Next generation government for The Woodlands Texas - Focus groups for Gap Analysis

The first step of resident input has been completed in a newly established project to determine the next form of government for The Woodlands Texas. As early as 2014, we are legally able to change to a city form of government.This phase of the project was to get feedback from residents for a gap analysis being conducted by the project consultant. Two goals of this phase are in the project plan - (1) See what residents don't know or understand, and (2) determine what are the perceived issues and future needs for effectively governing the community. To do this, residents were divided into two knowledge groups and attendees chosen at random to attend a number of focus groups moderated by the project leader. Focus groups were kept small in size so as to encourage interaction and contribution. The data collected will be sorted out, analyzed, characterized , and then presented back to the community in January to the next focus group workshops and apparently a town hall meeting. You will find a number of issues below related to governing and what seems to be a laundry list of problems as the primary concern on people's minds as we move forward. I may not agree with some of these, but I do believe as many ideas as I can remember should be included. I missed some I am sure, but the idea is to get these out in the open for continued development and thought by residents.  

To get an idea of what has been brought forward in these focus group discussions, here are some of the thoughts from one group.

What is right about our government

There was not much discussion in this area.

(1) Parks and pathways are excellent amenities and are kept clean.

(2) Government looks after the expense of our pools but there are perhaps too many of them and some tax dollars support their use.

(3) We are not part of Houston or Conroe (implied,not stated explicitly)

(4) Inclusion of residents in Parks department and policing strategies by government staff
(5) The Fire Dept is a fire class service.
(6) The policing force has improved and is now one of the best around.
(7) Excellent delivery of information to residents, beyond that required by the Open Records law of Texas 

Gaps

(1) Residents cannot influence decisions about land use. This is no longer a community of large land blocks to be developed except in the Village of Creekside Park. In the other villages, development is typically near and around existing residences or businesses. Residents have been demanding input for years, but go unheard and then with empty promises of inclusion into the process. As the remaining development properties within the villages are sold, residents do not want to have surprises and new establishments that seem to alter the master plan, with lack of controls such as noise, presentation and  privacy expectations that affect the quality of life by taxpayers. 

(2)  Local taxes for the benefit of local needs are managed by separate entities, some of which reach outside of the territorial jurisdiction of The Woodlands, with even differing strategies of management. Lack of centralized control of tax dollars is a gap, especially for county wide taxation based on property values. The county commissioners conduct their meetings on local issues in Conroe, and those decisions are integrated with other county areas. Management for a town of 90,000 should be from within the community and integrated with this community's priorities and needs, not managed by an external entity. This tax domain primarily consists of road maintenance, law making, courts, policing and jail. Governing must be equal and apply to all parts of the county equally due to the legal restraints on spending of taxpayer money.

(3)  There are no controls for noise pollution other than county laws which are designed for rural areas. County rules, regulations and guidelines are applied to stop signs, speed limits, signs, traffic noise, dogs barking, and other very common municipal issues within the territory of The Woodlands. The lack of ordinance power prevents The Woodlands from controlling its quality of life. It forces the community to accept rural conditions within the bounds of large densely populated area. 

(4) There is not an effective way to interact with the Board of Directors as a whole. That is prevented by the current structure and method of government. There is no area representation on the Board of Directors and there is only a one way communication in meetings. Every taxpayer should be provided equal amenities and quality of community life. The village representation at meetings has failed to accomplish the original intent of Village liaisons. It is too weak a link to the board of directors. However, the Village Associations themselves need to be preserved and provide the social aspect of our community in the way they have traditionally served.  All taxpayers are not represented by members of the board in the current government/political environment.

(5)  Our local government has no control over the roads and streets. County and state regulations control and their funds maintain them. The placing or removal of a stop sign, the timing of lights, speed limits, design, and all related matters are in the hands of the county and state where a resident has much less influence. In contrast, our local government maintains the paths which must cross those streets and the master plan which includes easy, flowing pedestrian is sometimes impeded by actions on these roads. Noise on the roads impact the quality of life for several blocks adjoining the main roads. Some residents are thinking that we should re-evaluate the widening of the roads. Governing this issue is ineffective.

(6) Our parks for the most part are clean, but some are not. Trash is brought in and left in the parks and sometimes in the water of some of our parks apparently by outside visitors. This situation needs to be governed, perhaps by control of use.

(7) Residents do not participate in government elections sufficiently. There is a knowledge and interest gap. It appears we continue to have an educational issue or more probably are still plagued by government complexity. It takes years to get educated to a comfort level on local issues, while many people move in and out of the community. Before this government was established, all residents had a say in politics and community decisions. Additionally, demographics have been changing dramatically. We now have entire blocks where many residents have no ability to vote, because of the citizenship voting law. This problem did not exist before this new government, because all residents had a say in their government. No board member represents these people and they have no say who governs them.

