Cat lovers should corral their pets

Our thanks to Jan Wrede for the article “Keep cats indoors at all times to protect birds” that appeared in the Feb. 28 issue of Hill Country View.  We live in the Oak Knoll Circle subdivision in Boerne and have been overrun with cats over the last year or two. 

We have two large bird feeders in our back yard and on many mornings we have gone outside and discovered feathers and, on occasion, dead birds. We also have xeriscape landscaping and frequently find that our mulch has been dug up and scattered all over our sidewalks by neighborhood cats.  

We respect everyone’s right to have a pet and understand how they can be part of the family.  For those who prefer cats as pets, please be considerate of your neighbors as well as other wildlife and keep your cats in your own yard.

Candy and Mike Hagan

Boerne

Remember Esperanza vote at the polls

I am in total amazement that our trusted City Council has actually voted for the infamous development agreement for our new city, uh,  I mean neighborhood, Esperanza. 

 I wish that our City Council would actually listen to the people, not business people and others who will benefit financially from this development. Why does money always dictate everything in this community?  Do our children, our way of life, our mere existence mean anything to the council and mayor?  I suppose their own financial interests and chamber friendships are more important than the constituents that elected them. For shame.

Remember, when you vote in future elections, who voted for this proposal with such vigor: Ron Warden, Jacques Dubose and Judy Edmondson (along with our mayor wanting to push this through).   With such complexity and apparent holes, why didn’t they take more time to look at this?  Why didn’t they even consider what the average citizen wanted?  It just seems wrong that this occurs.       

 Because of the agreement, now my children will probably not want to live here when they grow up; they are the seventh generation in this area.  I truly appreciate it as that may be the end of our legacy.  Be proud of that. 

Denise Herbst

Boerne

Questionable ethics on the Boerne City Council

I would like to address an issue that should be of considerable public interest and that transcends the present discussion of the zoning ordinance – a public official’s ethical responsibility to recuse himself when there is even an appearance of a conflict between his public duty and private interests.

I am fully aware that, under the law, a monetary gain or interest must be apparent for a legal conflict of interest. But the inquiry should not end there. I seek to address the ethical issue of a council member serving two masters.  It should be fundamental that when a public official addresses public issues he or she does so serving only one master: the public interest. 

No ethical public official should allow even the appearance that public service can be compromised by private and personal interest. This is not to say that public officials can have no private interests; it is to say that when those private interests appear in the public domain, the public official should acknowledge the private interest and simply avoid the appearance of impropriety by recusal, whether legally required to do so or not.

To use a presently relevant example, serving on the board of directors of the Hill Country Pregnancy Care Center and participating in a vote as a public official that could affect the funding and the mission of the HCPCC should be the clearest of examples of serving both private and public interests while sworn to uphold only the public interest. Our council must be held to the highest of ethical standards.

In an effort to shed public light on this matter and to promote public understanding of the ethical standards that should control public duty, I am requesting a written opinion from the city attorney addressing more than a simple statement of the conflict of interest law, but rather a statement that should guide the conduct of our council members in the future and that will transparently set an ethical standard of which we can be proud. 

Janis Maxymof

Boerne

What does city zoning ordinance actually say?

To date several statements have been made to the Boerne Star by Mayor Dan Heckler, that the intention of allowing 501c3 organizations to use existing residential properties did not extend to the demolition of existing housing stock. Rather, the intention was to allow for “adaptive re-use” of existing housing stock.  This is a strategy that has been successfully employed for decades in cities across the country, largely in inner-city neighborhoods where rejuvenation and reoccupation of older homes has been the goal. 

While this is a laudable idea that could bring new money and appropriate housing to neighborhoods like Oak Park, in the case of Boerne’ proposed change, grossly inadequate zoning language created a very large loophole. This loophole was created by wording that did not specifically preclude tearing down existing structures and erecting “disguised” commercial buildings of a size and character not in keeping with the neighborhood.  Nor, it could be argued, did the faulty language specifically allow for such a use.

Is there now, or has there ever been, an ordinance revision allowing 501c3 organizations to operate in Boerne’s residential single-family neighborhoods?  Has this merely degenerated into a semantics discussion about an idea that was floated, but somehow never made it into the zoning code?  Regardless, it is clear that more than a few of our city’s finest servants are either unaware of the law, or just uninformed.  There is no way to “grandfather” an ordinance revision that does not exist, period.  If the ordinance revision does or ever did exist, it should be clearly traceable in city records.

Jeff Spencer

Boerne