2003-09-08 Regular Meeting, Public Hearing and Workshop Meeting

Browse Search

City Council Regular Meeting, pUb.earing and Workshop Meeting - Septemb., 2003 - Page 2 6. PETITIONS, REMONSTRANCES, COMMUNICATIONS, AND CITIZENS AND TAX PAYERS WISHING TO ADDRESS COUNCIL ON ANY ITEM POSTED ON THE AGENDA Bill Scott of 1807 Lomax School Road, La Porte, Texas 77571- This evening Mr. Scott will continue to discuss public comments made about him by a Councilmember at the October 14,2002 Council Meeting. Mr. Scott will refresh your memories, regarding the feedlot that is 50 feet upwind of his front door; with a Councilmember stating adjoining landowners had no problem with the feedlot. Mr. Scott later responded, with the fact, that he was the only adjoining landowner other than the feedlot owner himself, and the landowner's undivided interest partners. Mr. Scott strongly objected to the feedlot, which makes the Councilmember's statements completely untrue. The Councilmember also attempted to use a City survey mailed to landowners within two hundred feet of the feedlot, as evidence that the feedlot was good for the community. Before we look at that survey, Mr. Scott would like Council to listen to an analogy that's very similar to what happened with the survey. The Analogy - Suppose you have children, you voted in favor of a bond issue that would raise your taxes to build a playground on the vacant land across the street from your home, the bond issue passed and the City raised your taxes. Then the City decided to build a playground elsewhere and put a garbage truck repair shop on the land across the street from your home; what would you call that Council? Fraud? Deception? Corruption? Possibly TIlega!? Now let's look at the survey the City mailed to landowners around the feedlot. The landowner fills in the blank below "I'm in favor of'. This particular person I spoke with yesterday; filled "in favor of' the feedlot; thinking it was for about six cattle, the maximum he had ever seen on the feedlot, and that's what any reasonable citizen would have concluded. The landowner informed me he would have opposed the cattle production had he known it would probably be granted for an unlimited numbers of animals. I believe the other landowners would have opposed the cattle production also; it destroys property values in the unlimited stage. Comparing this playground analogy, what do we call the City Survey? Fraud? Deception? Corruption? TIlegal? What is even more despicable than the deception is a Councilmember attempting to use the survey to justify a feedlot of unlimited numbers of animals in a residential area. I haye two 26-46 questions for Council: Number I - Who engineered and who reviewed this deception against the citizens? The Survey? Number 2 - When are you going to start correcting this abuse? I also have a 26-46 question for you personally, Mr. Malone; why did you attempt to use this legal garbage up here to justify a feedlot. . Now regarding ditches, which I spoke on before. The City has three strikes against it: Strike Number 1 - allowing the Blackwell's to install culverts while our ditch is four feet deep and has standing water; the same street, the same scenario, the drainage scenario. Strike Number 2 - the City digging our ditch deeper so it has standing water rather than correcting our culvert? Strike Number 3 - the City installing our new culvert one iilch deeper than the downstream culvert, after Mr. Scott specifically asked the City to install it higher; it also has standing water. Mr. Scott is through dealing with the City's ditch and culvert people; he is through asking for fair and equal treatment. Now, I'm telling you, the culvert will be raised and the ditch will be filled so it drains. I suggest you folks go out and look at it; it has standing water right, after the last rain. The Blackwell's is dry within a day of a rain. You need to do something about this, gentlemen. Thank you for your time and consideration.