The Collin County Observer

Last year, the local media wrote of the perceived slow progress in completing and opening The Plano African American Museum (PAAM), which is in the Douglass neighborhood near downtown Plano.

The museum is housed in the restored historic former home of John Thorton, who was born into a sharecroppers life, but who later became a successful businessman. The museum has spent over $400,000 in restoring the old Thorton home and in setting it up as a museum of African American life in Plano.

Last year PAAM received $145,000 from Plano's Heritage Commission. It also raised another $125,000 from other granting foundations. This year, the PAAM has asked for an additional $245,000.

Justin Nichols, a former chair of the Plano Heritage Commission has resurrected last year's controversy by sending a "public comment" letter to the commission a couple of weeks ago.

In the interest of furthering public debate, The Collin County Observer asked for and received permission from Mr. Nichols to publish his letter to the commission. The Observer then asked the Board of the Plano African American Museum to respond.

Printed below are the unedited texts of both sides of the discussion; Mr. Nichols letter and the PAAM Board's reply.

Bill

July 21, 2010
Heritage Commission
c/o Mrs. Liz Casso Hersch
Heritage Preservation Officer
City of Plano
1520 Avenue K
Plano, Texas 75074
Via Email

Re: Public Comment on FY 2011 Heritage Preservation Grants

Dear Chairman Chaput, Vice Chairwoman Quaintance-Howard, and Commissioners:

I am writing to submit my comments to the Commission on the FY2011 Heritage Preservation Grant applications which you will consider on July 20-21, 2010. I regret that I cannot appear before you in person, but I hope you’ll consider my comments and concerns.

As a former member and chair of the Commission, I know that a difficult task lies before you. Indeed hundreds of thousands of public dollars, and best way in which to use those dollars to promote heritage tourism in Plano, rests upon your discretion and judgment. So, first, I want to thank you for your service to the city and for your dedication to this difficult process.

I am writing specifically about the application for more than $245,000 from the Plano African American Museum (“PAAM”). As a Plano taxpayer I have significant concerns about PAAM’s requests, and I have outlined my concerns below:

Repeated Failure to Abide by Heritage Preservation Ordinances

On November 30, 2004, at my first meeting to sit on the Commission, we considered an application by PAAM for a certificate of appropriateness (“CA”) for a new roof on the Thornton House. Notably, the roof was already installed before PAAM applied for a CA. The Commission and staff chastised PAAM for its disregard for the CA process, and PAAM’s leadership assured the Commission that it would comply in the future.

It’s important to note that, while the membership of the Commission has changed since 2004, the leadership of PAAM has not changed since that time.

And recently, as you are likely aware, in October 2009 the Commission was again asked to approve an after-the-fact CA for a granite sign which had already been installed. The leadership of PAAM, alleging an oversight, blatantly failed to comply with the CA requirements – again. It is hard for me to believe that one can “accidentally” forget about the CA process twice in a five year period, particularly with such large projects as a roof and a granite sign.

It is my opinion that the leadership of PAAM either refuses to learn, or more likely, refuses to comply with the basic Commission procedures which are imposed upon every other business, resident, and
organization in a historic district or historically designated structure. PAAM’s persistent disregard of heritage preservation ordinances should be taken into account when making this year’s grant funding recommendations; especially since the other applicants consistently adhere to basic rules and ought to be rewarded for their strict compliance with same.

Failure to Meet the Objective of Promoting Heritage Tourism

I’d ask the Commission to keep in mind that the heritage preservation grants have a primary goal – to increase heritage tourism in the city of Plano, thereby sustaining our city’s tax base. And, while there are other objectives ancillary to the tourism mandate, the main objective should be the promotion of heritage tourism. PAAM fails to meet this goal.

First, PAAM doesn’t provide any substantive information to the public or to prospective visitors. For example, its Website is defunct. There isn’t as much as a phone number on PAAM’s Website. The “Gallery” page consists of a single picture of the Thornton House, and other pictures from the Douglass Community Art Wall, which was not a project associated with PAAM. The “Events” page lists only a November 2009 “Holiday Fun Run,” which was not funded through heritage grants and doesn’t relate to the museum or the Thornton House. Its “Community” page is listed as being under construction. The “Exhibits” isn’t functional, and the “Home Page” provides only basic narrative. PAAM’s Website does not list any hours of operation, directions to the museum, or even a phone number or address. In this sense, PAAM is failing to take even basic, and free, steps to promote tourism.

