Blog Closing

I am closing this Blog. I have redesigned my web site to include my Blog and have transferred all the past postings to it. My web site is http://mikebassthewoodlands.com/

I will also be posting FaceBook links to any new Blog entries. If you have not done so, please like my face book page so you can be notified of new Blog features.

https://www.facebook.com/electmikebass?ref=hl

Due to security issues, my new Blog does not provide a  "follow me" feature

Is Texas Education In Trouble?

Today, we hear a lot about how well Texas is doing- increased job growth, low taxes, companies dieing to come here, etc. The 83^rd Legislature balanced the State’s budget but did they spend your money on the right things. Are political platitudes causing our children’s education and future to suffer?  To continue to be successful on the job creation front, our state also has to produce the talent companies need now and in the future.

We are lucky to live in The Woodlands where we benefit from one of the best run and managed school districts in the State, CISD. But we cannot totally isolate ourselves from what is going on around us. I am not an educational expert but I am concerned that overall our educational system is in trouble.

Recently, my concern was further brought home in an interesting article I read in the Chronicle Wednesday morning. The article was about the school district law suit currently underway, but it covered several interesting points regarding education in general:

1)    The suit involves more than 600 districts. These districts still argue that the recent new funding and reduced testing implemented by the 83^rd Legislature did little to fix our educational issues. The legislature boosted funding $3.4 billion but did not fully restore the $5. 4 billion they eliminated in 2011. 40% of the districts are still receiving less than  they received in 2011

2)    The State’s Legislative Board estimated that the increase spending per pupil over 2010-1011 was only 2%

3)    Texas has slipped to #49 in spending per pupil.  Spending is not the only benchmark of quality, but we also appear to be achieving poor results for the low amount money being spent. Go figure!

The results for the remaining five end-of-course exams have been mediocre- 45% of sophomores have been unable to pass the English 1 exam. Although testing has been reduced, the standards the schools must achieve have not. Graduation requirements, curriculum requirements and the accountability system have not changed.

4)    The current system is not meeting the needs of low income /limited English students which account for 60% of our students. It is estimated these students cost 60% more to teach. The recent increase in funding did not restore funds for remedial and tutorial programs required by these students. One could say this is a result of an inadequate immigration control program and require to educate the children of illegal immigrants.

5)    Districts lack the discretion to raise funds locally due to legislative caps on property tax rates (cap is $1.17/$100). More than 25% of districts are at their cap and others have not been able to raise their rate due to a lack of voter approval. The cap on tax rates does not give weight that the appraisal base varies significantly between districts.

I believe Texas is on the wrong track and we need to elect people to go to Austin committed to getting us back basics—and a quality educational system  is one of them.

Traffic Improvements Are Coming!

I believe we can all agree that improving mobility and reducing congestion is THE challenge in managing the continuing growth and economic development within The Woodlands. We need to make certain our transportation infrastructure is viewed as being equally "excellent" as the rest of our community.  

I want to bring you up to date on recent decision the Township Board took to help reduce delays and traffic delays over the next 18-24 months. In approving the Short Term Mobility Project, the Board joined in partnership with the County and the Woodlands Road Utility District #1 (WRUD) to implement improvements in over 50 road intersections and signals throughout the Township. Improperly designed and timed intersections are the biggest contributors to congestion. The traffic engineers estimate these improvements will reduce intersection delay time by at least 15-20%. These improvements were selected based on traffic surveys and studies performed both by the County and the WRUD.  

The Short Term Mobility Project illustrates what can be accomplished when all of us come together for the common good of our community.  Overall this project constitutes a $19 million investment, most of which will be funded by the WRUD and the commercial property owners.  The County will be investing approximately  $1.8 million in the project. The Township's investment will be focused in two areas:

1) Improving signalization through the use of the new Adaptive Signal Technology where it makes the most sense ($1.225 million).

2) Participating ($200,000) in determining the most practical solution to constructing grade separations at Lake Woodlands/ Grogans Mill and Research Forest/ Grogans Mill. All three entities recognize the sensitivity of any changes at the Research Forest/ Grogans Mill intersection. We also have to make sure the Lake Woodlands/ Grogans Mill project does not create problems for the Church and surrounding businesses. We have all pledged that the project teams will evaluate all the possible solutions in these areas and engage the surrounding businesses and residents in obtaining their input before any solution is cast in stone. But first, the engineering teams need to determine what are the alternatives and the pros and cons of each.

