Pipeline proposal hits new hurdle
Austin considering legislators' concerns about its safety plan

Austin American-Statesman
Friday, January 10, 2003

State lawmakers have taken a skeptical look at Austin's plan to regulate hazardous pipelines, and the city is scrambling in private to answer their concerns before deciding the issue publicly.

At a hearing Thursday, more than 30 people debated how Austin should best protect residents from potential pipeline accidents.

But well before it began, several City Council members said they expected to postpone the final vote on a proposed pipeline ordinance. The measure, which won preliminary approval late Thursday night, will come back before the council in a month. Members said they needed the time to review the ordinance and consider changing it.

Austin's lobby team, which includes several Republicans close to the Capitol's new legislative majorities, warned last week that some lawmakers believe the measure would infringe on landowners' property rights by restricting development near pipelines.

Among those lawmakers is state Rep. Mike Krusee, R-Round Rock, who said the Legislature would at least consider forcing Austin to compensate landowners if the city decides to test state law with the pipeline ordinance.

"I'm all for making sure things are safe," Krusee said. "My general principle is whenever there's a taking, whether it's for public safety or right of way for a road, we compensate for that taking."

The ordinance would apply to all pipelines in the city's jurisdiction with diameters of eight inches or more carrying hazardous liquids such as gasoline or natural gas. There are six such pipelines within the city's jurisdiction, including the Longhorn Pipeline cutting across South Austin.

Regulations would create a band of about 50 feet along pipelines in which no structures could be built.

On top of that, there would be a 400-foot strip -- 200 feet on each side of a pipeline -- in which houses, apartments or other structures would have to meet higher-than-normal building specifications allowing evacuations within an hour of a pipeline leak or fire.

The city would also ban hospitals, schools, day care centers or retirement facilities within 500 feet of a pipeline and require pipeline companies to obtain insurance policies of at least $50 million.

City officials and pipeline safety advocates praised the provisions as a compromise, providing basic safety levels for people living near a pipeline. The city, they said, justifiably could impose much stricter regulations.

But opponents -- particularly builders and property rights groups -- say the provisions effectively would prevent developers and landowners from using their land.

Many of those groups contribute heavily to legislative campaigns through political action committees. Krusee, a key player in regional planning and transportation groups, has received at least $9,000 since January 2000 from gas industry-related groups and builder and real estate political action committees, including the Real Estate Council of Austin Good Government PAC and the Texas Capital Area Builders Association, according to state records. Krusee received at least $79,000 from all donors over that period.

Krusee said Thursday the city should analyze the pipeline ordinance's effects and compensate people if it lowers the value of their property. That could be an expensive proposition, requiring Austin to pay for swaths of land that might otherwise be used for offices, stores, apartments or houses. The Homebuilders Association of Greater Austin, which opposes the ordinance, estimated that it could cost landowners $200 million.

A 1995 state law protecting property rights included an exemption protecting cities from compensating owners when taking property to protect public health and safety.

John Hrncir, city governmental relations officer, said Austin's lobbyists had advised that the council sit on the pipeline ordinance until it addresses concerns of legislators such as Krusee. Some staffers said the council might table the ordinance until June, after the legislative session adjourns and lawmakers return home.

The Real Estate Council of Austin suggested a putting off a vote for almost a year, allowing federal officials to complete a study, initiated last month, of land-use and zoning issues for pipelines.

But opponents say such a delay might effectively kill the ordinance. Builders could use the time to file development plans for affected properties, meaning their projects would be too far advanced for regulations to change or block them.

Mike Blizzard, a political consultant who has helped lead the push for tougher pipeline regulations, said legislative opposition should not drive the city's decision. Austin is paying lobbyists about a million dollars, he noted, to detooth just such a challenge.

"We have a moral obligation not to put more people into harm's way," Blizzard said. "Development's going to continue in that area. The time to do this is now, not later."

The proposed ordinance stems from the long fight over the Longhorn Pipeline, a defunct line from Houston to El Paso. The pipe is being refitted to carry gasoline, and the city and other entities filed an unsuccessful federal lawsuit seeking to block it.

After the lawsuit failed, officials huddled to look for ways to regulate the dangerous substances flowing across the city. There were few examples of stricter regulation, especially in Texas -- where pipelines are governed by lax state and federal regulation, some ordinance supporters said.

Mayor Gus Garcia said city officials drafted the ordinance to address residents' safety concerns. They'll now meet with legislators to weigh the property rights issues.

"There's a lot of balls up in the air on this one," Garcia said.