Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-01-10 Regular Meeting of the La Porte Development Corporation Board of Directors minutes MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CALLED REGULAR MEETING OF THE LA PORTE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS February 1, 2010 1. Call to order President Pat Muston called the La Porte Development Corporation Board meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Members Present: Muston, Woodard, Pizzitola, Moser, Clausen and Engelken Members/Officers Absent: Warren Staff Present: City Manager Ron Bottoms, Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins, City Secretary Martha Gillett and Main Street/Economic Development Coordinator Stacey Osborne. Others Present: Leonard Zlomke, Bob Payne of BAHEP, Paul Chavez of BAHEP, Dan Seal of BAHEP and Ted Powell. 2. Consider approval or other action of the January 11, 2010 minutes of the Regular Meeting of the La Porte Development Corporation Board of Directors - M. Gillett A motion was made by Board Member Clausen to approve the January 11, 2010 minutes of the Regular Meeting of the La Porte Development Corporation Board of Directors. Motion was seconded by Board Member Engelken. The motion carried. Ayes: Muston, Woodard, Pizzitola Moser, Clausen and Engelken Nays: None Abstain: None Absent: Warren 3. Consider approval of a contract between the City of La Porte and the Bay Area Houston Economic Partnership - S. Osborne The Development Corporation Board of Directors discussed a contract between the City of La Porte and the Bay Area Houston Economic Partnership. Dan Seal of BAHEP provided the board with an overview of companies that had worked with them in the area and in the City of La Porte. In addition he answered board questions. The board requested regular reports and updates from BAHEP. It was suggested they come to quarterly meetings and make a presentation to the board. A motion was made by Board Member Clausen approve a contract between the City of La Porte and the Bay Area Houston Economic Partnership. The motion was seconded by Board Member Woodard. The motion carried. Ayes: Muston, Woodard, Pizzitola, Moser, Clausen, and Engelken Nays: None Abstain: None Absent: Warren 4. Discuss the possibility of donating funds to support the rebuilding efforts of Battleship Texas. The Development Corporation Board of Directors discussed the possibility of donating funds to support the rebuilding efforts of the Battleship Texas. Staff will bring back information on funds already donated by other organizations and what is still needed. Also, some board members noted concerns with the Battleship not being located inside the City of La Porte corporate limits. 5. Receive updates from city staff on following Projects - S. Osborne Economic Development /Main Street Coordinator reported on the following projects: o TEDC o Town Plaza o Sylvan Beach Shoreline Project o 912 West Main/Gateway o Main Street Activities Stacy Osborne informed the Town Plaza Grand Opening and Ribbon Cutting Ceremony will not be held on February 4th due to weather concerns. The new date has not been set yet. Stacey Osborne provided the board with the following updates: TEDC - Ms. Osborne gave the board an update on the recent conference she attended. Town Plaza - the board was informed the Town Plaza Grand Opening and Ribbon Cutting Ceremony will not be held on February 4th due to weather concerns. The new date has not been set yet. There are plans for future events at the Town Plaza including concerts, Motorhead Mania, MarketlTrade Days, etc. Sylvan Beach Shoreline Project - the board was informed this project is almost completed and Stephen Barr is working on the punch list. 912 West Main/Gateway - the board was informed City Council approved this project and it will be moving forward. Main Street Activities - the board was informed that Ms. Osborne is still working with the businesses on Main Street. The next Morning Brew will be held on February 17, 2010. 6. Executive Session - pursuant to provision of the Open Meetings Law. Chapter 551 Texas Government Code, Sections 551-071 through 551.076, 551.087 (consultation with attorney, deliberation regarding real property, deliberation regarding prospective gift or donation, personnel matters, deliberation regarding security devices, or excluding a witness during examination of another witness in an investigation, deliberation regarding Economic Development Negotiations). There was no Executive Session. 7. Board Member Comments A. Matter appearing on agenda B. Inquiry of staff requiring a statement of specific factual information or a recitation of existing policy. 