Kingwood Complaints

[ricco67]

I spent a good portion of yesterday in Kingwood with a few friends up there.

Seems that they have quite a few complaints about the area and seem to blame Houston for a few of them.

One of the more interesting statements I've heard is that Kingwood (in their eyes) is going ghetto. Reason that they are blaming this on is the annexation! One of the examples they talked about are the apartment complexes just off Kingwood drive (or whatever it's called) and point out that "it's being turned into a drug dealer's haven!"

There seems to be a considerable amount of complaining about the lack of eating choices in the area as well. I think they blame Houston on that as well.

The entire evening's conversation seemed rather dominated by their beef with Houston and the woes of the kingwood community.

While I know there are a number of Kingwood residents on this system, is it REALLY considered that bad or did I just come across a bunch of people that just wanted to complain all night?

[editor]

I worked with someone for two years who lives in Kingwood. Everything you said, he said. All he ever did was complain that Houston annexing Kingwood turned it from a suburban paradise into a ghetto. I doubt half of what he said was true, though.

[dalparadise]

The biggest thing to hurt Kingwood, in my opinion, is the success of The Woodlands. Kingwood was mostly built-out about 25 years ago. It's a relatively old community by Houston standards. As was fashionable at the time, it was built as a bedroom-commuter community, leaving nearby Humble with the responsibility of providing retail infrastructure. Fashions change and this type of development strategy is no longer in style. Incorporating commercial, office and residential -- like The Woodlands has done -- is.

The Woodlands offers a lot more just a couple of miles to the west. They beat KW to the punch and KW has been declining for some time.

[wxman]

I worked with someone for two years who lives in Kingwood. Everything you said, he said. All he ever did was complain that Houston annexing Kingwood turned it from a suburban paradise into a ghetto. I doubt half of what he said was true, though.

I hate to bring The Woodlands into this, BUT, campare the two. Kingwood was The Woodlands of the Estex Frwy. I nice suburban community with good schools and soccer moms. But you have to admit that Kingwood has changed. Why do you think The Woodlands is fighting so hard to stay out of Houston? It's probably because things that are important to The Woodlands are not important for the folks living in the inner city. Same as Kingwood. But I believe, IMO, that they are getting shafted on money. Also they now have METRO running up there. I don't see that as a positve...unless it was lightrail. But that's a whole nother subject.

As a disclaimer...I don't know a whole lot about the annexation of Kingwood or on monetary agreements. This is just how I see things...whether they be right or wrong.

[mrfootball]

I hate to bring The Woodlands into this, BUT, campare the two. Kingwood was The Woodlands of the Estex Frwy. I nice suburban community with good schools and soccer moms. But you have to admit that Kingwood has changed. Why do you think The Woodlands is fighting so hard to stay out of Houston? It's probably because things that are important to The Woodlands are not important for the folks living in the inner city. Same as Kingwood. But I believe, IMO, that they are getting shafted on money. Also they now have METRO running up there. I don't see that as a positve...unless it was lightrail. But that's a whole nother subject.

As a disclaimer...I don't know a whole lot about the annexation of Kingwood or on monetary agreements. This is just how I see things...whether they be right or wrong.

Up through the 1980's and into the 1990's Kingwood was hotter than The Woodlands. The Woodlands was just a lonely backwater up near Conroe.

[TJones]

Up through the 1980's and into the 1990's Kingwood was hotter than The Woodlands. The Woodlands was just a lonely backwater up near Conroe.

Yeah, a lonely "backwater" that has been holding a Major PGA event for the past 20 something years. Where do you get your information mrfootball ? These two suburbs just show what GOOD city planning can do.

After Deerbrook Mall was put in back in the 80's THAT is where your REAL decline took place. If Kingwood hadn't cried about how HPD and HFD's services couldn't cross the river but how desperately they needed their help, Houston would have NEVER annexed them. Oh yeah, don't forget Houston's waste water services. Kingwood was still using Septic tanks for the most part up until the annexation.

[dalparadise]

Yeah, a lonely "backwater" that has been holding a Major PGA event for the past 20 something years. Where do you get your information mrfootball ? These two suburbs just show what GOOD city planning can do.

After Deerbrook Mall was put in back in the 80's THAT is where your REAL decline took place. If Kingwood hadn't cried about how HPD and HFD's services couldn't cross the river but how desperately they needed their help, Houston would have NEVER annexed them. Oh yeah, don't forget Houston's waste water services. Kingwood was still using Septic tanks for the most part up until the annexation.

The PGA tournament moved to Redstone Golf Club a few years ago. It's a lot closer to Kingwood than The Woodlands.

[KinkaidAlum]

I love people who blame the big bad city for all their woes.

