Onto the little meeting!
Just one citizen comment, from a community member about the Dunbar Heritage buildings that are under renovation.
…
Item 12: The good people of Riverside Drive want to ban parking on their street.
The issue is that the street fills up with river-goers in the summer. Since there is not enough proper parking around the falls, people park on Riverside Drive during the summer, and walk over.
Look, I’m not in a great mood. I didn’t like it last month on Sturgeon, and I don’t like it now.
- This is exclusionary. The street does not belong to you.
- It’s counter-productive! Street parking is a traffic-calming measure. It makes drivers go more slowly, instead of tearing through your neighborhood at 40 mph.
- I might be sympathetic if local residents did not have driveways, and were forced to park away from their houses and walk to get home. But that is not what is happening. The residents of this street put out orange traffic cones to block river-users from parking in front of their houses. They’re not putting their own cars out on the street.
- The parking ban is year round. (Holidays and weekends.) There is no reason for the ban to exist during the winter. Does it matter? No, but it’s overreach.
Living near the river is a privilege. The streets belong to the public, and that includes those who want to visit the river. I’m just not in the mood for territoriality and exclusion at the moment.
The Vote:
Yes, parking bans are great: everybody
No, parking bans are the worst: nobody
Oh well. At least I can rant on the blog.
…
Item 4: The new HEB.
Everyone cheered and quickly voted on this, in about 30 seconds.
Here were my concerns last time:
- Would all HEB employees get the $15/hour as required by local ordinance, even at the existing stores?
- Can we include something about wage and benefits, to make sure our workers are given good jobs?
- Is it in writing that Little HEB will stay open for a certain number of years?
- Can we ask HEB about purchasing that little triangle of land next to Purgatory Creek from them?
Here’s what council said about these questions:
[Nothing.]
I know, we were all consumed with the election. But I still wish we’d fought on behalf of employees.
The vote:
YAY HEB 4-EVAH: Everybody, unanimous, etc.
I hate everyone’s favorite grocery store: nobody.
…
Item 10: The Mitchell Center
We mentioned this last time at the workshop: it’s being handed over to the Calaboose African American History Museum.
It’s located here, tucked in the back corner of Dunbar park:
Apparently there is a covenant that runs with the land that requires the land be used for a public, non-profit purpose. This seems like a good choice.
…
Item 13: Naming the alleys
This also came up last time:
Those seven alleys with names in white are getting officially named.
The remaining alleys are driving Jane crazy. She wants to pair them up with movies or anything, and get them named. No one else seems to be in that big a hurry.
…
Item 14: Municipal Court
I guess we’re getting a new spot for our municipal court?
I don’t know if this is where the public will go for court, or if it’s administrative type stuff.
Here’s the building, according to Google Maps:
We signed a 20 year lease.
…
Item 17: River Bridge Ranch is this giant future subdivision:
It’s located here:
(That bit above is actually two closely related developments: River Bend Ranch and River Bridge Ranch. But the details are murky to me.)
This development makes me cranky:
- In 2022, they wanted to put an industrial plant on the southern corner, which would have required an insane cut-and-fill. This would have increased flooding in Redwood. Huge numbers of residents from Redwood turned out to argue against it, given the flooding and infrastructure. The permit was denied.
- Originally, River Bridge Ranch was approved to be both housing and commerce. After all, it’s huge! And we have this long-standing issue where there isn’t any commerce on the east. They waited for a polite amount of time to pass. Then they came back and asked if Council would just forget about the pesky commerce bit.
Council said “You betcha! This way you’ll make more money!” And lo, no more commerce.
This meeting, Council forms a subcommittee on it: Saul Gonzales, Matthew Mendoza, and Jane Hughson.
So this means it’s going to be coming back around again. Fingers crossed!
…
Items 16 and 18: The New City Hall
We’re designing a new city hall.
Council has this grand idea that the new city hall should replace the dog park and skate park, and the current location should be housing:
I am not convinced! Why should we develop our parks? Why not re-build where you are?
Anyway, Council appointed a 23-person steering committee:
– The mayor and two councilmembers
– These groups all get to pick a member: P&Z, Library, Downtown Association, River Foundation, University representative, Chamber of Commerce
– Each councilmember picked two community members.
In total there are 23 people.
SO! After multiple meetings and lots of discussion, what did the DEI Coordinator say about the end result? Did we achieve diversity, equity, and inclusion? Moment of truth!
…Nothing. The DEI coordinator wasn’t there. Status quo was upheld.
This would have been the moment to verify that “business as usual” had produced a diverse committee that matches San Marcos. We did not verify this!
The San Marxist 