Secondly, PAAM has failed to carry out even non-Thornton House events which would promote tourism. You’ll note that for FY2011 PAAM has requested $20,000 for an “Underground Railroad Symposium.” However, also note that for FY2010, this body granted $10,000 for the exact same symposium, which was supposed to occur in the spring of 2010, but never happened! And now, PAAM is asking for twice the money for an event it failed to host when it was funded last year, and has provided no evidence as to why the symposium would now cost twice as much as its previous request or how the previously granted funds were spent.

It seems to me like PAAM consistently bites off more than it can chew. You’ll hear sound bites like “a museum without walls,” an “all volunteer board,” and being “open for business,” but the fact of the matter is that other organizations in Plano are holding truly regular hours of operation, providing ample information for an interested public, and have a clear scope of their mission and function – all for equal or less than the money PAAM seeks!

PAAM Continues to Increase Funding Requests Without Increasing Return

In recent years PAAM’s funding requests have begun to rival those of the Heritage Farmstead Museum and the Plano Conservancy. But, as I’m sure you’ll note, PAAM hasn’t nearly the public presence or reputation as the other two largest heritage organizations in Plano. And, while I’m not asserting that Plano’s heritage should be limited to only two main organizations, I would argue that if an organization is going to ask for the similar amounts of money as the “big boys,” then it should plan on providing the same level of service. PAAM doesn’t. While much younger than the Heritage Farmstead, PAAM’s only a year younger than the Interurban Railway Museum, and both the Farmstead and the Interurban have concrete, established, and functioning programs which absolutely dwarf, in size and scope, the much smaller PAAM – but who is requesting the same dollars.

In 2007 PAAM asked this body for $79,000 dollars and suggested that it would do everything in its power to open its doors soon, but no dates were given. Out of frustration with the history of slow progress by PAAM, this body recommended a funding level of $20,000. It was my job then, as it will be Chairman Chaput’s job, to present the Commission’s recommendations to City Council. PAAM showed up at the budget hearing to complain, but this time, just two months after the Commission had met, PAAM had refined its budget request to a more modest $49,000 for the same projects and PAAM promised a firm open date of October 1, 2008. That date came and went, and PAAM still wasn’t open for business.

Plano is facing extraordinary budget challenges. And while I realize that, per the ordinance, hotel/motel tax revenue cannot be diverted to the general fund, it is essential that the Commission do its part to ensure that every dollar being spent on for heritage preservation is likely to bring folks to Plano to shop, eat, visit, and stay. It is my opinion that, of all the applicants, PAAM is in the furthest position to positively affect tourism in Plano – especially given its exorbitant monetary requests which have not yielded any proportional return in the past.

PAAM’s Historical and Continued Lack of Fiscal Responsibility

PAAM typically fails to meet quarterly reporting deadlines at least once per year. These reports may be cumbersome upon recipients, but they are a necessary step to ensure the Commission’s goals are being met and that recipients are doing as they promised. Much can be inferred about PAAM’s respect for the grant process by its regular failure to make timely reports.

Also, as the minutes reflect, many Commission members, past and present, have repeatedly exhibited frustration with the lack of timeliness in completing funded projects. It seems that, while commissioners consistently request more timely completion of funded projects, PAAM only offers endless explanations and excuses, which at the end of the day, doesn’t change the long history of not completing projects on time, if at all.

Thirdly, PAAM has failed to provide the Commission with a certified audit which is required of all other grant applicants. While PAAM has offered unrelated memos from city staff, the requirement for applicants is clear – a certified audit must be submitted – period. Yet again, PAAM appears to be asking for special treatment and, in effect a waiver, from the Commission on important financial control procedures. I would urge the Commission not to excuse PAAM.

