue south past Dobbs and then curve to the right (west) and loop back towards quail run.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Gas Well Drilling in Corinth
On April 1, 2010 we have a public hearing and consideration of a permit for Drilling two wells on the west side of Corinth. Already I have been contacted by residents nearby the proposed drilling site (which is near Oakmont and Lake Sharon).
Their primary concerns are with some perceived safety issues with the drilling and pumping operations. One issue brought up about the safety of the kids on their way to the nearby schools and the impact on traffic the drilling operation with its heavy equipment and trucks hauling drilling supplies will have.
I'm examining these issues; as part of that I will be out near the site talking with residents Wednesday night (March 24).
Their primary concerns are with some perceived safety issues with the drilling and pumping operations. One issue brought up about the safety of the kids on their way to the nearby schools and the impact on traffic the drilling operation with its heavy equipment and trucks hauling drilling supplies will have.
I'm examining these issues; as part of that I will be out near the site talking with residents Wednesday night (March 24).
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Sales Tax Decline
For the last several years we have been seeing a decline in sales tax revenue for the City of Corinth. There was a 1.1% decline from 2006 to 2007, and then a further 6.5% decline from 2007 to 2008 (our most recently completed budget year - we are currently in the 2009 budget year). We are down 7.6% for 2009 to through January compared to the same period in 2008.
Overall, compared to October through January of 2006 we are down 10% in sales tax revenue for 2009. As you can imagine this has impacts for the remainder of this budget year as well as for the next budget year.
In round numbers our finance department is expecting a $200+ thousand shortfall for this year. This can be absorbed by from the reserves in the general fund. the $520 thousand shortfall projected for next year (2010 budget year) is going to be the real problem if sales tax revenues don't turn around.
Overall, compared to October through January of 2006 we are down 10% in sales tax revenue for 2009. As you can imagine this has impacts for the remainder of this budget year as well as for the next budget year.
In round numbers our finance department is expecting a $200+ thousand shortfall for this year. This can be absorbed by from the reserves in the general fund. the $520 thousand shortfall projected for next year (2010 budget year) is going to be the real problem if sales tax revenues don't turn around.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Disc Golf may not be gone
After all the drama of the last several months with the Disc Golf Course in Corinth, and the council vote to reject the course on the hill at community park - we could still wind up with a course in Corinth.
The volunteer that worked on the original course is proposing a course on property west of the soccer/football fields - west of the parking for them as a matter of fact. This time, the request is following the proper procedures: it will be considered at a meeting of the parks commission on March 16, 2010.
I have not seen the plan yet. The area proposed to contain the course appears to usable, and would provide some challenge for the players. It is not as suitable as the original site on the hill, however, it would still be a nice area for a course.
It would still provide a nice amenity for the city. It will be interesting to see what the plan is that is being pitched.
The volunteer that worked on the original course is proposing a course on property west of the soccer/football fields - west of the parking for them as a matter of fact. This time, the request is following the proper procedures: it will be considered at a meeting of the parks commission on March 16, 2010.
I have not seen the plan yet. The area proposed to contain the course appears to usable, and would provide some challenge for the players. It is not as suitable as the original site on the hill, however, it would still be a nice area for a course.
It would still provide a nice amenity for the city. It will be interesting to see what the plan is that is being pitched.
Disc Golf Course decision
We have a decision on the Disc Golf Course on the pavilion hill at Corinth Community Park: the council voted to stop the course.
It was a very difficult decision for me. On the one hand, the volunteers installing the course contacted the city administration, pitched the idea, and received permission from a city official to proceed with the project. Through no fault on their part, the city official did not have the authority to authorize the project. On the other hand, by this point the proper process had been completely ignored, and for my part, I was unable to find a truly compelling desire on the part of residents to complete the park. When I went door to door and spoke to people, almost none even heard of the park and the controversy. While some (less than fifty percent) agreed the park was a good idea and should go ahead, their comments were almost always that "it may be a good idea: I will never use it, but it may be a good idea". In all cases they only wanted the course "if it won't cost the city anything".
