Sunny Side /South Park Super Neighborhood

Investigating the City of Houston Planning Department

Dec 13, 2002

Press Statement ?– 12/10/02

Before we address our civic concerns I want to address two additional concerns that are ethical and political. Mayor Lee P. Brown has many detractors that are looking for any and all opportunities to highlight what a poor job he is doing as Mayor of the greatest City in America. Those of certain political views may use our presences and issues as a sounding board to trash one of the greatest Mayor?’s in the history of our City. To those people we say, do not make the mistake and think we don?’t support Mayor Brown.

There is another group interested in fair play, ethics, good government, good public policy and taking the moral high ground at every possible turn. To that group we stay that we have tried to handle this matter very quietly, diplomatically and through department channels and now we are forced into a public forum seeking answers to public policy questions that the director of planning decided not to answer after five plus months.

The duly elected officers, community leaders, and members of the Sunny Side/South Park Super Neighborhood, civic clubs, and other City-wide and community-based organizations have come to City Hall to take issue with the arbitrary actions by the City Planning Department Director, Robert Litke. As a deliberative assembly we collectively challenge the unclear authority and arbitrary decision-making exhibited by the planning department director, Robert Litke. The Sunny Side/South Park Super Neighborhood has been one of the most progressive groups in the super neighborhood program and has been supportive of the concept, Mayor Lee P. Brown and the planning department.

Our presence at City hall is to urge a response to our initial questions, our internal investigation and our resulting recommendations. We are seeking written policies to clarify the authority of a department head and employees with the decision making process of any super neighborhood, civic club, homeowners associations or any other stakeholders involved with the super neighborhood that has independent by-laws separate from City government jurisdiction.

As community workers, taxpayers, volunteers and leaders we question the so-called ?“investigation?” by the Office of the Inspector General. We challenge the City of Houston to require that someone respond to our questions that were not addressed by the planning department or in the OIG report. We find the OIG report inadequate, contradictory and incomplete. Therefore, in our opinion, the investigation should be supplemented by an investigation that includes non-City employee stakeholders.

If Neighborhood Oriented Government really means anything at all, it must be transparent, objective and guided by principles, clearly written polices and when policy does not exist, neighborhoods and City officials must come together and develop them jointly, -- to develop, review and ratify issues of common interest. The up coming public hearing in January on our Super Neighborhood Action Plan (SNAP) and the capital improvement plan (CIP) reinforces our presence hear today to raise the screen of bureaucrats with seemingly little concern for the citizens they are paid to serve.

We strongly urge that all elected officials and City employees see the significance of the absolute necessity of an open collaborative process and support our request for clearly written policies and work with us to resolve our concerns because these issues are not limited to any one district or Super Neighborhood. It is our sincere hope that at least our elected representatives will make a commitment today to review the results of our investigation in an objective manner.

We therefore present the following request:
a. The issue submitted to OIG by the Sunny Side/South Park Super Neighborhood is not resolved, and the investigation should not be prematurely closed;
b. The questions that have been submitted to the planning department and the OIG needs to be answered in writing and/or in a community forum;
c. The City of Houston?’s Ethics Committee needs to review the matter and the investigations of the OIG and the SSSP Super Neighborhood Ethics Committee;
d. These proceedings need to result in definitive policies within the planning department; and
e. If the OIG is not prepared to ?“make appropriate recommendations for constructive revisions?” when the citizens of Houston raise ?“inconsistencies, contradictions or inadequacies?…within a City of Houston department policy?…?” then they need to revise the charge listed on its web page.
Please see the following attachments for questions raised and steps taken for resolution.
Timeline/Requests/References

Our Request to the City of Houston?’s Planning Department Director July 15, 2002
1. We requested a meeting with the director of planning, staff and our executive board for clarification of Super Neighborhood policies and procedures.
?˜ The above request has not been answered to date

