Residents press tax, zoning concerns as Edinburg council advances rezonings, variances and contracts

Arnoldo Mata

Edinburg, TX – Residents used public comment and public hearing portions of the Feb. 3 Edinburg City Council meeting to raise concerns about taxes, city spending and the expansion of industrial zoning near established neighborhoods before the council approved a series of rezonings, development variances, an annexation request and multiple contracts.

Public comments: taxes, spending and industrial impacts

During public comments, Fern McClarty criticized rising property values and city financial decisions, arguing they place increasing strain on families. “Every 12 months our property values increase,” McClarty told the council. “The more you take, the poorer families become. Thirty percent of our families live in poverty and they do not get an annual salary increase.”

She questioned recent bond issuances and utility rate hikes, saying, “They increased the water rates by 67%. They gave away $10 million to DHR and then they had to sell bonds to supplement the solid waste department.” McClarty also urged council members to scrutinize variance requests later on the agenda.

“The purpose of an ordinance is to protect the health, safety and welfare of the residents,” she said. “If the council approves a variance, it says you do not have to comply with the orders that everyone else must obey.”

Fuel tank storage comments

June Job spoke about the fuel storage tanks along Orange Avenue, told council members she believes ongoing burning at the site is harming the neighborhood and raising health concerns.

“That burns most of the time, and that’s right in our neighborhood,” she said. “I do not know what all this burning is, but I don’t think it’s just trash. It’s polluting our air.”

She warned that the proposed expansion of industrial activity would worsen conditions residents already experience daily. “Now you want to put many more tanks and no telling how many more of these fuel burners,” she said. “I don’t know the city ordinances, but I’ve never lived anywhere where fuel tanks were legal in the city limits, especially in South Texas where there’s so much acreage not being used.”

Job said she believes the facilities pose a health risk and urged the city to consider relocating future development away from residential areas.

“I think it’s a health problem to all of us,” she said. “I would like the people to consider moving these fuel tanks, or the new ones anyway, somewhere else instead of just building more and more in our city and not helping us.”

She closed by identifying her family connection to the neighborhood, saying the issue affects multiple generations living nearby.

Job’s daughter-in-law, Terry Job, said neighbors have noticed possible air-quality impacts. “I put my clothes outside on the line, and my clothes smell like gas,” she said. “That’s not healthy for us.”

Public hearings: rezoning requests

The council then opened public hearings on six zoning cases. The most extensive testimony focused on a rezoning request at 500 W. Engle Road, which would change the property from residential to industrial general zoning.

Diane Teeter urged the council to table the item, calling it “a major upzoning from residential to industrial general immediately adjacent to established neighborhoods.”

“Industrial general is the highest intensity industrial category in the city zoning code,” Teeter said. “Approving it at this location places homes at a disadvantage and even dangerous.”

Teeter warned that the change could allow fuel storage, chemical handling, heavy truck traffic and 24-hour operations, adding, “These are not abstract measurements. They represent families who will live with the consequences of your decision.”

Another Orange Avenue resident said the neighborhood would be “sandwiched between two industrial locations.”

“Would you like to be sleeping next to a gas pump?” she asked the council. “No matter what the city says at the permit stage, it is hazardous to the people that have made Orange their home.”

A separate rezoning request at 1021 Sundance Drive drew brief comment. A representative for the property owner said the lot was listed as agricultural despite being located in a residential subdivision. “It’s in a subdivision where there’s a bunch of houses,” the speaker said. “I think it’s just a paper mistake.”

City staff explained that properties often enter the city as agricultural upon annexation and are rezoned later when development occurs.

Council Member Dan Diaz said he would have preferred additional discussion on the Engle Road request. “I would rather be able to table it to talk with the residents,” Diaz said. He also suggested some type of buffer between the new development and the residential area.

“This is just the rezoning of the land. We will definitely make sure that all protocols are followed, and I do want the residents to be included in these plans as well,” Council Member Jason De Leon added.

The council approved all six rezoning items.

Variances: subdivisions and townhome development

The council also considered multiple variance requests, including those tied to the Sapphire at La Sienna subdivision. City staff had recommended denial, citing concerns about reduced rear-yard setbacks and extended block lengths that could affect emergency access. Despite the recommendation, the council approved the variances.

A separate item involving six variances for a townhome-related development prompted a lengthy discussion between council members, staff and the applicant’s engineer.

“What we’re asking for is form, not functionality,” the engineer told the council, saying public safety and engineering standards would still be met.

He added that similar developments are allowed under different standards in neighboring cities. “McAllen is similar, and not exactly the same. Mission, Harlingen, Brownsville — we could go on and show all those codes.”

The applicant said the project would represent at least $1.5 million in investment and generate close to $1 million for the tax base over 10 years.

Staff noted the city may need to revisit its Unified Development Code so similar projects would not require multiple variances in the future. The council approved the variances.

Annexation, contracts and scheduling

The council approved a voluntary annexation of a 0.918-acre property at 1099 E. FM 2812.

Members also approved a renewal of citywide GIS licensing agreements with Environmental Systems Research Institute as a sole-source contract not to exceed $268,200, and awarded a construction contract for Phase 3 of the Brenaline Cedar Detention Pond project, funded through a federal community development grant.

The consent agenda passed without discussion.

The council also voted to reschedule its next regular meeting from Feb. 17 to Feb. 19. No reason was stated for the move. According to the memo provided by staff in the agenda, “Whenever a function conflicts with the Tuesday of a regular meeting, such regular meeting may be scheduled as soon as practical at the same time and place. Special meetings of the City Council shall be held as scheduled. There are no public hearings scheduled, nor are there any anticipated Governing Body issues that would require legislative action on the date of the next regularly scheduled meeting.”

Executive session

After an executive session, the Council took action on one item, which covered Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Economic Development Matters- Agreement with EDC regarding Ebony Hills Development Project-Project Workforce Resource Center. The Council voted to approve the “agreement on the terms and conditions as discussed in executive session.” No other action was taken.