So the Mayors Went to See the Colonel: A Bayport Timeline
Natalie O'Neill, Mayor, Taylor Lake Village

(Presented at the State of the Bay Symposium, January 2003,  in poster form, this  listing of public actions  on the proposed Bayport container terminal was  developed after concerns prompted three local mayors, one mayor pro tem, and a series of other city officials and state  legislators or their representatives to pay a joint visit to the Corps of Engineers and air their unease about the Environmental Impact Statement process for the project. Participants are indicated near the end.)

On a large estuary, issues arise that cross the administrative boundaries of several governments, and many of these fall under the purview of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The most recent example of the Port of Houston Authority’s plan to build a container port at Bayport illustrates how various municipalities not accustomed to joint action have overcome the unease of their differing needs, mandates, and perspectives to collaborate when their joint interest in a sound conservation future for the bay and surrounding communities is at stake.

Silence Reigns-the cities join together to determine impacts

Despite thousands of letters and numerous formal resolutions from the impacted communities, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) does not address the issues and questions presented. For more than 5 years the cities and citizens have each demanded that the Environmental Impact Study (EIS) address Land Use/Values, Security, Small Particle Air Pollution, Wetland and Water Quality, Noise and many other issues that to this day remain unanswered in the Draft EIS. The cities banded together to fund technical studies coordinated through the Galveston Bay Conservation and Preservation Association (GBCPA), so they could respond effectively to a very large and complex Environmental Impact Study. None of the cities could have conducted these studies alone. When the DEIS is not responsive to the public we must join together to protect the bay and our communities.

The following timeline is representative but not complete because the communities are unable to have access to the complete USACE file on Bayport. This is only the information that has been shared between the communities; there have been far more responses by the affected communities than those listed below. This timeline does not reflect the weekly communications between the applicant, the third party contractor and the USACE.

Timeline-

June 1998- Port of Houston Authority Master Plan for the Proposed Bayport Container Port released.

June 16, 1998- The City of Seabrook adopts Resolution 98-15 in opposition to the Bayport site location and delineating concerns with the Bayport Site.

August 15, 1998- The El Jardin Community Association adopts Resolution in opposition to the Bayport site location.

August 19, 1998- The City of Taylor Lake Village adopts Resolution 98-525 in opposition to the Bayport site location and delineating concerns with the Bayport site.

August 31, 1998- The City of Shoreacres adopts Resolution 98-09 in opposition to the Bayport site location and delineating concerns with the Bayport site.

September 1, 1998- The City of Seabrook adopts Resolution 98-23 requesting an EIS and delineating concerns with the Bayport site.

September 1, 1998- The City of El Lago adopts Resolution 98-14 in opposition to the Bayport site location, delineating concerns with the Bayport site and petitions the USACE to do an EIS.

October 8, 1998- The Port of Houston Authority files Permit Application for Bayport Expansion with Colonel Buechler (EA not EIS)

GBF and GBCPA request an EIS be completed rather than the EA.

December 4, 1998 Corps of Engineers determines an EIS Required.

Senate Bill 1502 (St. Sen. Lindsay) to allow navigational districts or port authorities to condemn property without consent of the lawful authorities of that municipality in which the property lies.

March 23, 1999- The City of Seabrook adopts Resolution 99-11 asking the Texas Legislature to refrain from adopting new statute that would allow navigational districts and port authorities to condemn land in a local municipality without first obtaining permission from that municipality.

April 7, 1999- The City of Taylor Lake Village adopts Resolution 99-549 asking the Texas Legislature to refrain from adopting new statute that would allow the navigational districts and port authorities to condemn land in a local municipality without first obtaining permission from that municipality.

May 24, 1999- USACE Published notice of Intent to conduct EIS in Federal Register

July 6, 1999- The City of Seabrook adopts Resolution 99-19 delineating concerns with the Bayport site and reaffirming opposition to the Bayport site location.

July 22, 1999- The City of Humble adopts Resolution 99-586 in opposition to the Bayport site location.

August 3, 1999- The City of Clear Lake Shores adopts Resolution 99-17 in opposition to the Bayport site location.

August 4, 1999- The City of Taylor Lake Village adopts Resolution 99-559 reaffirming opposition to the Bayport site location and in favor of a Regional Port plan.

August 1999- The City of La Porte submits a white paper delineating concerns with the Bayport site and requests that those concerns be addressed.

August 10, 1999- League City adopts Resolution 99-40 reaffirming opposition to the Bayport site location and in favor of a Regional Port plan.

August 17, 1999- USACE conducted Public Scoping Meeting held at Pasadena Convention Center- nearly 3,000 in attendance

August 21, 1999- The City of El Lago writes the USACE requesting denial of application and asking the USACE to address concerns of citizens.

September 9, 1999- The City of Hedwig Village adopts Resolution N-9-9-99 in opposition to the Bayport site and in favor of a Regional Port plan.

