Maple Leaf: What are the other options?

I serve on the County Redevelopment Commission (RDC).  The following is a copy of a Letter to the Editor of the Brown County Democrat. The purpose of the letter was to reinforce the need for a collaborative approach when considering development projects that can have long-term impacts on the community.

Maple Leaf: What are the other options?

 The explanation for the funding for the proposed Maple Leaf Performing Arts Center (MLPAC) has identified that “tourists will pay for it through the innkeeper’s tax.”  It has also been stated that building the venue will require borrowing at least 10.2 million dollars and issuing a bond.  Although the strategy is to make the bond payments from the innkeeper’s tax, if the revenue from the venue is not sufficient to cover the payments, the responsibility to meet the bond requirements falls on the county taxpayers.

The project is also being marketed as a “too good to fail.”  If this is true, then take some time to market the venue to private developers who can raise capital to fund the venture.

Maple Leaf in a different location (Gnaw Bone? Bean Blossom? Ski World?) could be an “anchor” facility that could support further residential and commercial development in the respective area that would be compatible with the comprehensive plan. This could include more housing that attracts businesses that can serve both the residential and tourist market.

A different location might also have the highest likelihood of resulting in positive trends in all the County’s Community Vitality Indicators (CVIs). CVIs include assessed value, per capita income, population growth, school enrollment, and educational attainment rate. A government owned venue does not generate property tax.

Establishment of the innkeeper’s tax required State government to pass a law – IC-6-9-14 Brown County Innkeepers Tax. The statute requires “county government” to provide the management and oversight of the revenue and to establish a five (5) member convention and visitors commission (CVC).  The law states that the purpose of the commission is: “to promote the development and growth of conventions and visitation in the county.”  CVC members are appointed by the Commissioners and Council.

Wikipedia identifies an extensive list of tourism related categories that would “promote the development and growth of visitation in the county” that includes: Cultural, Historical, Preservation, Education, Athletics, Arts, Agricultural, and Wellness/Fitness to name a few.

In regards to the statute, CVC member Barry Herring has remarked: “I think it’s primarily supposed to promote heads in beds. It’s supposed to promote overnight stays because it’s an innkeepers tax, that’s generated by innkeepers.”  

The statute does not restrict tourist related options to those that may result in hotel stays. In fact, any of the options could result in overnight stays.

In reply to a question about the possible competition from the Opry, Herring replied: “We’re looking at it like a Branson (Missouri) scenario. We think the more, the better.”  Note that Branson has been referred to as “the music capital of the entire universe” and includes numerous theatres built by nationally recognized entertainers. Gatlinburg has Dolly Parton.

The fact that Mr. Herring as the new owner of the Brown County Inn who is also a new member of the CVC had an epiphany regarding the options for investing revenue from the innkeeper’s tax should indicate that other investment opportunities may have been missed over the years.

The Comprehensive Plan is also mandated by law (Title 36, Article 7, Planning and Development). The Plan Commission is the body responsible for maintaining a comprehensive plan, which is required to be developed and maintained (IC 36-7-4-501) if the community wishes to exercise the power of zoning. The plan is the foundation for assessing whether new ideas fit into the strategy that citizens will support.

The Plan must be updated to include a tourism strategy that identifies the categories of tourism that taxpayers may want to support with revenue from the innkeeper’s tax.  It is up to all the county citizens to decide how the revenue from the innkeeper’s tax can best be invested.

In addition to the plan, procedures also need to be developed by the plan commission and shared with the public that identifies the process that will be used by members to assess the benefits of a project against the criteria identified in the plan. This change can help assure the community that the plan commission performed their due diligence before providing a recommendation.

At the Area Plan Commission (APC) meeting on August 22, Bruce Gould presented the request for the required zoning change for MLPAC. Citizens had up to three minutes to communicate their support or lack of support for the project. Mr. Gould had the opportunity to provide a rebuttal. APC member Paul Navarro suggested that the county first conduct a traffic analysis and effects study before voting on the recommendation. The APC with few questions and little to no discussion among the members quickly voted to recommend approval. Paul Navarro was the only dissenting vote.

MLPAC proponents emphasized the possible benefits to the Town of Nashville and the tourism industry but did not provide a convincing argument as to why this was the best option for the county. The next step in the process requires the commissioners to listen to input from the citizens and to consider the APC ‘s recommendation for the zoning change.

I am a fifth-generation Hoosier who has enjoyed hiking, camping, biking and vacationing with my family in Brown County for over 50 years. My wife and I bought property here over 18 years ago with the intent of retiring here full-time, which we did in 2014. The current comprehensive plan identifies the vision for Brown County that I support, but it could be more specific in order to clearly identify what Brown Countians want and do not want regarding change and new development.