8. Adjournment There being no further business to discuss, the La Porte Development Corporation Board of Directors adjourned the Regular Meeting at 5:55 p.m. Respectfully submitt~g,. . ~~ '-frItU:tk~ Martha Gillett City Secretary TRMC ~~ed a approved on this pi day of tttlA-d..- 2010. lon,"~ BATTLESHIP TEXAS FOUNDATION WHITE PAPER Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ), Dry-berth Project Rationale and Ship's History September 5,2008 Updated: February 5, 2010 Introduction - The Battleship Texas is owned by the State of Texas and, through Legislation, is administered by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD). The Battleship Texas Foundation (BTF) is the successor entity to the Battleship Texas Commission, created by the Legislature in 1947 to raise funds to move the Texas and to manage her restoration and public display. The Texas Legislature delegated the administrative responsibility for the ship to TPWD in 1983. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)- Q1. Why is the Battleship Texas at the San Jacinto Battleground in the first place? AI. When the ship was offered to the State of Texas in 1947, Governor Buford Jester appointed the Battleship Texas Commission to address all aspects ofthe issue, including the ship's location and how to raise funds to pay for moving the ship here. The Commission heard testimony from a wide range of interested Texans including several descendants of General Sam Houston. They stated that the San Jacinto Battleground site was the ideal location for the ship since, as an icon ofthe State as well as the State's namesake, she would be a constant reminder that, although Texans won their freedom from Mexico at the Battle of San Jacinto in 1836, freedom is never fully and finally won. Freedom is preserved through constant technological innovation and by the sacrifices of heroic individuals. Heroes are not limited to a specific time and place in our State's past; they are also part of our more recent history, as embodied by the Battleship Texas, as well as by those citizens of Texas who volunteer to serve in our armed forces today. BTF is proud to celebrate all of our heroes, both past and present, and to provide inspiration for our future heroes. The state statute that created the San Jacinto Battleground Historical Advisory Board, which advises TPWD on the presentation of the State Historical Park, specifies that one board member shall represent the Battleship Texas Foundation, implying clear legislative intent for the ship to be at the San Jacinto Battleground. Q2. Some have suggested that the ships would draw more visitors if she were moved to a more "tourist-friendly" site. How do you respond? A2. The expert consensus is that the most cost-effective plan is to dry-berth the Texas at its current location. She can't be moved any significant distance and she needs to be in a dry berth at the earliest possible time in order to preserve her. 1 Any relocation to a new site (presumably also on the Houston Ship Channel) means that land must be located and purchased and the new site dredged just to get to the point where she is right now. It has been estimated that the purchase of a new site, plus the cost of facilities at that site, plus the cost of dredging could total in excess of $22 million. How many taxpayers want to spend an additional $22 million just to place the ship at some new location on the Houston Ship Channel? Q3. How does the presence of the Battleship Texas at the San Jacinto Battleground complement and enhance the State Historical Park? A3. The Texas helps to draw visitors to the San Jacinto Battleground and generate revenue for TPWD. TPWD uses this revenue to support the maintenance of the entire State Historical Park. As directed by the state of Texas, TPWD subsidizes visitors to the Park by charging a low admission price and by offering free admission to children. When the Texas was removed from San Jacinto in 1988-90 to be dry- docked, overall Park attendance declined by over 40%. When the dry-docking was completed and the ship was returned to her San Jacinto berth, overall Park attendance increased dramatically. A 2005 economic study by TPWD concluded that the San Jacinto Battleground - Battleship Texas State Historic Park has a significant positive impact on Harris County. TPWD estimates that, on an annual basis, the Park generates over $10 million is direct and indirect sales, generates over $51,000 in sales tax revenue and creates over 120 jobs. More recently, TPWD documents that attendance at the Battleship Texas increased from 58,700 in FY 2006 to over 94,000 in FY 2008. This year, the