September 15, 1999- Peter Brown, AIA, AICP releases first land use impact study.

November 2, 1999 - Bond Election held for funding of port improvements.

June 6, 2000- The Harris County Appraisal District recommends a 40% reduction in property value for Gerald Cooney’s home adjacent to terminal proposed site.

July 5, 2000- The City of Taylor Lake Village adopts Resolution 00-579 agreeing to fund technical studies on land use/values, traffic, air quality, and other impacts from the proposed Bayport Container Terminal.

July 18, 2000- The City of Seabrook adopts Resolution 2000-16 asking the Texas Legislature to refrain from adopting new statute that would allow navigational districts or port authorities to condemn land in a local municipality without first obtaining permission from that municipality.

July 2000- The City of League City adopts a Resolution to join the Bay Area Cities Coalition to evaluate the Bayport Expansion Project.

August 2000- Five Cities- Clear Lake Shores, Shoreacres, El Lago, Seabrook, Taylor Lake Village all band together with residents to fund Technical Studies reviewing impacts of the proposed port- this effort is coordinated through the Galveston Bay Conservation and Preservation Association.

1) Arno Bommer, Noise

2) Peter Brown , Land Use/Values

3) Michael Hunt, Michael Kleinman, Air Quality

4) John Jacob, Wetlands

5) Robert McFarlane, 50 foot Channel and Ecology

6) Lee Engineering Jody Short, Transportation

September 11, 2000- El Lago adopts Resolution 2000-09 asking the Texas Legislature to refrain from adopting new statute that would allow navigational districts and port authorities to condemn land in a local municipality with out first obtaining permission from that municipality.

September 12, 2000- City of Morgan’s Point adopts Resolution 00-08 asking the Texas Legislature to refrain from adopting new statute that would allow navigational districts and port authorities to condemn land in a local municipality with out first obtaining permission from that municipality.

September 19, 2000- The City of Clear Lake Shores adopts Resolution 00-05 agreeing to fund technical studies on land use/values, traffic, air quality, and other impacts from the proposed Bayport Container Terminal.

November 18, 2000- Texas Municipal League adopts Resolution asking the Texas Legislature to refrain from adopting new statute that would remove rights of Texas Cities to control land uses or enforcement of environmental impacts or that would create exemptions for other governmental agencies or special districts without first obtaining permission of the city in which such actions are proposed.

March 26, 2001- League City adopts Resolution 2001-14 supporting House Bill 564, which would make PHA subject to Sunset Legislation.

June 5, 2001- The City of Seabrook adopts Resolution 2001-08 requesting the USACE extend the time for review of the DEIS.

Other cities adopt resolutions supporting House Bill 564 making PHA subject to Sunset Legislation.

Senate Bill 1502 fails

Sunset legislation fails

July/August 2001- Colonel Buechler leaves and Colonel Waterworth is assigned a two-year term.

August 30, 2001- Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway (BNSF), a common carrier, files a petition with the Surface Transportation Board for construction of a new rail line terminating at the proposed Bayport Container Port. An EA is all that is called for, the communities demand a joint EIS. Despite the community’s requests for a joint EIS, these projects are considered separately therefore cumulative impacts will not be measured.

October 2001- Mark King leaves - Kerry Stanley takes over as Project Manager

October 2, 2001- GBCPA writes Colonel Waterworth acknowledging that under 40 CFR 1508.25 the proposed rail and proposed port must be considered in the same EIS, urging formal coordination between the Surface Transportation Board and the USACE.

October 16, 2001- The City of Seabrook adopts Resolution 2001-17 reaffirming opposition to the Bayport site and requesting an extension of the comment period.

November 9, 2001- USACE Public Notice released stating dates and places of two Public Workshops and the Public Hearing at George R. Brown Convention Center, Dec. 12, 2001.

November 12, 2001– U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Bayport DEIS completed and released for public comment.

December 12, 2001- USACE holds Public Hearing at George R. Brown Convention Center over 5,000 persons in attendance. Senators, State Representatives, Mayors and Aldermen from Pasadena, Taylor Lake Village, El Lago, Shoreacres, Seabrook, and many other communities speak out against the Bayport site and ask that an alternative site be chosen. Most are frustrated with the DEIS and its bias’, its failures, and its incompleteness. The ILA speak out for the jobs that will be created, attendance is mandatory for the union members.

January 7, 2002- Houston Galveston Area Council (HGAC) comments on the DEIS and requests a supplemental DEIS to address “questions raised”.

January 8, 2002- La Porte Independent School District adopts Resolution against expansion at the Bayport site.

January 10, 2002- The City of La Porte submits formal response to the DEIS and states “the City is opposed to the Bayport site”. Further, the response states that the concerns listed in the 1999 white paper have yet to be resolved or acted upon.

