Corpusfishing.com

[The Trash Heap]

The Caller-Times today recognizes how much hinges on the response to the proposed beach closure ordinance, both within the council and without. That accounts for some of the flagrant editorial license taken with the facts, such as the claim that the proposal is within the letter and the spirit of the TOBA. Another misleading thing in the editorial is the statement about this proposal's intent being to raise Corpus Christi's tax base, although the part it raises is by design within the TIF zone. Odd that increased beach access, as well as access to the Packery Channel south jetty and the creation of park and recreation facilities at its base, touted on the City's website before and after the TIF election as some of the TIF's goals, are now being tossed aside as unimportant to the very citizens who voted for it.

See you at the council chambers at 1:30. Since the majority of the councilmembers have demonstrated repeatedly they won't keep a promise made to the citizens, ask that the charter amendment include a citizen vote on this beach closure ordinance, not just on any subsequent ones.

Caller.com

To print this page, select File then Print from your browser
URL: http://www.caller.com/ccct/local_news/article/0,1641,CCCT_811_4558469,00.html
Council leaning in favor
Charter revision could become a sticking point

By Nick Nelson Caller-Times
March 21, 2006


The most polarizing City Council issue since last year's smoking ban - a proposal to restrict vehicle traffic on 7,200 feet of Padre Island beach - comes up for a vote today.

Most council members said Monday that they planned to approve it, though a charter amendment built into the new ordinance could become a sticking point in the debate.

Discussion of the new ordinance will begin at 1:30 p.m. at City Hall.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mayor Henry Garrett
"I supported the ordinance before, and I’m going to support it again."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Councilman Brent Chesney
"I’ve been pretty clear that I support ... the idea of a pedestrian only portion of the beach. With or without the development I think that’s a good idea."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Councilwoman Melody Cooper
"I’m going to vote for the ordinance. I think the charter amendment will assuage the concerns of those who thought we’ll go further with beach restrictions."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Councilman Jerry Garcia
"If I can get my questions answered — and it looks to me like they are — I would lean favorably to the ordinance."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Councilman Bill Kelly
Kelly has abstained from voting about the issue because of a conflict of interest. He owns property near the beach in question.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Councilman Rex Kinnison
"I’m more inclined to vote for the ordinance if it’s not coupled with the charter amendment, but I think the ordinance itself needs to be tweaked a little."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Councilman John Marez
"I’m definitely leaning to vote against the ordinance."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Councilman Jesse Noyola
"I would probably support (the ordinance) with the charter amendment."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Councilman Mark Scott
"As the ordinance is written today I’m comfortable with it."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


In October, the council voted to ban vehicular traffic on 4,200 feet of beach along the island's seawall. The council rescinded that vote after Austin developer Paul Schexnailder announced that a major resort developer needed additional vehicle-free beach to move forward with a $500 million resort project overlooking the beach. The Caller-Times learned in December that the developer was Vancouver-based Intrawest Corp., a publicly traded resort and travel company.

City staff took several months drafting a new ordinance and circulated it to council members on Friday. It calls for a vehicle ban on 7,200 feet of beach between Packery Channel and Padre Balli Park, including the beach along the island's seawall. The vehicle ban north and south of the seawall wouldn't take effect until developers begin building the resort projects planned for the area.

Until Friday, it wasn't clear whether the ordinance would include a proposal to amend the city's charter, but it does include such a proposal. The charter amendment would require a citywide vote to approve any future beach restrictions.

On Monday, Mayor Henry Garrett and council members Melody Cooper and Mark Scott said they would likely vote for the ordinance.

Councilman Rex Kinnison said he planned to make a motion to separate the charter amendment proposal from the rest of the ordinance. He said he thought it unwise to bind future city councils and remove them from beach management decisions.

"You end up with everything going on the ballot, regardless of the size and scope of the project," he said.