Battleship generated 57% of the total revenue (admissions and souvenir sales) at the San Jacinto State Historical Park. The Battleship and the Battleground complement each other and constitute a mutual "draw." More visitors come to see both the Battleship and the Battleground than come to see either one alone. Neither the Battleship alone, nor the Monument/Museum alone are financially viable; together, they are a growing source ofTPWD revenue. Q4. Why do you believe the San Jacinto Battleground is the best place for the Texas? A4. The Battleground and the Battleship represent a part of a historical continuum that helps to tell the tale of Texas and its honored place in United States history. It is a little-remembered fact but, in 1836, it was the action of the fledgling Texas Navy that denied water transportation and re-supply to the Mexican Army. This forced General Santa Anna to rely on extended overland supply by wagon trains which were raided by Texians. He and his army were near the end of their supplies when they were defeated on April 21, 1836 at the Battle of San Jacinto. In 1947, General Sam Houston's descendents lobbied the Texas Legislature to place the Texas at the San Jacinto Battleground, believing that the two, Battleground and Battleship, not only were complementary, but helped to present a broader sweep of Texas' history than either one could alone. 2 The Texas has been and continues to be an icon of our state. In 1947, no one wanted to see our state's namesake ship suffer the inglorious fate that was visited on so many of her "obsolete" sister ships. The USS New York (BB-34), for example, was sunk by other U. S. Navy ships as a practice gunfire target in 1947. Many other ships that were deemed "obsolete" became targets for gunnery or torpedo practice or were simply sunk to help form new reef systems. We wanted better than that for our namesake vessel. For over sixty-one years the Texas and the San Jacinto Battlefield have been bound together in the public perception ofthe San Jacinto Battleground. The Texas is the constant reminder of the technological innovation and the heroism that is always needed to win freedom from tyranny. Q5. What would be the advantages of having the Texas dry-berthed instead of being relocated? A5. That question indicates a misunderstanding of the issue. The issue is not: dry-berth verses relocate. Mere relocation, even if possible, does not solve the core problem. To be properly preserved, she must be removed from the water. And relocation, without subsequent dry-berthing, only moves the problem; it doesn't solve the problem. Any relocation ofthe ship is an additional cost to the taxpayers of Texas. In November 2007, the voters of Texas approved $25 million in bonds for the specific purpose of dry-berthing the Texas right where she is. Relocation, beyond the two mile limit stated by the independent maritime engineers, places her at grave risk of a hull breach and, possibly, sinking. None of us want that. Dry-berthing the Texas where she has been for over sixty-one years will allow her to be properly displayed for the first time since she was built. Q6. What is the timeline for construction of a dry berth? A6. The Legislative Budget Board (LBB) authorized the issuance ofthe $25 million in voter-approved bonds on March 16,2009. Public hearings related to the issuance of the Bonds were conducted by the Texas Public Finance Authority TPFA) (April 2, 2009) and the Texas Bond Review Board (TBRB) (May 12, 2009). The TBRB, by a letter of May 21,2009, directed that the Bonds be sold and the proceeds from the sale be delivered to TPWD. It is helpful to note that the LBB letter of March 16, 2009 specifically stated that the $25 million in Bond financing was approved "contingent on the ship being dry berthed in its current location." Many parties with an interest in the Texas, the Battleground, the Monument, the Museum and the San Jacinto State Historic Park all placed their views on record with the Texas Legislature and its various Senate and House Committees, with the LBB, with the TPF A, and with the TBRB. After considering all points of view, the government of the state of Texas (which owns the ship) made a clear decision to fund the construction of a dry berth for the Texas at San Jacinto. The $25 million in Bonds were sold during the summer of2009. In compliance with Rider 33, the BTF delivered $2 million to the TPWD in late August 2009; the balance ofthe BTF's commitment to this project (an additional $2 million) will be delivered to TPWD by August 31, 2010. TPWD started 3 drawing on those Bond funds in August and September of 2009 to prepare