Porretto Beach

A trolley passes Porretto Beach in Galveston on Jan. 10, 2018. The Galveston Planning Commission voted to deny an application that requests 25 public easements be abandoned on the beach.

It’s hard not to agree with bankruptcy trustee Randy Williams’ assessment of news this week that Scenic Galveston is interested in buying Porretto Beach and making it public.

Williams, who’s working to sell the land for $6 million to a private developer, said the environmental group’s statement of interest in the land was theater for what’s expected to be a heated meeting of the Galveston City Council today.

“It’s all a show for the next city council meeting,” said Williams, who’s charged with liquidating the assets of Sonya Porretto’s estate, and paying off her creditors.

The timing certainly was interesting, considering debate about Porretto Beach, the proposed development and whether the city should abandon some rights of way on the beach have been going on — raging at times — for more than two years.

None of this has been a secret.

There’s no doubt the group’s offer adds a new level of pressure on the city council to keep the rights of way, rather than cede them to a group of adjacent property owners interested in developing a boardwalk with residences, retail and restaurants.

Williams also dismissed the group’s interest by saying it doesn’t have the financial means to buy the land.

Some opponents of the boardwalk project no doubt hope that if they can kill the $6 million deal the land will become available for far less than that.

The highest and best use of that land may very well be as public beach, but the city council has to consider some realities other than that. Council members who plan today to vote against releasing the rights of way should be prepared, for example, to explain the legal alchemy that would allow them to use a right of way as a zoning tool or a land development regulation.

That’s exactly what opponents of abandonment are proposing. Maybe that can be done legally, but it’s going to take more than two rather vague words — “community benefit” — to make that argument convincing.

Even if those two words do, in general, provide a bridge substantial enough to carry the weight of a governmental decision to encumber private property and deny property owners the full legal use of their land, questions remain.

Who’s the “community” here? Has the council measured it? How big is this community? Is it anything like a majority? And what is the “benefit?” Is there wide agreement that the greatest benefit lies in keeping the rights of way? How has the council determined that?

This is a classic lose-lose situation for the council. The best it can do is carefully follow the law and take care not to mistake what people wish the law allowed with what the law actually demands.

• Michael A. Smith

Michael A. Smith: 409-683-5206; michael.smith@galvnews.com

(3) comments

Jeff Patterson

Reading your column, I would come away thinking that City Council is nothing more then a panel of administrators. They are not; they are elected officials who are charged with representing their constituency. As you point out, determining exactly what that constituency wants is a moving target and very hard to determine. But just because its hard, doesn't mean that Council shouldn't try to do that..........otherwise all we need is a group of administrators to make these decisions. Respecting property rights is very important, but we elect a Mayor and City Council to consider all aspects of an issue and make the hard choices about what is the greater "community benefit". Remember that City Council has already voted once to unanimously acquire Porretto Beach, so they do recognize that they have a key role to play in this messy thing we call democracy.

Bill Cochrane

Anyone viewing the website of Scenic Galveston will easily see that this organization is solely based on saving wetlands and marshes. Searching their website, there is no mention of “saving beaches”? While I do think there is some need to save wetlands, with any endeavour, there is need for moderation. When a group like scenic Galveston gains power by obtaining grants and donations from like-minded folks, they tend to overstep their boundaries. In order to receive grants, obviously they need a project. Even if the project isn’t pertaining to their core values. It seems that Scenic Galveston has run out of wetlands to save, and have become the sight police. It’s one thing to “save” unusable wetlands, but entirely reckless to “save” perfectly usable land, such as Porretto Beach. The saved wetlands owned by Scenic Galveston are converted to property tax free parcels. So it seems that Beeton and Scenic Galveston want to keep the rights of way in order to purchase the beach and convert it to a property that has no property tax. All in the name of maintaining the “scenic view”?

jack sheaffer

I support scenic galveston and I’m willing to make a donation to purchase Porretto Beach for the citizens of Galveston and Texas. A beach is a wetlands. The beach is more than a scenic view. Visitors from Houston, other Texas Cities visit Galveston and spend time on the beaches. The HOT and sales taxes far surpass the property taxes generated a boardwalk concession.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for Reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.