Earth to complainers; there'd be no suburban utopia without the big bad city. Plus, the big bad city still has neighborhoods, parks, restaurants, entertainment, and even schools (Bellaire, Lamar, HSPVA, Health, Criminal Justice) that blow yours out of the water!

[mrfootball]

Oddly enough, If given the choice, I bet you'd have a hard time finding a Kingwood family that would forego their own schools for the option of attending one of those HISD schools that (as you stated) "blow yours out of the water"....

Did you really go to Kinkaid?

Edited July 23, 2007 by mrfootball

[Trae]

Kingwood is still nice. Consider it the Parkway of the Northeast. The Parkway out in West Houston (along Briar Forest and Eldridge mainly) is one nice area. I see Kingwood as that (the last time I was there was 2005 for Christmas).

[RedScare]

Also they now have METRO running up there. I don't see that as a positve...unless it was lightrail. But that's a whole nother subject.

There is no METRO service in Kingwood whatsoever, except for Park&Ride service during rush hour. As for Kingwood going ghetto, most people would not call 2.37 percent Black population "ghetto" (except for a Kingwood resident, of course). It is likely that former East Texas residents make up a much larger percentage of the population. I would suspect that the fact that the housing stock is approaching 40 years old, along with the fact that much of the subdivision was built during the boom town years of the 70s and early 80s, when some of the sorriest housing in Houston was built, has much more to do with Kingwood's ills than Houston. But, if it makes them feel better to blame Houston for it, more power to 'em. Not like it is going to change anything.

[mrfootball]

Shame on you people for wanting to live in a green, wooded forest away from the hustle and bustle of the city. A place where you can have a nice big yard and a friendly street. A nice, safe place to start a family and raise your kids. Good schools to educate those kids and active parents who wish to see them succeed. Shame on you for creating such a place where you can afford all of these things. You thought you could get away with it, but you didn't. A great and glorious city such as ours requires you to contribute. We have streets to fix in the Heights, afterall. The nerve of you people for expecting the same level of service you had before you became part of such a glorious and wonderful city. A city that took you (against your will) for the 'greater' good. A city that loves you (as displayed here by it's citizen's comments). Can you not feel the love, Kingwood? Can you not feel it?

Edited July 23, 2007 by mrfootball

[Parrothead]

Has anyone here lived in Kingwood besides me?

Yes, Kingwood went a bit downhill after the annexation; most people in Kingwood were against it. They knew what happened to Clear Lake City and they didn't want that happening to them. Thanks to Lanier and Co., they really had no choice about it.

As for Deerbrook Mall and uh...septic tanks? I don't know about any of that. I don't believe we had septic tanks and the mall was AWESOME until the early '90s... Kingwood was annexed in 1996. Friendswood development was sold around the same time wasn't it? I think annexation hurt Kingwood for sure, but I think it was just one of a few things that contributed.

Some of you seem to think we little Kingwood suburbanites just couldn't live without the big ol' COH. Well, you couldn't be more wrong. We did, and just fine, thanks.

[TheNiche]

Some of you seem to think we little Kingwood suburbanites just couldn't live without the big ol' COH. Well, you couldn't be more wrong. We did, and just fine, thanks.

...oh no. You had to say that.

Edited July 23, 2007 by TheNiche

[Jeebus]

Oddly enough, If given the choice, I bet you'd have a hard time finding a Kingwood family that would forego their own schools for the option of attending one of those HISD schools that (as you stated) "blow yours out of the water"....

Did you really go to Kinkaid?

It wouldn't make much sense for a Kingwood resident to send their kid to any of the schools inside the city when they can just send them to the schools in Kingwood. Why would you want to send your kids to a school across town (no matter how great it is) when none of the kids at that school would be in your neighborhood, and able to befriend & play with your kid.

Some of you seem to think we little Kingwood suburbanites just couldn't live without the big ol' COH. Well, you couldn't be more wrong. We did, and just fine, thanks.

Without the COH, Kingwood at most would be a trailer-park in the middle of nowhere.

Ohhh, you meant that Kingwood's self governance did just fine before COH's annexation. Well, just say that instead next time.

[KinkaidAlum]

Oddly enough, If given the choice, I bet you'd have a hard time finding a Kingwood family that would forego their own schools for the option of attending one of those HISD schools that (as you stated) "blow yours out of the water"....

Did you really go to Kinkaid?

Oddly enough, I wouldn't let what Kingwood residents would decide cloud my decision about rating schools.