These projects will now move into the detail design and bid phase. No actual construction work will begin until the SJRA project is largely completed, April 2014.  We expect these improvements will be implemented over the next 18-24 months. 

These short term mobility improvements are not candidates for federal and state matching funds. Thus,  a list of long term improvement projects have also been submitted to the South County Mobility Study Team for consideration in the plan currently being developed. These recommendations include the widening of Gosling and Kuykendahl, and their respective bridges. These are significant congestion problems today and deserve to be considered a very high priority for our community.

Businesses and residents will have an opportunity to provide their input on the SC Mobility Study recommendations and proposed projects when the time comes. The Short Term Mobility Project is designed to produce more immediate benefits while the longer term plans are being developed.

2014 Property Tax Abatements- Are They Justified?

My answer is YES!

Since I was elected to the Board, I have found each time the Township Board grants a property tax abatement to a company I can pretty well expect to receive an increase in emails and comments about a “deal” being given to some company at the expense of the rest of us. An example is an email I received stating “Not that I'm trying to soak businesses, but seems like they could pay their "fair share" of the Woodlands Tax burden.” I do not object to the questioning; any question is a good one. But, I would like to provide my perspective as I do not believe the Board is “throwing your money away.” On the contrary, I think these abatements are driven by the competitive market and the need to bring new jobs to our community. If used wisely and only where the competitive environment dictates, the use of property tax abatements will, both in the short and long term, increased property tax and sales tax revenue which will help lower our property taxes. 

The Township’s Tax Abatement Policy mirrors that of Montgomery County. We rely on J.R. Moore, County Tax Assessor, to do all the evaluation work, and a lot is involved, keying off his recommendation. After I was elected in 2012, I wanted to confirm for myself that the Board was not just “blindly” following the County’s lead and that there was substance behind any abatement decision. So, I met with Mr. Moore to understand our policy and what he does in evaluating all potential abatements in developing his recommendations. Personally, I found that Mr. Moore leaves no stone uncovered in evaluating every abatement request. I thought he did, and continues to do, a very thorough job in making sure no one is giving anything away unnecessarily and considering the best interest of the tax payers. 

The following abatements have been approved by both the County and The Woodlands Township: 

The Woodlands Township Property Tax Abatements
Company	2014 Market Value	2014 Abated Value	2014 Taxable Value	Expires	Est. New Jobs (Note1)
Anadarko	185,158,000	53,683,860	131,474,140	12/31/02	450
ARC Holdings	28,199,840	23,306,900	4,892,940	12/31/15	379
Fox Network	18,878,450	1,642,110	17,236,340	12/31/15
Chicago Bridge and Iron	15,697,410	Under Construction	15,697,410	12/31/22	200
Clarient	2,613,940	2,163,090	450,850	12/31/19	85
Repsol	5,456,750	4,005,000	1,451,750	12/31/22	368
RPC	8,235,350	3,699,270	4,536,080	12/31/17	154
Us Oncology/McKesson	28,648,860	27,812,510	836,350	12/31/17	599
Total	292,888,600	116,312,740	176,575,860		2,235
2014 Township Property Tax Rate(per $100)		0.2940	0.2940
Abated Property Taxes		341,959
Taxable Revenue To Be Received			519,133
Note 1 Job estimates per JR Moore's July 13 Countywide Abatement Report
Note 2 The above abatements are based on 2103 property tax valuations. These abatements will reduce the Township's property tax revenue to be received in 2014.

 

At our current tax rate of $.2940/$100, the value of these abatements is $341,959.  This is up from 2013 due principally to several abatements granted in 2012 and 2013 (Anadarko, US Oncology, Repsol, Clarient). Even so, the 2013 abatement does not seem to be a large amount given the competitive situation we face and the jobs that have been created (estimated by JR Moore to be 2,235 new jobs).  Eventually when these abatements expire, The Township will add an additional $116 million to its tax role. Today, these companies are paying $519,133 in property taxes on their unabated value. Our total 2014 Property Tax Revenue is budgeted at $42.4 million on an assessed value of $14.5 billion. Our 2014 abatements are only .8% of our total property tax revenue to be received in 2014 (2013 was .4%).