January 2002- The City of Clear Lake Shores adopts Resolution 2002-04 requesting a supplemental DEIS to address concerns not accounted for in the DEIS and filing the cooperative technical studies with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

January 16, 2002- The City of Taylor Lake Village adopts Resolution 02-626 requesting a supplemental DEIS to address concerns not accounted for in the DEIS and filing the cooperative technical studies with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

February 5, 2002- The City of Seabrook submits formal response to the Bayport DEIS and requests a supplemental DEIS to address concerns not yet accounted for in the DEIS.

February 8, 2002- Area Mayors meet with Congressman Tom Delay to discuss Bayport site location, supplemental DEIS and post 9-11security issues.

February 26, 2002- Clear Creek Independent School District adopts Resolution opposing the Bayport site location.

March 2002- The City of Shoreacres submits formal response to the Bayport DEIS, listing persistent issues and asks for a supplemental DEIS.

March 4, 2002- The City of El Lago submits formal response to the Bayport DEIS, listing persistent issues and asks for a supplemental DEIS.

March 7, 2002- The City of Taylor Lake Village submits formal response to the Bayport DEIS, listing the same recurring issues (reviewed in the Scoping Meeting and in every letter since) that remain unanswered and asks again for a supplemental DEIS.

March 8, 2002- Texas Parks and Wildlife response to the Bayport DEIS calling the DEIS unclear, misleading and biased. Further stating, “Overall, the information provided in this document does not appear to be in compliance with the requirements of NEPA.”

March 2002 – U.S. Fish and Wildlife response to the Bayport DEIS stating the Bayport site is the “most environmentally damaging”.

March 13, 2002- USACE Close of comment period on DEIS

March 14, 2002- USACE Begin development of FEIS

March 27, 2002- United States Environmental Protection Agency’s response to the DEIS stating the need for further analysis.

April 4, 2002- Permit Application Revision #1 that shows additional wetlands.

April 28, 2002- The City of El Lago submits response to Revision #1, requesting a Supplemental DEIS and requesting the DEIS comment period be reopened to correct their comments which were based on the initial permit application before revisions.

May 1, 2002- The City of Taylor Lake Village writes the TNRCC stating that the USACE re-evaluation of the wetland acreage requires thorough review under the Tier II certification process.

May 1, 2002- The City of Taylor Lake Village submits response to USACE Revision #1, requesting opportunity to comment on changes to permit and comment on proposed mitigations

May 1, 2002- The City of Shoreacres submits response to USACE Revision #1, requesting opportunity to comment on changes to permit and comment on proposed mitigations.

May 2, 2002- Texas Parks and Wildlife response to revised application recommending denial of permit application.

June 4, 2002 The City of Pasadena adopts Resolution 2002-48 in opposition to the Bayport site location and supporting the CAG recommendations.

July 22, 2002- Permit Application Revision #2 that reduces the size of the required footprint by reducing the number of cruise berths from 5 to 3.

July 23, 2002- Congressman Nick Lampson writes Colonel Waterworth urging a Supplemental DEIS and requests a response within the next two weeks.

August 6, 2002- Congressman Lampson’s deadline, no response from Colonel Waterworth.

August 13, 2002- The Cities meet with the Colonel

August 22, 2002 - U.S. Fish and Wildlife response to the second revision stating they “continue to recommend denial because of the significant cumulative loss of native coastal prairie habitat”.

August 30, 2002- The City of Shoreacres submits comments on to permit revision #2 and requests a Supplemental DEIS and request the DEIS comment period be reopened to correct their comments which were based on the initial permit application before revisions.

September 4, 2002 – The City of El Lago submits response to permit revision #2 and requests a Supplemental DEIS.

September 4, 2002- The City of Taylor Lake Village submits response to permit revision #2, asks that the public comment period be reopened to allow for corrections to those portions of our studies to reflect changes to the DEIS or alternatively requests a Supplemental DEIS.

September/October- USACE Project Manager changes from Kerry Stanley to Fred Anthamatten

December 30, 2002- Letter submitted to the USACE authored by Attorney Jim Blackburn on behalf of the cities of Taylor Lake Village, Shoreacres, Pasadena, Seabrook, and El Lago, the El Jardin Subdivision, Galveston Bay Foundation, Galveston-Houston Association for Smog Prevention (GHASP), The Houston Audubon Society, Texas Committee on Natural Resources TCONR), the commercial fishing organization PISCES, the Gulf Restoration Network, the Houston Yacht Club, the Sierra Club, Environmental Defense, and the National Wildlife Federation joining together to again ask for a Supplemental DEIS.

April 4, 2003- USACE Publish Final EIS –(recent change April 12, not yet posted)

June 18, 2003- USACE Record of Decision – (recent change June 25, not yet posted)

The PHA continues to try and condemn property needed for the proposed Bayport Expansion.

So the Mayors went to see the Colonel

Attendees at the meeting held