Maple Leaf Project – For The Record

The Maple Leaf Music Venue and Performing Arts Center is to be a Brown County, IN government-owned and managed venue.  It is a 12.5 million dollar facility that is funded by revenue from the Brown County Innkeepers Tax.

The intent of the documentation (this post) is to keep track of the evolution and impact of the project over time and compare the expected results with the actual.

PHASE II —  Management and Construction – Feb 27, 2018 to Present

PHASE I — Approval Process – April 2017 – Jan  2018.

Decision Authority:  The commissioners and all council members voted to approve funding for the project.  They declined to hold any public meetings to get input from the citizens regarding the desirability and concerns related to the project.

  • Commissioners: Dave Anderson, Diana Biddle, Jerry Pittman.
  • County Council: David Critser, John Price, Glenda Stogsdill, Debbie Guffey, Darren Byrd, Keith Baker, Art Knight.
  • Maple Leaf Project Committee:
    • CVC: Barry Herring (Brown County Inn), Kevin Ault (The Seasons Lodge, Hotel Nashville),
    • CVB: Bruce Gould (Cornerstone Inn,) Jane Ellis (CVB Director).
    • Other: Doug Hardin, Venue Designer, Jim Schultz, Community member

2017 Board of Directors CVB

Key Dates:  Commissioners and council refuse to answer questions or delay their vote pending public hearings to obtain citizen input regarding the project.

  • August 22, 2017. Request for Zoning Change, Area Plan Commission, Recommend approval by the Commissioners.
  • September 6, 2017.  9:00 am Commissioner Meeting. Zoning approved. It was stated that the approval was for zoning and not the project and that public meetings would be held regarding the desirability of the project.
  • November 15, 2017. Commissioners approve the project.
  • November 20, 2017. Council approves project.
  • Dec 20, 2017. Commissioners pass a final resolution approving the project.

SUMMARY – Extracted from the following article: Dec 27, 2017. GUEST OPINION: The role of process in the future of Brown County. The Maple Leaf Performing Arts Center (MLPAC) project and the process used to fast-track approval may represent a turning point for the future of the county.  

  • In April 2017, owners of hotels and inns, who are also appointed to the Convention and Visitors Commission (CVC) and Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB) decide to use the revenue collected from the innkeeper’s tax to invest in an asset that will promote tourism. The Innkeeper’s Tax is a pass-through tax paid by the party renting the overnight accommodations.
  • CVC members are appointed by the county commissioners and council. The CVB is a non-profit organization established to manage tourism related promotion on behalf of the CVC.
  • CVC/CVB members decided on a music venue and performing arts center and also determined the size, location, scope, cost (12.5 million), and overall governance plan for the facility. Given that this investment is expected to result in overnight stays, their businesses will directly benefit from the investment, and the asset values of their establishments will likely increase.
  • Initially, county citizens were told that revenue from the innkeepers tax would be used to pay the principal and interest on the mortgage for the venue. Any profits were to be used for community and county infrastructure priorities.  The final terms of the deal are that profits would be used to make the mortgage payment and the revenue from the innkeeper’s tax would only be used if profits were not sufficient to make the payment.
  • A common perception in the county that was reinforced by the president of the county council, may be that the revenue from the innkeeper’s tax is “their (CVC) money.” This inaccurate perception may have contributed to a lack of transparency over the years regarding the management and expenditure of these funds.  This revenue, per statute, is a county asset. Commissioners and Council (elected by citizens) appoint CVC members who are subordinate to the citizens and their elected officials.
  • The approval of a 12.5 million dollar loan using the revenue from the innkeeper’s tax as collateral was approved by the commissioners on Nov 15 and the county council on Nov 20. The commissioners approved another resolution approving the project on Dec 20. In case of default, the venue would become the property of the bank, and per the county council president and the county financial consultant, county taxpayers would not be obligated to assume the liability.
  • No public meetings expressly focused on this important project were scheduled by the commissioners or council before their meetings to approve the project. The League of Women Voters of Brown County offered to facilitate a public meeting to address citizen questions, concerns, and issues regarding the project. Members of the CVC, the CVB and the informal team working on the Maple Leaf project declined to participate, as did several key elected officials.
  • The editor of the only newspaper in the county – The Brown County Democrat, did recuse herself from being the primary reporter because of a conflict of interest — her husband serves on the CVC. The Democrat welcomed opposing opinions in Guest Columns and Letters to the Editor.