According to Newsweek's latest national rankings, Kingwood High wasn't rated in the top 1300 public schools. Bellaire, DeBakey, Westside, Lamar, and HSPVA of HISD were all rated in the top 655! Other area schools that made the list included Yes College Prep, Memorial, Stratford, Cinco Ranch, Katy Taylor, The Woodlands, Aldine, Ft Bend Austin, Langham Creek, Cypress Creek, and Clear Lake.

According to Children At Risk, Kingwood wasn't rated in the top 10 in the region based on factors like graduation rates, SAT/ACT scores, TAKS scores, and % of students enrolled in and passing AP courses. HSPVA was rated #1 and DeBakey #4. Others on the list included Yes College Prep, Cinco Ranch, Memorial, Clements, Katy Taylor, Friendswood, Clear Lake, and Ft Bend Austin.

According to 2006 SAT scores, students at DeBakey, Carnegie Vanguard, HSPVA, and Bellaire score higher than their counterparts at Kingwood.

Other area schools that have higher SAT averages in 2006 include Clear Lake, The Woodlands, The Woodlands College Park, Ft Bend Clements, Ft Bend Austin, Cinco Ranch, Katy Taylor, Memorial, Stratford, Friendswood, and prep schools like St John's, Kinkaid, St Agnes, Awty, Duchesne, Strake Jesuit, John Cooper, Emery/Weiner, Episcopal, Alexander Smith, and St. Thomas.

Seems like there are a LOT more options for quality education within the city limits than there are up in Kingwood despite 85% of the students being white (the real reason Kingwood types would probably still choose Kingwood H.S).

[TheNiche]

Fellas, why are we arguing over schools?

The only way that a resident of KISD could get their kids enrolled in HISD is if the parent works for HISD. School districts and Cities are two seperate entities, and annexation has absolutely nothing to do with any of this.

[millennica]

It seems to me that this discussion is not simply about schools.

[TheNiche]

It seems to me that this discussion is not simply about schools.

I would agree. On the other hand, I'd also rather not get into one of these pointless go-nowhere City vs. Burbs shouting matches.

[wxman]

There is no METRO service in Kingwood whatsoever, except for Park&Ride service during rush hour. As for Kingwood going ghetto, most people would not call 2.37 percent Black population "ghetto" (except for a Kingwood resident, of course). It is likely that former East Texas residents make up a much larger percentage of the population. I would suspect that the fact that the housing stock is approaching 40 years old, along with the fact that much of the subdivision was built during the boom town years of the 70s and early 80s, when some of the sorriest housing in Houston was built, has much more to do with Kingwood's ills than Houston. But, if it makes them feel better to blame Houston for it, more power to 'em. Not like it is going to change anything.

What does black people have to do with being ghetto? Black people don't make a place ghetto. Ghetto people make it that way.

As far as the burbs go...let's state the facts. They use the City of Houston for jobs, entertainment, sporting events, and transportation. Being a person from a burb...I like it that way. That's why we are a suburb. I don't want to pay taxes to fix roads on the other side of town (which in Houston can mean 50+ miles away.) Like I said in a pervious post, what is important to Kingwood, The Woodlands, Conroe, Katy, Cinco Ranch, Cypress or any other burb, is not important to Houston. That just doesn't cut it. Believe me if I was the only one that felt that way, there would be no burbs. I like Houston. In fact, I love it. There is no better city in Texas. However there are things I don't like. Some don't like the density. Some don't like the schools. Some don't like the urban setting. There is nothing wrong with that. There are a number of reasons people live outside of Houston. That doesn't make them any less of a "Houstonian" at heart.

Everybody in the city wants our tax money, but yet we have no right to vote for mayor, stadiums, rail, or any other city improvement. It's taxation without representation!

[millennica]

I would agree. On the other hand, I'd also rather not get into one of these pointless go-nowhere City vs. Burbs shouting matches.

Anyone who doesn't want to get into another discussion they believe is "one of these pointless go-nowhere City vs. Burb shouting matches," shouldn't join in the discussion. But, others who might want to engage in this and related issues are surely free to do so, aren't they?

[TheNiche]

Black people don't make a place ghetto. Ghetto people make it that way.

What, you mean Jews?

Anyone who doesn't want to get into another discussion they believe is "one of these pointless go-nowhere City vs. Burb shouting matches," shouldn't join in the discussion. But, others who might want to engage in this and related issues are surely free to do so, aren't they?

Of course they're free to...even if it is a pointless go-nowhere shouting match. ...and on that same note, I'm free to voice my disapproval of it.

I've taken part in these before in previous threads, one of which was also related to Kingwood. No sense in covering the same ground twice and still going nowhere.

[Mark F. Barnes]

Well if that's the case Meyerland must be "Ghetto", they have more Synagogues per ca-pita than any other area around Houston.

