During public comment time in the morning a local citizen pointed out that he had not gotten a letter about a planned unit development because his land does not adjoin the development, even though the land use code directs that landowners whose land is “adjacent” to the development should be notified.  There was discussion about the difference in definitions of “adjoining” and “adjacent.” Both Commissioners Ertel and Candelaria spoke about their plans to “refresh” the county’s planning documents. The county has been talking about updating the land use code for over 2 years.  Whenever someone points out a conflict or suggests a clarification, they’re told that the county has plans to update the code.

There was also a public hearing for a high impact permit and special use permit for Kinder Morgan for a well they will drill at the southeastern corner of County Road S and Road 18. During the public comment time concerns were expressed by Ellen Foster, long-time observer of commissioner meetings, about the noise that will result from 400 belly dump trucks of gravel needed to construct the well pad and the 56 trips made by very large trucks to move the drill rig in. Several inconsistencies in the threshold standards regarding the use of engine brakes and the speed limit were pointed out.  Foster suggested that Kinder Morgan would be a good neighbor to try to minimize traffic noise. At this point Commissioner Suckla interrupted by pointing out the Kinder Morgan does many things to be a good neighbor including donating computers to Lewis-Arriola school and sponsoring baseball and basketball teams. Then he asked Foster what she has done to contribute to this community.  She simply said that was not up for debate. Other comments were made by other citizens. The Commissioners voted unanimously to approve the permits as requested by Kinder Morgan.

Following routine reports by county staff and the commissioners, the meeting was adjourned. Commissioner Candelaria came over to speak with Foster, Gala Pock, and myself about engine breaks and offered to continue the discussion.

MB McAfee

I have two observations to offer:

1. There was a fairly full and fully open discussion of problems with financing replacement vehicles for the county’s fleet. Options were not clearly explained, but seemed to involve a tax increase and/or increased charges to departments for vehicle use.

2. The county opened discussions for financing of a convention center with a governmental / hotel industry entity.

I thought both points were discussed in a reasonable and responsible manner.

Jim Rogers