Jan 23, 2018.  Working toward ‘a more perfect union’ By Tim Clark, guest columnist. ”As individuals, we may not have too much direct influence over what happens politically at the national level of government. At the county level, our efforts can certainly be directed to local issues. We can choose to determine the quality of government that we want and need.

Jan 11, 2018.   Land, loan set for Maple Leaf project – Brown County Democrat.  The Maple Leaf Performing Arts Center officially has a home and a $12.5 million bank loan to build it. The Maple Leaf Building Corporation signed an agreement with Chuck Snyder on Dec. 20 to buy his land. The sale closed Dec. 28. A tentative agreement had been in place since July to buy 13.472 acres …

Jan 11, 2018GUEST OPINION: ‘Coming together is a beginning’ By TIM CLARK, guest columnist. In the first part of my series, “The role of process in county’s future,” I suggested that the process applied to fast-track approval of the $12.5 million investment in the Maple Leaf Performing Arts Center (MLPAC) might represent a turning point for the future of the ...

Jan 9, 2018Letter: Maple Leaf Committee needs to answer questions To the editor: It is obvious to me that the Maple Leaf Committee is not going to answer questions about the performing arts center and to have “no more forums.” Someone needs to immediately file a lawsuit against the committee and compel them to answer all questions in writing! Michael B. Smith …

Dec 26, 2017. Letter: In response to Maple Leaf ‘no more … – Brown County Democrat To the editor: When we saw the headline in this past week’s paper, we were shocked. After much thought, we have concluded that this letter is necessary. As far as we know, no true forum which seemed designed to solicit genuine input from our county’s residents on the viability of the proposed Maple Leaf …

Dec 26, 2017Letter: More questions about the Maple Leaf center – Brown County …To the editor: Someone once told me “If you’re not prepared to deal with the answer, don’t ask the question.” It seems to me that many of the questions raised since the Maple Leaf Performing Arts Center idea was introduced have not been fully considered or answered. Some of the questions include: Who ..

Dec 19, 2017Maple Leaf Building Corporation meeting Wednesday. Members have been appointed to the Maple Leaf Building Corporation, and they’re having their first meeting Wednesday afternoon. Local attorney Andy Szakaly will serve as the registered agent for the Maple Leaf Building Corporation.

Dec 12, 2007. Brown County Democrat.  Maple Leaf committee: No more forums Sufficient input time has been given at past public meetings, group says.   The offer by the League of Women Voters to facilitate a public meeting was refused.  

Nov 28, 2017. Council approves pledging innkeepers tax to fund Maple Leaf venue The Brown County Council voted unanimously last week to pledge innkeepers tax revenue to pay the mortgage of the Maple Leaf Performing Arts Center. That was the third of three board votes needed to move the project along to the next step.

Nov 22, 2017, Print Edition Brown County Democrat:

Nov 20, 2017, 6:30 p.m.   County Council Meeting. County council unanimously approved the project. The audio recording of the meeting (See: Public Meeting Audio, County Council Minutes Audio Link 11/20/2017). Copy of the questions provided to the commissioners on Nov 15 also provided to the council.

County Council Statement 20 Nov 2017.   Copy of the questions provided to the commissioners meeting on Nov 15 also provided to the council.

Nov 17, 2017Steps taken to fund Maple Leaf venue. The Maple Leaf Performing Arts Center has received two votes of approval from government groups, and it will go before the Brown County Council for an additional vote on financing Monday night. 

