I have two points I wanted to make tonight:

First, I have not seen the language of the Inner Arbor Trust easement, and am not qualified to comment on legal issues relating to the easement. However I have read pretty much every public source of information I could find relating to the various proposals for Symphony Woods, and everything I’ve read indicates that the Columbia Association has been accepting of the actions taken by the Inner Arbor Trust since its creation. That includes in particular the Trust’s decision to leverage the work already done by CA as part of the county planning process, and concentrate first on developing the part of Symphony Woods covered by the current Inner Arbor plan—a plan whose elements are those contained in the original CA-submitted Final Development Plan, including an amphitheater, café, play area, and so on. There is nothing in the public record to indicate that the Inner Arbor Trust was ever acting in violation of the easement as far as CA was concerned. If the current CA board is determined to test the issue in court I believe that the private record of dealings between CA and the Inner Arbor Trust will also show this to be the case.

Second, if the CA board is determined to pursue action against the Inner Arbor Trust then it will presumably put at risk the construction of the Chrysalis amphitheater, the first feature of the Inner Arbor plan scheduled to be realized. The Chrysalis is a key element of the plan, and a needed complement to a renovated Merriweather Post Pavilion. It is also a beautiful and innovative structure, designed by an award-winning architect who’s been hailed as “the rising star of the 21st century.” It would be a shame if Columbia were to lose the chance to host the first major work by an architect who may become as prominent in this century as Frank Gehry did in the last. And given that construction of the Chrysalis is being funded by the county, it would more than a shame if the CA board’s actions cause schedule delays and consequent cost overruns for which Howard County taxpayers will be asked to pick up the tab.

I believe the Inner Arbor Trust has produced a superior plan for Symphony Woods, a plan of which CA has previously been supportive. By all indications the Inner Arbor Trust has also been executing on that plan in a competent and timely manner. For the CA board to now reverse CA’s previous support of the Trust would I think do a disservice to the residents of Columbia and the rest of Howard County, who want to see a renewed and vibrant Symphony Woods. If that reversal ultimately leads to expensive and protracted legal proceedings then I think the board would also do a disservice to the Columbia Association itself, and risk damaging CA’s ability to effectively serve the Columbians to whom it is ultimately accountable.

As for what the CA board will end up doing, I have no idea. I look forward to reading reports from those who are able to attend the meeting.

UPDATE: Fixed a couple of grammatical errors.

Julia McCready - 2014-07-10 16:52

Submit this in writing! It is too good to be cribbed by others.

hecker - 2014-07-11 12:19

Thanks for stopping by! Unfortunately I had other commitments that prevented me from being there in person or otherwise submitting stuff before the meeting.

“Showing up is half the battle.” Apparently the original quote was “showing up is 80% of life,” which only reinforces the point and is coincidentally apposite, since apparently 80% of the resident speak-outs at the meeting were in favor of the Inner Arbor plan. (Per Julia McCready, of the speakers who expressed a clear opinion on the plan 12 out of 15 expressed support.) Promoting the plan online is great, but I think one speaker at an in-person meeting outweighs dozens of blog posts, tweets, and Facebook likes. There will be other opportunities for Inner Arbor supporter to show up and let their voices be heard, whether through speak-outs or written testimony or both. Let’s continue this practice.

Perception has been diverging from reality. Tom Coale has emphasized that the easement scheme for Symphony Woods, under which the Inner Arbor Trust was granted power to carry out the Inner Arbor plan, provides the plan a very strong guarantee of protection from interference from the CA board: “Let’s be clear - the Inner Arbor Plan is the future of Symphony Woods. CA elections will not change that. The vote from February 2013 became irreversible once the easement was signed, so long as the provisions included therein are followed.” Given that Tom is both a lawyer and a former CA board member, I’ll take his word on this.

That means that talk from CA board members about “going back and reworking the plan,” calling for the “return of Symphony Woods to CA control,” and similar sentiments is for the most part just that: talk. In some ways the Inner Arbor skeptics elected to the CA board are like Republican legislators crying “repeal Obamacare,” who found a hot-button issue that can keep their core supporters outraged and motivated to go out and vote. Whether they can actually keep their (expressed or implied) promises to those voters seems to be beside the point.

