Corpusfishing.com

[The Trash Heap]

In my garage there is a jar of vehicle window glass fragments that a friend told me could be added to the contents of my rock tumbler to help carry the grits and polish into all the little crannies in the surfaces of the stones I want smoothed. If it works, there's an endless supply of glass where that came from: the parking lot at Suter Refuge. Funny, in all the years I've tended garden around the parking lot at the refuge, no one's ever broken a car window while I was there. Apparently, being big, hairy, and nearby is enough to deter thieves and vandals. Or maybe it's my bark.

There are thieves and vandals, some of them with world-class ambitions, lurking along our beaches, too. Keep barking.
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_4590091,00.html
Group to file for a petition
Members oppose ban on beach traffic

By Jaime Powell Caller-Times
April 2, 2006




Members of a group opposed to banning traffic on the 7,200-foot stretch of beach between Packery Channel and Padre Balli Park will file a notice Monday of their intent to petition to force the issue to referendum and to have a segment of a second ordinance repealed.

The Beach Access Coalition, which includes surfing and fishing organizations, environmental groups and others, needs roughly 8,000 signatures to put the issue on the ballot. The group first must issue notices of intent to petition to give the City Council a chance to reconsider.

What's at stake are two ordinances passed by the City Council, one that bans vehicles on the section of beach in question and a second that established an election on a charter amendment that would require voter approval on future vehicle bans.

If the City Council refuses to reconsider the two ordinances at the next scheduled council meeting April 11, the city secretary will issue petitions to the coalition, which will have 90 days to get the required signatures.

If the petition drive is complete within 60 days, the election will be held in November. If not, it will be held in April 2007, coinciding with City Council elections, said Bill Kopecky, a coalition member.

The coalition has been an outspoken opponent of the vehicle-ban issue, related to a $500 million resort development, from the outset. Its opposition to the second ordinance lies in a loophole that says the charter amendment goes into effect only if the 7,200 feet of beach is closed, Kopecky said.

It means that if the coalition defeats this go-round of beach closure, the coalition would have to start all over again once future developers come around asking for similar closure concessions, said Hal Suter, another group member.

"What has been the bone of contention is whether what is being done is the foot in the door or camel's nose in the tent, if you will, the first step to closing beaches to vehicular traffic," Suter said. "In response they have come up with what we consider an inadequate charter amendment, and we want to remove that paragraph."

City Councilman John Marez said Saturday after attending the coalition's meeting that the issue likely will be forced to a vote.

"I am in agreement that this issue needs to go to the voters once and for all and this issue needs to be settled," he said.

Mayor Henry Garrett said Saturday night that the charter amendment was an attempt to assure the public that once the city closes the section of beach in question any further beach closures would come to a vote. He will not support closing the loophole in the second ordinance.

"If the 7,200 feet does not fly, we will start all over again," Garrett said. "It's over with as far as we are concerned. This is all we are going to do. We already voted on the thing, and I am not aware of any new action that we are going to take."

That stand does not surprise some coalition members.

"Technically we are formally asking them to reconsider what they already passed," Suter said. "The odds are remote. After they refuse, which is what we expect, the city secretary gives us the petitions and the clock starts ticking from them."

Contact Jaime Powell at 886-3716 or powellj@ caller.com

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_4590079,00.html
Letters to the Editor: 04.02.06

April 2, 2006

Ripe targets

The March 26 Caller-Times editorial is dead wrong. Beach traffic has been eliminated at South Padre and Galves-ton, with remote parking similar to what is being proposed on Corpus Christi beaches. Cars parked in these remote parking lots are open season for thieves, and break-ins are rampant.

Just as at Cole Park, South Guth Park, and many others, if you turn your back on your parked car for more than a couple of minutes you can count on having windows smashed and anything of value stolen.

The current proposal is to allow a vote on future closures, and the Caller-Times opposes even this. How about a vote on the first closure?

Richard Fischer
_________________
The Trash Heap Has Spoken!
NNYYAAAHH!!!