a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) to solicit proposals from qualified consultants who will then help TPWD execute the dry berth project. Prospective bidders on the RFQ met with key TPWD personnel in late September; bids were delivered to TPWD in late October 2009. At this writing, TPWD is in the process of negotiating a contract with the successful bidder for the design, engineering, environmental review, and construction of the dry berth. Starting from TPWD's formal presentation ofthe "Project Plant for the Dry Berthing ofthe Battleship Texas" to the LBB in mid-July 2008, the clock has been running. The Bonds have now been sold; the RFQ has been issued and bids received; the contract should be in place before the end of March 2010. Engineering work on dry-berth alternatives could be completed by late June 2010; the environmental assessment and cultural clearances could be completed by July 2011; detailed engineering of the dry berth could be completed by Spring 2012; and physical construction of the dry berth could begin in the Summer of 20 12 with completion in the Fall of2013. That schedule would place the Texas in a permanent dry berth after the Centennial of her launching (May 18, 1912 - May 18,2012) and before the Centennial of her Commissioning (March 12, 1914- March 12,2014). Q7. In addition to the work on the Texas, what else is included in TPWD's "Master Plan" for the San Jacinto Battleground? A7. TPWD's plans include the design and construction ofa Visitors Center. Five possible locations for the Visitors Center, all located on San Jacinto State Historical State Park grounds, are in the process of being evaluated. Public meetings, to secure comments about the five possible locations and the unique designs for each location, have already been held. Additional meetings, also to secure public comment, will take place in the near future. The BTF favors locating the Visitors Center on the west side of Independence Parkway South (formerly Battleground Road) and north of the existing ship's berth. For those of you who are familiar with recent history in East Harris County, the location we would prefer is the site of the old San Jacinto Inn, which burned several years ago. In that location, the Visitors Center will be located as far away as possible from any of the San Jacinto Battleground. The Visitors Center will improve the historical interpretation of all aspects of the San Jacinto State Historical Park, including the San Jacinto Battleground, the San Jacinto Museum of History and the Battleship Texas within her new dry berth. At this time, there is no location where a visitor can see how the Battle of San Jacinto was waged. The Visitors Center will address this deficiency while providing services needed for the entire Park (centralized ticketing, gift shop, restrooms, etc.). In addition, the new Visitors Center will have classroom space, where visiting students can learn about the Battleground, the Museum and the Battleship as a comprehensive whole. Q8. What plans does the Battleship Texas Foundation (BTF) intend to implement as part of the dry-berth project? 4 A8. BTF is raising private funds for the design and construction of facilities that will complement the Visitors Center while assisting in presenting the world's last dreadnought-type battleship. We plan to construct, in cooperation with TPWD, a wharf adjacent to the ship on its north side. The north side ofthe existing berth is the "spoil area" where the material from the original 1948 dredging was deposited. This location was selected specifically to minimize any adverse impact on possible Battlefield artifacts. The wharf would not be functional, of course, because the Texas will not be in the water, but it will be outfitted to depict the ship in mid-World War II, in the process of being resupplied before returning to action. The wharf will have a building which will house amenities that will help tell the ship's history, will provide exhibit space for the presentation of ship's artifacts, will incorporate workshops where visitors can observe on-going ship's restoration projects, will include several offices and climate-controlled storage for the photos, documents and other Texas artifacts that are not being displayed. It is possible that the building will include a multi-purpose facility which could take the form of a briefing room, where visitors are "briefed" on an upcoming convoy escort mission (like many the Texas supported in World War I) or a gunfire support mission in support ofa World War II island invasion. The exhibit space will present a photographic history of the ship, including the many famous personages