(8) Managing and encouraging homes to be purchased instead of rented as a business plagues the community. Residents prefer to have resident owners as neighbors instead of renters who rarely participate in government or have an interest in the local systems. They become users and part of the problem while no one represents the home at the polls. This is apparently a growing problem and not governed in any way.

(6) There is no governing of imposed tax dollars. Instead, taxes are governed by percentage of home value. Although the economy continues to have low inflation, some home owners have huge tax increases and therefore significant inflation. Salary does not keep up with home inflation. This affects long term residents the most. It is assumed that the value of a house should be the taxed by a cap on percentage of value instead of tax dollars. This gives the government more money. Residents are more than concerned about this, but it is not governed. 

(7) The DSC is a critical part of the fabric of the community, yet members on this committee are appointed by the Board of Directors. There remains representation by the development company. The RDRC boards of each village are elected to position, but the DSC sometimes overrides the decisions by those boards. This creates a gap in governing. Perhaps a solution would be to place this function in the hands of the people and let there be an elected association to manage restrictions.

(8)  This government has evolved into a business-centric group of directors who are imposing past and present decisions of the development company and the prior Town Center government officials who were appointed, on the residents. There is a hesitancy to consider candidates who have other ideas for various reasons. Incumbents are the preferred choice of the very few voters who go to the polls. This seems to be the cause of the continued frivolous spending of tax dollars and lack of home owner buy-in to the business community role in the spending of tax dollars. Governing Town Center activities, plans and role in the community remains with the development company. 90,000 residents need to have a say in the development of the entire Woodlands now. These people live here and many of them work here. Governing the use of land is a huge gap as we move forward. There continues to be negative neighborhood impact by development decisions. One such recent example is a cemetery in close proximity to a residential neighborhood. When are we ever going to get a master community plan to manage? The gap is that the local government does not have land use controls.    

Future Challenges

(1) Peripheral development of business and housing. ExxonMobil brings a larger number of people to the area in a relatively short time. Development along the new parkway and other peripheral areas will bring considerable competition for tax dollars and housing. Rental properties could increase in our community as older homes sell. Traffic could rise and the quality of life decrease if not governed. Development to our north will bring Houston closer to us. New development will outclass technology here in The Woodlands, especially "green technology". So there is a perceived related threat to home value and taxation demands by our government.

( 2) Traffic in general will rise as our roads continue to absorb traffic passing through The Woodlands, as a conduit between new development to the west and south from I45. Governing the use of roads and related noise/vibration  is a considerable challenge. The quality of life here needs to be protected.

(3) Managed affordable taxation for the residents

(4) Resident participation as volunteers. There is less opportunity than in the past to participate in government. Growing replacement or new volunteers is an issue. There is less opportunity than in the past to learn how the governing processes work, how issues are addressed and how decisions on the budget are made.

(5) Developing transparency of the development company as a governing body. It makes decisions for residents and has the master plan that is not visible. Residents want transparency now. The master plan appears to change whenever the development company wants it to. It is time to stop that behavior, or it is time to open it up so that residents buy into it and have confidence in decisions and not feel constantly threatened.

(6) Getting resident buy-in/influence in decision making. This could be related to just getting the vote out. Current government makes decisions based on the ideas and thought processes of a very few. There seems to be little conferring with residents on the issues.  

Need to protect      

(1) Unique feel of The Woodlands

(2) High quality of our schools

(3) Forest including trees, undergrowth and wildlife. Seems to be a gap in protecting our wildlife.

(4) Parks and pathways

(5) Residential standards

(6) Managed traffic flow (a county service)

(7) Volunteer system - inclusion of residents

Missing items

I can think of a couple of additional things not mentioned but very relevant to the future governance model. One is water. We are taxed based on bonds for wells. Newer MUD districts have a much larger debt than the older ones in general. I see a financial issue associated with consolidating all the MUD districts together now but we may want to do that in 10-15 years. We face significant issues with water in the future, and there are issues with the governance model related to these issues.

On the positive side, we have excellent senior staff in government, most which transferred from the associations. This was not discussed in our focus group. 

In our current governing model, we cannot annex peripheral areas. This was mentioned, but I don't believe it ever made it to the gap analysis data. To be able to manage our current territory domain, we need to be able to have the sales tax income generated by nearby businesses. There needs to be flexibility to annex areas, especially to our west.

Our fire department is certainly a very good one, but we do not need to be top of the class in firefighting capability. We need better leverage surrounding departments. Our goals should not be to be the best in every class of service but to be as good or better in some of them, with a manageable and affordable budget. Budget must be governed better than it is. 