 Tim Clark
Brown County

Disclaimer:  The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any commission or board.    

Maple Leaf: Not in the plan

I serve on the County Redevelopment Commission (RDC).  The following is a copy of a Letter to the Editor of the Brown County Democrat. The purpose of the letter was to reinforce the need for a collaborative approach when considering development projects that can have long-term impacts on the community.

Letter: ‘Zoning for Maple Leaf: Not in the plan’

The Brown County Comprehensive Plan states that the purpose of the plan “is to provide guidance on decision making regarding Brown County land use, public service and zoning that enhances the quality of life for the residents based on the county’s natural beauty and rural atmosphere.”

The comprehensive plan further states that “the desire to preserve” is the major element in guiding the comprehensive plan for the county, and states: “People continue to come to Brown County to visit and live. We must plan to ensure that the residents’ reasons for choosing Brown County as a place to live are protected and preserved.”

The Area Plan Commission approved the zoning for the assisted living facility and the senior apartments. The zoning request for an adjacent property from agriculture to commercial to accommodate an entertainment venue is incompatible with the planning principles stated in the comprehensive plan, and the commitment made to the senior residents and neighboring property owners in the area.

Further, given the intent for Mr. Snyder to sell a section of his farmland for commercial purposes, it’s possible that he may choose to sell more land in the future. Now may be a good time to update the comprehensive plan to identify community expectations for the types of development for Snyder farm that the community will want to support. The update to the plan should also include a tourism-related policy and strategy.

The “voice of county residents” is captured in the comprehensive plan that guides any zoning related changes.

Although the proposed Maple Leaf Performing Arts Center has not been formally approved by the commissioners and council, advocates of the project will be requesting a zoning change at the APC on Tuesday, Aug. 22 at 6 p.m.

This request should be denied.

The APC should consider beginning the process of involving the community in making any needed updates to the county comprehensive plan.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this letter are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any commission or board.

Tim Clark, Brown County

Failing to Plan: Planning to Fail

The following is a copy of a Letter to the Editor of the Brown County Democrat. The purpose of the letter was to reinforce the need for a collaborative approach when considering development projects that can have long-term impacts on the community.

Maple Leaf Proposal: Let’s Not Fail to Plan
By Tim Clark

At the June 20, 2017, presentation to a crowd of approximately 100 people on the proposed Maple Leaf Performing Arts Center (MLPAC) at the Brown County Playhouse, Commissioner Diana Biddle stated:

“We have planned ourselves to death: Strategic planning, strategic planning, strategic planning.”   “It is time for strategic doing,”  

Although this statement received a round of applause, and may accurately reflect the perception held by many in the community, there can be more to the story.

The Purdue University, Center for Regional Development has described “strategic doing” as including “engaging the community in building a prosperous, sustainable future for ourselves and future generations.” This future must be identified in a comprehensive plan and strategy. The last revision to the county comprehensive plans was in 2011, and the county does not have a published strategic plan.

Regarding the proposed MLPAC, the community at large has not had the opportunity at official public meetings to provide input on the best investment options for the revenue collected from the inn keepers tax nor were they involved in providing feedback on the size, scope, and location of a venue.

Further, citizens have not been provided with sufficient details on the nature of the $10.2 million dollar debt including information about the right, if any, to remonstrate. Although principal and interest on the debt can be paid with revenues from the inn keepers tax, taxpayers are likely at risk for the total debt.

Despite this lack of community engagement, advocates for the proposed MLPAC are on the Area Plan Commission agenda on August 22 and intend to request a zoning change for the Snyder Farm site.

An initial outline of the “proposed” MLPAC review and approval process was developed by the county attorneys – Barnes and Thornburg.  The Brown County Redevelopment Commission (RDC) initiated a review on the proposed MLPAC in the context of a county wide perspective. This review included an outline of an initial action plan that involves collaboration among all affected government offices to ensure the due diligence expected from taxpayers.

At the July 13, 2017, RDC meeting, Commissioner Biddle stated that the initial process that was outlined by Barnes and Thornburg was changed to the extent that project reviews and approval no longer required the involvement of the RDC.   An updated outline and timeline has yet to be shared with the public.

The RDC is pursuing federal grants to fund updates to the county comprehensive plan and to fund development of an economic development strategic plan.  These plans along with a five-year budgeting capability would include the key elements of a county strategic plan –likely the first ever such plan in the history of Brown County government. Because of the long lead time involved with government grants, self-funding the development of these plans may be an immediate and needed course of action.