Second series of policy questions asked to the planning director August 2002, including:
?˜ What were the policies and procedures etc used by the director of planning that guided his decision to split the Sunny Side/South Park Super Neighborhood?
?˜ What was validation process used by the director to ensure that the civic clubs affected were fully understood and agreed with his decision
?˜ By what authority could the planning department director arbitrarily take this action without even the ?“courtesy?” of communicating with the existing executive board?
?˜ Why did the director choose to not respond to our concerns in a timely manner?
?˜ We would like a copy of the written procedures and a copy of his recommendations to Mayor Lee P. Brown.
?˜ How can the director justify a change in an established successful protocol in resolving specific types of membership issues without notifying the executive board?
?˜ The above questions have not been answered to date

Meeting with Mayor Lee P. Brown August 5, 2002
1. During the 8/5/02 meeting with the Mayor we conveyed and requested from the executive board that he Mayor convene a meeting for discussion and recommendations concerning these local issues.
?˜ Chief of Staff Oliver Spellmen replied 2 weeks later in a phone conversation with the president of our super neighborhood ?– ?“there will be no meeting?”


Filing our request with the Office of the Inspector General ?– September 6, 2002
1. Key questions in our original request to the OIG.

?˜ The OIG Found No Policies were violated by the director of planning in a report dated December 5, 2002 (see copy of our response attached
?˜ What guiding principles did the director use to override the super neighborhood?’s authority, the executive board?’s guiding principles and the organization?’s by-laws?
a. According to the current information available to us, Mr. Litke has no reference that authorizes him to make such decisions. We are requesting your help to secure a copy of the decision making process that went into his decision with a timeline and his recommendation to Mayor Brown. We would like to know if he has made similar decisions for other super neighborhoods?
b. We have many questions concerning policy issues that the directors have not addressed. We are seeking your assistance to help us define, develop and implement clearer, best practices/guidelines for the planning department. When there are no clearly defined policies or if there are existing policies, we are seeking your assistance in making them clearer and distribute them to the various super neighborhoods in a timely manner. We are also asking that Mr. Litke?’s decision be overturned if his decision was incorrect.
b. We want to know if the authority of the planning departments?’ director includes the authority to override a community based groups?’ by-laws or guiding principles without invitation, due process or notification. And we would like to know where those policies are printed? In an effort to prevent or reduce any future misunderstandings concerning policy issues and correcting the current situation, we seek your participation in implementing this process.

Our request to the OIG included asking for help via construction of a policy that would prevent or reduce future misunderstanding between community-based organizations and the City-planning department. The specific questions to the Office of Inspector General were based on the following statement listed on their City of Houston?’s web page, third paragraph:

?˜ ?“Whenever inconsistencies, contradictions, or inadequacies are discovered within a City or department policy, it shall be the duty of the OIG to make appropriate recommendations for constructive revisions?”.

?˜ The above questions were not addressed by the OIG report dated 12/5/02 and have not been answered to date.