The exercise itself did not ask for feedback but did ask for questions. That bothered me a bit. When I asked a few of the people leaving what they thought of it, I got some good feedback that should have been gathered in the meeting itself. However, I believe this was very worthwhile and am anxious to see the results from other focus groups. I wish they too would be published, but I do not yet have my hands on any documentation. I understand someone else has done some documentation though. The project manager seemed a little anxious about that, because I believe he wants it all to be presented as a processed presentation rather than delivering the sound bytes that were collected. 

---

Election 2010 Apathy and Politics - Randy's opinion

I have heard various accounts of what happened on May 8th. Each one has its merits. However, most skirt the real issues by just calling the turnout “apathy”. One person characterized the 92% no-show as the "shame of America". From what I observed, the lack of turnout has numerous reasons that could collectively be called apathy. Many residents here believe the local government is complicated and beyond their available time and effort. Why vote on something that you don’t really understand, especially when things seem to be OK? We have had this problem ever since I moved here and long before. Apathy is just “leave it to the others to determine”.  If anything has changed since we became a township, we have a much better voting turnout than we did before, but the quality of the turnout may not have been so great. The turnout in my precinct was probably the highest ever, but not good enough to make a difference.

I’ve heard this question - "who knows what is right anyway?" And in some cases - "I don't even know what directors do! Do they have job descriptions?" Then there is the other simple perspective - "I go vote for someone I know, but I have no idea what the issues are. I trust the person, not the words." Personally, I understand both viewpoints. As a voter, I have been in both places. Circumstances around an election can create a feeling of ignorance to many and discourage people from coming to the polls, but that does not adequately describe what happened.

There were basic politics not too difficult to understand in this election. One candidate sought his position through one issue, thinking that issue was significant enough to get attention, and his solution would get him a position on the board. Nope. That does not generally work. The public was leery. Crime and policing seemed overstated anyway. There were other candidates who did not clearly set themselves apart from the incumbents; change is usually needed to take a position away from an incumbent. My team thought we had a good shot at Robb, because of his attendance and voting history, along with a solid issue platform which would have retained the waterway strategies of TCID for tourism and commercial expansion, but at a much lower cost. None of that seemed to matter, as it turned out, due to apathy and personal loyalty. Then there was a third person who entered the contest the same day as I did. She was endorsed by what I call the “anti” group of people. I am not an anti-establishment type of person; I am just a resident who wants to have an affordable quality lifestyle. I know how to get it done and why one needs to do it. The fourth candidate was not seriously running, so he was not on our radar.

It is tough for the working resident to sort out the issues and be able to make an informed decision on them. In this election, the voter had significant information provided by The Villager and the League of Women Voters, in addition to candidate websites and literature paid for by candidates, but many residents were not even aware of them. Unfortunate to challengers, the safe position for many voters is to vote for incumbents. After all, they have the "insights" into how things are run and have a great deal of knowledge and contacts, right?  Actually - wrong! Can you blame the voters? Yet there could be significant consequences from that attitude. Status quo through incumbent support eventually leads to a decay of living quality and lost opportunities for improvement. In this case, leaving it to others holds fast to the commercial-centric doctrine in lieu of residential needs. Consequences of this doctrine are not seen for the moment, but when the time comes, they will become evident. Then it is too late. Remember the stock market? Despite all the communication attempts, our residents generally remain an uninformed public.

Leaders of the community have a job to do in order to get more voters to participate, but that would not serve them well. They need to educate the public in a way that is clear and short, not in the terms of those seeking deep understanding, but that is not going to happen. Many of us question the status quo, but many also defend it as a safety net. A candidate's challenge is to gain voter confidence, so that the voter will truly listen. I understand that. I dealt with it daily when I was trying to describe my position on issues during the election. The more depth one wants to know, the more difficult it becomes to get the point across. The bottom line is that the public wants to elect candidates it can trust to make the right decisions for it, never mind the issues. That becomes the psychology of endorsements. What I call "limelight advertising" is reality in the eyes of many. Focus on the people around the candidate instead of the person. That hides the candidate's capabilities and presents an image rather than a person. It is also a social issue, blinding to the eyes of those who are not interested in local issues. It takes the common resident to vote in order to make a difference.