Nov 15, 2017, 9 a.m.  Commissioner Meeting.  Commissioners voted to approve a resolution requesting council approval for financing.  Copy of questions provided to the commissioners.

Nov 6, 2017, Commissioner and Council Meeting.  Maple Leaf update provided to commissioners and council in a “working session”-  not advertised to the public.  Copy of the timetable provided at the meeting: Oct 24, 2017, Project Timetable).

Nov 1, 2017 9 a.m. Commissioners Meeting.  Maple Leaf update provided to commissioners – not advertised to the public.

Sep 20, 2017.  Guest Column: A study of tourism and economic sustainability.  By Tim Clark, “However, tourism, by itself, has not and cannot provide a sustainable economic future for Brown County. Further, too much tourism can have …”

Note: The proponents of the Maple Leaf project claimed that Maple Leaf “….  could be what it takes to turn things around economically for Brown County.”  This article was written to offer another perspective.  The county is funded primarily by income and property tax.  

Sept 6, 2017. Memorandum to the County Commissioners preceding their vote to approve the zoning change for the Maple Leaf Music Venue.  Encl 0 Memo for Commissioners 2017_09_06

July/August 2017.   ENCL 6 RDC Working Draft Project Analysis and Review 201709v10a – Proposed Maple Leaf Project

August 29, 2017.  Guest Opinion: Maple Leaf: What are the other options?  By Tim Clark guest columnistThe Maple Leaf in a different location (Gnaw Bone? Bean Blossom? Ski World?) could be an “anchor” facility that could support further …”

Facebook Page: Nashville isn’t broke so don’t break it! Comments on the article

Aug 29, 2017. New developments prompt county planning discussion “Clark asked fellow members of the Brown County Redevelopment Commission on Aug. … in a permanent increase in year-round tourism in Brown County,” Clark wrote in a letter to the board.”

August 22, 2017.   Letter: ‘Zoning for Maple Leaf: Not in the plan’ – Brown County Democrat , Tim Clark  “Although the proposed Maple Leaf Performing Arts Center has not been formally approved by the commissioners …”  

August 21, 2017. Letter to the Area Plan Commission preceding their vote for the zoning change for the Maple Leaf music venue. Encl 2a Letter to APC on Maple Leaf Zoning

Aug 17, 2017.  Letters: Find a better site for Maple Leaf concert hall – Brown County … The proposed Maple Leaf Performing Arts Center would put a 2,000-seat concert hall next to one of the prime retirement communities in the state of Indiana. While the performing arts center is a good idea and has been talked about for many years, the chosen site is not only poor planning, it is a bad idea.

Aug 8, 2017. Letter: Maple Leaf proposal: Let’s not fail to plan By Tim Clark. 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!”

At the July 13, 2017, RDC meeting, a County Commissioner stated that the initial process that was outlined by the county attorneys 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.

June 20, 2017.  Building a destination: Maple Leaf Performing Arts plans “A group of people were waiting for the Brown County Playhouse doors to open for a public rollout meeting and presentation about the Maple …”

April 9, 2017.  Brown County Redevelopment Commission (RDC) members attended a presentation that outlined the concept for the Maple Leaf Performing Arts Center (MLPAC). In a follow-up contact following the presentation, the RDC reinforced their support for the concept and the importance of aligning the project in the context of a county plan and strategy. The RDC had no further involvement in the project.



Planning for project success is a choice

The following is a copy of a Guest Column that was expected to be published Nov 15, 2017, in the Brown County Democrat prior to any vote by the Commissioners (Nov 15) and Council Meeting (Nov 20) approving the Maple Leaf Music Venue project. Due to space constraints, the article was published in the Nov 23, 2017, edition which may have been better timing.
The purpose of the column was to reinforce the need for a collaborative approach when considering development projects that can have long-term impacts on the community.

