With the Montgomery City Elections quickly approaching on May 2nd, a candidates forum was held by Community Impact at the Montgomery city hall chambers this past Thursday. CI Government Reporter Nichaela Shaheen acted as moderator for the event asking the candidates questions, as well as timing the two-minute responses, noting a 30-second reminder on the time limit, and allowing for closing remarks. Some of the major topics of interest were infrastructure issues of water, sewer, roads, and communications with the residents of Montgomery. The city budget which has grown five times over the years, as well as capital improvements were discussed, in addition to impact fees, development agreements, the possibility of annexation, and developer contracts. Candidate for Montgomery City Council, Place 4, Cheryl Fox, incumbent, was on hand to answer questions from Ms. Shaheen, while Ms. Fox’s opponent Efrain Lucas, did not participate in the event. For the Mayor of Montgomery, four candidates were on-hand, Art Aguilar, Sara Countryman, incumbent; Mark Gess, and Kristin Gyldenege, all participating in the questions posed by the moderator.
“This forum is designed to be informative, respectful, and focused on helping voters better understand the candidates and the offices they seek,” said Shaheen.
Montgomery City Council Place 4 has a term length of two years, with responsibilities entailing decisions on city ordinances, budgets, infrastructure investments, development matters; as well as representing the residents of Montgomery, and considering the feedback from the community. Fox was asked what should be the city’s top priority in regards to new development proposals. She acknowledged that city growth is inevitable, and that infrastructure readiness, such as water, and traffic concerns should be prioritized.
“I do believe that our top priority is always our town, our community, and it extends to place protection, water, sewer, and a good place to live.,” said Fox. “But I really do believe that our main focus should be on how the development is going to benefit our residents.”
On infrastructure, Fox, a long-time resident dating back to the mid-1950’s as a young girl, recalls times when city water would not work for 2 or even 3 days. She praised the city’s infrastructure and its improvement over the past five years, as well as the city staff that keeps getting the job done to provide services.
Shaheen described the mayor as serving as the city’s chief elected official for a period of two years, and helping set the tone and direction for city council meetings, as well as representing the city in public discussions. Her first question of the mayoral candidates, ‘What is your vision for how the city should grow over the next two years? And where do you believe the city should draw the line on development, if at all?
Mark Gess remarked that managing the growth with the tools that the city maintains is a clear indicator in managing expectations. “Not only for the city and the residents, but also for the developers and the people,” said Gess.
Incumbent mayor Sara Countryman spoke on a $134 million dollar capital improvement project to improve Montgomery’s water, sewer, and roads. She noted that much of that alleviates the Montgomery taxpayers because of the development coming in, since those who live outside the city’s jurisdiction take advantage of the retail development when they buy their groceries, gas, supplies, eat out, etc. in the city proper.
“The people coming through our city or living outside of our city limits are helping build the city,” said Countryman, in reference to their purchases in the city’s jurisdiction.
Art Aguilar expressed annexation as a way to generate revenue without increasing taxation. He noted that a lot of the surrounding community outside the town proper already has the Montgomery name, and the one-half mile limit outside the city’s extraterritorial jurisdiction, or ETJ, would be subject to city ordinances regarding infrastructure, platting and driveways.
Kristin Gyldenege focused on Historic Montgomery as a destination place for the patrons of its small businesses, and addressed the parking concerns that can be a challenge to the area, wanting Montgomery to be able to compete with Tomball and Spring.
Ms. Shaheen next inquired of the candidates as to new neighborhoods and commercial projects coming online, and the possible struggles of the infrastructure to keep pace. Ms. Countryman noted the impact fees to help pay for the infrastructure, and the impacts on traffic, roads, water and sewer needs. She mentioned the new Briarley neighborhood (formerly Redbird Meadows), of which their roads are very much in need of repair; the city has asked that the developer assume the cost for the road repairs once construction is completed. The same idea was done with the addition of the Home Depot and their widening of Buffalo Springs Drive from Hwy 105 to just north of the HD property line, and is intended to negotiate with developers to take the burden off residents, without yielding any tax breaks.
Mr. Aguilar spoke on surface water issues such as those associated with Waterstone on Lake Conroe. The creeks that were designed to feed Waterstone’s waterway lack water, and are unable to feed into Lake Conroe. The city has been in litigation with the developer for over a year.
“We have to ensure that our contracts with developers actually pass muster and protect citizens,” said Aguilar, in being proactive in regards to contracts and not reactive.
While Aguilar was answering his question, a certain segment of the audience were openly talking amongst themselves, and at times laughing. Ms. Shaheen had to remind them out of respect to the forum to keep their comments to themselves, which garnered a tremendous applause from the rest of the observers.
Ms. Gyldenege stressed the importance of developers prepping everything on a development; roads, ditches, drainage, prior to any building taking place. While Mr. Gess warned of keeping costs under control, and holding the developers accountable according to the agreements which had been decided beforehand.
The question of communication between the city and public in regards to city priorities and development decisions was brought up. Mr. Aguilar noted that the citizen holds part of the responsibility to make themselves aware, but at the same time noted a chance for the mayor and council to engage with community outreach with the HOAs and individual neighborhoods in the city.
Ms. Gyldenege highlighted the need to improve the city’s website, making it easier to display agendas, budgets, or meeting minutes; as well as increasing the city’s social media presence.
“We have a very small social media presence,” said Ms. Glydenege. “And that lends itself back to the concept of creating a tourist destination.”
Mr. Gess pressed the need to speak with the citizenry giving them the opportunity to express their ideas and have some ownership in the issues. While Ms. Countryman spoke on the citizens and the city government meeting in the middle in the searching of and dissemination of information. She noted that the website has come a long way and the city is in the midst of upgrading it again, as well as increasing the city’s social media presence online.
There is no doubt that each of the candidates, whether for council, or mayor, love the City of Montgomery, and want to see it succeed. Each candidate has their own vision of the city and how it should be guided, and each expressed their concerns with the infrastructure issues of water, sewer, roads, and communications with the residents of Montgomery. So as the City of Montgomery voters go to the polls on Saturday, May 2nd, they will make their choice as to who will be part of the city council or the mayor’s seat for two more years.