I felt most issues were simple rather than the reverse. Spending too much, wasteful spending, the need to have better alternative and contract selection criteria, the need to measure better, and last but perhaps more important than anything else, the absolute need for a director to tend to the business of the township instead of being absent from decision discussions and voting. Some people argued that work conducted behind the scenes of the township board meetings was more important than attendance at board meetings. I strongly disagree. Government should be transparent and arguments visible to the public. Otherwise those working in the invisible background should not claim any responsibility for successes. The evidence of performance is at the board meeting when one discusses a proposal and casts a vote. That participation could also be evident in open discussions with the public, but that is rarely seen in local politics. We do have town hall meetings for this purpose, but they are not sufficiently leveraged to affect many projects. Hot resident issues can be heard at these meetings, but they are not very frequently discussed with residents. I conclude that the Board of Directors remains a closed door operation to most of us, with political influence constantly used to gain support for individual ideas and perspectives behind the scenes. As long as that happens, we lack diversity in decision making, and our money is inadvertently channeled into pet projects. That was evident in the strategic planning exercise. Residents were not invited to participate in those proceedings, but the budget is justified on the outcome of that process.

So what happened out there on the 8th? I witnessed three groups of residents. (1) Those who feel like they don't have sufficient exposure to the government in The Woodlands or have no interest in local issues. These folks normally do not vote in local elections. This group constitutes at least 50% of the registered voters. (2) Family life comes first - hey it was Saturday. During the early voting there were homework assignments, getting home late, leaving early, and the old 50+-hour work week. No time for voting. This group is also very large and comprises most of the remaining 92% no-shows. (3) The voters – 8% of the registered voters who are oftentimes die-hard Americans, involved in local issues, appreciating the opportunity to speak out, and selecting the candidates who they deem best to serve the community. They are exercising their American privilege to choose.

In the 8% who did vote, I can think of six categories. (1) Status quo - give me an incumbent. I am afraid to change; (2) First on the ballot; (3) Loyalty: I know the person, have organizational ties, or I am from the candidate’s village; (4) Name recognition: I have heard of the person; (5) Issue-centric: based on ideals, desire for change, or values; and (6) Duty:  I am supposed to vote. Research often occurs at the polling location for these people. I believe the majority of the 8% group did their homework and were prepared to cast their ballot on arrival at the polls, but most of them voted personal loyalty for at least one candidate. If one looks at the voting demographics, I suspect the median age of voters was very high relative to the median age of the registered voter community.

What did the candidates do to get voters to the polls and vote for them? Money buys votes. There is no doubt about it. With money, you can also claim about anything you want. You have name broadcasting power. You can buy the biggest, the most, and the labor to get your message to the population. If you are an incumbent, you can claim virtually anything that went right when you occupied the position, to be your personal accomplishment. If you did not vote against it in an open meeting, then you are safe. You can also buy a following of people. If you have organizational power, you can influence your people's role and support from within the organization, including financial support.

Standing out in the hot sun earns votes. Being the last voice or image a voter sees before going into the voting booth is highly valued by the candidates. Being on location to greet them is appreciated by voters. I guess that depends though. I felt that the “hawking” done by candidates at the early convenience election location was frankly distasteful. Many voters chose not to be bothered and parked where campaigners were not allowed. The hawking had no value in attracting voters to the polls, but possibly helped to persuade them to cast their votes for some candidates. I was one of the few who preferred to go house to house and ask people to come out and vote. Calling friends brings loyal supporters to the polls. Going door-to-door educates the public. A personal “please vote” goes a long way.

Some of the things I heard occurring behind the scenes of this election made me bristle. Politics are not exactly ethical, you know. Candidates can be ethical, but their people may not. Signs were stolen out of yards for example under the cover of darkness in apparent attempts to remove advertising of targeted candidates. There were even reports of coerced contributions of skilled labor. Some activities by “supporters” disappointed me and some advertisement falsehoods disappointed me. There was no avenue to contest those claims except to spend more money.

In this election, residents were blasted by propaganda in every media possible. Many did not want to be blasted, so they turned it all off, throwing away the newspapers, and not answering or ignoring the calls. I heard "enough already" several times. I sure felt that way myself. "Another d*^# call from a machine!" How is it that a candidate can use a machine to call your home numerous times when you are on the national no-call list anyway? Is that ethical? Is it breaking the law? Also, why would anyone call from a church when that is against IRS regulations? Why did I get a call from Tommy Williams? Why did I get a call from Kevin Brady? Politicians were actually advertising themselves on someone else's campaign contributions. Maybe robo calls should have said "This has been a paid political advertisement for Tommy Williams and Ed Robb by the campaign committee for Ed Robb."  Why would anyone spend so much money anyway for a non-paying job? Ego? Issue? Ideal? Fun? Experience? Why? I am a voter and a stakeholder in this government, so I ask these questions. Don’t you? What is the motivation and why do certain political figures want to have a certain candidate in office, especially in light of that person’s past performance? Some people have connected the dots and made their own calculated conclusions.  Advertising can be informative and appreciated, but the repeated immersing of people in it is not.