Fourthly, I continue to be disappointed by the lack of non-city funds procured by PAAM. While we can talk about the cancellation of past debts (i.e. mortgages), the Heritage Commission has never been asked to service debts used for the purchase of land. PAAM’s funding requests continue to increase and are not offset by sources outside city funds. As you’re likely aware, a key element of each application is how much of an applicant’s funding comes from the, as well as the length of time on which an applicant has relied on city funds. The trend suggest that the newer an organization, the more likely the Commission is willing to accept more reliance on city funds. But the expectation has always been clear: as they age, applicants need to become less sufficient on city monies. This has categorically not been the case for PAAM, and I feel that continued funding by the city only perpetuates PAAM’s reliance on same.

Finally, the projects for which PAAM has applied for funding this year lack any specificity, and it appears that PAAM’s leadership is content with explaining tens of thousands of dollars of requests under the broad descriptions of “operational” and “service specific.” Surely PAAM could have provided more details to aid the Commission in making a more educated decision. PAAM’s lack of transparency in this grant application, like its other applications, raises many concerns about exactly how money has and will be spent.

Conclusion

Commissioners, I want to assure you that this was a difficult and unpleasant letter to write. I take no pleasure in highlighting the shortcomings of an organization that started with a well-intentioned and ambitious mission. But, these are tough times, and no application should receive a less stringent review, be granted an unwarranted exception, or served with an uneven hand when dolling out public funds.

I urge the Commission to refrain from recommending funding for anything except what is necessary to keep the power and water on at the Thornton House, and to ensure its security. I feel that any additional funds sought by PAAM should be pursued directly from City Council, and should be made to compete with the rest of the city’s budget challenges.

I thank you for your service to our city, and for your consideration of my thoughts.

Sincerely yours,

JUSTIN P. NICHOLS

And the statement of the Board of The Plano African American Museum:

July 27, 2010

Via email
Mr. Bill Baumbach
Collin County Observer

Re: Response to July 20, 2010 letter from Justin Nichols to City of Plano Heritage Commission concerning the Plano African American Museum

Dear Mr. Baumbach:

On Friday, July 24, 2010 you called T.J. Johnson concerning the above-referenced letter you received for your publication, the Collin County Observer, and you offered an opportunity to respond. Having reviewed Mr. Nichols’ letter, the Plano African American Museum (PAAM) Board of Directors (BOD) do appreciate the opportunity to respond to Mr. Nichols’ letter.

To our understanding, as a former member and Chair of the City’s Heritage Preservation Commission, Mr. Nichols was charged, as is subsequent Heritage Preservation Commissions, primarily with the mission and responsibility to protect and preserve every aspect of the history and heritage of the Plano community, including our diverse communities. In our view, Mr. Nichols’ letter does little, if anything, to serve this mission. If Mr. Nichols truly was concerned for this mission and, particularly PAAM’s efforts toward the mission, it would seem more logical for Mr. Nichols to first contact PAAM with his issues and concerns, with his thoughts and suggestions, including any indication of what he himself was willing to do to help. It would be more useful for Mr. Nichols to at least have visited the museum and researched his claims and concerns. Instead, we have only ever personally heard from Mr. Nichols on one occasion (outside of a formal commission meeting), which will be discussed later and he has not visited the museum, certainly not within the last four years. And, instead of acknowledging and helping PAAM to celebrate the efforts and accomplishments which have been made toward the Heritage Preservation Commission’s mission, Mr. Nichols chose to nitpick and criticize the efforts of PAAM’s BOD with mistruths (some would say lies), half –truths or distortions of the truth, inaccuracies, innuendo and negative implications.

Consequently, before we address Mr. Nichols’ broad generalizations and issues and misinformation, we must put this response and Mr. Nichol’s comments within the proper context of the facts. Most of these facts are available, as a matter of record in the minutes of the City Council or the minutes of the Heritage Preservation Commission.