Our Request to the City of Houston?’s Ethics Committee to review the matter was on 10/29/02
1. We are asking them to review all of the previous questions asked as well as review the director?’s authority guidelines with super neighborhoods councils.
?˜ The Ethics Committee has not scheduled a hearing as of yet.
?˜ To craft clear polices for the director related to his authority related to neighborhood governance.
?˜ What authority can City officials or representatives exercise regarding Super Neighborhoods in matters where no relevant written guidelines or policies currently exist?
?˜ What appeal process exists to mediate or resolve differences between Super Neighborhoods and City of officials?
Our request to the City of Houston?’s Ethics Committee is based on the information located on the City of Houston?’s committee web page in the section regarding the committees charge and it is as follows:
?˜ ?“Will consider regulations adopted in Chapter 18 of the Code of Ordinance and other matters involving ethical conduct by City officials and employees?”.
Sunny Side/South Park Super Neighborhood ?– Investigation Results
After researching all the known information from the City of Houston?’s Planning Department and Housing and Community Development related to super neighborhoods, super neighborhood clusters, civic clubs we found no authorization for the director of planning to not communicate the answers that we requested in a timely manner and nothing that authorizes him to intervene in local governance issues.
?˜ According to ?“How To Run an Effective Neighborhood Based Organization?” (Department of Housing and Community Development)
o Page 1 paragraph 1 - Introduction
?§ ?“The problems and concerns of neighborhoods can best be addressed through the involvement of the people directly affected?”.
o Page 5 paragraph 1- Forming Organizations
?§ ?“Before you form a new organization, find out whether an organization of the type you seek to develop is already active in the area. If so, it is probably better to join forces than start a new group?”.
o Page 16 diagram ?– Summary of Governing Body Types and Selection Methods
TYPE MAKE-UP OF GOVERNING BODY METHOD OF SELETIONS
Executive Committee Officers of the organization Officers are elected by vote of membership.
Executive Committee Officers of the organization; committee chairs Officers are elected by vote of membership; president selects committee chairs.
Board of Directors Officers of the organization Officers are elected by vote of membership
Board of Directors Officers of the organization; committee chairs Officers are elected by vote of membership; president selects committee chairs.
Board of Directors Officers of the organization; committee chairs Additional representatives Officers are elected by vote of membership committee chairs are selected by president; additional representatives are elected by vote of membership or board members appoint them.
Board of Directors Officers of the organization; additional representatives Immediate past president, (ex-officio member) Officers are elected by vote of membership; additional representatives are elected by vote of membership or board members appoint them.
Board of Directors Officers of the organization; additional representatives Immediate past president, (ex-officio member) Officers are elected by vote of membership; additional representatives are elected by vote of membership or board members appoint them.
Board of Directors Representatives of a non-membership organization Incorporators select initial board in subsequent years; present board members select new board members.
This book is used as part of the orientation for super neighborhood councils. This chart does not include the planning director in the decision making process of a super neighborhood.

?˜ According to ?“Guidelines for Organizing Super Neighborhoods and Forming Super Neighborhood Councils?”:
o Has no reference to the authority of the planning director to intervene in stakeholder governance.
o Super Neighborhood Best Practices Material: states that council will be rewarded for their problem solving skills; the application process for a super neighborhood also needs additional clarification in this matter.
?˜ At the June 20, 2002 recognition ceremony, according to statements made by Mayor Brown and Robert Litke related to the role of the director of planning has to do with responding and assisting the super neighborhood councils.
We conclude that:
?˜ Robert Litke is not authorized to make any decision for this body and is not a member.
?˜ We are an officially recognized super neighborhood cluster with a board of governors who are volunteers and not City employees.
?˜ We have an established successful protocol with the planning department that was ignored and no reason was given.
?˜ Our boundaries as a cluster are clearly defined and are inclusive.
Recommendations
Preventive Actions Taken by the Sunny Side/South Park Super Neighborhood Executive Board