Personally, I had one reason to run for office. I believe what has occurred on the board is not exactly right. That was exemplified by the all out campaign spending to maintain control of the waterway spending strategies and other projects. I bet there were some people who would have raised $100,000 and spent it, if they thought that was necessary to reach their goal. I draw parallels with the spending of our taxes. That leads me to think there is big money in getting all those people into office. Doesn’t it to you?

Look back at who endorsed the candidates and start asking yourself some of these questions. Politics here appears to run much deeper than any concerns about The Woodlands itself. Those currently in office are not suspected of neglecting township business in my mind, but I know the job can be done better at a lower cost. Government watch groups are chasing the money trails to check if there is foul play with money. They believe through those connections that we have an under-the-rug political machine operating here. They insinuate that some of the people on the board have personal agendas. The suspicion is raised to a much higher level when one looks under the umbrella of endorsements and favors. It is not about the quality of living in The Woodlands.  One person compared it to Chicago. That was because of the apparent money trail and endorsements. Well, let's see, a church where candidacy was announced from the pulpit without equal time to others (perception: my organization, I can do what I want). This raised the question of church vs. state in the minds of many. If one would compare the voting records against the church's membership role, some say the outcome would be obvious. I do not plan to conduct that study, but perhaps some organization or watchdog group should.

I have heard these thoughts from several sources, some from activists and others from long time residents. Several people say they are afraid to speak out, because they fear that they will not be heard in other matters, or their business relationships would be impaired. Influence and power drive them to be quiet. I am not one of them. My strategy is open and much easier to understand. We need to focus on one thing here – Be a great place to affordably live, that serves the entire family and community. Everything else takes a back seat.

For me, my values stand with those who originally came here, who developed the feeling of a hometown, those who walked to the store, even at night to get a gallon of milk for breakfast, in the darkness of the tall tree shadows. That is the way it was when I moved here, and that is the way I seek it to be in the future. Some people say we should not be out at night. Bah humbug. Quality and security is not defined in that way. Quality is defined and measured within certain focus points, namely safety, amenities, mobility, pollution, affordability, services, livable homes and our natural forest. Excellence in mobility gives us the complete freedom to move about anytime of the day or night. If you make the place not livable, then it is not the community we have known with the advertised values seen in marketing.

Residents missed an opportunity to make a difference on May 8^th.  Other opportunities will come along as life goes on. My hummingbirds returned to the yard five days after the election; I am going to double the number of grandchildren this year with my son’s announcement on Election Day. Yes, there are better things to do, but I do want to thank my supporters for their confidence in me.  A person can only offer to help. Some force it down the public. I will not. The community will likely continue to flourish but at a higher price than necessary. It will be a community of distinction, but maybe not one of quality. We continue to grow, but we are beginning to see deterioration, and we are only two years into the township. Now seven directors will manage your tax money. One of them was absent from voting for 37% of the decisions for the past several months. His loyal following and political allies voted for him to be on the board. 92 % of our registered voters remained quiet and allowed that to happen. If you are one of those quiet ones, will you allow it to happen again next year and the year after? What will it take to get you to help drive your own destiny?

How important are volunteers in The Woodlands?

Volunteers have historically been the key to a successful community here in The Woodlands Texas. All governing functions have originated from these residents, some of whom have been elected and others as ad hoc volunteers. With the advent of a taxing authority, we will now be governed by a single volunteer board of elected directors to The Woodlands Township. This only replaces the governing constituents of the associations. There remains the necessity to operate our covenant standards enforcement with resident elected volunteers. There is also the continued need to have village associations with elected residents.

This month, the associations put together a "final" annual celebration for volunteers. Each year, the progress of the community is celebrated in a Christmas party as a "thank you" from the community for the work of volunteers. This is an event always appreciated by the volunteers and has in itself created an atmosphere of willingness to serve in our community. This year we had a live band but normally we have a DJ to play music. Those who I have talked to prefer the DJ over the live band due to of the variety of music and lack of dead time when the live entertainment takes a break. Many people decided to leave when the band took its break this year. Also the the service company staff always comes to this meeting and dance, and they enjoy the evening alongside the volunteers. Since we all work together throughout the year, this is a perfect event to cap off the year.

So I ask, is this the last of this type of celebration? Have we matured into something less hometown? I hope not. The community derives a great deal of benefit by the teamwork demonstrated in every meeting and event through the year. Maybe the Township can find this type of event useful to keep costs down and encourage continued resident participation in hometown activities beyond the village events. This tradition will be sorely missed by those who have grown to appreciate the contributions of fellow volunteers. We have tradition. I hope this was not the last of these year-end celebrations.

