Wednesday, November 4, 2009
North Hays firefighters lose, 748 to 667; developer wins, 1-0
The ESD board approved its sales tax proposition BEFORE Rose passed his HB4825, so he was in conflict with the firefighters from the get go. Rose knew what he was doing with his Special District, but pleads ignorance to avoid taking responsibility for his actions
Send your comments and news tips to online.editor@valleyspringcomm.net, to codell@austin.rr.com, and you can click on the "comments" button at the bottom of the story
Editor's Note: Voters yesterday in north Hays County said no to a one-cent increase in the sales tax to improve firefighting and emergency response services. The vote was 748 against and 667 for, according to election results posted by the Hays County elections office. Two other measures on the ballot, however, imposing a sales and ad valorem property tax for the Driftwood Municipal Management District, were passed handily, by a vote of 1 to 0. Now there's an interesting and eye-opening contrast in democracy in action and a special interest bill authored by State Rep. Patrick Rose. Read the posts below for more details and background.
See the Hays County results of Tuesday's election at this link (click on the November 3 Elections Results for a down loadable pdf file): http://www.elections.co.hays.tx.us/November032009ElectionResults/tabid/109/Default.aspx
Election Commentary
By Charles O'Dell
RoundUp Contributor
It reads like something the Dripping Springs Development Coordinator would write: “None of the (Salt Lick Special District) tax revenue would fund the development costs. The tax revenue would only pay for road maintenance and other public costs that the city of Dripping Springs tax dollars would have paid for if this new district wasn't created.”
That’s shear nonsense. The City can’t annex property without approval of the developer, and Roberts didn’t agree to annexation so his Special District is in the City’s ETJ. Dripping Springs doesn’t spend tax dollars in its ETJ. It only collects development fees and taxes from the ETJ to feed the City officials insatiable spending. And what services does the City have to provide? Its $15 million central sewer serves only a special few inside the city limits. Dripping Springs is a taker – not a giver.
“The emergency services vote was not conflicting with Roberts' vote until very recently - and the conflict came about as a result of something that was out of Rose's control.“
Still more misinformation. The ESD board approved its sales tax proposition BEFORE Rose passed his HB4825, so he was in conflict with the firefighters from the get go. Rose knew what he was doing with his Special District, but pleads ignorance to avoid taking responsibility for his actions.
Here is what the Dripping Springs’ home boy created for Hays County taxpayers with his HB4825.
A Taxing Government Without Voter Accountability
The high-end Special District is governed by a board whose members are appointed by Hays County Commissioners’ Court and the Dripping Springs City Council. District residents can only vote for one County Commissioner and the County Judge. So District residents will be governed by a board appointed by ten elected officials, only two for whom residents can vote.
Taxes, Taxes and more Taxes
Sales taxes in the Special District are collected at the expense of fire fighters and other emergency jurisdictions that must still provide their services to the District. Together with a hotel occupancy tax and an excise tax, the sales tax will finance an array of developer costs approved by the appointed board. And if the developer wants home owners to help finance his development, the District can impose property taxes on the high-end home owners once residential lots are sold.
A Free Ride for the Developer
A developer typically invests in building roads, sewer and water lines and other utilities, and then floats bonds to reimburse his expenditures. These bonds are repaid through property taxes collected from homeowners. This developer will finance his infrastructure investment up front with an array of taxes. Mark my words – Dripping Springs city officials covet these taxes, which is why their hand is in this Special District pie.
Collateral Damage
Who pays for the public costs associated with all the destination tourists? Building larger public roads for visitors cost money and those costs are typically financed through public bonds the community at large repays through property taxes. The more visitors there are the greater the need for bonds and higher property taxes. But the Special District reaps all the sales, occupancy and user taxes, while property owners outside the District pay for the increased “public” costs: safety and emergency services; road building, maintenance and traffic risk; air and noise pollution; water and environmental degradation.
