Padraic M. Kennedy is Columbia's consummate insider.
Many residents may know little about him. But for the past 23 years, as the first and only full-time president of the Columbia Association (CA), the nation's largest homeowners association, he has been the rough equivalent of a mayor in the planned community.
Mr. Kennedy plays down his role as the $103,000-a-year chief executive of the nonprofit association which runs the community's services and recreational facilities. He says he serves at the pleasure of the elected, unpaid Columbia Council, which, he says, is the community's ultimate seat of power.
But many say there is no mistaking that Mr. Kennedy -- through his strong personality and his conviction that Columbia should remain true to developer James W. Rouse's vision -- sets the tone for CA.
"He's a true believer in the Columbia concept," says Charles Acquard, a former Columbia Council chairman. "He believes one man can make a difference and every man should try."
Mr. Kennedy, 61, came to the CA in 1972 after stints as a Peace Corps training officer, national director of Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA) and head of an urban development effort by the Boise Cascade Corp. He says he intends to stay at CA "as long as it continues to be exciting and fun, and as long as the [Columbia Council] feels I can be useful."
Under Mr. Kennedy, the CA has been praised -- even by the private corporation's detractors -- for making Columbia a highly attractive place to live. But critics have charged that the organization is inefficient, self-serving and unresponsive to residents. "The regular man is the low man on the pole," says former Councilman Charles W. Ahalt.
Mr. Kennedy deflects such criticism.
A New York City native with a master's degree in American history, he has led the CA with apparent dedication, a firm will and what many consider an unflappable graciousness.
"He's a consummate diplomat," says Barbara K. Lawson,
executive director of the Columbia Foundation, a grant-giving agency that receives annual CA contributions. "He cares about this community to the bottom of his soul."
On CA matters, however, Mr. Kennedy typically stays behind the scenes and is rarely drawn into public debates. Former Columbia Council members describe his day-to-day role as a cross between a New England town manager and a corporate executive.
James Loesch, a former councilman, says Mr. Kennedy faces a Catch-22 situation: If he takes a higher-profile stance, he might give credence to criticism that he runs the CA with an iron hand. Still, many say, Mr. Kennedy isn't timid about expressing his opinions.
"He can be charming, but if you get into a position running contrary to his beliefs about what Columbia can be or how it should be run . . . I've seen him get a burr under his saddle before," Mr. Loesch says.
An issue on which Mr. Kennedy has not taken a clear-cut position is a Columbia group's current effort to turn the community into a city with its own government, possibly replacing the CA.
During a recent 90-minute interview with The Sun in his second-floor office overlooking Columbia Town Center's Lake Kittamaqundi, he discussed the incorporation effort and a wide variety of other issues of concern to Columbia residents.
Here are excerpts from that interview:
Q. Has Columbia lived up to its billing as . . . a better-planned community?
A. I think it definitely is that. I think it has lived up to its ideal of being a community that is a clear improvement over other communities in so many ways.
Q. Examples?
A. I'd say race relations is the most powerful of the ways -- where there probably is not a street, cul-de-sac, a neighborhood, a village in Columbia that isn't racially integrated. . . . It is not an issue. It isn't talked about. It isn't thought about. It is an accepted form of life. . . . And this in a county -- you'd have to check this out -- . . . where the county courthouse had whites-only drinking signs over the fountains in 1959. This is in a very short period of time.
Q. What is CA most like? Is it more like a government, a nonprofit agency or a business?
A. The interesting thing about it is, it's a little bit like each. It is totally committed, all of its resources, all of its staff, all of its fundings, all of its facilities is totally committed to public service. . . . In that respect, it's a little like a nonprofit community service organization or a government. It is like a business in that it employs marketing techniques. It employs budget disciplines. . . . It has a lot of the disciplines of a private firm for the purposes of a public firm.
Q. How would you describe your role at CA?
A. I would say my job is to translate the priorities and policies and financial goals . . . of the Columbia Council into action. It's like the conductor of an orchestra . . . to motivate, to assist, to hire, fire, to get the best people possible to do the job here. . . . I think that the most important thing I do is try and get good people . . . working for the Columbia Association.