To support the aim of “engaging the community in building a prosperous, sustainable future for ourselves and future generations,” either the RDC or another objective third party should be asked to take the lead in facilitating the review and approval process. This will help ensure community support for the proposed MLPAC and its alignment with the existing or updated county comprehensive plan.

For those where planning may be an abhorrent concept, Benjamin Franklin is credited with the axiom that: “If you fail to plan, you are planning to fail!” Let’s not plan to fail.

Disclaimer:  The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any commission or board.

How to make a great country, better

The U.S. system of government is designed to be continually improved with the aim of “We the People” making progress toward “a more perfect Union.” The opportunity is to consider applying a proven method for reducing imperfection that will produce results where we all gain or, at least, are not any worse off.

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”Preamble to the U.S. Constitution

A problem with the word “perfect” is that the term can be used in a context where perfection can be perceived as being obtainable. The U.S. Founding Fathers were careful to prevent citizens from drawing this conclusion by using the phrase “more perfect.” Legendary football coach Vince Lombardi reinforced the “more perfect” theme in his statement: “Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence.”

A 2016 Gallup survey indicated that 89% of Americans believe in God or a universal spirit. Many of the Founding Fathers were influenced by the biblical philosophy that only God is perfect and that man is imperfect but is expected to improve. Consequently, it might be concluded that life is all about reducing imperfection.

W. Edwards Deming, who is the founding father of many effective quality improvement methods, concluded that if he was to reduce his message to just a few words, it all had to do with reducing variation. Reducing variation is synonymous with reducing imperfection. A description of variation in a context that supports the interrelationship between variation, perfection, excellence, and quality is as follows:

American Society for Quality: What Is the Law of Variation?

“In simple yet profound terms, variation represents the difference between an ideal and an actual situation.

An ideal represents a standard of perfection—the highest standard of excellence—that is uniquely defined by stakeholders, including direct customers, internal customers, suppliers, society, and shareholders. Excellence is synonymous with quality, and excellent quality results from doing the right things, in the right way.

The fact that we can strive for an ideal but never achieve it means that stakeholders always experience some variation from the perfect situations they envision. This, however, also makes improvement and progress possible. Reducing the variation stakeholders experience is the key to quality and continuous improvement.”

Ideals are derived from basic human needs. America’s ideals were identified in the Declaration of Independence:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Deming concluded that, without knowledge of common and special cause variation, 95% of actions taken to improve a situation results in no improvement and can make things worse. Knowing the difference between common and special cause variation results in a higher success rate because it leads to improving systems. Further, it leads to knowledge through assessments to determine what worked, what did not work, and what might be done differently next time to successfully reduce variation. (Assess your knowledge of the variation paradigm.)

By implementing the methods proven to be effective in reducing variation, the United States has the potential to surpass and then sustain the economic boom and prosperity it experienced after WWII (1947-1977) when the country had a global competitive advantage. But as Deming often remarked: “It is not necessary to change. Survival is not mandatory.”

Despite the conclusion drawn by major media outlets such as FORTUNE magazine and U.S. News and World Report that Deming’s work represents one of the most fundamental improvements in business if not human history, Deming’s work is still virtually undiscovered.

When Deming described the scope of the needed transformation, he used the term metanoia, which he defined as “penitence, repentance, reorientation of one’s way of life, spiritual conversion.”Norman Todd elaborated on this premise in his paper Metanoia and Transformation II.

A Way Ahead

Perhaps if more leaders recognize the connection between imperfection and variation, they might become more aware of the connection between science and spirituality. This, in turn, might lead to the broader application of Deming’s teachings.

Leading this change will require that a critical mass of leaders embrace the new paradigm for Quality Leadership that will support a Vision for Transformation.

A Critical Flaw in the U.S. System of Government

Note: This article was re-posted on Linkedin (with a few minor word changes) under the title: “How to make a great country, better.”   

The U.S. system of government is designed to be continually improved with the aim of “We the People” making progress toward “a more perfect Union.” The flaw is that we lack a shared method for reducing imperfection that will produce results where we all gain or, at least, are not any worse off.

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”Preamble to the U.S. Constitution

A problem with the word “perfect” is that the term can be used in a context where perfection can be perceived as being obtainable. The U.S. Founding Fathers were careful to prevent citizens from drawing this conclusion by using the phrase “more perfect.” Legendary football coach Vince Lombardi reinforced the “more perfect” theme in his statement: “Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence.”