In December, The Township Board approved a new abatement for Exxon/ Mobil. They will house 1,400 people in two new buildings to be built in Hughes Landing. The estimated salaries of these people are $179 million. Exxon/Mobil could have chosen to build a new building at their Springwoods complex but thought the Township offered a better economic deal. The new buildings will add $117 million to our tax roll. The abatement, estimated to be $341,000, will impact our 2015 property tax revenue and bring the total of our abatements to approximately  $683,000, 1.5% of our total property taxes. 

In competing for new business, the County and Township have few financial incentives to offer new companies other than tax abatements. Cities on the other hand have Economic Development dollars (generated from a portion of their sales tax dollars).We can only offer abatements. Whether an abatement is granted, for how much and for how long depends on the level of jobs to be added to our community- - the income generated by the new jobs created must be large enough to more than offset the property tax revenue we give up in the short term. Our abatement policy should not be influenced by whether we have an “up” or “down” economy; abatements are not intended to be subsidies! The evaluation by Mr. Moore and the decision by your Board are designed to make sure this is the case.

The Woodlands Township in Retrospect

I was elected to the Woodlands Township Board of Directors in May 2012. It really does not seem that long ago. Prior to this experience, which has been very rewarding, I served for ten years in my previous city as an elected official. So I took the Township position with my eyes open. But one thing I have learned over the last 1½ years is that the Township governance responsibilities are different than most municipalities- The Township Board must insure that we preserve all the attributes of our master planned community that have attracted families and businesses to locate here.   

Now that I have passed my “first year anniversary” I felt it was time to step back to reflect on what has been accomplished. My governance experience over the last 13 years has taught me that there is no room in government for egos or the “I” word. Governing requires leadership, seeking to understand the viewpoints of others, consensus building and sometimes compromise. But one must also recognize that compromise does not mean one has to sacrifice one’s principles and values. Our Board members do not always agree on everything. But most often we are able to talk through the issues and reach a compromise that is best for all.  

I believe The Township Board and Staff have worked well together to accomplish a lot in the last 1 ½ years. For example our team effort has resulted in the following:

•We have continued to preserve all the attributes of our master planned community which we inherited. This responsibility requires an unwavering commitment to: 

--Public safety

--Enforcement of our Covenants and Standards which have served our community well for many years and are critical to protecting property values

--Maintenance and enhancement of all of our family oriented amenities- parks, pools, pathways and sports fields

--Sponsorship of community events to support our Village Associations and to reinforce a sense of community 

These are critical attributes of our master planned community, attributes that attract people to live, work and play in the Woodlands. In turn, these same strengths have attracted many companies to locate in The Woodlands. We are no longer solely a “bedroom community” for Houston. 

•In 2012 and 2013, we spent a significant amount of time to evaluate the impact incorporation might have on our community, governance structure and costs. This included a very aggressive outreach effort to our community. The end result was that our community saw no overriding reason or urgency to incorporate anytime soon. We have until 2057 to make such a decision and there was no compelling reason to take such a step now or in the foreseeable future. In fact, if the power of Home Rule cities to arbitrary annex adjoining communities was eliminated, there may never be a need for the Township to incorporate. I believe the Township governance model provides a very effective alternative to the traditional municipal form of government. 

•We have kept down the growth in our operating expenses, continuing to focus on what we think are our core functions.  The Township continually looks for ways to reduce our costs. A recent example is our insurance program. We spent a good part of 2013 reevaluating the coverage needed to reduce our risk of a major loss. This work cumulated in the recent selection of the Texas Municipal League (TML) as our new insurance carrier. TML provided much broader coverage with over a $1 million savings- more coverage at less cost. Not a bad deal!  

•As a result of keeping our cost down and our economic growth, we have reduced property taxes by 10.4% over the last four years. For the first time, our property tax revenue in 2014 will be less than 50% of our total revenue. We expect Sales and Hotel Taxes to constitute about 52% of our total revenue. This is exactly the opposite of what most cities are experiencing today. A 2012 TML survey shows that municipal government revenue across Texas was derived 58% from property tax and 42% from sales tax revenue. 

•We have made effective use of debt, using debt only where it was required and made financial sense. When the Township was formed, it had no surpluses or reserves.  In fact, it had to assume debt incurred by the TCID and the HOAs. In addition, the Township had to take on $17 million of debt to pay Houston and Conroe not to annex us before 2057. In 2014, the Township will pay off the remaining $14 million of this debt. The Township does not over rely on debt. In addition, it has accumulated a 20% “rainy day” contingency fund. In so doing we have achieved an AAA credit rating. 

