Tag: news

Yes. My back yard is okay.

A profound NIMBY attitude has coalesced in opposition to certain elements of the Envision Taylor comprehensive plan. That opposition is starting to show up on Taylor City Council agendas (just look at item 13 on the current agenda — then consider how this might play out in next week’s joint meeting between the P&Z and the council — right, there’s nothing at that link because the city hasn’t posted anything yet).

I encourage everyone — especially our new council members and candidates — to recall that more than 150 people engaged with the process that wrote a plan that specifically protects the character of this town while also encouraging a conservative, fiscally responsible approach to development. It took more than two years. That’s a lot of work. 

Let’s not forget that it’s primary purpose of this effort was to introduce fiscal responsibility into our land development code, while also letting let folks do what they want with their property within reason. It also helps protect our community from out-of-town, corporate developers who are just looking to make a quick buck before scurrying back to Austin or Houston or Dallas.

As far as I can tell, few if any of our neighbors who most vocally oppose the plan cared enough about the future of our community to participate in those workshops. That includes at least one current member of the council and at least two candidates. Hell, I’m not sure any of our current council candidates attended more than one of those workshops.

I do understand that the NIMBY-ites are loud. And many are active in electoral politics — at least, they are in the background, and likely contribute to local campaigns. But they didn’t care enough to help shape the plan in a way that might have addressed their objections to building condos or townhouses, or breaking up large lots to build smaller homes in the core of our town. Further, they won’t show up to future land use public meetings because they never have and they never will. They just need to wield torches and pitchforks.

Now, while I understand the concerns being raised, it’s not controversial to say that a residential home never pays enough property tax to account for the public services it consumes — and, the larger the lot it sits on, the larger that gap is. A single family home is a tax liability forever. In other words, if we truly care about taxpayers, the city needs to encourage “high density” housing as described above. Not discourage it.

Another quick, but related comment. I’ve heard that a driving force behind trashing our comp plan is that “we’re behind on housing,” and developers say Taylor is difficult to work with and blame the comprehensive plan for this. 

Huh. 

During his State of the City address to the Greater Taylor Chamber of Commerce on Monday, Mayor Ariola told us that more than 900 residential housing units involving at least three developers are currently under construction in Taylor. Further, more than 6,000 units from 15 different developers have already been permitted and are in the pipeline, presumably waiting for interest rates to moderate. Apparently, some developers are just fine with Taylor’s land use code. 

Perhaps the real situation is that corporate developers who plow up farmland to throw up 2x4s and drywall in cookie-cutter neighborhoods, like those we see in Hutto and elsewhere, don’t want to alter their plans to fit our needs. And some of those developers have the ear of some of our candidates, and some on our city council. 

We, as a community, invested a lot of resources into the current plan, a plan that ensures that our development efforts will stretch our tax dollars as far as possible and not saddle us with future tax liabilities. The comp plan — and the land use code it enables — is a conservative, fiscally responsible document. Yes, it is a living document but like all guiding charters, we should approach changes to it with a scalpel, not a chainsaw.

I, for one, am damned proud of the work we did to see that our city gets the biggest possible bang for our tax dollars while protecting the unique character of our town.

• For additional reading on why our current plan is good for Taylor, our economy, our tax base and our overall standard of living, read this.

• Also, I addressed the issue of participation last summer. You will find that commentary here.

Don’t be one of those people who gripe only after all the work is done

This essay began this life on the digital page in response to a recent social media post. But the genesis was in March and April, during the run up to the most recent city elections.

That election turned out to be a referendum on the Envision Taylor Comprehensive Plan, with bike lanes and infill development front and center. The incumbent in one race doubled down on his support. His challenger spent thousands of dollars bashing it. In public, she said she was “familiar” with the plan but was dismissive of the process.

Throughout the campaign, misinformation about the comp plan spread across our local Facebook pages, and into some campaign literature. Various factions used the opportunity to deliberately misrepresent it.

Among the many misrepresentations was one that concerned the process: the city conducted the workshops at inconvenient times and did a poor job of marketing. As a result, too few people participated.

As one who invested months into that project, I found that more than a little insulting. I still do.

While I agree that more people could have participated, one should remember that voter turnout for municipal elections is also pretty poor. Perhaps there’s a correlation.

This position shows a stunning lack of respect for the hard work that citizens of our community put into the new plan, one that was “Taylor Made” and would protect the cultural and historic nature of this town.

That was our charge, and we took it seriously.

Meetings were held over Zoom and in person; in the afternoon, early evening and weekends, beginning as soon as the ‘Rona let up a bit and for the following 18 months or so. It’s true that most had 100, or fewer, people in attendance but more than one or two were standing room only.

The schedules were posted in the expected places and on the appropriate platforms: the paper, the city newsletter, on its website and on all the city social media. The meetings were streamed live on Facebook and the city’s website.

I understand that the sessions were inconvenient for a lot of folks. People will always have more important things to do … like work or care giving or whatever. And I’m not mocking that — those are important things and often cannot be deferred.

I can take the time to attend meetings like this. I’m semi-retired, and given that I’ve followed municipal government professionally for decades, I was motivated. Plus, I’m a public policy nerd.

But, if you didn’t know about the meetings, it’s because you weren’t paying attention. If you couldn’t find the time to attend, whatever the reason, no judgement but that’s on you.

Now, I think it’s great that more people have become more engaged. The more voices at the table, the more likely more people will buy into the results. I hope they stay engaged, but I wonder and here’s why: The same 150-200 citizens show up to virtually every city function I’ve attended over the last 10 years.

It’s the folks from that pool of around 200 people who show up for efforts like the work of the Greater Taylor Foundation, or who spent the time to help develop the Envision Taylor Comprehensive Plan. Or a myriad of other projects undertaken for the good of the community as a whole. They don’t care about gotcha politics, or the most recent cultural outrage. They aren’t posting snarky, knee-jerk pot-shots on social media, bashing their neighbors who are just trying to serve.

No. They don’t wait around. They get things done.

Should any effort to re-write the comprehensive plan be in the works, I can’t help but wonder at how many of these newly engaged people will show up, meeting after meeting, for 12-18 months, to help modify it in a way that protects the culture and history of Taylor but also meets the fears and perceptions of a loud group of keyboard commandos who are often angry and suspicious at anything that reeks of “planning for the future.”

City planners set their course based on the voices of the people who show up, not the people who gripe — after the fact! — on social media. So, don’t wait until your neighbors have already devoted months of work to complain about the outcome. Be intentional, be part of the process. Get involved early and show up when and where it matters.

If you can’t do that, please show a little respect and accept that the resulting work was done with your neighbors’ best intentions.

Note: I replaced the original essay with the version I edited for print. It appeared in the July 7 edition of the Taylor Press.