The Eagle - Your digital news leader
Saturday, May 03, 2008
        Daily Archives   SU | MO | TU | WE | TH | FR | SA              RSS      Mobile Edition      Daily Email Updates
 Printer friendly version |   E-mail to a friend |  2 comment(s)  | 

Published Saturday, May 03, 2008 2:22 AM

Letters for May 3

Missing the point

Recent letters concerning "growth or no growth" in College Station have missed the point.

Veronica Morgan, a talented engineer formerly on the city staff, and developer Brad Corrier both note that College Station will most certainly continue to increase its population and its boundaries.

John Crompton, Dennis Maloney and Larry Stewart agree with this. The issue is the quality of that growth and how it will be managed.

Let's get its straight: The issue in this election is one of priorities. Do we want growth that is predicated on fast rates of return whatever the cost to the appearance of the community and the quality of life in the long run, or are we prepared to accept that sound planning, a pleasing visual appearance and a good social environment are worth paying for, even paying some increased property taxes to offset some reduction in short-term sales tax returns?

The city of College Station must take the same long-term view; quality will beget quality, and the property taxes will soar.

The scare-mongering about driving investment away is just that. If we demand a great city, with great neighborhoods, good traffic patterns for cars, bicycles and pedestrians, resources and activities that support a healthy lifestyle for mind, body and spirit, then good growth will be assured.

John Crompton, Dennis Maloney and Larry Stewart would help us achieve these goals. Please support them with your vote, and please join Valerie and me and vote.


College Station


Pay the full cost

As the owner of an engineering consultancy whose major clients are the developers, Veronica Morgan (Eagle, April 25) was disingenuous in her recent letter attacking John Crompton when she asserted, "New development does pay for itself." This is clearly false.

Consider the following observations:

• The current $150 million bill that taxpayers are facing for new infrastructure was not created by new needs from existing residents. It was created by new growth. This bill is prima facie evidence that new development does not pay for itself.

• Developers oppose traffic, water and wastewater impact fees on new houses which would be established to recover the costs of providing new roads, water and wastewater infrastructure for new developments and they have successfully diluted the existing fees for parks. Last September, parks staff showed a fee of $1,900 per house was needed to pay the costs for new parks created by new development. Despite John Crompton's efforts to fix it at that rate, the developers' opposition resulted in it being set at $900 by the council. The remaining $1,000 per house will be added to the current residents' bill.

• Developers only pay the costs of roads within the boundaries of their subdivisions. But these subdivisions create the need for the collector and arterial streets adjacent to them. They pay nothing towards the cost of these expensive streets and expect existing taxpayers to pick up the bills. This is the main generator of the $100 million roads bill we now face.

Crompton has fought to require developments to pay the full costs of their projects and to make growth pay for itself. It we want our tax bills to decrease, we need to re-elect John Crompton to continue this battle.


College Station

Support residents

Hunter Goodwin (Eagle, April 30) claims to be concerned about older neighborhoods because he lives on Munson Avenue and is, "head of a [homeowners association]." Goodwin is, in fact, a developer of University Preserve, a new gated community off Munson Avenue.

His neighborhood association is not registered with the city of College Station and he has not participated in the College Woodland Hills Association which represents the larger neighborhood in which the gated community is located.

If you are interested in supporting residents, not developers, people who live in neighborhoods, not gated communities, may I suggest a vote for John Crompton, Dennis Maloney, and Larry Stewart.


College Station

Remarkable progress

In the year since John Crompton was elected to the city council, College Station residents have seen remarkable progress in the city, most of it due to his efforts.

Crompton has turned out to be the hardest-working council member by far. He has placed twenty-one items on the council's agenda, while, in the same time period, no other council member has placed more than two.

Crompton has a vision for making College Station a city that is an attractive and desirable place to live. That vision includes:

• Designing traffic plans to keep non-local traffic out of established neighborhoods.

• Removing subsidies from residential growth so that the impact of new development is taken off the shoulders of existing residents.

• Creating dedicated bike trails to relieve traffic congestion and promote health residents.

• Developing a green infrastructure of parks, historic districts and urban forests, which are hallmarks of great cities.

We have known John for almost 20 years. We share his vision and believe that no one is better able than John Crompton to make it a reality. His record of dedicated service in his first year on the council is convincing proof.

We hope that everyone who shares the vision of an attractive, livable and dynamic College Station will cast a vote for John Crompton.


College Station



Your Name:

captcha 6225e60049704ef3a96b9d8f0615f243

Enter text seen above:

2 comment(s) found!

Posted by: On: 5/3/2008

Comment Title:
Just keep Ron Gay off the city council. He''s on every committee known to man within a 100 mile radius. He''s on an ego/power trip. There''s no way he can do a good job. He''s too busy. How does he even have time for his so called full time job? I bet his family never sees him. Get rid of him!
Report Abuse
Posted by: On: 5/3/2008

Comment Title: Illegal Election Signs
Lots of talk in the College Station elections as usual. I am very curious about who is paying for the "Vote at the MSC" signs I see all over town. There is no "paid for" information on them. Isn''t that required?
Report Abuse



  • Jobs
  • Cars
  • Homes
  • Merchandise
BILLING/COLLECTIONS:Highly motivated Billing Clerk needed immediately! Mus ... More Details

Quick Hire!15 ImmediateOpenings!Evening shifts.Earn up to $8-$15/hr. Plus B ... More Details

Oilfield TraineesAre you dependable andwilling to learn. Greatopportunity f ... More Details

NURSING:Great Opportunity To GROWProfessionally!CMA/CNA/EMT/Medical Assista ... More Details

MANAGEMENT:B-CS Community Health Center seeks Full timeCase ManagerNursing, ... More Details

LAB TECHNICIAN:Needed at the BCS Community Health Center, Mon to Fri, 8:00 ... More Details

MEDICAL:CMA/Medical AssistantCNA/Nursing Assistant3-6 months exper. B/CS Co ... More Details

MEDICAL:EXCITING OPPORTUNITY! Medical Office Staff – looking for a per ... More Details

MANAGEMENT:GREAT OPPORTUNITY! Clinic ManagerLooking for a versatile leader ... More Details

HAZMAT DRIVERS:Local Fuel DeliveryHOME DAILYMust be 25, 2+ Yrs ExpTX licens ... More Details


© 2008 The Bryan College Station Eagle
Contact Us | Subscribe/Customer Care | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | FAQ | Corrections | RSS Feeds | E-mail News