1. Around 2002, there were discussions and efforts to move the Thornton House to another location near 12th street and Avenue I. The Plano Conservancy, a long-time recipient of City grant funds, sought City funds, $20,000, for this purpose. However, the Thornton House was not moved and, to PAAM’s knowledge, those funds were never applied to any efforts on or for the Thornton House nor were any of these funds distributed to or on behalf of PAAM.
2. In 2004, the PAAM BOD included Myrtle Hightower, John Hightower, Ben Thomas and T.J. Johnson. The Chair of the BOD was Charles Grigsby of Frisco, Texas. The PAAM BOD appointed T. J. Johnson Chair in the fall of 2004. The current BOD: T.J. Johnson, Dollie Thomas, Bob Drotman, Angela Fisher, Ron Jones.
3. Between 2004-2007, Ted Peters, then Executive Director of the Heritage Farmstead Museum (HFM), a long-time recipient of City grant funds, worked closely with PAAM to restore the Thornton House and, as he had done with the restoration of HFM properties (i.e. The Young House, the Farrell-Wilson House), he used his experience and preservation knowledge to guide PAAM’s efforts to restore the Thornton House. Mr. Peters was the project manager for the restoration project.
4. Between 2004-2007, Ted Peters and HFM included a request for funds for restoration of the Thornton House, as a line item in its grant applications and Ted Peters (as the project manager for the Thornton House Restoration Project and until his death), directed the application of City funds and the restoration efforts. No City funds were requested or received by HFM for any other PAAM project or program, except for Thornton House plans or restoration. A total of $88,721 was awarded to HFM and funds were applied for this purpose.
5. The first City Grant award to PAAM (2008-2009) $159,798 ($98,000 for operations and maintenance, including salary, utilities and contracts and $56,798 for projects and programs – building sprinklers, oral history, museum design, Thornton House interior restoration). All projects funded were completed as planned. No funds were requested for exterior restoration since the exterior restoration was completed in the previous grant year, as planned with HFM. This was the first City grant application by the PAAM BOD and the first funds requested or received for operations and maintenance of the museum.
6. The second City Grant award to PAAM (2009-2010) $145,000 ( $92,800 for operations and maintenance and $50,000 for projects and programs – museum design and an Underground Railroad Symposium).

In his letter Mr. Nichols first alleges: Repeated Failure to Abide by Heritage Preservation Ordinances. He describes two instances involving applications for certificates of appropriateness (CA) “after the fact,” one in November 2004 for the new roof for Thornton House and one in 2009 for approval of the granite museum sign. However, he does not mention the number of other PAAM applications for CA’s or the fact that in 2004 the request he describes was made to the Commission by Ted Peters on behalf of PAAM where PAAM BOD members were present in support and Mr. Peters was specifically chastised for the “after the fact” CA because of his experience with the commission as a long-time representative for HFM and because of Mr. Peter’s experiences with “after the fact” CA applications (a fact which Mr. Nichols knows because he was at the meeting). In October 2009, concerning the granite sign, PAAM board members did attend a commission meeting and offered their explanation for the “after the fact” request. The Heritage Commission approved the granite sign as appropriate.

Mr. Nichols’ next allegation was: Failure to Meet the Objective of Promoting Heritage Tourism. He alleges that PAAM fails to meet the primary goal “to increase heritage tourism in the city of Plano.” He specifically points to the PAAM website and states that PAAM has not carried out a non-Thornton House event. First, Mr. Nichols has never visited the museum or Thornton House and has no clue as to what has been accomplished by PAAM or how PAAM promotes tourism. For example, in the past year Thornton House has enjoyed a number of visitors, including youth groups, teacher groups, small and large groups. PAAM has had a number of requests from groups to tour, such as family reunions and youth groups. For further example, last year PAAM hosted a Holiday FunRun? and Family Fest on November 21, 2009 at the Oak Point Park in Plano. This was also advertised on the DART public transportation system, inviting surrounding areas to come to Plano on November 21. We have also been told repeatedly that part of the interest in Plano by the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center in Cincinnati and the U.S. Department of Interior’s National Park Service’s Underground Railroad Program is PAAM’s enthusiasm and promotion for Plano “as the place to visit.” PAAM has been selected by both organizations as affiliates, an honor and significant accomplishment, to say the least, for PAAM’s small and dynamic BOD.