•The Township is one of the few government entities that values and executes long range planning. We have a Five Year Plan which is continually updated and revised based on our best knowledge at the time. This planning allows us to make effective operating and financing decisions. It gives us the confidence that when we decide to lower taxes, the reduction will stick. 

•In 2013, we finalized a plan to provide annual funding for a new Capital Replacement Fund. This fund is intended to provide for the replacement of existing Township capital assets when they reach the end of their useful lives. Over the next 20 years, The Township will need to replace or refurbish the $230 of community amenities and other assets we have today. This funding approach will allow us to “pay as we go” and avoid future debt to fund the replacement and major refurbishment of our many amenities and other assets. 

•Although the Township has no statutory responsibility over its roads, we recognized in 2012 the negative impact growth was going to have on our mobility and congestion. We have become much more proactive in collaborating with the County and the Woodlands Road Utility District to address these issues. Our efforts started with the recognition that the County and The Township must be much more proactive at the regional level in securing our share of matching federal and state transportation funds. This recognition has led to the current mobility studies for South County. No one will receive matching funds if they do not have a plan in place and that plan is integrated into the regional transportation plans. 

In addition, we are now responsible for transit in our area.  In undertaking our new role, we have dealt with the growing service and funding issues we inherited with the Woodlands Express, a service we became responsible for in October 2013. Through our recent initiatives, we have reversed the declining financial performance of the Express to insure that it will not require local taxpayer dollars in the future. The Express is a critical service for many of our South County residents but it must pay for itself.

•Lastly, The Township was accused in the recent 2013 election of “undisciplined spending and the automatic renewal of contracts.”  I can say that all of us on the Board would strongly disagree with such assertions. To deal with this unwarranted assertion, the Board recently asked our staff to review all of our procurement decisions over the last year. I believe this analysis supports the view that 1) the Township has a very competitive, fair procurement process in place and 2) The Board selects the best and highest quality solution at the most reasonable cost. For the most part these decisions translate into the lowest cost supplier. But in a few cases quality is more important than cost and the Board have selected someone that has higher cost but the difference has been very minor.  

The Township Board should be proud of what it has accomplished. I hope all of you voters agree, which is really what counts.

 

New Township Insurance Program Will Save $700,000

With the aid of Township staff, Director Bunch’s insurance firm and RWL, an independent outside insurance consultant, The Township recently completed its reevaluation of our insurance coverage and selected a new carrier. The end result is that the Township will receive much better coverage at a $700,000 savings.

However, before we “toot” our horn too loudly everyone should understand this significant improvement was achieved primarily because we could avail ourselves of insurance from the Texas Municipal League (TML). TML was not an option last year; they would not bid because they did not think the Township had enough loss experience. TML is not a broker. TML is a Texas based insurance pool that operates on a nonprofit basis. It is not funded by the state but by the premiums paid by the municipalities who are its members. It has a history of often returning premiums paid-in when losses are low. They will only provide coverage on a one year term. It is hard for the commercial insurance market to compete with such a pool.  

This effort has a history that goes back to last year when the Board was presented a set of insurance proposals only days before our insurance was to expired. The proposed coverage was on our desk when we arrived. But to be fair, this was not an “automatic renewal” as the existing broker obtained over 26 insurance policy bids to consider. The Board was still upset with two things- 1) the Board was never asked about what sort of coverage they thought was needed and 2) we were faced with making a decision with no time to review the recommendations. Given the deadlines upon us, the Board decided to go forward with the proposed coverage with the understanding that the staff would immediately start a new re-evaluation process. 

The following are examples of the areas where we have achieved expanded coverage. I thank Director Bunch’s Firm and RWL in helping the Township achieve this significant benefit. RWL charged $18,000 for the services; an amount well worth it.
 

• $5,000,000 coverage for lost sales and hotel tax revenues from a covered storm like IKE or Sandy. 

• $3,200,000 coverage for our newly installed all-weather sports fields. 

• Landscaping and Trees - TML will cover debris removal and replacement of landscaping (trees/plants).  However, the damaged landscaping must be within 100 feet of a structure listed on the property schedule, there is a $250 limit for each replacement tree or shrub, and the total limit is $10,000.  TMLRFP to evaluate the cost of additional standing timber and expanded definition tree landscaping coverage.