The Water Scam
While Roberts has touted his District as “green” and water friendly, the facts tell another story. Every acre of his vineyard already uses more groundwater than if those same acres were covered with 1/8 acre lot homes. Each mature grapevine plant requires about 16” of water during the growing season and that has to come from rain or irrigation. And it has to come at the right time. That’s about 353 gallons per plant. So water budget wise, nearby well owners are better off with more residential wells than with agricultural wells for vineyards.
Rose’s HB4825 demonstrates his commitment to his special interest, not to those constituents relying on their wells for drinking water.
Someone posted on the Roundup that the only real solution to these kinds of special interest/public official marriages is to vote the officials out of office. I agree. Anyone willing to run for state office? You would have a lot of voter support.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Mr. O'Dell, why don't you run against Rep. Rose?
The fact that Texas voters approved ALL of the proposed constitutional amendments underscores how out-of-touch the voters are and highlights business as usual by legislators.
No way should ALL of those propositions have gained the approval of voters, yet, manipulated wording by officials and support of their wealthy special interests did the job.
How can we expect any real positive change on the state level and here in Hays County when residents are misinformed, lied to and manipulated by those in charge?
That's a rhetorical question, no need to answer.
"Mr. O'Dell, why don't you run against Rep. Rose?"
Then who would watch me if I got elected?
And with me writing for the Roundup as an elected official it might become like the Barton newspaper...a propaganda medium.
Let's just keep things like they are. I'll report my findings in the Roundup and encourage qualified citizens to engage in government service for their community.
Are you interested in serving your community?
I'm in favor of a voter imposed terms limits approach. Wonder boy Rose is in his fourth term. Can anybody point to anything that he's done for the rank and file citizens of his district?
If you're a developer, Rose is your boy. If you're a water company, Rose is your boy. If you're just a citizen who cares about natural resources or keeping guns off of university campuses, forget it. Rose ain't your boy.
I think it's time for some bumper stickers. Should it be "Send Patrick Packing" or "Adios Patrick" ---- any other suggestions?
I smell dead fish in these election results. If both tax items (fire fighters and Driftwood) had passed they would have canceled each other out. How convenient it was the developer won and the fire fighters lost. Voters usually support their local first responders, unless they are totally incompetent. Was there an 11th hour push by someone to defeat the fire fighters ballot measure?
Here's what happened (I think). The initial ruling was that if both items passed, the tax increase would exceed the legal limitations on local taxation. That's the law. Both entities were informed of this and told that one measure had to be withdrawn.
Rose has always enabled the Salt Lick owner- Roberts- by accepting very large campaign contributions from him (exceeding 20 K several times), and in exchange, Rose got a litle bill quietly through the last legislative session that allowed Roberts to create his own tax for collection in his 1 man, uh, fiefdom?
Since one of the 2 entities had to withdraw their tax item, the firefighters withdrew theirs. Why? Publicly the firemen said Rose was their pal, and that since Rose had helped them in the past- they withdrew their request for a tax that would give them an INCREASE in pay.
Privately ....what.. really.. happened..?
Letters were mailed to voters in D.S. and Driftwood informing them the firemen had withdrawn. BIG PROBLEM!! The Hays County elections head- Mrs. Cowan- discovered you can't withdraw a ballot measure once it's on the ballot. It was then put back on the ballot the day before the election for voting on election day.
But it was ruled if both measures passed, they would negate one another. Then no go for both parties (exceeds the legal limit). If Robert's 1 vote WON, and the firefighters LOST, then Roberts gets his tax; fireman don't.
That's what happened.
Question:
1. How many people voted in early voting thinking they COULD NOT vote for the firemen, having been told it was off the ballot?
2. How many people did not vote at all based on not being able to support the fireman?
3. How many people voted on election day under the assumption their vote for the fireman WOULD NOT COUNT?
This needs acriminal investigation.
This goes beyond a mistake, incompetence, and unethical. We need to find out what happened- Rose, Roberts, firefighters, Cowan. I think one of these knows what happened, and how it was pulled off.
Spencer – First, your post is anything but unbiased. It is, as it has always been the responsibility of the voters to read the ballot and vote their choice. It does not matter what someone tells the voters, they should vote their convictions regardless of the so-called experts.