Ultimately at the point I had to make a decision for my vote, that cost factor and the lukewarm reception the idea received caused me to vote against the course. The final vote was 4-1 to dismantle the course.
I simply could not be sure that the volunteers would be able to deliver on a "cost free" course for the city. Although the materials had already been purchased, the cost of ongoing maintenance, while not high, was not negligible either. We would have to rely on the volunteers to make it work.
When members of the trails committee expressed that they did not wish to participate in making the trail and the course coexist, it seemed that the only action would be to keep the existing trail and dismantle the course.
It was a very difficult decision for me. On the one hand, the volunteers installing the course contacted the city administration, pitched the idea, and received permission from a city official to proceed with the project. Through no fault on their part, the city official did not have the authority to authorize the project. On the other hand, by this point the proper process had been completely ignored, and for my part, I was unable to find a truly compelling desire on the part of residents to complete the park. When I went door to door and spoke to people, almost none even heard of the park and the controversy. While some (less than fifty percent) agreed the park was a good idea and should go ahead, their comments were almost always that "it may be a good idea: I will never use it, but it may be a good idea". In all cases they only wanted the course "if it won't cost the city anything".
Ultimately at the point I had to make a decision for my vote, that cost factor and the lukewarm reception the idea received caused me to vote against the course. The final vote was 4-1 to dismantle the course.
I simply could not be sure that the volunteers would be able to deliver on a "cost free" course for the city. Although the materials had already been purchased, the cost of ongoing maintenance, while not high, was not negligible either. We would have to rely on the volunteers to make it work.
When members of the trails committee expressed that they did not wish to participate in making the trail and the course coexist, it seemed that the only action would be to keep the existing trail and dismantle the course.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Safety could be the deciding factor for Disk Golf in Corinth
At the recent Corinth Trails Committee meeting some information on safety was presented by a resident attending the meeting. Basically, the PDGA guidelines on Disc Golf Course Design discourage building fairways that cross heavily trafficked trails, paths or sidewalks or cross those the same passages blind.
I'll get some of the links up here soon.
At this point, as far as I am concerned, safety is going to be the main issue going forward. We already have a problem in terms of how the project launched without proper input from the Parks and Rec Commission or the Council. As we go through the belated process of public discussion, we will have to sort out the costs and safety issues.
As the course is laid out now, it violates the PDGA principles in that it crosses a well trafficked multiuse trail in several places. I think this has to be addressed to have any chance of going forward. Issues of drainage and erosion control also have to be addressed. I think those are easier to handle, but could be expensive. I can't support adding any significant expense to the city budget to put the course in. We could be forced to spend to correct the problems presented by the de facto course - my gut feel is that will cost less than the design and construction work necessary to bring the course in.
I look forward to seeing the design changes that the Disc Golf volunteers would propose to solve the safety issues.
There is a Parks and Recreation meeting Tuesday February 16th at Corinth City Hall. The disc golf course should be on the agenda.
I'll get some of the links up here soon.
At this point, as far as I am concerned, safety is going to be the main issue going forward. We already have a problem in terms of how the project launched without proper input from the Parks and Rec Commission or the Council. As we go through the belated process of public discussion, we will have to sort out the costs and safety issues.
As the course is laid out now, it violates the PDGA principles in that it crosses a well trafficked multiuse trail in several places. I think this has to be addressed to have any chance of going forward. Issues of drainage and erosion control also have to be addressed. I think those are easier to handle, but could be expensive. I can't support adding any significant expense to the city budget to put the course in. We could be forced to spend to correct the problems presented by the de facto course - my gut feel is that will cost less than the design and construction work necessary to bring the course in.
I look forward to seeing the design changes that the Disc Golf volunteers would propose to solve the safety issues.
There is a Parks and Recreation meeting Tuesday February 16th at Corinth City Hall. The disc golf course should be on the agenda.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Disc Golf in Corinth
We've definitely had some interesting issues come up in Corinth lately. This one has created a real dilemma for sure. What happens when you have a good idea, go to the "right" people to help get the idea implemented, and then start putting your idea into action, then find out the "right" people took some wrong steps?