I can't think of a Temple one in Kingwood. The do have one in Humble though, is that close enough?

[millennica]

Of course they're free to...even if it is a pointless go-nowhere shouting match. ...and on that same note, I'm free to voice my disapproval of it.

I've taken part in these before in previous threads, one of which was also related to Kingwood. No sense in covering the same ground twice and still going nowhere.

Indeed you are free to express your disapproval of whatever you choose along with your opinion that there is no point in covering the same ground. And it may be the case that there is a previous thread that was also related to Kingwood. But there may be others who frequent HAIF who don't feel as you do and they are entitled to their opinion as you are to yours. Frankly, I am interested in discussion on this topic and others like it and hope people will continue despite your having expressed your disapproval.

[TheNiche]

Indeed you are free to express your disapproval of whatever you choose along with your opinion that there is no point in covering the same ground. And it may be the case that there is a previous thread that was also related to Kingwood. But there may be others who frequent HAIF who don't feel as you do and they are entitled to their opinion as you are to yours. Frankly, I am interested in discussion on this topic and others like it and hope people will continue despite your having expressed your disapproval.

I understand, actually. Times like this I wonder whether HAIF has grown too big for its britches. There are just so many threads and of course we are so tangential--myself not excluded--that we inevitably end up covering the same ground as we gain new members, like yourself.

...so have at it. I'll even kick it off for you, by stating (or reiterating) the following:

The Central City needs the suburbs because they are the mechanism by which labor is attracted to the region that allows for the City's commercial base to grow and to be valued at such a high level as it is...and do bear in mind that Houston's very high ratio of commercial tax base to residential tax base does provide it a big advantage in providing for its citizens because commercial property owners require far less public resources than do residents. If the suburbs were outlawed tomorrow, and the systematic demolition and reforestation began, a big chunk of the dislocated people would probably rather move to other regions than pay what they perceive as ridiculous prices for smaller homes, smaller yards, less safety, and lower-quality schools. I'm not saying that their perceptions are necessarily entirely correct, but even if Kinkaid is right, he can't change them, and decisions will be made because of them. That action would immediately ruin our economy, and the high costs of doing business here would keep it ruined perpetually. Likewise, poor people would be put into an incredible bind because inner city land values would rise to such high levels. And historical preservationists could kiss a lot of treasured neighborhoods goodbye. It is honestly very difficult to see how this scenario works out very well for anyone except owners of urban land and a smattering of urbanistas wealthy enough to afford their utopia...never mind that their utopia would have instantly become corrupted with people of a suburban mindset.

Edited July 23, 2007 by TheNiche

[millennica]

I understand, actually. Times like this I wonder whether HAIF has grown too big for its britches. There are just so many threads and of course we are so tangential--myself not excluded--that we inevitably end up covering the same ground as we gain new members, like yourself.

...so have at it. I'll even kick it off for you, by stating (or reiterating) the following:

The Central City needs the suburbs because they are the mechanism by which labor is attracted to the region that allows for the City's commercial base to grow and to be valued at such a high level as it is...and do bear in mind that Houston's very high ratio of commercial tax base to residential tax base does provide it a big advantage in providing for its citizens because commercial property owners require far less public resources than do residents. If the suburbs were outlawed tomorrow, and the systematic demolition and reforestation began, a big chunk of the dislocated people would probably rather move to other regions than pay what they perceive as ridiculous prices for smaller homes, smaller yards, less safety, and lower-quality schools. I'm not saying that their perceptions are necessarily entirely correct, but even if Kinkaid is right, he can't change them, and decisions will be made because of them. That action would immediately ruin our economy, and the high costs of doing business here would keep it ruined perpetually. Likewise, poor people would be put into an incredible bind because inner city land values would rise to such high levels. And historical preservationists could kiss a lot of treasured neighborhoods goodbye. It is honestly very difficult to see how this scenario works out very well for anyone except owners of urban land and a smattering of urbanistas wealthy enough to afford their utopia...never mind that their utopia would have instantly become corrupted with people of a suburban mindset.

Either you misunderstood my post or you saw it as an opportunity to hold forth, using the excuse that I am new to HAIF. I'm not sure who appointed you the person who is charged with educating new HAIF members. But, I neither want nor do I need a lecture from you about suburbanization, poor people, land values, historical preservation and whatever else you are spewing forth. So, spare me. Let me reiterate what I said. Regardless of whether you approve or not, I am interested in discussion on this topic and others like it and hope the people will continue. I do not want to hear you hold forth on this topic.