A 2016 Gallup survey indicated that 89% of Americans believe in God or a universal spirit. Many of the Founding Fathers were influenced by the biblical philosophy that only God is perfect and that man is imperfect but is expected to improve. Consequently, it might be concluded that life is all about reducing imperfection.

Edwards Deming, who is the founding father of many effective quality improvement methods, concluded that if he was to reduce his message to just a few words, it all had to do with reducing variation. Reducing variation is synonymous with reducing imperfection. A description of variation in a context that supports the interrelationship between variation, perfection, excellence, and quality is as follows:

American Society for Quality: What Is the Law of Variation?

“In simple yet profound terms, variation represents the difference between an ideal and an actual situation.

An ideal represents a standard of perfection—the highest standard of excellence—that is uniquely defined by stakeholders, including direct customers, internal customers, suppliers, society, and shareholders. Excellence is synonymous with quality, and excellent quality results from doing the right things, in the right way.

The fact that we can strive for an ideal but never achieve it means that stakeholders always experience some variation from the perfect situations they envision. This, however, also makes improvement and progress possible. Reducing the variation stakeholders experience is the key to quality and continuous improvement.”

Ideals are derived from basic human needs. America’s ideals were identified in the Declaration of Independence:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Deming concluded that, without knowledge of common and special cause variation, 95% of actions taken to improve a situation results in no improvement and can make things worse. Knowing the difference between common and special cause variation results in a higher success rate because it leads to improving systems. Further, it leads to knowledge through assessments to determine what worked, what did not work, and what might be done differently next time to successfully reduce variation. (Assess your knowledge of the variation paradigm.)

By implementing the methods proven to be effective in reducing variation, the United States has the potential to surpass and then sustain the economic boom and prosperity it experienced after WWII (1947-1977) when the country had a global competitive advantage. But as Deming often remarked: “It is not necessary to change. Survival is not mandatory.”

Despite the conclusion drawn by major media outlets such as FORTUNE magazine and U.S. News and World Report that Deming’s work represents one of the most fundamental improvements in business if not human history, Deming’s work is still virtually undiscovered.

When Deming described the scope of the needed transformation, he used the term metanoia, which he defined as “penitence, repentance, reorientation of one’s way of life, spiritual conversion.”Norman Todd elaborated on this premise in his paper Metanoia and Transformation II.

A Way Ahead

Perhaps if more leaders recognize the connection between imperfection and variation, they might become more aware of the connection between science and spirituality. This, in turn, might lead to the broader application of Deming’s teachings.

Leading this change will require that a critical mass of leaders embrace the new paradigm for Quality Leadership that will support a Vision for Transformation.

Business Culture and Financial Success

 

Top Bridgewater exec explains how its intense, unique culture helped the world’s largest hedge fund make $50 billion

Interesting insight on the correlation between culture and success.  Ray Dalio provides further insight in his e-book titled Principles by Ray Dalio,

W. Edwards Deming estimated that only 5% of management actions applying traditional methods resulted in improvement. Appears that Bridgewater has a higher success/failure ratio.

New Book: The Symphony of Profound Knowledge

New Book: The Symphony of Profound Knowledge

Just ordered the book – The Symphony of Profound Knowledge, through Amazon. The book was developed by a Deming colleague in partnership with Aileron.

I’ve read and studied dozens of books written by individuals that worked with Deming.  I have yet to read one where the authors attempted to identify the paradigm that led to Deming’s  insights and contributions.

The most impressive comment that I heard first hand from a well known and respected student and colleague of Deming was that he never quite understood Deming’s concept for the system of profound knowledge.  Rare for someone as accomplished as he is to admit what he did not know.

It  will be interesting to read how and if the author – Ed Baker, offers and explanation of why Deming concluded that improvement is all about reducing variation.

Online school to be largest internet company in 2030

A top futurist predicts the largest internet company of 2030 will be an online school

Seems like an ambitious projection until you think of how fast the unmanned vehicle technology has progressed.

DARPA sponsored their Grand Challenge in 2004 that required a vehicle to autonomously navigate a 142-mile course. None of the 15 vehicles made it to the finish line. In 2005, five (5) vehicles completed a 132-mile course.

 

New Administration: Real Improvement This Time?

Throughout my federal career, I had the opportunity to work with and support many presidentially inspired “change initiatives,” with the expectation that change would result in what citizens would conclude is an improvement.

The past initiatives include zero-based budgeting, quality circles, total quality management, Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA), Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence, Corporate Information Management, Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), business process reengineering, reinventing government, Six Sigma, and Lean.