Councilmen Jerry Garcia and Brent Chesney also said they had misgivings about the charter amendment. Councilman Jesse Noyola, on the other hand, said it was the charter amendment that made him comfortable with the ordinance as a whole.

Councilman John Marez said he would likely vote against the ordinance, charter amendment or no. Marez said the ordinance didn't give enough access to Packery Channel's south jetty.

"The essence of this entire ordinance is privatizing the beach," he said.

The Beach Access Coalition, which formed in November to petition against the council's previous 4,200-foot traffic ban, is ready to start a new petition with the passage of the new ordinance.

BAC spokesman Michael McCutchon expressed his disappointment with the ordinance in a recent letter to City Manager Skip Noe. McCutchon wrote that the city had deviated from its original plan to build a park area just south of Packery Channel and to fund it with surpluses in property tax revenue. To pay for Packery Channel, the city organized a Tax Increment Finance Zone in the area. When property values go up in the area, the tax on the increase goes into a TIF fund. McCutchon argued that the TIF fund has exceeded estimates and that a park should be built with the surplus funds.

"You propose to take away park land and use the tax money earmarked for that park to build the infrastructure that would enable the developer to take away our park," he wrote.

Noe said Monday that the TIF plan included a reference to parks but there was never any funding set aside for them. He said the new ordinance differs from the original TIF plan only in that it places a public parking lot just north of the seawall instead of just south of Packery Channel.

"No one has suggested at all that we remove anything from the TIF plan," he said.

The Corpus Christi Hispanic Chamber of Commerce issued a resolution in support of the beach restriction, saying "the development of a pedestrian-friendly beach on Padre Island will enhance the beach going experience for residents and tourists alike."

Asked Monday what outcome he expected from today's vote, Scott said he couldn't predict it.

"Based on past history on this issue, I've learned not to expect anything," he said.

Contact Nick Nelson at 886-3678 or HYPERLINK mailto:nelsonn@caller.com nelsonn@caller.com

Caller.com

To print this page, select File then Print from your browser
URL: http://www.caller.com/ccct/local_news/article/0,1641,CCCT_811_4558468,00.html
Access to fishing spots worries some

By MARI SAUGIER Caller-Times
March 21, 2006

More than vehicular restrictions, many Corpus Christi residents worried about their access to Packery Channel fishing piers Monday at a monthly Town Hall meeting at Kostoryz Elementary School.

Parking lots too far removed from the jetty south of the channel would present problems for retirees toting fishing gear or families with small children, said resident Robert Frank James. He thinks council members aren't prepared for the fishing traffic the jetties will attract.

"I don't mind a section of closed beach, but why that much?" he asked City Council members Brent Chesney, Melody Cooper, Jesse Noyola and Jerry Garcia, who attended the meeting.

Business owner Joe Farah said the city should not turn over some of its most valuable property to an outside developer.

"If anybody develops that property it's got to be Corpus Christi," Farah said. "Why are we sitting here with our hands tied, begging for something. We're giving away our most precious asset and there's no reason for that."

Island resident Michael Smith said he worried the proposed island development could limit the public's access to the beach, similar to a situation on South Padre Island, where some public beaches are only easily accessible to beachfront condo owners.

Council members said public facilities such as restrooms, showers and parking lots would encourage the public's use of the pedestrian-only beach.

Contact Mari Saugier at 886-3623 or HYPERLINK mailto:saugierm@caller.com saugierm@caller.com

Caller.com

To print this page, select File then Print from your browser
URL: http://www.caller.com/ccct/editorials/article/0,1641,CCCT_840_4558453,00.html
Pedestrian beach is idea whose time has come

Today, council members, having weighed all the pros and cons, should pass ordinance that will enhance Padre Island's appeal.

March 21, 2006


The Corpus Christi City Council ought to be clear in its own collective mind as to why it should approve an ordinance today that would create a pedestrian beach on Padre Island. There are straightforward and solid reasons for such a beach, reasons that revolve around the public's benefit.