who walked her decks. The restoration shop will be a fully functional work space, where members of First Texas Volunteers as well as members ofTPWD's restoration staff, will be conducting the on-going restoration of the ship. The entire wharf and amenities may be designed to look like 1940s-vintage construction, but it will be a "green" building, with solar panels for electricity and with a low-maintenance design. An additional benefit of placing these new facilities on the north side of the existing berth is that, once they are in place, the existing buildings on the south side of the berth can be removed, along with two existing parking lots. Removal of these structures and parking lots will allow the entire south side of the berth to become part of a completely restored Texian Camp, a significant addition to the history of the Battle of San Jacinto. Dry-Berth Project Rationale - The economic rationale for a dry berth is to avoid the cost of periodically placing the Texas in drydock to repair and maintain the ship below the waterline. (The U. S. Navy rehabilitates active-duty ships in drydock at least every 8-10 years.) The Texas was last dry-docked in 1988-90 at a cost of over $15 million. During that time in drydock, only 15-20% of her underwater hull plating was replaced. Rather than spend in excess of $15 million (of Texas taxpayer money) every 15 or 20 years to patch the hull, TPWD searched for a more cost-effective alternative. Starting in the mid-1990s, several "Master Plans", both for the ship and for the Battleground, were proposed and discussed. More information on the "Master Plan" is presented below. 5 Since returning from the 1988-90 dry docking, the Texas has been back at the San Jacinto Battleground State Historical Park, sitting in brackish water (not fresh water, but lower salt content than sea water). Steel and water are not a good combination. Independent maritime engineering surveys of the ship have been conducted from time to time to assess the ship's condition. The most recent survey was completed in February 2008. The inescapable fact is that the outer hull plating is now so thin that there is real danger that the Texas could suffer a hull breach, take on water and sink if she had to be towed. She has several active "seepage" -type leaks that are kept in check by monitored submersible pumps. As recently as May 2008, she suffered a significant hull breach that placed her in jeopardy of sinking. Trim Tank D-12 is a compartment directly below the After Steering space and there is an active 4-5 gallon per hour "seepage" -type leak in that compartment. Without warning, the leak rate increased to over 40 gallons per minute, in excess of the capacity of the pump in the space. Fortunately, a team of divers were at the ship that day conducting training. A diver was sent down, in scuba gear, to locate the breach by feeling along the hull for the suction that identified the hole. As the diver was feeling for the hole, her hand pushed through the paper-thin hull plating causing the water influx to increase to an estimated 200 gallons per minute. Fortunately, the dive team placed a temporary patch on the breach and additional portable pumps were brought in to pump the water out. This incident is only the most recent and the most dramatic of the problems below the waterline. Maintenance and restoration efforts have focused on getting publically- viewable spaces in condition to be seen by visitors. Maintenance and restoration funds are always in short supply and, over the last sixty years, care and attention that should have been focused on keeping the ship in a secure floating condition were, instead, focused on publically-viewable spaces. The result is that, below the waterline, particularly in the after half of the ship, the Texas is not watertight and her internal bulkheads will not prevent her from sinking in the event of another maior hull breach. Both the U. S. Coast Guard and officials at the Port of Houston have expressed grave concern that any attempt to move the Texas might result in the ship sinking in the Houston Ship Channel. Ifthat were to occur, the adverse economic impact to the maritime traffic in the second-largest port in the United States could be disastrous. There is not a dry dock in the Houston-Galveston area large enough to accommodate the Texas. The dry dock used by the Texas in 1988-90 is no longer available. Although dry docks of sufficient capacity exist in New Orleans, Mobile and Tampa, an open-ocean tow to reach one of them, given the ship's condition, is out ofthe question. Even if it were physically possible to get the Texas into a dry dock, that does not solve the problem. The problem gets solved when the ship is permanently removed from the water. 