Woodlands Township 2010 Budget Public Hearings

---

As we take each step towards the first budget for the township, more residents are waking up to the opportunity to influence the outcome. Last night, the public hearing at The Woodlands Emergency Center proved to be a more informed, more aware, less emotional group than the previous town hall meeting on the same subject. Assimilation of the budget by more residents is producing more interest by people without political agendas, such as incorporation. To some people incorporation is the solution to all issues, but ask those who live in cities and see what they say. When the time is appropriate, we will consider incorporation, bringing to the table the pros and cons of following that path. One person at the meeting last night even volunteered to go to the City of Houston and renegotiate the agreement with that city to incorporate The Woodlands before 2014. This is supposed to fix our "policing problem".

In all reality, we do not have such a problem. The Woodlands is a safe place, but it is now an urban community that will have crime regardless if it is a city or not.

So putting the political aspect aside and just looking at the issues of the budget, many of the residents and board members are taking a fresh look at it. Don Norrell presented a fresh view of the same budget but this time had an alternative financial proposal that was discussed with the Sheriff's office. It is doable and in my opinion, the preferred alternative. I believe The Woodlands as a whole welcomes the redistricting proposal and wishes to act independently from the county which has significant budget issues this year and probably next year as well, limiting what we can do. That is, I believe we want to get on with it and fund what is required so that we have our own district with supplemental contracted deputies in 2010, not wait until 2011 and not have a phased approach to reach that vision. One of the suggestions in Mr. Norrell's alternative is to discontinue the patrol contracts with Shenandoah and Oak Ridge. Instead, use those ($0.5mm) funds for the extra $1.5mm dollars required to implement the project at the beginning of 2010. It was suggested that the remaining funds come from other undetermined projects that would be deferred by one year.

The trend of thought seems to cap the budget as it has been proposed, at 32.8 cents per $100 evaluation. It appears that the board asked to keep it there. That is a reasonable approach to me but we should be conscious of the public view of the budget and make adjustments to mitigate their (our) concerns.

The other project which needs adjustment is the Indian Springs fire station. Indian Springs is a mature village, now completed for quite some time. Many of the homes in the village were built in the 1990's. For five years, the plan has been to build a fire station for the village in 2010. That seemed like eternity as residents watched the service continuously decay as the traffic increased on Gosling and The Woodlands Parkway. The eastern side is served by station #2 at Research Forest and Gosling, so the trucks must deal with the congestion to reach the village. The response averages about 8 minutes. The maximum average of most fire fighting units is 5 minutes, that recommended by the insurance standards board (ISO). The current ISV level is not acceptable. In the proposed budget, the station is scheduled to be built in 2011. That means the village station remains in the long range plan. Another way to look at it is: the station has been delayed in favor of one in a developing village. Since the budget item has been scheduled by the WCA for years, the transition agreement has faulted on a critical service level. Therefore, we see this as a problem related to the 2010 transition to a new government. We would likely have a fire station in 2010 since the WCA and TWA acted independently on their projects. Last night, I was there to represent the concerns of Rush Haven residents. There were also residents from Trace Creek subdivision who have a similar service response. They also are concerned along with the entire ISV village board.

Personally, I was pleased to at least see the township board receiving and considering resident concerns. More than that, I was pleased to see the president of the Township working the residents' issues. That gives us all some hope and tells us that it is worthwhile to attend and provide our opinions and input to the board. I thank the chair person, Mrs Nelda Blair for being very patient with everyone. A great deal of passion was expressed, whether just perception or real, about the service levels of policing and the priorities in the budget.

Hopefully the board will realign budget priorities to meet the expressed needs of the community.

Decison-making in The Woodlands - part 1

I have been saying for a while that I have a position which calls for due process in our decision making. It is time to explain that a little. My background as a professional project manager makes me more aware of this matter than many people, yet most residents understand this conceptually. I call the core of the value presented in due process, with respect to our money, "capital stewardship".

When we elect a public official, we elect them as stewards of capital, whether it be the budget of the Township, the Association, county, MUD district, school district, or state. But capital is not always measured in dollars either. We give stewardship to individuals to maintain the value of our homes through home and property maintenance standards as well when we elect RDRC residents.

Our expectations are that those who are given stewardship in our governments, assume responsibility for their decisions and become accountable for them, as if it were their own money.

Now I would like to put this in the context of project management. Project management is an organized means to dutiful stewardship. Some people mistake the term to mean "on time and on budget", but that is a totally false perception. It means taking responsibility for all the decisions from beginning to end, which minimizes risk to stakeholders and which provides the right deliverables to the right customers at the right cost at the right time. I can go into this at great depth, but only want to get the bare essentials out in the open at this time.