Opponents, however, prefer to frame the issue of a pedestrian beach in terms of loss. If the issue is accessibility to the beach in a motor vehicle, last week's spring break masses on the beach, with seemingly most of them mounted in a car or pickup, should underscore that there is no shortage of miles of beach on which to drive. Some have equated the right to drive on the beach with public access, but, as Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson told the Editorial Board recently, neither statute nor rule has ever defined the law in that manner.

What is at stake in the council's vote today is setting aside 7,216 linear feet of island beach, south of Packery Channel, for pedestrians only. And this out of scores of miles of island beach within the city limits that are now open to driving. The gain for the public would be a section of the beach where families and other beachgoers would be free of the worry of vehicles traversing any part of that piece of sand. This is no minor concern, given the growing traffic activity on a piece of barrier island that is increasingly popular and urbanized. The days when North Padre and Mustang islands were remote and sparsely populated have long been over.

And though some view any development with suspicion, one of the chief points of dredging Packery Channel was to spur the very kind of development that is now promised. Developer Paul Schexnailder's vision of a $500 million resort community adjacent to the pedestrian beach is the very kind of tax-inducing project that was in mind when voters approved participation in the nearly completed channel that will connect Corpus Christi Bay to the Gulf of Mexico. To put up obstacles to development by allowing vehicular traffic on the adjacent beach would be counter to the very mission of Packery Channel: to create economic activity on the island that will raise the tax base. And raising the tax base is to the advantage of all of Corpus Christi's citizens.

The council's path to a pedestrian beach hasn't been a straight line. In December, the council rescinded an ordinance that created a pedestrian beach of 4,216 feet that it had passed in October. Chalk that up to the right information not being in the hands of the council; that ordinance simply wouldn't have done the job needed. But there was enough leadership on the council to recognize a mistake and move on.

Now that same kind of leadership is needed today. The council should pass an ordinance that creates a safe and attractive beach, that not only meets the letter of the Open Beaches Act, but the spirit as well. That means ready and plentiful access to a beach where beachgoers won't have to constantly look over their shoulders.

Caller.com

To print this page, select File then Print from your browser
URL: http://www.caller.com/ccct/letters_to_the_editor/article/0,1641,CCCT_841_4558457,00.html
Letters to the Editor: 03.21.06

March 21, 2006

Facts, please

Construction on Packery Channel still seems to slowly progress, but no stories have been printed recently on what the real schedule is. It has been reported that the boat ramp is virtually complete; however, there are no roads started to it, or even parking facilities. It just sits there.

I know that some details had to be redesigned due to the damage of hurricane season, and the weather surely has caused some delays. It would be refreshing to have the real facts and dates for a change. Last I heard, Mark Scott indicated it would be finished sometime in March. Fat chance.

What about channel markers and lights at the end of the jetties? Is someone going to start thinking about those issues in a couple of years?

Someone knows the real schedule, including what is going to happen and what has not even been discussed as of yet. The city's Web site used to run monthly aerial pictures of the progress, but even those have bit the dust.

Terry Quiroga
_________________
The Trash Heap Has Spoken!
NNYYAAAHH!!!

[mastergunner]

I hate to say this but when the south jetty is basically privatized for resort members I think we should establish a monthly "south jetty redneck fishing tournament and beer drinking contest" and for a whole weekend each month take back our beach and jetty that our tax dollars built for developers. This makes me want to ask the city to build me a nice house on the beach with tax payer dollars, I will call it my world class resort.
_________________
Mastergunner, supporter of hardheads for state fish of Texas

[funmeters1]

Master gunner and all. From now on I am going "Shark Fishing" along the sea wall once a week. " best shark fishing in the US" Yep, lady you should have been here last week,big excitement, guy was walking his dog along the water edge, the dog ran into the water chasing a bird then all of a sudden swhoosh the dog was gone, shark i guess yep the dog was about as big as YOUR kid. Got to remember here that over your knees means you are part of the food chain. Have a nice day lady , Seems safer at Disneyworld.
On the jetty maybe I can get to like rap music, nice and loud and the nastier the better.
Those guys are going to get it. Now I know how the Native Americans felt. Power and Money rules. But not without a fight.
Spread the word that it is still a Texas beach

[Seabass]

Yeah... I'm up for a beach party I've got a beer gut on me that would make the best Chicago Bears fan proud. Not to mention one heck of a farmer's tan. I'd be happy to take my shirt off and do some fishin along that little stretch of "pedestrian only" beach. What's that you say? It ain't such a pretty picture?