The recent community conversation on the status of the Salt Creek Trail reinforces that using ad-hoc teams to identify and manage projects independent of a county strategy and comprehensive planning can be problematic.

Salt Creek Trail has not been the only County project that has risks that can be eliminated or mitigated through improvements in the planning process.  Without better planning, we will continue to take a reactive “whack a mole” approach as issues bubble to the surface. Current projects include the following:

  • Salt Creek Trail Project, now 15 years in duration, has been delayed due to objections from affected property owners and elected officials opposed to the use of eminent domain by the State of Indiana.
  • Proposed Maple Leaf Music Venue.  This project is expected to be approved by the end of November. The following entities have accepted responsibility and accountability for all project results:  Council, Commissioners, Convention Visitors Commission.  Commissioners accepted the League of Women Voters request to hold a public meeting to address any questions or concerns that citizens may have with the project.
  • County Courthouse Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).  This is a critical project to accommodate citizens with challenges, but approved and funded solutions have yet to be identified. Improving security is another important requirement.

Project results – be they good or bad, are determined by processes (habits, approaches) that are used in leading and managing the respective project. An improved process for identifying and managing projects can prevent problems and provide project leaders with the needed support from the community.  Successful projects that meet the expectations of the citizens make a positive contribution to our culture and quality of life.

As a certified quality auditor – now semi-retired, I have conducted and supported performance and process reviews in a wide variety of areas and industries. The scope of projects ranged from improving math skills and management issues in elementary and high schools to assessing compliance of government agencies with financial management controls required by federal and state statutes to improving national defense-related strategies.

Process reviews consist of assessing an organization’s processes (habits, approaches) and their respective capabilities in meeting the needs and expectations of the customer and other stakeholders.  Findings often supported the adage that “If you always do what you always did, on average, you will usually get what you always got” — 99.73% of the time.

In considering needed changes, the overwhelming preference – despite the risks and quality of the outcome, is often to maintain the status quo.  To break the gravitational pull of the old habits, there must be a sense of urgency that change is required to produce the desired result.

Regarding urgency, many rural counties throughout the country including Brown County, face projected declines in the population that contribute to a declining tax base. This decline may require frequent and recurring tax increases and cuts in services unless the situation can be improved.  Indiana counties are funded primarily by property and income tax. New residential and business developments that are supported by the citizenry and will result in increases in the tax base can help mitigate the projected economic decline.

Attracting investors for residential and business developments requires the formulation and updating of a comprehensive (master) plan that reinforces the community vision and values, and includes the immediate and long-range reports and plans necessary to implement the desires of the community. Elements of master planning could include strategies and plans in the following areas:  Broadband (Internet), Trail Systems, Wastewater Treatment, Residential Housing, Land Use, Thoroughfares, Tourism, and Capital Improvements.

With a master plan, community leaders can market the plan to private investors and companies can then use the plan to assess their risks and return on investment to seriously evaluate expansion and growth in Brown County.

To help develop support for the right projects, developments requiring taxpayer funding or other support must be guided by the policies and goals specified in the county comprehensive plan. The current 14-page comprehensive plan was approved in 2012 and provides general guidance concerning the future of Brown County.  Larger counties in Indiana can have more detailed plans that exceed 200 pages. Additional information on this approach is provided by The Indiana Citizens Planners Guide.  Another useful guide for developing effective project management plans and schedules is available from the Project Management Institute.

An immediate and incremental change to supplement the county comprehensive plan with the plans from current projects represents a proven strategy. This change to the status quo will help support elected leaders to maintain required project oversight, engages the citizenry, and ensures the community that actions align with the vision for the county. This change can take us a step forward in building a master plan that will convince potential new residents and investors that Brown County remains a desirable place to live, work, play and invest!

Tim Clark
Brown County

Tourism and Economic Sustainability

I serve on the County Redevelopment Commission (RDC).  The following is a copy of a Guest Column published by the Brown County Democrat on  Sept  20, 2017. 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.

