The Kyle Report

The Kyle Report

Friday, January 22, 2021

Kyle has plans, but are they the right ones

 Writing in the latest edition of the Hays Free Press, David Abdel, who, one would hope, should know better since he recently ran for mayor and taught in area public schools, said “It’s time to demand those whom you’ve elected to lead the city articulate a plan” to, among other things, manage the city’s growth. That’s a bad idea on a number of different levels. Long-range planning should be not be political. Long-range planning should not be left to the political whims of “those whom you’ve elected to lead the city,” but to professional planners. Experts trained in the process. But even more than that, it’s a bad idea because such plans already exist and it’s regretful, but a reflection of the problems current facing the city, that someone who recently ran for mayor and is now writing in the local newspaper is clueless about the fact that such plans already exist. In fact, at least three significant such plans exist. There is the plan for Kyle’s immediate future, which you can read here. There’s a long-range plan which you can read here. There’s even a special one covering the city’s transportation needs, which you can read here.

No, the demand should not be for another plan. We already have plenty of plans. What we should be deciding is whether these are indeed the best plans for the city. And, today, I am speaking specifically about that second plan I referenced above — the long-range plan — because (1) that is the plan Abdel seems to be referencing (even if he didn’t know it already existed) and (2) it is time for a major overhaul of that plan.

The fact that an individual doesn’t know that a long-range plan already exists also means that this individual is clueless about the city’s constitution and that such a document is actually mandated by that constitution. Section 10.02 of the City Charter specifically states “The council shall adopt a comprehensive plan” and, more specifically that this plan “shall constitute the master and general plan for the development of the city. The comprehensive plan shall contain the council's policies for growth, development and beautification of the land within the corporate limits and the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the city, or for geographic portions thereof including neighborhood, community or area wide plans.” Not only that, but Section 10.02 mandates that this plan “may be amended at anytime and shall be reviewed and considered for amendment or revision every five years.”

So that is why I bring this up now. Not to criticize those like Abdel who are clueless about the current existence of municipal long-range planning, but to try to galvanize them into realizing they have a voice in that planning and they ought to begin thinking now about how to use those voices. Don’t go demagoguing in the local newspaper about planning, but, instead, offer concrete, sensible suggestions that might just become part of the fabric of those five-year revisions.

For those who don’t know, the revisions work this way. Once every 10 years, the city’s comprehensive plan undergoes a thorough re-evaluation. For all practical purposes, it is completely rewritten. But since this is a long-range planning document and not a political document, that rewrite is wisely not assigned to “those whom you’ve elected to lead the city,” but to an outside group of professional municipal land planners whose hiring is approved by the council following a supposedly rigorous vetting process. Five years after that thorough re-evaluation is adopted, the plan is subjected to a review just to determine if anything needs to be updated and, if it does, those updates are incorporated. Thus the long-range plan becomes a living document that continues to use the present as a foundation to plan for the future.

Here’s what’s important about all that, however. The plan is based on the notion that not only should it not be left to the dictates of “those whom you’ve elected to lead the city,” but, instead, to those who elected those folks to lead the city. You, in other words. This is truly a community document, a citizens’ plan.

At least, it’s supposed to be. The problem has been in Kyle that too few of its citizens participate in the process. Instead, there are too many people who want to shirk the responsibility they have in shaping the future of the city they call home and cast it off to “those whom you’ve elected to lead the city.” Then they are very quick to blame “those whom you’ve elected to lead the city” when that future doesn’t turn out exactly the way they envisioned it.

During the time the planning firm that will be hired to draft the next update of the city’s long-range comprehensive plan, that firm will be hosting workshops designed to get citizen input into the plan. Study the current plan. Think about the changes you believe should be incorporated. Then attend these workshops. Mobilize your homeowner associations and get them involved. If more workshops are needed, demand that more of them be held and, I promise you, if more workshops are warranted they will take place. These planners want your input. They need your input. They depend on your input. If you’re like me, and want the plan to devote a chapter to hike and bike trails, let the planners know that. If you want a plan that makes the city more pedestrian friendly, let them know that. If you desire a city composed of sustainable neighborhoods instead of a city that’s just a collection of different zones, let them know that. To cite just one example, I personally believe it’s not sustainable that here in Kyle we have only two primary major grocery store options and those two options are closer to each other than either of them are to the nearest residence. That’s the result of planning for a city that’s just a collection of zones and not one composed of sustainable neighborhoods. And that’s just one example of why, to do just about anything in Kyle, you need some form of a motorized vehicle to do it. And of course, that form of non-sustainable planning, has produced whatever traffic situations that exist in the city today.

Last week, the City Council voted to delay until the next fiscal year the hiring of a firm that will draft the next major revision of the city’s long-range comprehensive plan. But the process will begin sooner than that. I imagine the council will begin soliciting firms to submit their proposals for handling this assignment no later than late spring or early summer. For those interested in actively taking part in shaping the city’s future, read all the supplemental material, such as this, that will be a part of the council’s agenda related to reshaping the city’s vision and provide timely input to your representative on the council.

Don’t complain. Don’t demand, in the newspapers or anywhere else, others assume what should be your responsibility. This really is a situation in which the future is in your hands.

No comments:

Post a Comment