Hello Austin, did you know that we are putting together a comprehensive plan for our city, to update the one 30 years ago? Yes, we are, and according to the city, it will take 2 years and $1.8 million, with $1.5 million going to the independent consultant. You heard me: $1.8 million in total with $1.5 million going to the independent consultant. Seriously.
This is the point where everyone should have his or her eyebrows raised and said, "Really?" Not only is the ratio a complete fallacy in terms of including Austinites and building goodwill towards the city, but the whole price is a complete insult. There are many, many houses in Austin worth more than $1.8 million, let alone an entire comprehensive plan. That amount is a paltry sum, a mere token, and the process for completing the plan is most likely going to offend more people than be effective.
Anyone who reads this knows that I care a great deal about community involvement in the comprehensive plan (see the October 5, 2008 entry). If anyone is aware, there is a UNIVERSITY that has a COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT located fairly close to downtown. Its name is the UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN. If one gave $1.5 million to that department to help complete the comprehensive plan, not only would there be more models to base actual results on, but the STATE university would have free access to the information gathered by the state. Comprehensive planning is what these students AND PROFESSORS study, morning, noon and night, and to pay an outside consultant a ridiculous sum of money when we have resources at our own disposal is going for the two birds in the bush.
Yes, UT has seemed a bit like Rapunzel, standing in her tower and only allowing the sacred few to enter. On the contrary, how on earth are we going to initiate the process of removing the maiden from the tower if we are unwilling to climb her hair? Universities know how to live on $1.5 million sums, and they know more about allocation than anything, not to mention that they are non-profits. It simply makes no sense to spend $1.8 million on a comprehensive plan and give that money to someone outside of the direct effects, while ignoring perfectly good resources at our immediate disposal. And $1.8 million dollars is nothing, for the record.
4 comments:
These sorts of things are usually put up for bidding. If the Community and Regional Planning Department wanted to do it, why didn't they bid for it? Also, who says they would do a better or more cost-effective job? Who says the independent consultants won't be Austinites, which would be "including Austinites"? Doesn't everybody have free access to the information gathered by the state?
[sips coffee, preens, looks around the table]. Well I heard that this initiative is not even going to update or amend the 30 year old plan. As I understand it, the purpose is to assess how current residents envision future growth. No changes will be made to the comprehensive plan.
The problem is that many Austinites are anti-developer, but even places like Williamson County are recognizing that we need to change how Austin is growing. If all we're doing is coming up with a process, we should have spoken amongst ourselves and then chosen an independent contractor to implement that process. The real problem is that the money involved in the contractor's work and the lack of dissemination of information is just another block of wood for the fire.
My mention of the University of Texas was largely to point out that we have a large scholastic energy that can and should be a part of this process, especially since many of our residents and much of our revenue comes from UT.
AMEN! I maybe a bit biased being an UT almnus, but I totally agree. The architecture school is so involved in planning projects around Austin. They are absolutely in the know about what's going on. Not only that, it furthers education, gets the community involved, and would certainly save money, as opposed to a private consultant.
Post a Comment