6 After many years of evaluating a wide range of alternative plans to address the ship's problems (as well as other issues at San Jacinto), TPWD, working with many of the stakeholders at the San Jacinto Battleground State Historical Park, adopted a "Master Plan" that called for placing the Texas into a permanent dry berth. It must be emphasized at this point that all parties that are partners with TPWD at San Jacinto, including the San Jacinto Historical Advisory Board, the San Jacinto Museum of History, BTF, the San Jacinto Battleground Association (aka The Friends of the San Jacinto Battleground), Daughters ofthe Republic of Texas, Sons of the Republic of Texas, and others, had input into the "Master Plan". After the "Master Plan" was formally adopted by TPWD in 2004, the Legislature was approached to secure appropriate funding. The Legislature allowed the voters of Texas to express their opinion and, in November 2007, the voters approved Proposition 4 which authorized the issuance of $25 million in bonds to fund the cost of placing the Texas into a permanent dry berth. One of the provisions of the bond legislation is that BTF raise $4 million in private funds to supplement the $25 million in bond funds. This will provide a total of $29 million to accomplish the goal. With this vote-of-confidence in place, BTF contracted with an independent maritime engineering firm to make a survey of the ship to determine her condition. After all, if the ship is not structurally sound enough to support herself when permanently resting on keel blocks, then the question of dry berthing would be moot. Fortunately, the report reflects that, although her hull leaks, her keel and main supporting internal structure is sufficiently strong to support the weight of the ship in a dry berth. Throughout the evaluation process, BTF has worked cooperatively with TPWD to ensure that the overall plan for preserving, restoring and presenting the ship meets TPWD's goals. Once it was determined that dry-berthing was physically possible for the ship, it was necessary to make a preliminary evaluation of the engineering-viable ways in which dry-berthing could actually be accomplished. Again, an independent maritime engineering firm was contracted to study the full range of dry-berth alternatives and to present a report of their findings to BTF and to TPWD. TPWD, acting on the report of the ship's condition, and on the report of the engineering-viable dry-berth alternatives, and on their internal studies and reports, prepared a progress report which they presented to the LBB in July 2008. The LBB agreed that the required progress, in accordance with Rider 33 to Proposition 4, has been made. On March 16,2009 the LBB acted to authorize the sale of the Bonds, specifically stating that the Bonds are "contingent on the ship being dry berthed in its current location." So the financial choice is stark - spend at least $15 million every 15 to 20 years to patch the ship (and never be sure it's "enough") or spend a maximum of $29 million, just once, to permanently solve the problem. 7 Ship's History - The USS Texas (BB-35) was authorized by Congress in 1910; her keel was laid in 1911 and she was launched on May 18, 1912. She was fitted out, completed her sea trials and was commissioned on March 12, 1914. During her sea trials, she set a new record top speed for a battleship - over 22 knots. When she joined the Fleet, she was the most powerful weapon in the world, mounting ten 14" guns in five twin turrets, with twenty- one 5" guns and four torpedo tubes. The Texas was one ofthe first "dreadnought"-type battleships in the U. S. Navy. The name "dreadnought" was applied to this type of ship design because the ship would be so powerful that it would fear nothing; i.e., it would literally "dread naught". The British Navy built the HMS Dreadnought in 1906 and, in the process, coined the name for an entire class of warships. Dreadnought-type ships were characterized by a large number of high caliber guns in center-line turrets. The HMS Dreadnought had ten 12" main guns while the Texas had ten 14" main guns. When this class of warship was envisioned, designed and built, a nation's navy was the public expression of its national pride. In the early part of the 20th century a dreadnought was the functional equivalent of NASA's Space Shuttle; she represented the epitome of a nation's technological and engineering talents, brought together to accomplish a high national purpose. The Texas has been designated as both a National Historic Landmark (in 1976) and a National Engineering Historic Landmark (in 1975). The engineering designation is due to her unique steam engines. Over the years and several refits, many 5" guns were removed but smaller caliber anti-aircraft weapons were added. In 1916, the Texas received two 3" anti-aircraft batteries before crossing the Atlantic to join other U. S. Navy battleships in support ofthe British Home Fleet. The threat of "aeroplanes" was new and the response to the threat was prompt. The Texas supported convoy operations bringing supplies to England during World War I and was stalked by a German U-Boat (which never got into a position to fire its torpedoes). In 1919, the Texas became the first U. S. Navy Battleship to launch an aircraft. In the 1925, the Texas was converted from coal-fired to oil-fired boilers, her original cage masts were replaced with the tripod masts and "torpedo blisters" were added to her hull as protection from the newest threat. Later, additional anti-aircraft armaments were also added so that, by the time she became the Atlantic Fleet Flagship in 1938, she mounted sixteen 5" guns, eight 3" guns and several .50 caliber machine guns in addition to her main battery. In 1939, the Texas became the first U. S. Navy vessel to be outfitted with radar. She was a ship of many significant "firsts." When World War II began, the Texas, as an older vessel, was primarily a training ship; many young officers and crewmen honed their seamanship and naval gunnery skills aboard "The Mighty T." Refitted with additional weapons, which also increased her crew complement to over 1 ,800, she provided gunfire support for the Allied landings in North Africa (Operation Torch) and was part of the 5,000-ship Allied Fleet on D-Day at 8 Normandy on June 6, 1944. The Texas was part of the bombardment group with responsibility for direct fire support of the landings. This placed her close to the beaches so her 14" and 5" guns could be most effective against German shore batteries. Before the landings, the Texas shelled the known German bunkers guarding the Omaha invasion beach. During the landings, she shelled the area behind the bunkers to keep German troops away from the coast; on June 6, the Texas fired 445 rounds of 14" armor-piercing and high-explosive shells. Following the landings, she responded to radio calls from the Allied soldiers seeking suppressive fire on specific positions so the ground troops could advance inland. On June 15, after the landings had taken place, the fire control center aboard the Texas received a request for supporting naval gunfire. The request was not unusual; but the source of the request was unusual. The request came from the pilot of a British spotter plane. He reported that "elements of two German armored divisions are massing at (and here he gave the grid coordinates identifying the location of the German tanks);" he asked if any ships could fire on that location to destroy the German tanks. The location was approximately 14 miles from the beach. One can only imagine the havoc that could have been unleashed on the Allied foot soldiers if a large contingent of German armor was able to attack and disrupt the invasion. Obviously, this was a problem that needed a quick solution. Aboard the Texas the options were limited. Because of the constraints imposed on U. S. Navy battleships (as well as on the battleships of other major naval powers) by the Conference on the Limitation of Armaments (usually known as the "Washington Naval Treaty of 1922"), the 14" main guns ofthe Texas had a maximum range of only 12 miles. That range limitation was a product of the post- Wodd War I idealistic notion that battleships should not be able to shoot any farther than they could see (and thus, visually identify their targets). This was obviously before radar and before radar-directed fire control. The treaty limitation meant that the Texas had steel "stops" welded in place in each gun turret which restricted the ability of the guns to be elevated beyond 12 degrees. On the Texas, 12 degrees of elevation equated to 12 miles of range. The Captain ofthe Texas had a problem: he needed to be able to shoot 14 miles to help save the lives of Allied troops, but his guns were limited to only a 12 mile range. Fortunately, as an American naval officer dedicated to the success of the Allied mission, he also had a solution to the problem. He maneuvered the ship to place the port side parallel to the beach; then he ballasted down on the starboard side. This had the effect of raising the port side farther out of the water and also raising the elevation of the guns. When his Gunnery Officer told the Captain that sufficient elevation had been attained to permit the guns to shoot the required 14 miles, the ballasting was stopped and the Texas commenced firing on the grid coordinates. 