Next, Mr. Nichols alleges: PAAM Continues to Increase Funding Requests Without Increasing Return. Mr. Nichols expresses concerns that PAAM’s funding requests rivals the HFM and the Plano Conservancy (we assume this reference is to the Interurban Museum), that PAAM does not have the presence or the reputation as the “big boys” and that PAAM does not have the concrete, established or functioning programs as HFM or the Plano Conservancy. As a former member of the Commission, Mr. Nichols knows this comparison is inappropriate. First, 2010 is only the third year that PAAM has requested City funds for operations and maintenance to help PAAM establish the museum at the Thornton House and only the second year that PAAM has received funds for operations and maintenance. Mr. Nichols distorts the truth as he compares PAAM to the (25+ year old) HFM and the (15+ year old) Interurban Museum since, as he is aware, the “big boys” (as Mr. Nichols describes) have very different developmental histories than PAAM. For example, the City owns the land under the HFM properties and owns land and buildings at the Interurban Museum (which is only managed and operated by the Plano Conservancy). Both organizations, under appropriate staff including Executive Directors, were primarily concerned at start-up only with maintenance, displays, exhibits, programs and projects. Unlike these organizations, PAAM, at start up (with a small volunteer BOD and no Executive Director) has had to concern itself with securing the land and buildings, including financial, structural, historical preservation and restoration, before it could focus more heavily on programs and projects. As Mr. Nichols is also aware, all City funds requested prior to 2008 by HFM for PAAM were for the Thornton House only, particularly for restoration but no funds for operations and maintenance. Mr. Nichols distorts the truth, knowing that PAAM is not “only a year younger than the Interurban Railway Museum.” Over fifteen years ago, the Interurban Museum opened its doors for business, with two fulltime staff and HFM with even more staff. Initially, for a number of years (for operations, maintenance and programs) HFM received all of the City funds earmarked for heritage preservation and subsequently Interurban shared those funds and now, for the last two years, PAAM has shared those funds but all three organizations, even today, depend on City funds for more than 85% of their operations and maintenance budgets. PAAM opened its doors with a part-time administrator, in 2008, without an Executive Director. The basic premise is this: If there had been a way to acquire sufficient funds or resources in the beginning, as the other organizations, to secure the property, in all aspects, and to hire full time personnel to recruit volunteers and seek other funding, PAAM would be further along in its development. Instead, with limited funding and resources PAAM has taken an incremental approach designed to methodically and carefully lay a solid and long-lasting foundation for PAAM to get the museum fully operational, i.e. facility first. No doubt both HFM and the Interurban Museum built their programs and offerings over time, much the same as PAAM.

Concerning the 2007 presentation before the Heritage Commission and the City Council, once again, Mr. Nichols, distorts the truth. In June 2007, just after Mr. Peters had passed away, Chuck Laenger, then Interim Executive Director for HFM and T.J. Johnson for PAAM appeared before the Heritage Commission concerning the HFM City grant application. Appearing for the presentation, were PAAM and HFM board members and Jerry Kolesiack, Habitat for Humanity/Project Manager for the Thornton House restoration project. Prior to the presentation, Mr. Nichols sent a number of messages (through others including Chuck Laenger and Dollie Thomas) to T.J. Johnson that “Ms. Johnson had better call [him] immediately or he would make sure that PAAM got nothing.” He did not directly call Ms. Johnson. When Ms. Johnson reached him and inquired of the “urgency” Ms. Nichols indicated that he wanted to visit about the presentation. There was no mention of “frustration with the history of slow progress…” Mr. Nichols did indicate that he was running for City Council and wanted to know if Ms. Johnson would support him. Ms. Johnson congratulated him on his decision to run without comment or commitment concerning any support. At Mr. Nichols’ presentation to the City Council, there was also no mention of “frustration with a history of slow progress…” and the City Council did award additional funds for the only project which HFM/PAAM had requested, the restoration of the Thornton House. Following the presentations, Mr. Nichols approached Ms. Johnson and Ms. Thomas, again reminding them that he was running for City council and hoped for their support. The ladies again congratulated Mr. Nichols without further comment or commitment to his campaign. Mr. Nichols lost his bid for City Council.