Reality has a bias. Tom goes on to write of the irreversibility of CA’s decision: “It would be good, very good in fact, if our local media would clarify this fact for its readership.” I personally doubt this is going to happen. Luke Lavoie and other Baltimore Sun reporters have done great work in providing timely coverage of the Inner Arbor plan and the controversies surrounding it. However by the nature of their positions and the policies of their employers they and their fellow reporters at the Sun and elsewhere are very much locked into what some have called the “view from nowhere”: “a bid for trust that advertises the viewlessness of the news producer,” which “places the journalist between polarized extremes, and calls that neither-nor position ‘impartial.’” If Inner Arbor opponents on the CA board want to distort reality for their own political gain then I suspect their half-truths or even outright falsehoods will get duly recorded in the press without comment or contradiction, except perhaps for an occasional editorial piece in which “opinions” are carefully walled off from “reporting.”

“Use the Source, Luke.”¹ If folks want to really know what’s going on with the Inner Arbor plan then ultimately they need to look beyond Columbia Flier articles and go to the source documents. Fortunately the Inner Arbor plan is extremely well-documented both in its features and its history. A good place to start is the “Making of the Trust” page on the Inner Arbor Trust web site and in particular Michael McCall’s letter to the Hickory Ridge Village Board. Unfortunately primary source documents like this rarely get linked to from press articles—but that’s what bloggers are for.

Where I stand. That leads in to my final thought, about my own small role in all this as someone who supports the Inner Arbor plan and has written a lot about it. The article I quoted above also had another quote about an alternative to the “view from nowhere,” a quote that I think sums up well how I approach blogging about the Inner Arbor plan and other topics of relevance to Columbia and Howard County in general: “‘Look, I’m not going to pretend that I have no view. Instead, I am going to level with you about where I’m coming from on this. So factor that in when you evaluate my report. Because I’ve done the work and this is what I’ve concluded…’”

Julia McCready - 2014-05-31 14:35

Sadly, this sort of living life in the rear view mirror appears to be catching on with the newly-elected Oakland Mills Board, who are now publicizing their quest to remake the OM Village Center for the 21st Century with the help of Cy Paumier

hecker - 2014-05-31 15:08

Julia, thanks for stopping by. I have nothing against Cy Paumier personally, and my opinion of his professional work is limited to his plan for Symphony Woods. So I’ll reserve judgment and see what if anything he comes up with for Oakland Mills.

Jessie Newburn - 2014-06-01 13:41

Amen, Frank. Own your perspective, as you do.

Jessie Newburn - 2014-06-01 13:53

I find it fascinating the Cy & Co. are trying to make their mark on Columbia, still and again. Bless their hearts. I was at the Wilde Lake Village Board meeting several years back when – I believe it was Robert Tennenbaum, Cy Paumier and perhaps another – were trying to out-tell Kimco how superior their plan for WLVC’s redevelopment was to the Kimco plan. Both Darrell Nevin (a commercial realtor and lease negotiator for decades) and Dennis Lane (the same, but with a different niche) were in the audience; they had been asked to attend the meeting by the WLVB. Time and again, when Cy & Co. said they wanted X, Y or Z in the village center design, Darrell and Dennis kind of shrugged and said (paraphrasing), “Yeah, you may want that, but no retailer will sign a deal with that space design. Saww-reee” So, why select members of the OMVB / OMCA board would choose Cy & Co. for some sort of idealistic redevelopment vision – when clearly these men are out of touch with market trends and the current realities of retail – is beyond me and, I assume, to most anyone who bothers to look and wonder.