Q. As an organization, are there any accomplishments that you really are proud of?
A. The level of participation in the programs or the services that are provided and the attempt constantly to be better than you were the year before. Whether it is in the physical plant . . . or whether it is in the personal services. . . . Over the years, the Columbia Association has improved and continually strives to improve.
Q. Is CA financially healthy?
A. Oh, very healthy now. The bond rating agencies have upped its ratings from A to A+, and it'll be very shortly a double A. . . . It's in very good economic health.
Q. Some residents point to the $90 million debt and say it continues to rise, that it's too high.
A. As the whole community becomes fully developed, then the debt peaks and the debt starts to decrease. . . . But it's all secured by assets so that on the balance sheet it isn't just debt. . . . It's basically what any corporation would consider good debt. If . . . you have a $6 million debt to build the Supreme Sports Club, well, the Supreme Sports Club is a terrific asset that is
certainly worth $6 million or more.
Q. A criticism you might hear often is [that] the CA budget continues to increase at a rate beyond inflation, when government and businesses are cutting back. Is CA being fiscally irresponsible?
A. No, I don't think so at all. You hear it said CA's bureaucracy is burgeoning. . . . Right now CA's full-time staff is 186. Three years ago CA's full time staff was 186. . . . First of all, CA is a service organization. . . . Any service organization is going to be more personnel-intensive than a manufacturing organization. . . . But if the service personnel is tied to new services that are given, you obviously are going to grow.
Q. Residents also look at the recreational membership fees. Some people think they're a great bargain and some think they pay too much.
A. I think they are still a bargain, and that is particularly true if you go outside Columbia. If you lived away from Columbia and then you come into Columbia and you look at it, you're amazed by the rates. I think the rates are a bargain and think the rates are going to be even more of a bargain. . . . I think they could be much more of a bargain in the next five years so that Columbia will have the option where those rates can go down, down, down, for Columbia residents, because Columbia Association will be in a more sound financial posture. . . . The one thing is to go to the facilities and see the number of people who are using them... About 42 percent of all Columbians are members of Package Plan...[Facilities] are very heavily used, much more so than any community I know of.
Q. Concerns have been raised recently and over the years about CA's relationship with the Rouse Co., which controlled CA's board until about 1982. The recent example would be the recreational vehicle storage [park proposed by CA on land to be purchased from the Rouse Co.].
A. I don't think that is a recent example. . . . So if you want to take them separately, you can talk about them separately.
Q. Is there a relationship between CA and the Rouse Co.?
A. Well, it has certainly been an evolving relationship. The Rouse Co., as you say, until 1980 or 1981 controlled the Columbia Association board of directors, and then from 1981 until now, 1995, the last 14 years, the Columbia Association has been exclusively run by the Columbia Council.
Q. Is there any communication [with Rouse]?
A. Sure, there is communication between us and a lot of organizations. . . . But today the Rouse Co. no more controls the Columbia Association than the Ryland Corp. does or than any other organization does. But . . . there is a relationship in that the Rouse Co. by agreement . . . has committed itself to . . . turning over certain lands to the Columbia Association for certain facilities. For example, pool sites in the neighborhoods, recreation sites in the villages for major recreation facilities, community center sites in the villages.
Q. So are you saying the Rouse Co. doesn't have any influence over CA decisions?
A. No, doesn't even try. . . . If you talk to 50 council members over the past 10 years and you say, "Did the Rouse Co. control that decision?," the answer would be no, because the council makes the decision. And the council has made decisions against what they thought . . . was in the Rouse Co.'s interest because it was in the Columbia Association's interest.
Q. Is there a symbiotic relationship a lot of times where what might be good for the Columbia Association also would be good for the Rouse Co.?
A. It can be symbiotic that it is good, and it can be symbiotic that isn't good. For example, on the [recreational vehicle proposal] . . . our primary obligation is to make sure that it serves the Columbia Association's purposes, interest, financial needs and community responsibilities the best. And if it does that and it happens to be not a Rouse Co. piece of property . . . so be it. If it happens to be, so be it. But it has to be in our best interest.
Q. There is an effort to turn Columbia into a city and possibly replace CA. . . . Does that concern you or CA as an organization?