Sometimes projects are defined from the wrong direction. The solution (or deliverable) defines the problem. You will see what I mean when we discuss incorporation of The Woodlands at a later date. Project management is a process which needs to begin with a clear and relative definition of some problem or issue. If I don't see that clearly defined and I hear about solutions, it immediately raises a red flag to me. "It is a solution looking for a problem."

Projects provide value. If the value is not defined and cannot be compared to the value of another project, our capital is not being managed. One cannot manage if there is no perception of relative value. Without value, there can be no investment. Investments yield returns and before one goes to spend our money, they must tell us the value of their proposal.

So we have defined two critical parts of a project proposal - definition and value. They may seem obvious, but I have seen them forgotten several times in my lifetime. A proposal goes much deeper than these two items of course. There are actually 6 phases of a project. I will tell you about those in another article.

Residents' Value System

Article modified 11-14-08 to include readers comments provided here and in email. 

Ongoing governance series in this blog: 
1. The Road to Governance - short description of the process 
2. Governance in a Nutshell - list of issues and thoughts about those issues 
3. Governance September Forum - my take on the public forum in September 
4. Meet the TCID Board - provided by each member of the TCID board for us to meet 
5. Panel Discussion- Discussion of the issues 
6. The Decision
7. Congratulations to The Woodlands
8. Value System for May Election - a process of determination. This article!
9. Candidates' qualifications and map into the value system. Meet the candidates!
10. And my vote  is .... and why
11. Election news
12. Election Results - what is the prognosis from here?
12. Look back on what happened. Did we do the right thing? Scheduled to be published in 2009.

The residents of The Woodlands need to be thinking about what agenda and platform they would like to see in the five elected representatives on the TCID board. The election in May will be here faster than a speeding bullet! Already we have two candidates announcing their intent to run for available positions. Both of them are on the current board. These two candidates' terms end in May, and they want to be among those who determine our present and future. This article addresses only our value system, not any specific candidates, nor any projects. Those will be articles for the near future. This is authored in the hope that we generate a wise  comparative frame from which to choose candidates. Each candidate can have different strengths and weaknesses, but the combined elected group should be a working team. If there is a left hand, there should also be a right hand. To understand the team, we also need to review the qualifications and characteristics of those who will remain on the board until 2010.

I am looking at this in two ways which tie together-

1) What systemic values (click) do we as residents want to guard and what other values do we need to promote? (this article)

2) What is the candidates' position or inclination to act on these values?

Measuring a candidate:

This is a starter for the measuring table in my mind, for which I am beginning to write:

Considerations	Candidate 1
Supporting resident values that make our community unique (value system above)	Takes a stand on the values presented above. We know where the candidate stands relative to our local values system
Personal style of leadership	i.e., presents an example, get things done, asks questions before leaping to conclusions, walks the talk,  ...
"Teamsmanship"	Works well with others, not a loner. Encourages credit for the team
Integrity	Walks the talk, does what what has been promised in concert with the support of others.
Communicative	Keeps public aware of major issues and stand on issues, not secretive or protective in spirit
Inclusive behavior	Shares ideas, concerns, responsibility for decisions
Independent and creative thinking	Not afraid to speak out for or against ideas or actions. Is considered a credible resource for ideas and solutions.
Appreciates and leverages the diversity of people and customs	Understands and verbalizes, when appropriate, that not everyone sees the world the same for many reasons. Openly shows respect for others and willingness to listen regardless of race, creed, or ethnic background.

 

Value System 

I am noting my values here as a starter. These are probably incomplete and certainly not intended to be prioritized (yet). Other residents  may have different value systems than I, but they may not be all that different. I am inviting residents to contribute their ideas so that I can include them in this blog. You can express yourself openly as blog comments or privately via email (click).  I am turning off the blog moderation process for this topic. This article addresses only item #1 above. It forms a framework around which we can determine candidates to be fit to govern us or not. If the candidates do not support our values, how can we possibly put them into office? I believe this is a significant part of the measuring stick for the elections.

I value these amenities:
a. Fishing on a pond or a lake. Kayaking without interference from motor boats. 
b. Walking and running the dog 
c. Running and biking on the trails safely 
d. Swimming in a neighborhood pool 
e. Seeing a vast amount of trees and natural vegetation everywhere I go - the living forest!
f. Enjoying wildflowers in spring and throughout the year 
h. Seeing fireflies, butterflies, resident birds, migratory birds, squirrels, Coyotes, Deer, Hummingbirds, Bald Eagles, Raccoons and other small creatures living in and passing through the forest. The food supply, control of pesticides and many other conditions contribute to their health and presence.
i. Hearing the birds sing. Hearing silence, especially at night. 
j. Having constructive, recreational activities for our children so they are raised to appreciate the world about them. 
k. Safe roads with safe drivers so our family and friends are not maimed in our neighborhoods.
l. Village activities - social gatherings and local projects shared by neighbors.

