And 45 Million paid to the City of Houston over 30 years.....
(from Renee C. Lee and Matt Stiles from the Chron)
Voters in The Woodlands could decide as early as next year whether to take the first steps toward self-government under a deal that also would remove the possibility of annexation by Houston, local officials announced Thursday.
(snip)
It also provides the master-planned community of about 84,000 a chance to be a regional player for the first time. Under the agreement, The Woodlands would enter into an economic partnership with the city to fund mutually beneficial regional projects totaling $45 million over time.
Houston Mayor Bill White and state Sen. Tommy Williams, R-The Woodlands, heralded the deal as an example of cooperation between communities that depend on each other.
(snip)
"Decisions should be in the hands of the people most affected, and that would be the people of The Woodlands," White said.
Williams said the proposal is what The Woodlands residents asked for in a recent report that listed the goals they wanted to achieve as they worked toward a new form of governance.
"They wanted to work with Houston, not against it. They wanted to work to maintain their independence and avoid annexation. And they wanted to take action now. I took them at their word," he said.
As a potential future resident of the Woodlands (either that or somewhere in mid-Houston, haven't decided as of yet) I would think this is a good deal for the community. Sure, there's been vocal opposition from Edd Hendee already on KSEV and Lone Star Times is doing their usual job of piling on. And, if you read the comments, you begin to wonder if LST's protestations don't stem from "different" sources:
Rob Eissler was one of the loyal supporters Tommy paraded before the convention in support of Perry’s business income tax last summer. I’m glad the Woodlands has him instead of Crosby. Crabb is bad enough.
$45 Million could be a bargain, if you consider the long term costs of the City of Houston taking control of the Woodlands.
Don't believe me?
Ask Kingwood if they would have taken that deal.
Posts
2 comments:
Cory, my beef with it is that it is blackmail. sign on the dotted line and throw money at us or we will annex. I don't particularly like bullies. The lege may be taking these annexed for limited purpose blackmail deals up this upcoming session and they may just throw a giant monkey wrench into the works.
I don't agree with the way the annexation laws are written either. I think the citizens being annexed should have the most say. NOT the City annexing.
So in that we agree. What I don't agree with are those that are besmirching the politicians who are simply doing their best (under the current system) to ensure the will of their constituents is upheld.
The People going after Williams et. al are grinding the wrong axe IMO.
Unless you want to be like Micheal Berry this morning:
"I don't care what the laws ARE. I'm only concerned about what the laws SHOULD be."
Except that the reality is what the laws are, and that's the environment that the current deal was negotiated under. For the people of The Woodlands trying to change the law may have been too little too late.
Again, ask Kingwood.
Post a Comment