Houston Chronicle Sunday

The Woodlands incorporat­ion advocates haven’t made their case

- ERICA GRIEDER Commentary

There’s an old saying, “Politics makes strange bedfellows.” That’s certainly the case in The Woodlands, where voters in this master-planned community of nearly 120,000 will go to the polls on Tuesday and decide whether to retain their status as as the state’s only township or incorporat­e and become a city.

“The question I’m hearing over and over from residents and business owners alike is ‘Why?’ ” said Montgomery County Commission­er Precinct 3 James Noack, a conservati­ve who lives in The Woodlands and opposes incorporat­ion, on Friday. “Why would we want to do this in the first place? Who wants this?”

“It’s our opportunit­y for our residents to take control of our community,” counters Gordy Bunch, the longtime chair of the township’s board, on Saturday. He added: “It’s not doom and gloom to be self-governed — unless you fear your neighbors, which I don’t.”

Supporters of the ballot measure include several township board members, including Bunch, as well as the Texas Patriots PAC, the tea party organizati­on for Montgomery County and north Houston.

An array of business, political, and civic leaders have come out against the measure, including Noack; The Woodlands Chamber of Commerce; the Montgomery County Hispanic Chamber; the Howard Hughes Corp., which acquired The Woodlands Developmen­t Co. a decade ago and owns much of the undevelope­d land; U.S. Rep. Kevin Brady, a Republican; and George’s Coffee Club, a civic group named for George Mitchell, the billionair­e, oilman and visionary who founded the township in 1974.

The civic group noted that it doesn’t make public statements on political matters, but had to make an exception in this case.

“In this unique situation the vast majority of club members feel so strongly that there simply are too many unanswered questions at this point in time to

support incorporat­ion now,” the members explained in a statement.

Caught in between these unusual coalitions are the voters of The Woodlands, who have been blanketed with slickly produced flyers arguing against incorporat­ion. Many remain confused by the question and the fact that it's being posed right now — in an off-year, during a pandemic, and in response to a problem that may exist, but hasn't been specified, exactly.

Incorporat­ion held a lot of appeal for years to township residents, especially after the city of Houston swooped in and annexed Kingwood 25 years ago. The reasoning was that incorporat­ion would serve as a bulwark against annexation by Houston, 30 miles to the south, or Conroe, to the north. But that threat has been allayed by agreements with both of those cities, as well as laws passed by the Republican­controlled Texas Legislatur­e that basically say no community — read,

The Woodlands — can be annexed without the consent of its residents.

Proponents of incorporat­ion say that annexation is not the issue anyway. They argue this is about local control in the face of ongoing developmen­t that could fundamenta­lly change the nature of the community, which the Chronicle described in 2014 as “a meticulous­ly planned community nestled in pine trees that's part well-kept neighborho­ods and part gleaming skyscraper­s.” It boasts an outdoor performing arts center, a thriving Market Street shopping district and man-made canals.

“The Township can't address these threats, but the City of The Woodlands can,” says the Texas Patriots PAC on its website.

And, according to supporters, incorporat­ion wouldn't cost residents a thing: rather than contractin­g with Montgomery and Harris Counties for core services such as law enforcemen­t and road maintenanc­e, the new city could simply pay for those things itself, without higher taxes (a companion ballot measure would set a maximum property tax rate of 22.31 cents per $100 of valuation, where it currently stands).

“If Woodlands residents vote to become a city, taxes won't go up and government won't grow,” asserted Dr. Shelly SekulaGibb­s, a township board member who supports incorporat­ion, in a September letter to residents. She also said the move would give residents more control over roads and developmen­t and prevent clear-cutting of trees.

COVID-19 funds have also become an issue. In June, the township board hired a $50,000-a-month lobbying firm, based in Washington, D.C., to make the case for federal COVID relief funds — after failing to secure them from the county or the state. Bunch argues that The Woodlands, given its population, would be due some $30 million under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, if it were a city

Since The Woodlands is not currently a city, it's hard to assess the claims made by proponents. But some voters are skeptical of the rosy picture they're painting

Township directors are elected, just as mayors and city council members are in regular cities—and the latter still have to contend with leaders at other levels of government.

And consider the COVID funds. Bunch's argument is reasonable, but at odds with other recent developmen­ts in the region. Houston is a city, for example, and we aren't getting a nickel of federal Harvey relief funds under the plan put forth by the state's General Land Office. Seriously, not even a cent! Just because you're a city, in other words, doesn't mean you always get your way — especially with a Texas governor and legislatur­e eager to wrest control of decisions from local leaders.

And critics of incorporat­ion are urging caution, at least, for several reasons. The process would be disruptive. It could involve new costs for residents, depending on which study you believe — and in the event of dueling studies, taxpayers should keep in mind that nothing is free. And once incorporat­ed, The Woodlands would remain a city, rather than the unique township it is today.

“The Chamber considers that this is not the best time for The Woodlands to take a step from which it will not then be able to retreat,” the Montgomery County Hispanic Chamber said in a statement.

Incorporat­ion advocates shouldn't feel overly optimistic heading into Tuesday's election, given that many voters are unclear on what the benefits of incorporat­ing would be.

And voters who are understand­ably confused by the case for incorporat­ion should consider that to be a mark against the idea. As it stands, advocates for incorporat­ion haven't made a dispositiv­e case. If that's indeed the best path forward for The Woodlands, it's an idea that should be put to voters during an even-numbered election year, after a thorough debate.

 ?? ??
 ?? Michael Wyke / Contributo­r ?? Proponents for incorporat­ion of The Woodlands have failed in convincing others it’s the right thing to do.
Michael Wyke / Contributo­r Proponents for incorporat­ion of The Woodlands have failed in convincing others it’s the right thing to do.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States