Author: parischamber

The Paris, Texas ‘Comprehensive Plan’ is a little goofy.

Consider pages 13 & 14, SECTION 5: THE ROLE OF URBAN DESIGN IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

On page 14, dealing with Public Art, (Item 16) states: Public art is an urban design element, and opportunities should be evaluated to place public art in areas that will enhance the aesthetic quality and reinforce the unique identity of each community.

(The italics are inserted by the Paris Texas Chamber of Commerce. Generally, it has been accepted by rational minds that privately donated art is usually art; publicly funded art is usually an eyesore or propaganda, as government acts as a censor of what “art” is or isn’t acceptable.)

The Section ends with: “The application of these urban design elements through the comprehensive planning program can aid the aesthetic quality of each community. Again, since the comprehensive plan is implemented over time, these design elements should be applied as part of individual zoning, subdivision, and site plan review approvals, as feasible.”

(Two “each community(s)” in one short section is likely a boiler-plate recommendation dreamed up by a committee of government planners. Otherwise, wouldn’t it just say, “Paris” or City of Paris – ?)

Government cookies, baked for the good of government, is not how policy that is good for Paris should be determined. Chowing down on such cookies may or may not be good or bad, but Paris is not the cook.

As the policy is not attributed to an outside source, it’s either carelessness or just being lazy, but moving on:

 

 

Page 17 – SECTION 7: DOWNTOWN PARIS

Item 1. Introduction. (States):

Paris has an important historic downtown, which continues to serve as a focal point for the citizens within the city and the region. The Paris downtown is filled with social, cultural, economic, and architectural amenities and potentials. Currently city staff, in conjunction with citizens and business input, Lamar County Historical Commission, the Historic Preservation Commission, Main Street Advisory Board, Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council are strongly committed to the preservation, enhancement, and upgrading of the many variables and elements that comprise Paris’ downtown.

So encouraging historic preservation is a goal. If not, why include it?

Accuracy, however, is demanded of restoration in the historical districts, which includes the downtown area. But doesn’t apply to the downtown area.  (Don’t ask; we don’t understand it, either.)

Recently, valuable historically accurate art works, privately donated to citizens, were removed from display at the public library by the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, and the Library Director, saying they were an “unsuitable history” of Paris; thereby, claiming that history does not exist – except the way they want it – regardless of existing policies demanding historical accuracy.

A little goofy goes a long way.  Sadly. –

Paris Texas’ neighborhoods are under attack. Blight and decay are waging war, and the City of Paris is losing it. In desperation, the city changes ordinances, policies and focus, concerning substandard and obsolete housing and vacant commercial properties, because, in general, as a community, we do not know what to do.

So, we do dumb things.

One is being really good at creating barriers of regulations, making it difficult for owners to repair, improve, or sell their property.

The city has an obligation of reasonable and equal applications for all taxpayers and home owners; therefore, it’s time to repair and upgrade ordinances:

  • – First, prohibit the city from adopting or enforcing an order, ordinance, or other regulation that requires an owner of a vacant building to obtain a permit to conduct repairs to the building if the repairs are necessary to: (a) protect public safety; or (b) prevent further damage to the building; (2) prohibit the city from requesting state officials to exempt the city from this prohibition by an executive order issued under the Texas Disaster Act; (3) provide that an owner of a vacant building who is required to obtain a permit in violation of this prohibition may: (a) bring an action against the city that violated this ordinance for damages incurred due to the violation; and (b) recover reasonable attorney’s fees and litigation costs if the owner prevails in the action; and (4) waives governmental immunity of the city to suit and from liability to the extent of liability created by this prohibition.
  • – Next, prohibit the city from adopting or enforcing an order, ordinance, or other regulation that requires an owner of a vacant building, when repairing damage to the building, to improve the building to a condition that is better than would have been legally acceptable before the damage occurred, including by requiring conformance to updated building code standards; (2) prohibit the city from requesting state officials to exempt the city from this prohibition by an executive order issued under the Texas Disaster Act; (3) provide that an owner of a vacant building who is required to improve the building in violation of this prohibition may: (a) bring an action against the city for violation of this ordinance for damages incurred due to the violation; and (b) recover reasonable attorney’s fees and litigation costs if the owner prevails in the action; and (4) waive governmental immunity of the city to suit and from liability to the extent of liability created by this prohibition.

These changes, of course, will not solve all the problems of older neighborhoods, but it’s a start on holding our own, at least.

It certainly beats forcing taxpayers to subsidize $200,000 homes – and calling the foolishness “affordable housing’.

But, WHY deny the right of a property owner to repair their private property? Especially, when the city allowed the property to decline to a point where it needs repairs?

There are only two reasons to penalize the improvement of property: Greed for fees or stupidity.

 IF we’re honest, looking back squarely, 29-years of cronyism have created the worst period of growth in the history of Paris, Texas.

It has been worse then the years after the Great Fire of 1916, a period of solid growth in Paris.

Paris is not meeting the expectations of her citizens.

We’re not getting our money’s worth.

It’s a failure of what we have done, and are doing.

Counting the lies leading up to citizen’s approval of the Paris Economic Development Corporation (PEDC), in November, 1993, Paris has enjoyed a lot of lies, broken promises, double dealings, and other semi-legal actions; all earning the community a well-deserved reputation in certain circles.

And now, the PEDC is spewing more double-talk than the Coronavirus has variants.

First, it repeats what the Paris Texas Chamber (and others) has said for years:

“Building a speculative building is foolish.  (EDCs don’t know what a prospect might require anymore than a cross-eyed stone-age Snapping Turtle.)

Now, the PEDC is agreeing with what we’ve said, but are –

–  also handing out at least $52,000 for designs that it claims can be later used to finish out a planned “flexible, bare-bone building“ –

Seems every time the PEDC meets, the Paris Chamber learns something new. Imagine our surprise to discover that a “flexible, bare-bone building” is not a speculative building. After all these years, we learn that both Gertrude and Willie were wrong: A rose is not a rose and the smell is not sweet.

The PEDC adds injury by saying this will save millions of dollars – !!?? (It also said said the foundation of the old Oliver Rubber plant would save money, too.)

We’re suppose to trust them.

On what? Transparency? Honesty? Double-talk? Stupidity?

The PEDC is a community representative that has said and done things that would make Joe Biden blush.

The PEDC has always been a conspiracy of cronies.

This time, cronies in the PEDC, who are cronies with cronies in the McKinney Texas office of a locally headquartered Paris firm, dreamed up a scheme to design floor-plans that can be used in different ways to finish out a pre-built (not speculative, of course, but a pre-built) building.

This way, the conspirators explain, an unknown future user – in some unknown future – can pick one of the interior configurations (or furnish their own), which, they add, can be completed “in a very short time.”

Knowing the pre-built building as they will, the bet should be that the cronies who will build the “pre-built” building, will do the act of completing the spec – uh – pre-built building, which may have to be  rebuilt to rid it of wasps, dirt-daubers, nesting pigeons, sparrows, field mice, and lots of East Texas’ Creepy-Crawlies.

Local suckers … uh … taxpayers provide the money.

Local politics at work.

Cronyism.