Everyone was sad to hear of the untimely passing of Montgomery Councilman Tom Czulewicz over the holiday season in an unfortunate accident at his residence. Besides being a loving family man, Tom was a man of service to The Nation, serving in the U.S. Navy for over three decades, as well as using his expertise in service to the local governments and entities in the cities he resided in over the years. Montgomery was the twilight of his service to the community having moved here to be close to family in recent years, and Tom did his part serving on the Montgomery Planning and Zoning Commission, then as a Councilman. I had known Tom for several years now, and he approached me several months ago with a concern that troubled him, so we met at the Honor Cafe in Conroe on November 29th, a few hours before they closed down for the day. It wasn’t a clandestine meeting, since Tom didn’t mind me mentioning his name in whatever I wrote, but he wanted to express his deep concern in regards to the rapid pace of Montgomery’s growth and the council’s willingness to provide variances for new housing construction.
Czulewicz was a man of character. After taking the oath to his council seat, he resigned his planning and zoning commission seat, all because he felt it was the appropriate thing to do. During our lunch Tom shared the complaints of Montgomery citizens from the time he made the council, and even before on the P&ZC. I also had received several contacts myself, but really couldn’t do anything about it, but I understood Czulewicz’s quest to reverse the trend. So Tom got up on his soapbox, and started his opposition to the growth of lot sizes for the new homes.
“City code requires residential lots to be 75 feet wide,” said Tom. “And the city council, for the last four or five years, has been consistently approving variances to allow the lots to be 45 feet wide.”
The 40% smaller reduction of the lot sizes of course equaled to a 40% increase in the number of houses. Czulewicz did the math in reference to the logistics, and rightfully so, noted the number of cars per residence, which in Texas is 2.2 vehicles per household.
“We’re accelerating the growth,” said Tom. “We’re not controlling growth.”
He stressed that each approved variance in the future could put the city in a bind that it may not recover from in the future. City services and traffic concerns are just the tip of the iceberg, as Czulewicz cited Town Creek Crossing as a supporting case to his doubt for Montgomery’s health should the variance practice continue, especially with new developments near city center.
Tom did not vote for any variances as to lot size, holding true to city code. He fought them on principle, holding firm on 75 feet wide residential lots. Besides accelerating the growth by 40%, it does increase property tax dollars, but he remained concerned about the effectiveness of city services and their likely diminishment.
With the new municipal building in the planning stages Czulewicz noted the need for additional police to deal with traffic concerns, as well as the need for additional city personnel. Tom was unsure if the additional personnel would diminish city services, but he reckoned that the potential was there. He wasn’t against Montgomery’s growth, but just a manageable rate so the city can adjust without being overwhelmed.
Czulewicz mentioned that the projected buildout for Montgomery would be near 10,000 people, and of course, it would take some time, with the need at that time for approximately 34 police officers according to one estimate. Tom noted Magnolia in his research, which is seven square miles as compared to Montgomery’s five, and Magnolia only has 22 officers, with a population of 9,600. A Montgomery with ten-thousand population would be a traffic nightmare.
Another issue that we discussed was apartments, to which about 60% are going to be one bedroom, and he did mention a new (5 building-300 unit) apartment complex located near Home Depot, with parking variances to reduce below those two cars per residence. I was amazed when Tom mentioned the city’s growth rate from 2023-2024 was 46%, and we touched on emergency services as population increases. City debt was also discussed, as well as some city purchases, such as the 213 Prairie Street building, which was bought in May 2022 for $992,000 with a $1.6 million bond; intended as a police station. Obviously the building was never converted since the purchase of the Jim’s Hardware building is in the works, and has since resulted in significant financial losses as well as underutilized assets. Even if the building (which was transferred to the Economic Development Corporation) was sold, the losses could be $300-400 thousand, and quite possibly more. Although the transfer of the building to the EDC was deemed legal, Tom called it unethical.
Czulewicz told me of ethical concerns raised about the city council’s decision-making and lack of due diligence, especially regarding property transactions and growth management. He reported that the city’s debt exceeds $14 million, including new city hall financing ($2.1 million of $2.8 million).
There is no doubt that Tom Czulewicz loved Montgomery and wanted to see it succeed. His untimely passing is a loss to the city, but his memory will not go quietly. I would hope that his legacy to Montgomery will be a lesson that Council, P&ZC, and the EDC will take to heart in really thinking out projects and changes to the city that will affect the citizens for generations to come.
Ruben can be reached at: ruben@montgomerycountynews.net