Cherie Beck (cheriebeck@gmail.com) - 2014-06-12 18:25

I will offer, keeping a door open for future plans that build on and improve the Inner Arbor plan is a generative position. To think that we’ve come up with what is the best use of the space is also delusional. In my view, the Inner Arbor Trust is a worthwhile improvement and represents an advancement toward Columbia/Howard County’s potential then the first plan submitted by Cy and Co. and approved by CA, which is why it displaced previous approvals and maintains an enthusiastic base of support. I would challenge anybody else, including Cy and Co. to re-imagine Symphony Woods from the “bar” set by Michael McCall/Inner Arbor Trust. I for one, am very interested in the next iteration of “what can be” as that space- not as a way to stop progress, as a way to add momentum for our collective future. I am grateful for the effort and results put forth by the team headed by Cy Paumier, it yielded a new imagining from Michael McCall. This is the kind of intergroup competitive posturing that generates prosperity for the whole. Being the rejected “stepping stone” proposal to a next iteration of truth, beauty and goodness does not make the previous one wrong, rather it builds a path forward. Watch out of for us vs. them tug-o-war when the battle has already been won. Leap frog, in this case, is a better game to play. Let’s keep it going! The village centers are calling….

Good evening. My name is Frank Hecker. I’m currently a resident of Ellicott City, and I’ve been a member of various Columbia Association programs. I’ve also blogged extensively about the Inner Arbor plan, and I’m a strong supporter of it. However I’m not here tonight to talk about my thoughts on the Inner Arbor plan; you can go to frankhecker.com if you want to read those. Instead I want to talk about other peoples’ opinions of the plan.

The weekend before last I spent Saturday afternoon at the Inner Arbor Trust tent at Wine in the Woods. I had the opportunity to talk to several dozen people about the Inner Arbor plan, many of them Columbia residents, some from elsewhere in Howard County, and a few from out of the area. Every person I talked to, without exception, was enthusiastic about the plan and eager to see it come to fruition. They liked the Chrysalis amphitheater and thought it would be in a great location, right where the Wine in the Woods Purple stage was located. They thought having food and restrooms available at the Butterfly was an excellent idea, and that the building itself was very beautiful. When I explained what the Picnic Table was for they got it instantly, and thought it would be a great place to hang out during Wine in the Woods or at other times. Finally, they even understood the purpose of the Caterpillar in providing an improved entrance to Merriweather and an alternative to the current fence, and thought it very attractive.

The lesson here is that while our attention has been distracted by the views of those who are vocal opponents of the Inner Arbor plan,  other Columbians and Howard County residents constitute a vast unheard supermajority who like the Inner Arbor plan and want to see it completed as soon as possible. I suggest those of you who are just listening to the small group of opponents go out and discover the depth of support that the Inner Arbor plan has from ordinary Columbians once you have their attention and they have a good chance to learn more about it. That concludes my remarks. Thank you for providing me the opportunity to speak tonight.

I saw many other supporters of the Inner Arbor plan there as well, several of whom also spoke. I hope to see others blogging about the meeting itself, as I’m curious as to what happened after I left.

Trevor Greene (trevordentist@gmail.com) - 2014-05-29 15:03

Frank, it was great to see you at the meeting. After you left, Michael McCall reviewed some details of the plan. He even included a photo from this blog and thanked you for the picture. I found that part of the presentation to be really interesting, but I think several of the people in the room have seen it before and were getting frustrated. During the presentation Reginald Avery and Alan Klein asked several pointed questions. It is clear that they were looking for any way possible to criticize the plan. At one point Alan Klein said, “no where did it say that you were to put meandering paths in the plan.” About 5 minutes later Brian Dunn pointed out that the planning board requested meandering paths. That shot Alan Klein down pretty good. I really appreciate how Brian Dunn points out the flaws in the detractors’ statements and backs it up with written documentation. About 10 more people spoke after McCall’s presentation. I wasn’t counting (this is an estimation), but I think of the 20 or so people that spoke, 17 were in favor of the Inner Arbor. One of the last few speakers said something very poignant. He said, “We are witnessing history.” He added that the pioneers had their time to lead Columbia and create something new. But now, another generation is taking the lead in Columbia and creating their own new Columbia. You really could feel a shift in the tone of the discussion at the meeting. There certainly were a grumpy few making snide remarks every minute or two, but a vast majority of people in the room were in favor of the Inner Arbor, and in favor of change. It was the first CA meeting I’ve attended, and was quite exciting. I’m really positive about the future.

hecker - 2014-05-29 18:45

Trevor, thanks very much for stopping by and writing an “eyewitness report”! (And of course thank you for showing up and speaking last night as well.)