By Karen Gleason
The 830 Times
Val Verde County Commissioners Court members voted unanimously Dec. 20 to draft a resolution opposing the route to and the location of the city’s proposed second international bridge.
The vote came after two members of the court, County Commissioner Pct. 2 Juan Carlos Vazquez and County Commissioner Pct. 4 Gustavo “Gus” Flores, said they supported the concept of a second international bridge linking Del Rio and Ciudad Acuña, Coah., Mexico, but added they were not in favor of the current site of the bridge and the route currently proposed to link the bridge to area highways.
County Commissioner Pct. 3 Beau Nettleton had asked for several action items regarding the planned second international bridge to be placed on the court’s agenda for Tuesday, and he initiated the discussion.
“Judge, I know we took a vote at our last meeting at the civic center to oppose the route and the location (for the planned second bridge). At this time, I think we need to do a more clarified effort. After our meeting with the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) yesterday, I think they would like something more defined on where we stand on this. Apparently this issue has caught the attention of the TxDOT Commission, and they want answers,” Nettleton told the court.
“So I will make a motion that we prepare a resolution opposing the location and the route at this time, and that resolution be sent to TxDOT, the TxDOT Commission, (Texas) Sen. Roland Gutierrez, U.S. Rep. Eddie Morales, U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, and U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales,” the commissioner added.
“The judge and I met with TxDOT yesterday and after that meeting, it’s become very clear to me that we actually don’t have a full picture of what’s going on here and why this is getting done. There seems to be a lack of communication, a lack of conversation about what is the best thing for this community. I think we’ve spent – not us, but the city has spent – quite a bit of money on this (bridge) study, and when I look at the numbers, from the best of my ability, these numbers don’t work.
“I think it’s time that this project stop, and the city and the county and the state look long-term, which is why I have another item on the agenda to discuss that, but at this time, if we can prepare a resolution defining the issues that are going the affect the people where these proposed routes are going to go, and the burden it’s going to place on the taxpayers because of the loss of revenue, and then present that,” Nettleton said, adding he would work with the county judge and County Attorney David Martinez to draft the resolution and bring it back to commissioners court.
County Commissioner Pct. 1 Martin Wardlaw gave the second, then Flores said he would like to make a statement.
“I’m all for the resolution and looking for a new route and a new site for the bridge. I’d just like to make it public that I’m not against the second bridge. We need it. We need to build it somewhere. Maybe not where they’ve chosen, but I’m all for the second bridge,” Flores said.
Vazquez, too, spoke in favor of the overall second bridge project.
“I would like to let people know that me, as an elected official, I’m all for a new bridge, a second bridge, but I’m not for this current location,” Vazquez said.
County Judge Lewis G. Owens also spoke about the issue.
“In 2012, the county and the city went in to look at a second international bridge. The county put up $225,000 to do a feasibility study and to pick routes. Right after that, we were presented with numbers, and it just wasn’t feasible then, with the numbers (of vehicles) that were coming across the bridge. I think we’re living on the premise that ‘if you build it, they will come,’ which is a heck of a way to do things,” Owens said.
“I did ask the mayor in the meeting that we had at the civic center the other night, if they had costs or something, and I was informed by the mayor at that time that he didn’t, and I didn’t understand the process, that that didn’t come now, it came later, and he asked me if needed the city attorney to explain it to me, and I said no.
“A couple of sentences later, (City Manager) John Sheedy said we actually do have a cost on the bridge, so, you know, it’s just real hard, in my opinion, to place trust on individuals that are sitting next to you, and they can’t get together and on the same page,” Owens said.
The county judge also reiterated the proposed routes to the planned bridge site lie outside the city limits.
“Bottom line is, the road belongs to the county. Las Brisas Boulevard belongs to the county. Everything that (the city) is trying to do is outside of the city limits, and I asked TxDOT if they were going to take the road away from us, and the bottom line is, we have to give it up or give it to them in order for this process to happen, and as of yesterday, I don’t think they were willing to go through that process,” Owens said.
He continued, “When Las Brisas Boulevard was built, it was set up for a highway. The amount of development that’s out there right now, it does not make sense to build the road through it, and I don’t think, from what you’ve heard today, that the commissioners think that Las Brisas Boulevard is the right way to move forward.
“Again, I think we’d support a second bridge if we had more details as to what was going on, and a location that wouldn’t put out so many families,” Owens said.
The court then voted unanimously to approve Nettleton’s motion.
—
Contact the author at delriomagnoliafan@gmail.com