A. I think that the concern is a concern that should concern all Columbia residents, because I think that there are very important questions that need to be answered. . . . What can, what will this new municipality do? What would it not do? . . . What impact will the whole municipality have on taxes, not just initially, in the short turn, in the opening bell, but what is it going to have two, three, four, five, 10 years down the road?
Q. Who should be looking for these answers?
A. Well, I would assume that the incorporation group, if they want to propose an incorporation, that they would want to know the answers. . . . People need answers because there are a lot of questions: How is it going to affect me? How is it going to affect my pocketbook?
Q. This incorporation group, the Columbia Municipal League, says you should join the discussion on this issue, take a more public role. They want you to come out and say, 'I support at least letting Columbia residents vote on this.'
A. I support Columbia residents finding out what it would mean.
Q. Not necessarily a vote somewhere down the road.
A. Well, I think first of all you have to find out what you are voting on. You have to find out if it is good or if it is bad. . . . What is the impact going to be? You don't say vote and then find out. You find out and then vote.
Q. Some activists have said CA is not sufficiently accountable to residents and that you interact mainly with the board of directors but don't have a lot of dealings with the public directly. Is there any void of accountability at the top of CA or with CA as a whole?
A. Well, I think the Columbia Association is accountable. The Columbia Council is the elected board of directors of the Columbia Association. They set the directions of where the Columbia Association would go and how it should get there. My job is to do it. The Columbia Council [members] sit on the village boards in each one of the 10 villages all over the city. They are involved in going to meetings with the Columbia community all the time. They encourage in the open meetings people to come and talk up. . . . Then they are accountable.
Q. Is there anyone accountable to the whole Columbia population? [Council members] represent individual villages and aren't elected by the population at large. Does that leave any void? For instance, a mayor would be accountable to every resident.
A. I think in terms of government, the [Howard] county executive is responsible for the whole of the county electorate.
Q. The incorporation group says it wants to create a Columbia politics . . . two competing parties or view points. Would that be good or bad for Columbia?
A. I think you would lose something that has been the hallmark of Columbia -- community service and public service and not political service and partisan service.
Q. Some residents, and even some council members, have talked about what they call apathy among Columbia residents, at least when it comes to [Columbia] elections. . . . Some say there's not a lot at stake in the elections. . . . The incorporation group believes that might be one reason people don't come out to vote that often. . . . They are saying private interests seem to keep control over what happens in Columbia.
A. What are private interests?
Q. They're referring to the Columbia Association and the Rouse Co. having a lot of influence and control.
A. Well, we have already discussed the role that the Rouse Co. plays with the Columbia Association and the Columbia Council. . . . I don't see them as involved at all. I think that there are people who have a view that is decades old, not current fact at all.
Q. The comment about the private interests having a lot of control . . . or operating in a corporate type of way might come from the fact that the Columbia Association isn't bound by laws that pertain to government.
A. Such as?
Q. Open meeting [laws]
A. We are bound by laws that are very similar in [the state] Homeowners Association Act, so that to close meetings you have got to be dealing with contract negotiations . . . personnel [matters]. . . . I'd say that we are very open.
Q. Do you think a lot of these issues we've talked about are overblown -- the incorporation effort, voting? . . . Bottom line, are people very satisfied and there isn't a lot of reason to cause a lot of commotion with these issues?
A. It would be presumptuous on my part to say yes or no. But I think it would not be presumptuous to say . . . if you were to take the Columbia Association from year to year and you were to read the mission statement . . . I think there is no question about the fact that the Columbia Association this year, five years ago, 10 years ago, 15 years ago is a community service organization that has made quantum leaps forward in its service and its operations and its relationships to the community over those years, and I think it will continue to.
Q. You think life is getting better for people in Columbia?
A. It's a very complicated question, so you have to narrow that question. . . . Do you think the Columbia Association has RTC improved the quality of life in the last five or 10 years? . . . I think it has improved, definitely. No question about it.
Q. What would be the main reason for that improvement?
A. One, because the Columbia Association has both built very good new facilities . . . or it has reinvested in facilities that were built in the beginning, and they are infinitely better . . . than they were the day they opened. Secondly, I think it is better because there has been a tremendous emphasis on quality of service. . . . The third thing, the financial condition of the Columbia Association from 1985 to 1995 is light years ahead of where it was, and in the next five, six, seven years it will be light years ahead of where it is right now.