Corpusfishing.com

[The Trash Heap]

First, Colleen McIntyre, Beach Blocker spokeswoman, argues they'll leave 72,000 feet of beach to drive upon, then the COC's CEO Terry Carter undercuts her by arguing an amendment putting vehicle bans in the hands of the voters would put the City at a disadvantage when wooing future developers with promises to take the vehicles off the 72,000. How do you decide which to believe? As Deep Throat said, "Follow the money."

Another of Carter's remarks made a handy intro to a new LTTE when he accused the Beach Access Coalition of false advertising on the issue. Remember those fliers in the utility bill envelopes? I'll get to work on that later.
----------------------
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_5060701,00.html
Families at center of debate on beach
Each side differs on which situation would be the safest

By Denise Malan Caller-Times
October 12, 2006


Beach vehicle ban supporters and opponents challenged each other's views on public access and the economic impact of a proposed resort during two debates on the issue Wednesday.

Both sides framed an upcoming vote on beach access as a decision about how families want to experience the beach.

Colleen McIntyre, spokeswoman for pro-ban group It's About Time Corpus Christi, and City Councilman Mark Scott said a beach with pedestrians only would be safer and more pleasant for families.

"Those who want to drive on the beach may do so on the remaining 72,000 feet of beach," McIntyre said. She said those who want a beach with wooden posts separating traffic can have that at Bob Hall Pier. "Those who want to enjoy the beach without vehicles may do so after taking only a few steps from one of the three parking lots."

Mike McCutchon, spokesman for the anti-ban group Beach Access Coalition, said he is involved in the fight because he wants to have vehicle access for his family, and he believes a beach with cars is safe.

"Parents and grandparents also support this because they know getting their kids out of a car in a parking lot is much more dangerous than getting their kids out (on a beach) with wooden posts and being able to walk out to the beach," he said.

McCutchon also said the main issue is access to Packery Channel's south jetty because it is a publicly funded project. He doesn't trust that a tram taking people 1,800 feet from a parking lot to the jetty would run during hours when he needs it.

"The tram may or may not be running when I want to go out surfing early in the morning," McCutchon said. "I may be looking at a 1/3-mile hike."

The debates occasionally turned personal. McIntyre brought up McCutchon's position as chairman of the board of the local yacht club, while McCutchon talked about Scott's job at a title company, which the city attorney has ruled is not a conflict of interest in the beach debate.

Terry Carter, president and chief executive officer of the Corpus Christi Chamber of Commerce, debated McCutchon on the second charter amendment, which would give voters a say in future proposed vehicle bans, during a televised forum sponsored by the League of Women Voters and the Leadership Corpus Christi Alumni Association.

The chamber opposes the second charter amendment because it would ruin the city's competitive advantage when trying to woo developers, Carter said. The Beach Access Coalition put the amendment on the ballot through a petition drive because it worries that future developers could want vehicle bans.

"We don't want to tie the future hands of our city," Carter said. "It's time for it to grow."

Carter called McCutchon an activist who circumvents the system and accused the Beach Access Coalition of false advertising on the issue.

"I am not an activist by nature," McCutchon responded, saying he went through the system by petitioning for a vote. "I became an activist after the actions by our City Council."

McCutchon said letters from the chamber inflated the amount of investment the resort would bring to the area.

He also questioned ban supporters' statements that development on Padre Island would be low-quality if voters don't approve the ban Nov. 7. Developer Paul Schexnailder has said the ban is necessary to attract a $1.5 billion resort. The current spurt of development on the island shows beach vehicle bans are not necessary for quality development, McCutchon said.

"These things are all coming forward without any requirement to ban driving on the beach," he said.

McCutchon and Scott also debated whether the city promised access to the Packery Channel south jetty before a vote to finance the project in 2001. The two squared off in the first debate of the day, sponsored by the Downtown Lions Club with the Optimist Club of Downtown Corpus Christi.

The audience had mixed views and asked McCutchon and Scott questions dealing with resort development company Intrawest, what might happen if the ban does not pass and whether the JFK Causeway could support increased traffic from the resort in a hurricane.

Scott assured the audience that Intrawest, which has been acquired by Fortress Investment Group, still is interested in the Padre Island resort, although it would pull out if the ban does not pass. He also said the bridge was built to handle much more traffic than it does at present.

One audience member asked McCutchon his response to the likelihood of a private development - without restaurants, entertainment and shops for public - coming in if the ban does not pass. McCutchon said that he could not foresee what might happen, but public access to the beach would be better preserved in that case.

Contact Denise Malan at 886-4334 or at HYPERLINK mailto:maland@caller.com maland@caller.com
_________________
The Trash Heap Has Spoken!
NNYYAAAHH!!!