9 The Texas fired over 150 14" shells onto the grid coordinates specified by the British pilot. The Texas ceased firing when the pilot radioed "You can stop now; those Germans won't be attacking anyone." The Texas suffered her only on-board combat death while supporting the Allied advance on Cherbourg, France in July 1944. A German shell from a coastal battery exploded on the top of the armored conning station, behind the number 2 14" gun turret. While the shell did not penetrate the heavily-armored station, its fragments shattered the pilot house, killing the helmsman and wounding thirteen other men. In spite of this death, the Texas was regarded by her crew as a "lucky ship." Once the fighting in the European Theater moved outside the range ofthe Texas' guns, she was transferred to the Pacific, where she provided gunfire support for the invasions oflwo Jima and Okinawa. After the Japanese surrender, the Texas made four "magic carpet" runs, bringing former prisoners of war, Army soldiers and U. S. Marines back home to the United States. With the support of Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz (a native of Fredericksburg, Texas), the Texas was accepted by the State of Texas as the first Battleship Memorial in the United States in 1948. Admiral Nimitz had a warm spot in his heart for the Texas because she had been a stalwart fighting ship under his command during the later stages of the war in the Pacific. As part ofthe legislation that accepted the Battleship Texas from the U. S. Navy, the Battleship Texas Commission was formed. The Commission raised money from thousands of generous Texans for the transportation costs and initial berthing costs of the Texas. School children contributed their pennies, nickels and dimes into a fund that helped bring the Texas "home." Leaders across Texas fully supported bringing the Battleship Texas to San Jacinto, including descendants of General Sam Houston, the Daughters ofthe Republic of Texas, the Sons of the Republic of Texas and many others. She arrived at San Jacinto with great ceremony on April 21, 1948, the llih anniversary of the Battle of San Jacinto. She has been berthed there ever since. Hundreds ofthousands of Texas school children have visited the Texas to walk her decks, learn her history and become inspired by the heroic deeds she performed. In partnership with the San Jacinto Museum of History, the Battleship provides a double history lesson for the many thousands of students who come to the San Jacinto State Historical Park each year. BTF works in conjunction with TPWD for the restoration, maintenance, interpretation and public presentation of the world's last dreadnought. We conduct a very active overnight education program; this year over 4,000 people spent a night aboard the ship and learned of her history. Recently, our overnight education program celebrated its 24,000th guest. We work directly with the First Texas Volunteers as they bring their knowledge of ship repair and maintenance to the goal of restoring spaces on the ship to their "original" condition so those spaces can be seen by our visitors. 10 For additional information please contact: Battleship Texas Foundation 908 Town & Country Blvd., Suite 120 Houston, Texas 77024-2208 713 827-9620 (0) 713 827-9621 (F) bb3 5 foundation@sbcgloba1.net Steven K. Howell, Executive Director Attachments: 1. 2. 3. Current photo of the Texas at San Jacinto State Historical Park Sketch of Graving Dock Option for Dry-Berthing Site Plan showing proposed Visitor Amenities Battleship Texas at San Jacinto 11 \ I U b '\ . \ , f n I .. :.tl I I i , :\ \ \ \ ,.\ , \ In' \ !~----._--- -\\~,,"''- ; L\ ~ I 12 - -- .... ~ n P4 ~ ... A "'0 Q.) ...- 'lJ ~ or o~ ;:: \.I'l 5' / /' . ~. r~ ;.~ ..> '/ "// /,. ,/" ,'<"- " :J:! ...~:Y @ , / / .- /- .... 1. Entry MoR.... 3. Vi...". CenIa. - Mlin EichiIoit IW " 0;.,1.... - In.......... Exhibit Sp11D8 - CIao.OOffW - 0lli0M - Gift Shcp 4- IM5Whatf Ane - IlIoolcrlllion WorDI>op - Pubi. IWtroome - s.oraga - Pomide ~io Aooo. -Ga..- - _s"otl'-, - c.Io Ii. IRd'luII;> r...... 6. .1tIaII9> r...... C.............. P.. a '_ory Point .z. M.m.rill Pl."" - Ouldoor Loabs. Sp""" - PI... Mop 7. M.~P'" -londeupod mlll-.."""", wilh .......1 Giruullllion pith. - Picnio"*,,. ..... bonc:N. .. 1.'RlllkKiti.. Z.... .....nd Porim_ oflll. 8octlioohip ... w.- Ship a.MnOI Park Point 1.. Pork.. "'- 11.0....... I'IIrkinoJ Ar.. 7-. ~ Node 13 Reminder: BAHEP report as item on 4B agenda every quarter meeting.