[TheNiche]

Either you misunderstood my post or you saw it as an opportunity to hold forth, using the excuse that I am new to HAIF. I'm not sure who appointed you the person who is charged with educating new HAIF members. But, I neither want nor do I need a lecture from you about suburbanization, poor people, land values, historical preservation and whatever else you are spewing forth. So, spare me. Let me reiterate what I said. Regardless of whether you approve or not, I am interested in discussion on this topic and others like it and hope the people will continue. I do not want to hear you hold forth on this topic.

Hold forth? That's an idiom I don't see every day.

If a debate must ensue (which I concede has nothing at all to do with my approval), then I decide against having my opinion left out of it. Is it that you are interested only in the [other] peoples' continuation and not my own, or do I not count as people?

[millennica]

Hold forth? That's an idiom I don't see every day.

If a debate must ensue (which I concede has nothing at all to do with my approval), then I decide against having my opinion left out of it. Is it that you are interested only in the [other] peoples' continuation and not my own, or do I not count as people?

It's an idiom commonly used in my workplace. Maybe you don't see/hear it because we inhabit very different workplaces.

If you had wanted to participate in the Kingwood discussion, there was nothing to keep you from having done so, but you didn't. So I can only assume you weren't interested in participating in the discussion. Instead you expressed your disapproval. After a few exchanges where I expressed my interest having the discussion continue, you concluded although I am not sure on what basis, that I needed to brought up to speed. But your conclusion was wrong. I was not asking to be brought up to speed. If you want to participate in the discussion, by all means, find a place in the thread where you can insert something relevant to the on-going discussion and debate with others who are also participating. That way if I choose to, I can read your contribution to the discussion.

[TheNiche]

It's an idiom commonly used in my workplace. Maybe you don't see/hear it because we inhabit very different workplaces.

If you had wanted to participate in the Kingwood discussion, there was nothing to keep you from having done so, but you didn't. So I can only assume you weren't interested in participating in the discussion. Instead you expressed your disapproval. After a few exchanges where I expressed my interest having the discussion continue, you concluded although I am not sure on what basis, that I needed to brought up to speed. But your conclusion was wrong. I was not asking to be brought up to speed. If you want to participate in the discussion, by all means, find a place in the thread where you can insert something relevant to the on-going discussion and debate with others who are also participating. That way if I choose to, I can read your contribution to the discussion.

Uh, ok. From my perspective, I started out prefering not to tread the same ground twice, but you changed my mind on account of that there may be a different audience and that the debate would seem to be an eventuality not worth trying to avoid. And so I embraced it and have already participated in it. ...and here, I thought that my (re)entry into the fray would be a signal to you that your reasoning had triumphed, and that we would be seeing eye-to-eye, at least on the issue of the validity of the debate itself, if perhaps not the content of it.

[millennica]

Uh, ok. From my perspective, I started out prefering not to tread the same ground twice, but you changed my mind on account of that there may be a different audience and that the debate would seem to be an eventuality not worth trying to avoid. And so I embraced it and have already participated in it. ...and here, I thought that my (re)entry into the fray would be a signal to you that your reasoning had triumphed, and that we would be seeing eye-to-eye, at least on the issue of the validity of the debate itself, if perhaps not the content of it.

Again you misunderstand. I was arguing only for the discussion to continue, not necessarily that you participate in it. If you decided that you wanted to participate in this discussion, then you shouldn't claim that it was because I changed your mind by suggesting that it was being presented to a different/new audience. That's bogus. You decided to participate because you can't stand not holding forth in most HAIF discussions. It has nothing to do with your having been convinced by my reasoning and everything to do with your own need to weigh in on almost every discussion. Honestly, it doesn't matter to me whether you participate in any particular HAIF discussion since your contributions aren't necessary for me to be interested in the conversations. You need to get over yourself.

As to your claim that you have already participated in the discussion, I disagree. A person who is serious about participating in the discussion, finds the appropriate place in the thread and enters the conversation at that point, not in the manner in which you chose to enter this one.

[TheNiche]

Again you misunderstand. I was arguing only for the discussion to continue, not necessarily that you participate in it. If you decided that you wanted to participate in this discussion, then you shouldn't claim that it was because I changed your mind by suggesting that it was being presented to a different/new audience. That's bogus. You decided to participate because you can't stand not holding forth in most HAIF discussions. It has nothing to do with your having been convinced by my reasoning and everything to do with your own need to weigh in on almost every discussion..

I understand that you were arguing for the discussion to continue, and whereas I was at first holding back, your reasoning convinced me that it was worthy. ...and so I only then held forth. If I were intent on holding forth at every opportunity, I'd have done it in the first place without your intervention.

Honestly, it doesn't matter to me whether you participate in any particular HAIF discussion since your contributions aren't necessary for me to be interested in the conversations. You need to get over yourself..