 

• Flood Insurance-Most homeowner and even many commercial insurance policies do not cover flooding. Ours does

Taxpayers should be please that the Board and its staff worked together to achieve substantial improvements to our Township insurance coverage at a much lower cost. We are now protected much better than in any previous year.

 

Should the Township Reduce Its Retirement Benefits?

The question of whether or not the Township 401K match is too rich  continues to receive a lot of attention, especially in conservative circles. One of our Board Directors is pushing for change once more. This seems to be a going effort on his part since 2012. I consider some of this “debate” to be uninformed and “political pandering” by some on, and off the Board, to their conservative base.  

I was not on the Board when the Waters Group in 2009 did its compensation study and helped the Township design the current system. But I have spent time going through the study and researching on my own what other municipalities provide.  I believe the 2009 study to be a good analysis and resulted in a robust and responsive system for managing our salaries and benefits. As noted below the resulting system has resulted in an improved ability to attract and retain quality people. All of should keep in mind that our ability to maintain a high quality and very rich amenity community is a direct result of the quality of our staff.

The overriding objective of the 2009 work and the proposed new study should be to provide a compensation system which fairly compensates our employees and which allows The Township to attract and retain high quality personal. As I have said repeatedly, it would be unfair to take one part of our compensation system, our retirement system, and drastically change it without considering the impact on our total compensation package and our ability to compete for quality people. Please also keep in mind that the Township does not have the funding issue faced by many retirement systems. As a 401K based system we have no unfunded liabilities.  

 Since the Waters Study was completed in 2009, The Township has made certain we have remained consistent with the governmental wage and benefit benchmarks used in that study. So I ask is the Townships compensation package, including all the benefits it offers, higher than the competitive market? I do not believe this is the case and I think the facts support this argument. I see no reason to waste money on a new compensation study that will only tell us what we already know.  

Prior to the implementation of the 2009 Waters Study, I understand the Township’s turnover rate was between 12-18%. Since that time, our turnover rate has declined significantly. In 2011 it was 7.8%. In 2012, our turnover was 9%. Since we went to the new compensation system, it appears we have also been more successful in recruiting new personal.

The basis for achieving the above objective is to fully understand what competitive markets we benchmark ourselves against. That market was determined in 2009 to be the municipal, public sector market. Nothing has occurred since then that change this view. Only about 8-10 % of our organizational positions can be matched against the private sector. We can find no comparable salary and benefit information for all our other positions except by looking at the public sector. The Townships goal is to be position our compensation in the middle of this market. So if our compensation benchmark remains the public sector, why does anyone think a new study will tell us anything different than the 2009 Waters Study?  

Public sector employees have historically been paid lower wages but received higher retirement benefits. This view is supported by Robert Half comparison done in 2012 showing for that for the few comparable positions that can be collated with the Houston private sector; the Township’s starting salaries were 11.7% lower than the private sector.

In terms of our retirement plan, we are currently in line with what municipalities of our size provide. The Texas Municipal Retirement System (TMRS) is another benchmark for us to consider. TMRS represents 849 cities (does not include private systems for Houston, Dallas, Austin, Fort Worth, Galveston, El Paso; for 39 cities it excludes fire fighters that have their own separate plans). TMRS is a highbred cash balance system (accumulated account balances are annuitized at retirement and guaranteed for life) versus a traditional formula based defined benefit system. It also provides for a younger retirement age (20 years of service or age 60 with 5 years of service; average retirement age at 12/31/12 was 58) than a 401K Retirement Plan. Each city may tailor their plan. This plan is 86% funded. These plans all allow employees to retire at an earlier age than the Township’s plan.

 
If municipalities are our competitive market, then TMRS provides a good insight into the retirement benefits offered by this market. Of the 849 cities in TMRS, 36% (309 cities) provide a 2 for 1 match of between 6 and 7%. This group of cities includes all those cities with a population greater than 100, 000.  There is no city of our size or larger that provides a retirement match less than 2 for 1 at 6 or 7%%

I do not dispute that on the surface our retirement match appears to be richer than the private sector. But we also know that private entities, in addition to higher salaries, provide other benefits such as bonuses and profit sharing that we do not provide. None of this has been taken into account by those criticizing the current retirement match

2011 Invesco Defined Contribution Survey Results

                                                                   i.      92.49 of respondents provide a 401 type plan.