Well, in the case of the Disc Golf Course some volunteers set out to create in Corinth, you get angry residents and a city manager and city council with a fair case of heartburn. So how did we get here? I suppose a short description of when and how things happened will help. You can read a variety of news articles on the subject. All of them have some of the facts. From my reading, none of them have all of the facts - I don't think even I have all of the facts - and that is going to be an important point later...
This begins in late in 2008 when a resident of Corinth approached the Community Services/Parks and Recreation department of Corinth with an idea to build a Disc Golf Course. The volunteer planned on providing all labor and materials to build the course. The city staff involved thought this was a good idea: a new recreation opportunity at little or no cost to the city on property the Parks and Recreation already controlled. So, the volunteer got the go ahead from the Parks staff to start building the course at Corinth Community Park - which he did.
The course was "opened" during mid to late 2009 and started to get some players out on it. Sounds good, right? Unfortunately, things were not so good. I actually do not know when the first complaint was registered. I do know that as a member of the city council I got my first indication that there was even a Disc Golf Course in Corinth in November of 2009, when I got an email asking who was in charge of it. So I asked some questions, and started getting even more emails on the subject.
Then I walked the course, while the baskets were still up. I saw some players getting started on a round on the course. After I walked the course, to say that I had some concerns would be a classic understatement.
My first question was "How is it that this never came before the Council?" And that is the crux of the problem here. An otherwise good idea is now reviled because it was never taken through the appropriate steps: review by the Parks and Recreation Commission followed by approval by the Council.
So now we are trying to go through some semblance of the proper procedure ex post facto. Some people are outraged that the council didn't just kill the project. This is where that statement I made earlier comes in - you know the one about how "I don't think even I have all of the facts". As a council member, I think it is wrong to make decisions without a good faith effort to get all the facts. We are currently doing this and bringing those facts back in front of the Parks commission and the Council.
In fact the next Parks and Recreation Commission session is Tuesday February 16th, 2010, and this Disc Golf Course is going to be on the agenda.
Well, in the case of the Disc Golf Course some volunteers set out to create in Corinth, you get angry residents and a city manager and city council with a fair case of heartburn. So how did we get here? I suppose a short description of when and how things happened will help. You can read a variety of news articles on the subject. All of them have some of the facts. From my reading, none of them have all of the facts - I don't think even I have all of the facts - and that is going to be an important point later...
This begins in late in 2008 when a resident of Corinth approached the Community Services/Parks and Recreation department of Corinth with an idea to build a Disc Golf Course. The volunteer planned on providing all labor and materials to build the course. The city staff involved thought this was a good idea: a new recreation opportunity at little or no cost to the city on property the Parks and Recreation already controlled. So, the volunteer got the go ahead from the Parks staff to start building the course at Corinth Community Park - which he did.
The course was "opened" during mid to late 2009 and started to get some players out on it. Sounds good, right? Unfortunately, things were not so good. I actually do not know when the first complaint was registered. I do know that as a member of the city council I got my first indication that there was even a Disc Golf Course in Corinth in November of 2009, when I got an email asking who was in charge of it. So I asked some questions, and started getting even more emails on the subject.
Then I walked the course, while the baskets were still up. I saw some players getting started on a round on the course. After I walked the course, to say that I had some concerns would be a classic understatement.
My first question was "How is it that this never came before the Council?" And that is the crux of the problem here. An otherwise good idea is now reviled because it was never taken through the appropriate steps: review by the Parks and Recreation Commission followed by approval by the Council.
So now we are trying to go through some semblance of the proper procedure ex post facto. Some people are outraged that the council didn't just kill the project. This is where that statement I made earlier comes in - you know the one about how "I don't think even I have all of the facts". As a council member, I think it is wrong to make decisions without a good faith effort to get all the facts. We are currently doing this and bringing those facts back in front of the Parks commission and the Council.
In fact the next Parks and Recreation Commission session is Tuesday February 16th, 2010, and this Disc Golf Course is going to be on the agenda.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)