You can always switch me over to 'ignore'. I don't mind.

As to your claim that you have already participated in the discussion, I disagree. A person who is serious about participating in the discussion, finds the appropriate place in the thread and enters the conversation at that point, not in the manner in which you chose to enter this one.

Call it a preemptive strike. What was said was going to be said, whether it be in the middle of the night or at lunchtime later today. ...and now, there is fodder for a rebuttal. Your discussion is pre-destined. And you're welcome. ...that is, if our senseless bickering doesn't get all of our exchanges deleted by a moderator first.

Edited July 23, 2007 by TheNiche

[RedScare]

While you are free to participate or not, Niche, you could at least stay marginally on topic. No one is advocating the destruction of the suburbs. The topic was the opinion that all of Kingwood's perceived woes are directly the result of the City of Houston's annexation in 1996. I have yet to see a post that actually addresses that. I have seen many that stated conclusions without any data to back it up, though. In fact, many of the conclusions are flat out wrong. It has already been pointed out that METRO does not serve Kingwood, except for Park&Ride service during rush hour, so the argument cannot be made that "ghetto types" are using public transit to access the Livable Forest (unless they pay $7.00 round trip). And, METRO is not a City agency, and is unrelated to annexation anyway. No one has posted statistics that Kingwood suffers from lack of fire protection, a City service. Other than the HOME GROWN armed robbers, Kingwood does not appear to be crime ridden. Besides, prior to annexation, Kingwood only received thin Harris County law enforcement. Even if this could be used as evidence of "ghettofication", NOT ONE poster has explained how posting new "City Limit" signs around Kingwood actually causes an increase in crime.

Schools, or lack thereof, cannot be linked to the City. They have their own tax structure and district, unaffected by annexation. So, what is it? Can anyone name something specifically and directly related to annexation that caused Kingwood's (perceived) decline? I noted earlier that Kingwood is past its prime as a premier subdivision, having been passed up by the Woodlands and some of the Katy and Fort Bend areas. But, this is related to age, not annexation. What is it? Anything? Someone? Can anyone point out something true, something that is not a "suburban legend" or lame anecdote?

[TheNiche]

While you are free to participate or not, Niche, you could at least stay marginally on topic. No one is advocating the destruction of the suburbs. The topic was the opinion that all of Kingwood's perceived woes are directly the result of the City of Houston's annexation in 1996. I have yet to see a post that actually addresses that. I have seen many that stated conclusions without any data to back it up, though. In fact, many of the conclusions are flat out wrong. It has already been pointed out that METRO does not serve Kingwood, except for Park&Ride service during rush hour, so the argument cannot be made that "ghetto types" are using public transit to access the Livable Forest (unless they pay $7.00 round trip). And, METRO is not a City agency, and is unrelated to annexation anyway. No one has posted statistics that Kingwood suffers from lack of fire protection, a City service. Other than the HOME GROWN armed robbers, Kingwood does not appear to be crime ridden. Besides, prior to annexation, Kingwood only received thin Harris County law enforcement. Even if this could be used as evidence of "ghettofication", NOT ONE poster has explained how posting new "City Limit" signs around Kingwood actually causes an increase in crime.

Schools, or lack thereof, cannot be linked to the City. They have their own tax structure and district, unaffected by annexation. So, what is it? Can anyone name something specifically and directly related to annexation that caused Kingwood's (perceived) decline? I noted earlier that Kingwood is past its prime as a premier subdivision, having been passed up by the Woodlands and some of the Katy and Fort Bend areas. But, this is related to age, not annexation. What is it? Anything? Someone? Can anyone point out something true, something that is not a "suburban legend" or lame anecdote?

It was a thought experiment, conjured up to preempt a tangent.

Otherwise, I'm all on board with your line of reasoning.

[RedScare]

No prob, Niche. However, I am very interested whether someone can point to something the City did to cause Kingwood to decline, or if it is the usual disconnected logic of blaming the Houston bogeyman for unrelated woes.

By the way, to the poster who said Kingwood got screwed moneywise, their tax rate is 3.08%, up to 25% LESS than Woodlands neighborhoods that do NOT receive City services. Please explain your math.

[wxman]

What, you mean Jews?

Of course they're free to...even if it is a pointless go-nowhere shouting match. ...and on that same note, I'm free to voice my disapproval of it.

I've taken part in these before in previous threads, one of which was also related to Kingwood. No sense in covering the same ground twice and still going nowhere.

That's racist and uncalled for!

No prob, Niche. However, I am very interested whether someone can point to something the City did to cause Kingwood to decline, or if it is the usual disconnected logic of blaming the Houston bogeyman for unrelated woes.

