Group wants vote on beach
Signatures sought on vehicle access

By Brandi Dean Caller-Times
October 26, 2005


Petitions soon will be circulating, as those against traffic restrictions on 4,200 feet of Padre Island beach work to bring the issue before voters.

On Tuesday the group requested the City Council reconsider its 7-1 decision last week to close the beach along Padre Island's seawall to vehicles. That request was the first step in getting the issue of beach access put on a ballot. The council took no action on the request.

"We already voted on it," Mayor Henry Garrett said. "There was no sense in voting again. We weren't going to vote to change it, so we took no action."

That prompted the opposition to move on to the next step - gathering signatures from about 8,000 registered voters in 90 days. The group picked up the petition forms from the city secretary Tuesday and hopes to start collecting names by the end of the week.

"I don't think (getting signatures) will be any problem at all," said Pat Suter, chairman of the Coastal Bend Sierra Club and a member of the opposition. "People believe in open beaches."

And in this area, Suter said, open means being able to drive on them.

The petitioners plan to set up in the Nueces County Courthouse as soon as possible, although they still are waiting to see if they can get permission, according to Bill Kopecky, a member of the Corpus Christi Taxpayers Association helping to organize the petitioning. Members of the group are planning to meet soon to organize more formally and discuss where else they might set up, according to Johnny French, who keeps the members in touch with one another through e-mail.

If the group is able to get enough signatures, City Secretary Armando Chapa said voters could be deciding the issue May 13. The question would share a ballot with school board races, but Chapa said he thought the election could cost the city about $100,000.

And that's not the only election the group asked for - they have also suggested that the City Council consider amending the city's charter to require that any future changes to beach access also be decided by voters. Several council members expressed their support of that, because while they have said they don't intend to close any more beaches to traffic, they're can't keep future councils from doing so.

"I would love to see us do something like that," said Councilman Jesse Noyola. "If we do that in a charter amendment, it's stuck in stone."

However, the council can't change the charter by itself. City Attorney Mary Kay Fischer said voters would have to make that decision, and by state law such an election couldn't be held until November 2006 - two years after the last charter amendment election.

Contact Brandi Dean at 886-3778 or HYPERLINK mailto:deanb@caller.com deanb@caller.com.

Copyright 2005, Caller.com. All Rights Reserved.

Corpus Christi voters reject vehicle ban on Padre Island beach

CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas — Corpus Christi voters have rejected the City Council's attempt to spur a resort development by banning vehicles on more than a mile of Padre Island beach.

The council voted in March to ban vehicles on 7,200 feet of beach, but the opposition group Beach Access Coalition led a successful petition drive to put the issue to voters.

Opponents of the vehicle ban on Tuesday defeated the proposed charter amendment with 55 percent of the vote. The amendment would have banned vehicles from the Packery Channel south jetty to the northern boundary of Padre Balli Park.

Voters also passed an amendment allowing a public vote on all future ban proposals.

Mayor Henry Garrett said he doesn't want to give up on the proposal for a resort on the beach. But landowner Paul Schexnailder has said the development company, Intrawest, said the project was contingent on a vehicle ban.

"I would like to get all the players together and see if there is some way we can salvage the development," Garrett said.

The Beach Access Coalition argued that a vehicle ban would hamper public access because beachgoers would have to walk from parking lots to the beach carrying surfboards, lawn chairs, coolers and fishing equipment.

They said the ban would effectively create a private beach for resort tourists.

Coalition spokesman Michael McCutchon said the group has been willing to compromise. The group proposed using wooden posts to separate pedestrians from vehicles, but developers rejected the idea.

"Our beaches mean too much to us to have an out-of-town developer dictate the terms of how we access and use them," McCutchon said. "Our beaches can't be bought by half-million dollar ad campaigns. I hope that future city councils take note and get a better feel from the community before pushing for something we clearly didn't want."

Council member Mark Scott, whose district includes the island, campaigned in favor of the vehicle ban. He said he believes Intrawest will pull out of the development without the ban, and he's not sure negotiations will help.

"I think we need to take a deep breath and give it a couple weeks," Scott said. "I think it's too soon after the election."

___

Information from: Corpus Christi Caller-Times, http://www.caller.com

___

Controversy Over South Padre Island Beach Access

SOUTH PADRE ISLAND, Texas -- A 9 1/2-mile-wide bay separates rural Willacy County from what surely must be paradise: Padre Island's isolated beaches, a nature retreat for bird watchers and what's considered some of the best sport-fishing in the country.