Economic impact studies of tourism in Indiana and Brown County reinforce the benefits of sustaining a tourism industry. However, tourism, by itself, has not and cannot provide a sustainable economic future for Brown County.  Further, too much tourism can have detrimental effects on the attributes that have attracted pioneers, artists, residents, and visitors to Brown County since 1836.

The Brown County Community Readiness Initiatives, a survey and economic assessment conducted by the Ball State Economic and Research Institute concluded that Brown County’s greatest potential for economic growth is not tourism but as a bedroom community. This option is defined as attracting individuals and families that live in Brown County but can work at home or commute to the higher paying jobs outside the county.

This is not a new phenomenon.  Past economic studies have identified that the majority of citizens in Brown County commute outside the county for employment.  This strategy is among the best strategies for having positive impacts on all five of our Community Vitality Indicators (CVIs) that include:  assessed property value, per capita income, population, school enrollment and educational attainment rates.

The study also reinforced the importance of quality of place that includes good schools and amenities where people want to live.  Identifying and maintaining these attributes must be identified in the county comprehensive plan.

A May 2017 assessment by graduate students of Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs (SPEA) reinforced the conclusions from the Ball State Study to include the importance of expanding the tax base to support the diversification of the business industries residing in the county.

The following chart includes data obtained from the U.S. Government Bureau of Labor Statistics.  The tourism industry is represented in the supersector identified as Leisure and Hospitality.  Comparing 2005 data with 2016 data identifies that the number of the establishments have stayed the same, jobs have decreased and wages are the lowest of the categories. Perhaps most important, the number of establishment in most categories have decreased with increases in the number of jobs in just a few areas.

U.S. Government Bureau of Labor Statistics
Brown County

In the 2014 Strategic Plan for Economic and Community Prosperity in SouthWest Central Indiana,  the Hospitality and Tourism Sector was identified as having 181 establishments in the region employing 3,506 employees with the lowest average wage ($24,477) of all the sectors.

To address the challenges within our region and with funding provided by Lilly Endowment, the Regional Opportunity Initiative (ROI) was established to: “Advance economic and community prosperity in an 11-county area that encompasses Brown, Crawford, Daviess, Dubois, Greene, Lawrence, Martin, Monroe, Orange, Owen and Washington counties.”

To prepare our students for successful careers, the Brown County Schools recently competed for and was awarded a grant from ROI to prepare our students to be qualified for the higher paying jobs.  This can lead to a business climate and a workforce that will help attract new businesses to Brown County.

A Way Ahead

The Brown County Redevelopment (RDC) commission was tasked to identify county wide strategies that would result in improvement in the CVIs.  Strategies will also need to consider courses of action if the tax base continues to decline.

The key priorities for the county include a focus on options that would provide the funding to support the capital improvements required to improve and expand the core infrastructure within the county. This infrastructure includes roads, water, sewer, broadband, police, fire and emergency services which would support the expansion of residential development and contribute to positive trends in the county CVIs.

The critical priority for the county includes broadband. Access to the internet is now considered a vital utility that is critical for leveraging the educational opportunities for our students as well as attracting businesses and new residents.

In support of this aim, the RDC has provided a proposal to the Area Plan Commission (APC) to work collaboratively in developing a comprehensive plan and economic strategy that will produce results where we will all benefit or at least, will not be any worse off.

Commissioners and Council and all their appointed commission and board members need to unite towards a common vision, plan, and strategy that has the support of the citizenry. The trend nationally has been one of polarization by wealth and political affiliation.  The challenges and opportunities facing Brown Countians cannot be successfully addressed with a divided community. The citizens of Brown County should expect the collaboration and action that will lead to a sustainable economic future.

Tim Clark
Brown County Redevelopment Commission

More info:

Survey Information:  2016 Community Readiness Initiative (CRI), Nashville, Brown County Ball State University

More Info ROI GrantGetting ready for the real world: New administrator’s job focuses on teaching workplace skills early



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

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 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.