By the way, to the poster who said Kingwood got screwed moneywise, their tax rate is 3.08%, up to 25% LESS than Woodlands neighborhoods that do NOT receive City services. Please explain your math.

And not recieving Houston services is a bad thing?

[RedScare]

And not recieving Houston services is a bad thing?

Well, let me put it this way. I have lived (in single family housing) in Houston, Fort Worth, The Woodlands and unincorporated Harris County. Houston city services were better than the other 3 in police, fire, garbage pickup, heavy trash pickup and water. The price was about equal to Fort Worth and unincorporated Harris County, and MUCH lower than the Woodlands.

When basing the equation on math, as opposed to hyperbole, the answer is an unqualified "Yes".

[Original Timmy Chan's]

While you are free to participate or not, Niche, you could at least stay marginally on topic. No one is advocating the destruction of the suburbs. The topic was the opinion that all of Kingwood's perceived woes are directly the result of the City of Houston's annexation in 1996. I have yet to see a post that actually addresses that. I have seen many that stated conclusions without any data to back it up, though. In fact, many of the conclusions are flat out wrong. It has already been pointed out that METRO does not serve Kingwood, except for Park&Ride service during rush hour, so the argument cannot be made that "ghetto types" are using public transit to access the Livable Forest (unless they pay $7.00 round trip). And, METRO is not a City agency, and is unrelated to annexation anyway. No one has posted statistics that Kingwood suffers from lack of fire protection, a City service. Other than the HOME GROWN armed robbers, Kingwood does not appear to be crime ridden. Besides, prior to annexation, Kingwood only received thin Harris County law enforcement. Even if this could be used as evidence of "ghettofication", NOT ONE poster has explained how posting new "City Limit" signs around Kingwood actually causes an increase in crime.

Schools, or lack thereof, cannot be linked to the City. They have their own tax structure and district, unaffected by annexation. So, what is it? Can anyone name something specifically and directly related to annexation that caused Kingwood's (perceived) decline? I noted earlier that Kingwood is past its prime as a premier subdivision, having been passed up by the Woodlands and some of the Katy and Fort Bend areas. But, this is related to age, not annexation. What is it? Anything? Someone? Can anyone point out something true, something that is not a "suburban legend" or lame anecdote?

RedScare hit it on the nose there...

Kingwood's decline, real or perceived, is not related to whether their taxpayers' checks go to a MUD or to the COH. It was going to happen either way.

Anyone know what the MUD taxes were before the annexation? COH taxes are $0.645. Suburban taxpayers like to complain about their property taxes increasing all the time...I assume their MUD taxes and services were not better than what they've got now through the COH (police, trash, fire, city water/wastewater).

[Ethanra]

They knew what happened to Clear Lake City and they didn't want that happening to them.

What happen to Clear Lake City? Clear Lake City is one of the best suburbs in the Houston Region. Clear Lake City has good schools, it has walkable neighborhoods that people actually do walk to the library, grocery store, little league fields, bowling alley, etc... Most other suburbs you have to get in your car and drive to get anything/anyewhere. You have a HPD command center in Clear Lake that is involved with the community. Pocket parks placed throughout the community plus larger ones that are close. There is a dozen other positives.....

[TheNiche]

That's racist and uncalled for!

It's racist to ask whether there are Jews in supposed ghettos?

Fwiw, it was meant to inspire a historically-based chuckle, not genocide or whatever such thing you associate with the word 'ghetto'.

[Trae]

Can Kingwood un-annex itself?

Oh, and Black people don't make an area ghetto, but many [white] people believe so. If there are a group of Black kids walking down the street (or even worse, riding bikes) in Kingwood, its "this place has gone ghetto". If it was a group of white or Asian kids, it wouldn't be like that.

[Mark F. Barnes]

No Trae they cannot un-annex themselves.

[editor]

Niche and Millenica: Take it to PM. You've both strayed way off topic. Instead of discussing the issue, you're arguing about arguing.

[KinkaidAlum]

My biggest guess as to what happened to Kingwood would be that it stopped being tightly controlled after Friendswood Development sold out. Additionally, every time I fly into IAH from BOS I notice that newer development is severely affected by the new regulations regarding flood control measures. The massive clear-cutting that takes place to put in new roads, schools, and cookie-cutter homes isn't very appealing, especially from the air! There is no Liveable Forest anymore.

Additionally, like all suburbs, Kingwood suffers when there is new development being built all around. Houses from the 1970s and 80s seem dated when some new megapalace is being built right up the road and often for the same price. Without having an excellent location near all employment bases, the older areas begin to decline. It's a natural cycle that happens in every suburb.

[MidtownCoog]

Kingwood is "built out" from what I understand.