Many of these programs have faded away. The initiatives supported by law (such as GPRA and FMFIA) are still on the books, but they certainly have not achieved their aims. Only the Baldrige program has successfully stayed the course since its inception in 1987.

I’m guardedly optimistic that government reform and improvement under the Trump Administration may have more success in bringing about and sustaining needed improvement.

Newt Gingrich and the Trump Administration

In the 2016 U.S. presidential election, voters voiced their demand for change. Veteran pollster and political strategist Patrick Caddell noted that this race represents another American revolution.

Trump supporters demand revolutionary change. Trump opponents are awaiting evidence that the new administration can make changes in one area without making things worse in others.

Success in achieving real improvement in a political climate that has been described as divisive and polarizing requires new approaches. Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the U.S. House and advisor to President-elect Donald Trump, might be able to provide them.

When Gingrich was asked about a possible new role in the Trump administration, he remarked that he saw himself as more of a waste, fraud and abuse czar. In The Hill, Gingrich commented:

“I said I want to be the senior planner for the entire federal government, and I want a letter from you that says Newt Gingrich is authorized to go to any program in any department, examine it and report directly to the president.” 

In a follow-up question on the involvement of Gingrich, President-elect Trump stated that “Gingrich is going to be involved in our government.” However, The Washington Post reported that Gingrich intends to focus on “strategic planning” rather than run a federal department. Gingrich remarked:

I want to be free to network across the whole system and look at what we have to do to succeed.”

During his run for president in 2012, Gingrich signed a pledge to adopt Lean Six Sigma in government if elected. By signing the pledge, he promised to:

“eliminate spending deficits and start paying down the national debt by 2017 by deploying Lean Six Sigma waste reduction methods to detect and eliminate 25 percent of spending per year across the federal government.”

As I mentioned in a previous article at FedSmith.com, “Individual and System Performance – Pass or Fail?”, Lean Six Sigma methods and tools can improve efficiency. However, they are not sufficient to bring about the federal-level changes that are needed to positively impact the entire nation. A new quality paradigm is needed.

The New Quality Paradigm

From 1991-1993, Gingrich was a student of the world-renowned quality expert W. Edwards Deming. Deming’s contributions were recognized by U.S. News and World Report as one of the nine turning points in world history and by FORTUNE Magazine as among the greatest contributions in business history. Dr. Deming was also nominated for a Nobel Prize in Economics.

Gingrich met with Deming for about 60 hours over a three-year period to learn how Deming’s principles could be applied to support a quality transformation in America. Gingrich integrated what he learned from Deming in the sixth class (“Pillar Five, Quality as Defined by Deming”) of a 10-session college course titled “Renewing American Civilization.”

Excerpts from that college course have been compiled into the book Readings in Renewing American Civilization (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993). On page 107, Gingrich defines “The New Quality Paradigm” as follows:

“What Deming offers is the beginning of a new paradigm and a framework for management within it.

His aim is to improve the quality of life and economic situation of all. Some may quibble with the aim, but there are no viable alternatives. Because of interdependencies, everyone will eventually lose unless all can win.

Furthermore, ensuring that everyone wins is not a matter of taking from the rich to give to the poor, i.e., redistributing the outcomes of the process. Rather, it is of working on today’s process so that everyone can get better results tomorrow.

The job is to improve the ability of each and every individual and organization to create value for themselves and for the society that nurtures them.”

New Standard for Quality Leadership

Successful application of “The New Quality Paradigm” requires the application of a new standard for quality leadership derived from the contributions of Walter A. Shewhart and W. Edwards Deming.

Deming concluded that working to achieve optimal levels of performance is all about reducing variation from the ideal. Deming also reinforced that the failure to understand variation results in situations where the majority of not all in some cases, of changes, result in no improvement. This observation was certainly validated by my experiences with change within the government.

During the final years of my career (2011-2014), I wrote a series of articles in FedSmith.com on the need for change and how better methods could be applied to improve the efficiencies and effectiveness of the political system and the administration of its policies, laws, and regulations.

A Way Ahead

The U.S. political system was designed to be continually improved through changes that result in “a more perfect union.” As Gingrich so eloquently expressed, a new paradigm is needed to achieve the types of results where everyone gains or is, at least, not any worse off. This requires the application of a new standard of quality leadership. Leading this transformation in a political climate that is divisive and polarizing has to be considered one of the ultimate challenges—but it is a challenge that the American people will expect to be met.

The mid-term elections in 2018 will provide citizens with the opportunity to provide feedback on the direction and to determine if they are any better off in 2018 than they were in 2016.