The Sunny Side/South Park Super Neighborhood is taking the following steps to reduce, prevent and clarify the relationship between its members and City, county, state and federal employees in our by-laws. These recommendations are scheduled to be ratified at our January meeting.
Article III
The purpose of this organization is to create a broad-based neighborhood forum where residents and stakeholders come together to discuss issues impacting their neighborhood and prioritize them in terms of economic value and community benefit, directly related to the Super Neighborhood Action Plan. The prioritizing formula of the action is based on the total impact it has on the community at-large. However, area stakeholders will discuss the matter for a collective decision. The organization will also seek to provide citizens with opportunities in the areas of: social and economic development, educational and recreational facilities, cultural experiences, job training, and affordable housing. This organization is defined as a deliberative assembly and not bound by governmental employees or department policy and procedures.
Article IV
?· Partnerships and collaboratives are welcomed as long as they are well defined by time, project, community benefit and organizational rules.
Section 4.1 Stakeholders Participation:
Stakeholders include groups like civic clubs, neighborhood block associations, non-profits, tenant associations, and community development corporations. Other neighborhood entities such as businesses, schools, churches and hospitals should be represented through their umbrella organizations and coalitions rather than as single entities. Where there is no coalition organization, one could be formed (Excluding government agencies or their designees) and a representative elected to serve on the super neighborhood council. This will also encourage enhanced cooperation and collaboration between similar groups. For example, instead of a bank president, the chair of the local chamber of commerce would be preferred. (Only the stakeholders as defined under membership can make decisions affecting the organization. Any other verbal contribution can and only be considered as suggestions.)
Article V Executive Board
Section 5.1. Authority
(A) The Board shall have the responsibility of determining policies for the organization and should assure Compliance with all Federal, State, and Municipal laws and regulations.
Section 5.2 FUNCTION AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE BOARD
(a) The Board shall hold regularly scheduled meetings, at least once each month, for which minutes shall be kept.
(b) The Board shall have specific responsibility for: Evaluating program activities including services, utilization patterns, achievement of program objectives and development of a progress for hearing and resolving stakeholders/customer grievances;
(c) Maintaining adequate records to verify and document the functions and activities of the;
Section 5.3 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITES OF INDIVUAL BOARD MEMBERS
(a) To maintain the confidentiality of board information.
(b) To serve on at least one board committee.
(c) To attend board and committee meetings regularly.
(d) To review information provided to the board.
(e) To exercise reasonable business judgment in the conduct of board business.
(f) To participate actively in Board issues, by critiquing reports and providing innovation resolutions to problems.
Section 5.4 Code of Ethics: As a member of the board I will:
?˜ Listen Carefully to Teammates
?˜ Respect Opinions of Fellow Board Members
?˜ Respect and Support the Majority Decisions
?˜ Recognize That All Authority is Vested in the Board
?˜ *Keep Informed of Developments Relevant to Issues
?˜ *Participate Actively in Board Meeting and Actions
?˜ *Call to the Attention of the Board Any Adverse Issues
Section 5.5 REQUIRED KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS OF INDIVIUAL BOARD MEMBERS
(a) Understanding of the concept and operation of a super neighborhood.
(b) Training and/or experience in one or more of the following areas:
A. Management
B. Law
C. Roberts Rules of Order
D. Marketing/public relations;
E. Community Relations






Article XI Committees - Section 11. 4 - Ethics Committee and Advisory Committee
Shall consist of a chairman and four (4) stakeholders including the parliamentarian.
?· Mission: our mission is to create policies in the spirit of professionalism, best practices, guiding principles and procedures that will improve and clarify our operations with governmental and community groups. This committee is also authorized to hear and redress grievances between stakeholder members.
?· Members: this committee will consist of a chairperson totaling five members. The chairperson shall appoint members. These five members are charged with developing various recommendations and meet on an as needed basis.
?· Advisory Members: will consist of not more than nine members seven of whom must be in a professional field of service. Advisory members will serve as a resource panel for the Ethics committee. The president shall appoint the advisory committee.
?· Term of Service: Both members and advisory members serve at the request of the president.
?· Recommendations: all recommendations presented by this committee will be presented to the advisory committee members for review and comment. Once this committee has decided on specific recommendation(s) they will be presented to the executive board for review and then to the general stakeholders board for final acceptance and ratification.

Preventive Suggestions: for the City of Houston?’s Ethics Committee

?˜ Clarify the authority of the planning directors in regards to community based-organizations, homeowner associations, super neighborhoods and super neighborhood clusters.
?˜ Provide us with the answers to the questions contain in this package from the director of planning.
?˜ Convene a public hearing on this matter


Summary: The City of Houston needs to develop clear policies in relationship to the planning department?’s and employees?’ role in the decision making process of any super neighborhood, super neighborhood cluster, civic club, homeowner association or community based-organization.