These values are supported by the following:

1. Assets to protect. For these I pay my association assessments.
   a. Forest. Save as many trees as possible. Reforest as much as possible. Control the vines and continue to keep the trees healthy. See if we can better control the spread of disease and not lose so many of our large pines. Enforce the tree cutting regulations better. 
   b. Paths. Continue to build and expand as we go forward with build-out of the community. Occasionally remove algae and mold. Keep them safe enough to jog, walk and ride bikes.
   c. Parks. Maintain them, improve them, protect them. Park Rangers are a big help to this end.
   d. Recreational areas - keep them close enough so that the kids can walk to them and clean enough for health and safe havens for summertime family fun. Subsidize them if need be, but do not make all families carry the cost burden for just a few people. 
   e. Ponds and lakes - keep the bodies of water supporting ecosystems that include fish and maintain the chemistry and vegetation around and in them, enough so that our dogs can drink the water without us being paranoid about it.
   f. Roads - keep and add to the trees alongside and in the median of major streets. Occasionally remove the algae and mold.
   g. Buildings and other assets- sufficient office space and class space to support educating residents in the sensible ways of living in the forest and promoting a diverse and healthy natural ecology. Keep The Woodlands a place for us to be proud to live and play. The Pavilion and Convention centers are important components  of The Woodlands; the Convention Center is also important.
   h. Others-  almost everything the Park and Recreation dept has is valued by residents. How about the garden plots? They were created to encourage residents to not kill trees in favor of gardening! A garden needs a lot of light that is not available in a thick forest.
2. Services to safeguard. For these I pay my association assessments.
   a. Excellent fire fighting and emergency services
   b. Around the clock police protection and traffic control
   c. Park Ranger patrols
   d. Neighborhood Watch
   e. Enforcement of deed restrictions
   f. Village Associations
   g. Garbage and trash pickup - we need to expand recycling practices and provide an option to residents for added recycling pickup.
3.  Environment to protect and improve - this is why I live here
   a. Air - we must consider the air we breathe as a very important part of our environment. With added traffic on our main arteries, we are polluting the air, so it is worthwhile to understand the effects of  the traffic on our health. We must keep a watchful eye the air for contaminants.
   b. Water - we must monitor and report the condition of the water that our children, animals and ourselves play in, especially the ponds and lakes.
   c. Sound - if we cannot appreciate our values through site and sound, we do not have some significant amenities that we value. Road noise, truck air horn blasts, truck vibrations, garbage truck pickup trucks, delivery trucks, motorcycles are all sound nuisances. Managing that which we hear is highly important. 
   d. Sight - in public places and along our roads, we should see the forest, the animals, not big buildings, nor shopping centers, nor concrete and steel, nor signs, nor trash.  
   e. Smell -  the forest has its own smell. Let's keep it that way. No pot along the walkways or in shopping centers or any other foul smelling drugs or garbage in public areas.
4. Finances to manage with wise strategies- it costs money to have what we value.
   a. Tax rates and appropriations - appropriate and prudent financials is a requirement for governing. Many of us can afford to have the amenities we demand but are willing to forego some amenities that are not valued so highly. The whole of The Woodlands is for the good part of the parts, and the parts are for the good of the whole. Do not be over thrifty nor be spending unwisely. Our thrifty household finances are expected to be honored by the governing body but at the same time, we expect the money to be used to obtain the goals we set out to meet.
   b. Debts - we do not want to be a community of large long term debt. We need to be nimble in what we finance, but also need to be in a position to do what we need to do when the opportunity arises. I see projects in the villages down the road a bit. We will have certain debts at the onset and of course must include that base as we go forward.
   c. Partnering with the development company - we need to include the development company as a partner in these values. The ability of a candidate to work with the development company to achieve our goals is imperative. 
   d. Partnering with contractors - we need to continue to write and execute contracts with our values in mind. Performance of contracts must include the strict adherence to our value system.
5. Desired personal qualities of an elected official - we want excellence on the leadership team. We expect it at work, in school and now in government.
   a. Has integrity - does what the candidate promises and is guided by a known value system. This provides the residents with a template of reasonable performance expectations by  the candidate, as a representative of the residents.
   b. Creative thinker - does not rely totally on the ideas of others.
   c. Questions direction, consistence of purpose. Seeks to understand the concepts before supporting or rejecting proposals.
   d. Practical - seeks solutions that are financially prudent and can be accomplished within a reasonable time.
   e. Strategic thinker - sees into the future with long term goals and makes/supports plans accordingly.
   f. Listens to the residents, speaks for them instead of to them. Understands that residents are also very astute on important matters and often are closer to the issues than the candidate.