Citizen Comment: Mostly of the speakers are people angry about the SMART Terminal.
A big fight is (hopefully) brewing. However, the development agreement was already discussed (in a pretty pathetic discussion) in January, and then approved back in February.
This is the same problem that happened with the La Cinema studio over the aquifer last year: by the time the public hears about something and has time to organize and respond, the development agreement has already sailed through Council.
With the SMART Terminal, the developer does still need more approvals. The new land isn’t yet zoned Heavy Industrial. So there are still intervention points. But the foundation has been set, and it’s very frustrating how quickly the basic agreement gets sealed.
In February, the SMART Terminal went to P&Z to be zoned Heavy Industrial. Because so many community members showed up and spoke at that meeting, P&Z delayed the vote a month, to give the developer time to meet with neighbors and gain their buy-in.
The speakers this week described how the meetings are going. It sounds like the developers are being giant pricks about meeting with neighbors, let alone gaining their buy-in.
When they finally met, the neighbors learned some interesting things. First, recall that SMART stands for San Marcos Air Rail Transit. It’s located right where the airport, railway – and unfortunately the river – all meet.
Anyway, here’s what the developers said to the neighbors:
- There’s no rail. There’s not going to be any rail. The developers haven’t reached out to the railroad company and have no intention of incorporating the railroad into any of the five stages to be built.
- There’s no air traffic, either. And no plan for any future airport tie-in.
So basically they’re planning a 2000 acre truck loading and unloading industrial site, right on the river? It’s gone from SMART to SMT? (Maybe the R was supposed to stand for River. The San Marcos All runs down to the River Terminal. Wheeeee.)
In response, the developers say, “Look, back in 2018, council told us this was the right place for heavy industrial.”
But let’s check that for a second:
– First off, in 2018, it was 900 acres, and now it’s 2000 acres.
– Second, clearly in 2018, the whole point was that the airport is right next to the railroad. Otherwise, you’re just building a massive industrial complex on the river.
So as best I can tell, that is the plan: a massive industrial complex on the river. This really seems to be a terrible idea. Unfortunately, this council (minus Alyssa) really has heart eyes for corporations.
…
Items 16 and 18: Starting on next year’s budget.
Council and department heads had a big two day workshop, where they envisioned the city for the next year in broad terms. This statement is the result, and it’s supposed to be the starting point for the new budget.
Here’s what they came up with:
Each of those has 5 or 6 sub-points, and then each of those has another 2-3 sub-sub-points. So for example, under Quality of Life & Sense of Place, it says:
The whole thing is pretty long. If you’re curious, read it all here. That document is supposed to be the scaffolding for the actual budget, which gets built over the spring and summer.
As for last Tuesday, there was not much more additional discussion. Max Baker spoke during the public hearing portion, and made some points:
– Weren’t you all going to do an Equity-based budget through a DEI lens?
– Annexing distant neighborhoods blows a hole in your future budget. As soon as they’re built, you have to provide fire/EMS/PD, as well as utilities, and it costs more to staff new far-flung firehouses than you’re bringing in with taxes. Sprawl is expensive for the city.
– Budgets are moral documents.
These are all good points!
Alyssa asks her colleagues to consider a participatory budget process next year. Get the community involved. This would be great. Maybe CONA reps could solicit input from their neighborhoods, and then contribute ideas when Council puts together their strategic goals.
(Because I’m a pessimistic jerk, I can also imagine neighborhoods coming up with goals that I’d find awful, like “let’s keep poor people far, far away.” So there need to be checks and balances.)
The San Marxist 
In the original boondoggle aka SMART Terminal, the newly formed venture capitalist investment group from Singapore, Softbank, was coupled with a company that made trusses to be shipped on rail. I guess the economy changed and everyone bailed on the project leaving the City with a freshly rezoned and annexed area, but no plan. I just wonder what kind of situation we will end up with if the project we to aget approved and 2 years down the road. Will they ask for major changes like almost every other development agreement when no one is looking or caring? Why is the City getting si invested into the rezoning for these particular businesses? Are our council members getting seduced by the same ole developer song and dance and wham bam, thank you mam?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Last Tuesday’s P&Z meeting really exposed what a shit show this is. We are writing a massive blank check to the developer.
LikeLike
As a CONA rep, I approve of your message.
And as an environmentalist, I disapprove of the SMART terminal, and you make some very compelling reasons why.
LikeLike
Thanks!! I appreciate that. After listening to last Tuesday’s P&Z meeting, I have even stronger opinions on it – I was really blown away by how many community members showed up to talk at a P&Z meeting.
LikeLike