Next, Mr. Nichols alleges: PAAM’s Historical and Continued Lack of Fiscal Responsibility. He explains this claim by asserting that PAAM “typically fails to meet quarterly reporting deadlines…,” fails to timely complete funded projects, PAAM “failed to provide the Commission with a certified audit” as required of other grant applicants and PAAM has not procured non-city funding. PAAM has missed two deadlines in the two years it has received City grants, hardly typical. Instead of this broad generalization, Mr. Nichols should have identified the specific projects to which he refers. As of this date, except for the Underground Symposium I, every project for which PAAM has received City funding has been timely completed. PAAM could not host the symposium which was previously scheduled for February 2010 because PAAM did not receive City funding until February 2010 and, therefore, could not commit funds for the symposium which had not yet been received. Again, a mistruth: the City does not require a certified audit for grant applications. An applicant has the option of submitting documentation certified by a CPA, which PAAM has submitted, just as other grant applicants. Unlike other organizations which have had financial issues, PAAM has been subjected to a number of city audits resulting in memorandums of no findings. Furthermore, as of December 31, 2009, PAAM had acquired significant non-city funding and enough non-city funding to pay-off the debt for the block of property from the corner of 13th Street and Ave H to the corner of 13th Street and H Place.

We are perplexed with Mr. Nichols’ letter and the unsubstantiated claims he makes, including his suggestion that PAAM seeks some exception. We are at a loss to explain his mean-spirited, negative and, seemingly vindictive and angry approach. We cannot understand why he seems so angry with PAAM, except perhaps he felt unsupported by PAAM board members in his failed attempt at the City Council. And while we applaud and admire any citizen who seeks public office and public service, we still believe that one had nothing to do with the other. The fact is that PAAM seeks no exceptions. To the contrary, PAAM simply seeks to be treated fairly, reasonably and consistently with other organizations. PAAM’s “well-intentioned and ambitious mission” to help support heritage preservation in Plano and the surrounding area should be supported, as with other organizations. PAAM’s goal is to complement the efforts of our community of museums by encouraging the research, review, preservation and appreciation of the heritage of the diverse communities and cultures in Plano, the All-American City. At the very least, PAAM’s efforts should be applauded and encouraged and should not be disparaged as with Mr. Nichols’ mistruths, inaccuracies, half-truths and negative implications, which certainly do not serve the heritage preservation mission which Mr. Nichols, as least on one occasion, swore to uphold. PAAM serves a significant and important role in the preservation of heritage in this area and has already proven its ability to bring attention and interest in the Plano community. Certainly, it is irresponsible to base his urgings to the Commission to refrain from full support and funding for PAAM on little more than mean-spirited and negative implications, not based on fact or firsthand knowledge of PAAM or the Thornton House.

We invite you to visit the Thornton House at 900 13th street (open from 10:30 am to 1:30 pm Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday), visit the website at www.aamplano.com and judge for yourself. Like other organizations, you will not see perfection but you will see the results of the efforts and accomplishments thus far of a small but strong and dynamic board of directors and the volunteers and staff that support them. We are always open to constructive feedback, ideas and volunteer assistance and we appreciate the opportunity to serve Plano in this very special way.

Best regards,

Board of Directors
Plano African American Museum

============================================

NOTES:

• Mr. Nichols Letter (pdf)
• The Board of Directors of PAAM letter (word doc)
• The PAAM FY 2011 Grant request (personal data redacted by The Collin County Observer)(pdf)

Collin County's Budget Director, Monika Arris, told the Commissioners Court Monday that the final appraised values of all properties in the county was substantially higher than projected.

The result of the higher than expected valuations mean that property tax revenue is expected to decline by about 1.5% or $2.7 million. Earlier projections had led the court to expect a tax revenue shortfall in excess of $7.5 million.

Still missing from the revenue projections are the county's estimate of 2011 fines and fees. Fines and fees, along with investment income, interest and miscellaneous income account for about 40% of the budget and in recent years have trended down.

After hearing the latest estimates, several commissioners noted that the reduced tax shortfall, combined with the District Judges, Auditor and Purchasing Agent's suggestions for reducing the budget, have eased concerns of the county not being able to balance the FY 2011 budget without draconian cuts. They then voted 4-0 to lift the hiring freeze imposed earlier this year.

Bill

==============

The Dallas Morning News has published an article on the county budget and the certified tax roll. Ed Housewright's article does a good job comparing the county with a few of its cities. You can read the article here.