                                                                 ii.      37.5%  also offered other type of additional plans, such as Profit sharing and non qualified deferred benefit plans

                                                              iii.      23.2% also offered some form of defined benefit plan

                                                               iv.      49.8 of 401 plan participants contribute 75% of more of the maximum contribution offered; 29.2% contribute 90% or more

                                                                  v.      37.6 % provide a match of 6% or more; for larger plans this increases to 47.5% 

So I ask again, is our total compensation higher? The facts do not seem to support this argument. I see no reason to waste money on a new compensation study that will only tell us what we already know.

 

2014 Reforestation Plans

In their 2012 forest audit report, American Forestry Management recommended we continue our planting program but to do so in a different way. They recommended that we  should continue to plant trees over the next 4-5 years but to focus on planting much smaller trees and create more species diversity that was more drought tolerant. Their thinking was that the forest will regenerate itself but only within the bounds of the species that exist today. AFM believed we could improve the heath and drought tolerance of our urban forest by planting other native species. They cautioned against planting large trees (30 gal) and focus more on seedlings and 5-15 gallon trees, based on the fact that these trees are less costly and can survive with much less watering by man and instead rely on nature.  

Last year I thought this was sound advice and still hold this opinion. What did the Township do in 2013- we ignored the advice and decided to purchase 1,340- 30 gallon trees, 40% of which have died. This cost well over $300,000. To me this was "pandering" to those residents that wanted such trees planted in areas adjacent to their houses. Our action ignored what the "experts" said was best for our forest and the best use of our money. 

Now we are proposing to repeat this experience abeitedly with only 800 trees but still at a cost of $134,000. over 50% of the total proposed cost.  It is proposed that we can lower the mortality rate and the wasted money by watering more often. But the proposal still falls well short of the weekly watering suggested by the Texas Forest Service. Arbor Care, a local arborist firm, recommends:

- One year old-- For a tree that you can wrap your hands around its trunk, it needs at least 30-50 gallons of water every week. In dormant season, water every two weeks
- Two Years old- water every 1-2 weeks all year round
- Mature Trees- water once a month (during a drought, water every 2 weeks).

Are we prepared to ensure this sort of watering plan? I think not.

For all of the above reasons I recommend we eliminate the 30 gallon trees for 2014 and focus only on using the 5 gallon trees

South County Mobility and Transportation Planning Initiatives-UPDATE

The Woodlands Township and South Montgomery County is one of the fastest growing residential and employment centers in the greater Houston-Galveston region. Improved mobility is critical to this continued growth and to assure that such growth does not adversely impact our quality of life. In order to compete for scarce State and Federal transportation funds, it is critical that we develop actionable plans that can be integrated into the 2040 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) managed by the Houston Galveston Area Council (H-GAC).

To this end there will be two major planning initiatives launched in October 2013 (see below). H-GAC is in the process as we speak finalizing the contracts with each of the Firms that will handle each of the two studies.

The South Montgomery County Mobility Plan will be a comprehensive transportation study that will identify existing and future roadway needs, including improved pedestrian  paths, bicycle paths, signalization and intersection design,  based on our changing land use and growth scenarios.  A prioritized list of projects will be developed that reflects the most likely and preferred scenarios for future development. The findings of this study will guide short, medium and long-range transportation investment within the study area region.

Sponsoring entities for this project include: Montgomery County Precinct 3, The Woodlands Township, The Woodlands Road Utility District #1, City of Shenandoah and Oakridge North. Brown and Gay Engineers will be the lead consulting firm.

The Woodlands Transit and Town Center Mobility Plan will be a comprehensive transit study that will determine existing and future transit needs for The Woodlands Township region, including its Town Center. The study will evaluate transit modes like local buses, vanpools, car pools, park and ride services, bus rapid transit and light rail; as well as other strategies to address mobility including intelligent transportation systems; pedestrian and bicycle networks; and other transportation strategies. The study shall conclude with a prioritized list of recommended improvements and tiered implementation strategies and policy recommendations with an emphasis on the transit mode of transportation.

The Woodlands Township is the sole sponsor for this study. Steer Davies Gleave will be the lead consulting firm.

The study effort will encompass the area bounded by FM 1488, FM 2978, the Grand Parkway and the San Jacinto River. These initiatives will be 9-12 month efforts and involve a significant public outreach effort. It will be critical that residents and business take advantage of these outreach efforts to make their needs known.