Monday, September 10, 2007

Bud Writes Back

From Bud Kennedy this morning:

Hi Steve,

Thanks very much for your heartfelt note.

However, I disagree.

Zoning is a commitment to the property owner. Changing somebody's zoning is robbery. It's like taking away their property.

I agree that cities occasionally must use such heavy-handed power -- but it should only happen rarely, and only where most of the land has been acquired on the fair market.

As far as waiting -- wait for what? So a small, bossy clique can continue what amounts to a shakedown of two landowners on their own property?

I am not promoting an advantage for the companies. I am defending their equal right to the free, safe, orderly use of their own property.

They are entitled to the same rights you and I have.

I didn't praise Chesapeake. I am not particularly happy with some of the gas drilling companies. But Chesapeake is right on this one.

I agree that greenspace is an issue. But if we're going to devote resources to greenspace, it needs to be to preserve unique natural features such as the Cross Timbers or Tandy Hills, or create greenspace on the edges of the city where tract homes go up for miles without a major greenbelt park.

Developers bring revenue. Revenue builds a city. The money from this well and others will help preserve and build badly needed parks.

Write again or anytime,


Thanks for writing back. Bud, I agree that revenue builds a city. But where is the shakedown? I don't see where anyone is trying to fleece Chesapeake or Union Pacific out of anything? This is about three permits out of more than 2,100 issued this year.

All I have heard Jim Marshall ask for is the chance to sit down and negotiate a win-win settlement for the people of Fort Worth, Chesapeake, Union Pacific, Colonial and the City. What's the problem? The problem with these three permits is they involve Chesapeake Energy, Union Pacific and Colonial Country Club. These are people who don't like to hear the word no. They are in a hurry to start cashing royalty checks.

You are right about Cross Timbers and Tandy Hills. But why should we expect anything different on those parks if we don't expect Chesapeake to act in good faith with the people of Fort Worth on this one?

Also, my understanding is that this gas drilling revenue isn't going into parks, it's going in to some undefined lockbox for some undefined use at some undefined future date. Seems like a pretty big leap of faith to me.

Bud, I'm sorry that you feel that way. The people of Fort Worth could really use some leadership from the Star-Telegram on this issue. Instead, we get this morning's editorial. I think the newspaper is out of touch with the people of Fort Worth on this one. And they are both going to be losers because of it.



1 comment:

Pete said...

From "Bud" -

"Developers bring revenue. Revenue builds a city. The money from this well and others will help preserve and build badly needed parks."

So, we should bulldoze this badly needed EXISTING park in the central urban area so that we can build some ephemeral future park on the outskirts of the city? (Which will likely have a gas well in it at the rate they're going on the outskirts.)

Keep digging, Bud, I wonder if Chesapeake is paying you by the word...