Where is this "new" development?

[Jeebus]

What does black people have to do with being ghetto? Black people don't make a place ghetto. Ghetto people make it that way.

Maybe in some places around the world black does not equal ghetto. Here however, how do you explain: 3rd Ward, 5th Ward, Kashmere Gardens, Denver Harbor, South Inwood, Acres Homes, Independence Heights, South Union, South Park, Sunnyside, ALL the apartments on the southwest side in neighborhoods like Forum Place, Gulfton, Westwood, Aleif - and along streets like Hilcroft, Fondren, Gessner, Wilcrest, Kirkwood, Synott, Harwin, Bellaire, Beechnut, Bissonnet, Bellfort, & West Airport?

Those are all predominantly black neighborhoods, and they are all ghetto. At what point can we put down policital correctness so that we may call things as they are?

FYI Jew's made up the first ghettos in the middle ages.

Everybody in the city wants our tax money, but yet we have no right to vote for mayor, stadiums, rail, or any other city improvement. It's taxation without representation!

Are you saying Kingwood residents aren't allowed to vote in public elections concerning the City of Houston?

Edited July 23, 2007 by Jeebus

[Trae]

Maybe in some places around the world black does not equal ghetto. Here however, how do you explain: 3rd Ward, 5th Ward, Kashmere Gardens, Denver Harbor, South Inwood, Acres Homes, Independence Heights, South Union, South Park, Sunnyside, ALL the apartments on the southwest side in neighborhoods like Forum Place, Gulfton, Westwood, Aleif - and along streets like Hilcroft, Fondren, Gessner, Wilcrest, Kirkwood, Synott, Harwin, Bellaire, Beechnut, Bissonnet, Bellfort, & West Airport?

Those are all predominantly black neighborhoods, and they are all ghetto. At what point can we put down policital correctness so that we may call things as they are?

FYI Jew's made up the first ghettos in the middle ages.

Are you saying Kingwood residents aren't allowed to vote in public elections concerning the City of Houston?

Black still does not equate ghetto. In a lot of those neighborhoods you named, Hispanics are the majority. Alief also isn't all black, but a diverse community.

[mrfootball]

I think we've covered just about everything on this thread.

Might help to get the input from a few more actual Kingwood residents:

http://www.kingwood.com/message_board/message_board.php

or

http://kingwoodunderground.com/

[wxman]

Maybe in some places around the world black does not equal ghetto. Here however, how do you explain: 3rd Ward, 5th Ward, Kashmere Gardens, Denver Harbor, South Inwood, Acres Homes, Independence Heights, South Union, South Park, Sunnyside, ALL the apartments on the southwest side in neighborhoods like Forum Place, Gulfton, Westwood, Aleif - and along streets like Hilcroft, Fondren, Gessner, Wilcrest, Kirkwood, Synott, Harwin, Bellaire, Beechnut, Bissonnet, Bellfort, & West Airport?

Those are all predominantly black neighborhoods, and they are all ghetto. At what point can we put down policital correctness so that we may call things as they are?

FYI Jew's made up the first ghettos in the middle ages.

Are you saying Kingwood residents aren't allowed to vote in public elections concerning the City of Houston?

No...Kingwood can. But Conroe, TW, and others can't but yet are expected to contribute. Don't think so!

As far as being ghetto, there is trash in every race. And white trash is some of the worst.

[Ethanra]

Maybe in some places around the world black does not equal ghetto. Here however, how do you explain: 3rd Ward, 5th Ward, Kashmere Gardens, Denver Harbor, South Inwood, Acres Homes, Independence Heights, South Union, South Park, Sunnyside, ALL the apartments on the southwest side in neighborhoods like Forum Place, Gulfton, Westwood, Aleif - and along streets like Hilcroft, Fondren, Gessner, Wilcrest, Kirkwood, Synott, Harwin, Bellaire, Beechnut, Bissonnet, Bellfort, & West Airport?

Those are all predominantly black neighborhoods, and they are all ghetto. At what point can we put down policital correctness so that we may call things as they are?

FYI Jew's made up the first ghettos in the middle ages.

Are you saying Kingwood residents aren't allowed to vote in public elections concerning the City of Houston?

Many of those neighborhoods are hispanic and a couple are Asian. What is your define. of ghetto? Some of the neighborhoods you listed are avrg., just minority owned. Their is a white-trash trailor park in Cypress, does it mean that community is ghetto? Missouri City has a few black neighborhoods, does it mean it is ghetto? Just wondering what your define. of ghetto is....

[musicman]

Are you saying Kingwood residents aren't allowed to vote in public elections concerning the City of Houston?

they can vote. district e councilmember lives in kingwood as well.