Oh well..it's not like I could hide behind a car..

Seabass

[Big John]

Yep, time for t he monthly redneck riveria surf fishing tourney.

Everyone gets a thong, no shirt to show off that back hair, a mullet wig, and we blast Travis Tritt or Bocefus up loud, drink beer and hoop and holler!
_________________
GOBZA!!!
Save $$$ - Get Coupons local businesses today! - http://www.gobza.com/29472

[snakecan2]

the South will rise again.. Time to bring out the rebel flag..
no i am not one of thoose peoples that stand for the negative or prejudices that it may have originally stood for.

But this is The Republic of TEXAS. We should stand together and fight for the majority of Texas for they do not know what is going on down there.

Closing the beach will only benifit a few rich deep pocketed individuals and eventually ruin the beach period. To much developement will deterioate the barrier island as it was natually to be. Maybe we need katrina to hit our coast for theese people to understand dont under estimate mother nature, She is here for all of us to enjoy and take part of and to leave as she wanted and for us to care for her. Not to build up and take away from the people who want to enjoy her. For her rath will come down and wash all of it away.

I agree with some of the other comments, shark fishing on the proposed banned area would get some mention to help keep some developement down

[JerryB]

Hell this transplanted yankee might need to grow a mullet. I'm not a shark fisherman but for this I could become one I guess I need to respool the 6/0 and bet a longer rod

[funmeters1]

You guys keep shaking the tree up there and we will do our best to keep the heat on. Sheesh what makes a bunch of hi rise condos along the beach such a wonderful thing unless you are a carpet bagger. These clowns are only in it for the buck and then move on to another place to trash and leave us holding the bag.
We need another Woodstock to send a mesage that condos and development of the beaches are not good. If I want to see gaudy and development I'll go to Las Vegas. Time to send a message that all of us local riff raff and not going to be good for business.

[snakecan2]

how bout doing a beach clean up just for this special occasion, clean up pins again, and leave it on the proposed area,

also report all of the hyperdermic needles that we have been finding. and other junk..

they hit us with bs, lets hit them back harder.. ok so maybe not litter the beach up..

ron

[Bluffer]

Ive still got a bunch of fireworks left over we can shoot off also!
_________________
-STAY THIRSTY MY FRIENDS!-

[unlucky_larry]

My dad always said fight fire with fire. When this comes down to a open election on the issue where going to need financial support. Its time to start thinking about raising money to block this deal.

[curtisrock]

You better be ready with more special interest than Windsurfers and Anglers. Business interest is the biggest interest in Corpus Christi.

[rabbit]

[Big John]

Curtis,

Explain to us how exactly the minimum wage jobs provided by resorts are gonna help you buy a house? How you would even be able to pay bills if you lived on your own?

(refering to the other thread)
_________________
GOBZA!!!
Save $$$ - Get Coupons local businesses today! - http://www.gobza.com/29472

[anzuelo]

Nobody seems to look at who is using the Corpus Christi beaches every weekend. The majority are not surfers or fishermen but just people who want to drive down to the beach and relax with a BBQ pit and a few beers. And if you drive along the beach you will see that the majority of those using the Corpus beaches are Hispanic.

If the resorts are built with the restrictions on vehicular traffic, how do you think the beaches will look then.

Can anyone say "WHITES ONLY BEACH."

I'm sure the city council doesn't want this little tidbit of information out there.