Bill

Non-profit group will operate Plano rec center

by DEBBIE DENMON
WFAA
July 26, 2010

PLANO — The Douglass Community Center in Plano will be run by the Boys & Girls Clubs of Collin County.

The Plano City Council Monday night voted to relinquish control of the rec center to save the city $508,000 a year.

African-American have expressed concern that the change could put an end to cultural and community events at the center — something that the Boys & Girls Clubs has said will not happen.

link to this article, video coverage and some great background links at WFAA Channel 8....

I'm on the TCEQ DFW mail list. Every summer, I get several warnings like the one below --

AIR POLLUTION WARNING - LEVEL ORANGE
OZONE is UNHEALTHY FOR SENSITIVE GROUPS in the Dallas-Ft. Worth Area Monday, July 26, 2010, 15:15 CDT

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) has issued a LEVEL ORANGE warning for the Dallas-Ft. Worth area. Ozone air pollution levels are rated as UNHEALTHY FOR SENSITIVE GROUPS based on measurements at the following monitoring site(s)...

Several years ago, the Council of Governments formed a Clean Air Committee made up of local officials, business leaders, and environmental activists. The committee was co-chaired by Dallas County Judge Margaret Keliher and Collin County Judge Ron Harris.

In 2006 the committee released its North Texas Clean Air Plan to put the region in compliance with then existing federal law.

The committee's plan relied in large part on the reduction of "Point Sources of NOx emissions", such as the Midlothian cement kilns and TXU coal fired generating plants. It also called for the adoption of California style auto emission standards. Claiming that the plan put too much of a burden on industrial polluters, the State of Texas refused to submit the DFW plan to the EPA.

Eventually, the TCEQ substituted its own plan, which it admitted would not meet EPA guidelines. In Jun, after years of negotiations, the EPA rejected the TCEQ plan, and the fight was on.

Last month, the EPA took over the permitting process for point sources from the TCEQ and denied an operating permit to the Garland Power and Light generating station in Collin County and to two other companies in Texas. Yesterday, the Texas Attorney General challenged the EPA, filing suit in the Federal Appeals Court in New Orleans.

None of these legal maneuverings keep the air in Collin County from remaining polluted for much of the summer.

In an effort to re-start the process of creating a new clean air plan, the North Central Texas Council of Governments is reconstituting the North Texas Clean Air Steering Committee.

Sadly, Dallas County, the largest stakeholder in the region, is embroiled with its own lack of faith in its County Judge and did appoint a member to the Committee.

During the May 10 Collin County Commissioners Court discussion on the appointment of a Collin County representative, Commissioner Jaynes nominated Keith Self to serve on the new committee. Jerry Hoagland seconded, saying that, "Clean Air is a big deal." The commissioners court then appointed Judge Keith Self, who seemed surprised at their decision. Self's obvious discomfort caused Matt Shaheen to dryly comment, "aw, you don't get to Arlington enough anyway".

After the vote appointing him, Self quipped, "You know what that's going to do to the COG - when I appear on the Clean Air Steering Committee?".

He's right. Self has in the past compared the NCTCOG to the Central Committee of the Soviet Union. He sees regionalism as a "slide into socialism".

But the simple fact is that Keith Self needs to be a part of any new plan. Collin County is too large to not be a part of any successful proposal. We're all going to have to find a way to get along or Washington will dictate what measures we will have to learn to live with in order to clean up our polluted air.

The first meeting of the 25 member North Texas Clean Air Steering Committee will be at the NCTCOG headquarters in Arlington at 10:00 AM on Thursday. It's role, according to its web page is:

"The North Texas Clean Air Steering Committee (NTCASC) is the regional air quality advisory body for the Dallas-Fort Worth area. The NTCASC is comprised of 25 members, including local city and county officials, environmental interest representatives, chamber of commerce representatives, and public/citizen education representatives. The committee’s main goal is to work collaboratively in making recommendations to the State on what regional air quality control strategies should be implemented to reach attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. This committee focuses on controlling air pollution from all origins including on-road, non-road, area, and point sources."

Meanwhile, if you live in Collin County, limit your outside activities tomorrow. We will likely be under a Level Orange air pollution warning.

Bill