I don’t claim to know how The Woodlands governs itself. After reading this article, I’m still not sure that I understand it. Besides, as someone who’s always lived in a big city, the idea of there not being some kind of Mayor and City Council is a little weird to me. But hey, it works for them, and that’s what matters.
I figure the propositions to change their structure of governance to comply with the terms of the agreement with the city of Houston regarding annexation will pass easily enough, but I got a bit of a chuckle out of this paragraph:
A special tax district would allow The Woodlands Development Company to protect its investment and continue building without any local municipal restraints, say those opposed to expanding the district.
You mean things will be as they’ve been before? Call me crazy, but given the popularity of the Woodlands, that would seem to be a feature, not a bug. You might want to consider offering a different reason for voting against the referendum, is all I’m saying.