Your suspicions and conspiracy theories are a little over-the top and I believe fueled by your own politics. Mr. Roberts has shown great skill in manipulating the system and pulled this off while you and other Rose detractors were asleep. That is what this is all about. It is not about the poor Firefighters, which are more than adequately funded in the first place, much like schoolteachers. All factions have their hands out these days of government over-spending and taxation.
You seem to favor both tax propositions passing in the election, to what end? Wouldn’t they have effectively canceled out each other and left the firefighters in the lurch? I think your hate for Rose is showing. Well it’s time for me to call in to the Mother Ship… Nanu Nanu.
You can't vote intelligently if you are unaware of the truth about an issue.
The media lies, officials bend the truth, legislators manipulate the voters by carefully constructing the words of a proposed bill that is desired by their wealthy special interests.
These days all too often people wouldn't know the truth if they tripped over it.
“The media lies, officials bend the truth, legislators manipulate the voters by carefully constructing the words of a proposed bill that is desired by their wealthy special interests.”
What a ridiculous statement and argument! I believe YOU should not vote if you are that cynical. As voters we should do everything possible to learn about the issues. That does not mean sitting home on your butt watching TV and reading the local newspapers. Get out and engage your Local, State and US Politicians and attend meetings. I’m getting really tired of this type of “It’s no use voting” crap coming from lazy bums.
I notice that you put “wealthy” right in front of “special interests” as if it is evil to have wealth. That is the talk of lazy ne'er-do-wells and socialists. Maybe you haven’t heard, but wealth and success are supposed to be a goal for all of us, not the sign of the beast. The “poor” special interests will always try to take the rest of us down to their own miserable level; what a shame.
The author of the article didn't quite get the development funding correct. What "bonds" do the developers sell for the infrastructure - none.
Typically, the developers make up the costs via the lot sales. Another scheme is to force homeowners (via restrictive covenants under the unilateral control of the developer) to be mandatory funders of an HOA or vendors "serving" the area. Using these approaches, the developer is able to force the homeowners of an initial phase to pay for subsequent buildout in later phases.
Take the water issue all over Hays County. Do you really think the new subdivision rules were written to protect water supplies or to ensure that homeowners in any new subdivision would be forced to be involuntary customers of private, investor owned utilities (i.e., developer owned central water systems).
As involuntary customers they can be forced to pay for buildout of subsequent phases of the development. Do you really think the developer cares about conserving water, or about forcing his "customers" via the HOA to consume as much water as he can possibly pump from his water company? The HTGCD is hardly a hero here either since HTGCD wants production fees - the more pumped the more money for HTGCD under the pretext of "managing" groundwater.
Regarding Roberts' Regime - of course it's a fiefdom! You forgot some of the other special "exemptions" Rose & Roberts colluded on. Look closely at section 3858.105 of the new statute which ensures no competitive bidding for district contracts. Hmmm.
Perhaps this is Roberts' way of having an alternative to an HOA. If that's the case then at least residents will get a tax deduction for their payments to the district. Of course, if there's an HOA on top of this district then it's just one more reason to not purchase property in that area. Secret meetings, perpetual liens on your property, etc. People would be living under a private corporation that will never be accountable to them PLUS they will be paying taxes to a political subdivision of the state that they reside within but that they are not permitted to run for office for. How legit is that? Is there a Tea Party in the not-to-distant future of the DEMMD?
See 3858.052 which dictates the composition of the board. See also 3858.054 which provides that even in the event of an "election" Roberts and friends will control the board for at least 3 years after the election. That means that the only "elected" positions cannot form a quorum and cannot alter the outcome of any board vote. Thus the "election" is for appearances only and at best ceremonial in nature. Those that control the board can accomplish quite a bit to the detriment of the residents in the three + years that Roberts & friends would have to continue ruling.
The best solution is to avoid buying in the place if you are suspicious of the motivations of Roberts & friends. However, it is unfortunate that our elected officials are giving us fewer and opportunities to live in a home free of homeowner associations and these "districts" under the pretext of being for the "public good". Which public?
Post a Comment