For about 40 years, the county has sought direct access to the riches of the narrow barrier island, with no success. The land to the north of a manmade ship channel dividing the island is the federally protected Padre Island National Seashore, a wilderness area.

That leaves South Padre Island. But the most convenient access point for county residents - on the northern end of South Padre - is owned by the Nature Conservancy and is a haven for rare and endangered species such as Kemp's Ridley sea turtles, the most endangered sea turtle in the world; piping plovers and brown pelicans. The islands are also an important staging area for rare peregrine falcons in migration.

So what's a county to do when an environmental group says the land's not for sale?

Willacy County is exploring its use of eminent domain to seize the land, an option that has stirred a cauldron of controversy.

Willacy is a financially foundering county on the northeast end of the Rio Grande Valley, about 40 miles from the Texas-Mexico border. It has fewer than 18,000 people, and no real industry since fruit-packing sheds and clothing factories closed decades ago.

Its bright spot is Port Mansfield, a sleepy town with a picturesque cluster of marinas and stilted homes with boat slips. Fewer than 500 people call it home. The town has no access to the island's beaches or the fishing in the Gulf of Mexico, and the waters of Laguna Madre Bay offer little for beachgoers and swimmers.

To reach the island, visitors must drive 25 miles up the coast from South Padre Island, a bumpy trip that requires a four-wheel drive vehicle and knowledge of tides that can trap a motorist on the return trip.

"If you don't have access to the island, then what's the purpose for coming here?" said Willacy County Attorney Juan Angel Guerra.

A few years ago the state General Land Office awarded the Willacy County Navigation District a $700,000 grant to fund a project to ferry passengers to the island. The district used $90,000 of that money in 2004 to buy "Lark," a 40-year-old amphibious vehicle that could ferry as many as 30 passengers from Port Mansfield to the island.

Now, it wants to buy a place to load and unload the craft so residents and tourists can enjoy the beach.

Enter the county commissioners. They voted in November to use eminent domain to seize the land, angering conservancy members who fear an influx of beachgoers will threaten wildlife on the 1,500-acre section of island.

Eminent domain gives governments power to take private land for public use - usually for projects such as highways or mass transit systems. Texas was one of at least 31 states to review eminent domain laws following a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year that backed governments' power to take private land for economic development as a way to increase tax revenue.

Gov. Rick Perry signed a bill into law last fall that limited eminent domain use in Texas, saying government should not encroach upon private property rights unless there is an eminent public need. "Eminent domain for private use is a great threat," he said.

Guerra said the county can legally take the land, since it will allow the public better access to the island.

The Conservancy vows to fight the land grab in court, but a law professor in Texas said they may not have much to go on if the county's aim is truly public use.

"As far as I can tell, Willacy County can clearly exercise their power of eminent domain. ... I don't see the county not prevailing in the long run," said Victoria Mather, professor of law at St. Mary's University School of Law in San Antonio.

Still, she said, it could be a long fight.

"Anytime people decide to dig in their heels, it can drag things out," she said. "But for the Nature Conservancy, I just don't think there's anything they can do, ultimately."

Conservancy representatives said they learned of the county's eminent domain decision through local news reports.

"No one at Willacy County has made any attempt whatsoever to contact the Nature Conservancy about this matter," said Carter Smith, the Conservancy's state director. "Candidly, we find that very disquieting."

Smith said the Conservancy talked about selling the land to the county several years ago but decided against it because the county hadn't thought through how it would deal with sanitation issues, law enforcement and other ways to mitigate environmental impacts and protect endangered species.

He said beachgoers could unknowingly tramp on clutches of endangered sea turtle eggs or disturb dunes and mud flats that are crucial habitat for reddish egrets, roseate spoonbills and redhead ducks. He said the county was vague about how and where it intended to install toilets or tote away garbage.

Mike Wilson, director of the navigation district, said all those concerns will be considered as the project moves forward, but the county doesn't yet have a firm plan or budget.

He said he doubted the environment would be harmed by providing better access to the island.

"I don't know why there would be more of an impact for our people coming over on a boat," he said. "How would there be any more impact than people driving up the beach?"

---

On the Net:

National Park Service, Padre Island: http://www.nps.gov/pais/

The Nature Conservancy: http://nature.org/wherewework/northamerica...es_art6430.html