We have a city that was incorporated in 1962. We have a history of mismanagement and poor planning. The administrations of the recent past have laid the groundwork for fixing what ails league city with regards to facilities and infrastructure planning and repairs. You either want a City with better than average Police, Fire, water, sewage, treatment, etc or you don't. These things cost money. I don't like debt either, however it is a necessary evil to leverage your income stream to accomplish the many needs of the citizens and pay as you consume these facilities. Few small-medium, and larger in size businesses can operate without some debt. Few cities that are League City size and that are also growing can plan growth preparation projects, execute them, or operate well without debt. I don't like waste, corruption, or any other government inefficiency. However, Since 1986 when I a moved here, this City's government has done a 180 as far as its forward thinking and management. Everyone who wants less government/less taxes needs to know that nobody is going to build the things we need for our community for free. The citizens will need to pay for these things. If you don't want to pay for these services and infrastructure, maybe you should find another community that matches your affinity to have your community strangled by a government that is scared of debt. The majority of citizens want to press the flush bar, and see the water do a swirly, press 9-1-1, hear a siren in 3 minutes. I could go on and on, but I want to live in a community with nice parks, and nice facilities for city workers. I would like to maintain the great police, fire and Ems departments we have to protect us. (the next call you make could be 911 for your wife son or daughter) I chose to live here and pay for the city services mentioned above, because this is the kind of community I want to live in. I think the majority of the citizens of League City feel the same way and could care less if their taxes are $80.00 more or less a year. Let's pay our taxes and expect in return great service and facilities. I think we are getting that now.
Marc,
ReplyDeleteI agree. The reason we chose to build and own a home in League City had more to do with quality of life than low taxes. Had we been lasered in on low taxes, we would have chosen instead unincorporated county land, or rural east Texas. Hey, no city water or sewer, the schools rank low, no EMS within the hour, and no parks or other amenities, but it sure is cheap!
Well said Mr. Edelman !
ReplyDeleteAll of this debt is issued for things like roads, water and wastewater lines, drainage improvements, traffic improvements, Loftin said.
ReplyDelete"Oh, yeah. We've got loads of debt, but it's good debt." What a load of crap. Just because we structure our budget to pay cash for certain things and save debt for things that appear necessary, doesn't excuse the debt. When you pay cash for things like arborists salaries, Longhorn museums, transplanting oak trees, customer appreciation days, etc. You should not take cash away from the public for these other frivolous expenditures that could have been used to pay for basic services such as water and sewer line repair and installation.
And before someone gives me that "dedicated 4B" tax noise, I'll say I understand about that already. That's part of our total tax burden, dedicated or not. It's nothing more than a loophole that allows government to collect more taxes and spend it. Where you get it or where you shuffle the money from is irrelevant. It is all part of the justification of borrowing money for large public works projects. The people getting rich are the engineering firms, and the money people on Wall Street who make a fortune from our bond issues. It's all part of machine for profit for these firms.
Glad the League City council is made up of "fiscal conservatives" to protect us from this.
So, (hiding as) Anonymous, I like that you're anti-debt. However, Mr. Loftin never said that any debt is good. You're reading into his words something that isn't there. Second, the infrastructure is absolutely necessary. Or would you rather have flooding continue in The Landing and Shellside, and traffic plus accidents continue to pile up on west League City Parkway, and my water pressure go to zero, and my sewer lines backing up? Then me and all my livid neighbors would get you fired.
ReplyDeleteOh, but wait--you're not a decision maker in League City government, are you? You don't have responsibility for budgets, projects, public safety and health. You are against debt, but you don't say how you would avoid debt, yet still serve citizens with municipal infrastructure. So how would you? Are you going to respond this time?
Chucky, You should look at some of our municipal neighbors as a model of how local government should be run. Santa Fe comes to mind immediately. They are thrifty and the cost of government in Santa Fe is low when you look at the total budget. Save me the blah blah blah about infrastructure. 80% of water and sewer in League City is paid for by MUD, Tirz, or some additional ad valorem tax.
ReplyDeleteMy dear (forever) anonymous, get a clue. Oh, Santa Fe is a great comparison. Unless it's not. Based on the 2010 census, the population density of Santa Fe is 710 per sq. mile, while League City's is 1,600 per sq. mile. League City is more than twice as densely populated as Santa Fe. Urban infrastructure costs increase faster than the population density increases.
ReplyDeleteAnd the fact that everyone's water rates went up about 30% over 3 years a few years ago to pay for the new southwest wastewater plant http://galvestondailynews.com/story/353838 and expansion of the existing Dallas Salmon plant http://www.leaguecity.com/index.aspx?NID=53. MUDs aren't paying for that; everyone's water bills are. Going forward League City faces an equally dire situation with water rights. Capital recovery fees aren't going to cover the many millions of dollars to acquire those.
Oh, and the $9 million ($100 principal per resident) in 2012 League City bonded debt being sold to fund infrastructure that's neither water, nor sewer, nor public safety building. Those needed projects, to catch up on the urban sprawl from last decade that didn't pay for itself, aren't being paid by MUDs or TIRZ either. But they ARE being paid for some other ad valorem tax, like my (and my neighbors') property taxes!
My friend Chuck, You say that Santa Fe is half the density of League City. However, their budget is only 15% of League City’s budget. Now, who do you think is processing the poop that is pumped to Dallas Salmon from the Muds? Huh? Who? Think Chuck, before you type, think.
ReplyDeleteMr./Mrs./Miss/Ms. Anonymous, retrieve your mind from where the sun don't shine. First, as an area goes from rural to urban, residents move off of well water and septic systems onto municipal water and sewage systems. Thus the demand for municipal utilities increases faster than the increase in density. So, for example, if the population density increases 2x, the capital cost for utilities could increase 4x. The point is that there is some curve fitting formula that is the kind of thing that university urban planning and civil engineering departments come up with. Also, higher density means more commercial structures per thousand residents. People don't live in those buildings, but they place an extra burden on municipal water and sewage systems. Exhibit A is the big box store eruption at I-45 and FM646.
ReplyDeleteSecond, other municipal costs increase faster than population density increases. Decades ago, when League City had a small central core and open ranchland miles to the east and west, stormwater drainage was nothing more than building a few earthen ditches in "old" League City, and let the vast open land soak up the rest. With more and more impervious concrete, the rain water has nowhere to go unless expensive, concrete storm systems are built. The same principle applies to traffic. cities under 50,000 population in Texas don't have to pay for traffic lights. Santa Fe doesn't need a traffic engineer on staff, but League City sure does. Also, crime, and thus public safety costs, increase faster than population density increases.
Third, Santa Fe's budget is not 15% of League City's. Since you can't do the math, I'll do it for you. Santa Fe operating budget 2012-13 = $4.6 million / 12,222 population (2010 census) = $376 per person. League City operating budget 2012-13 = $96 million / 83,560 population = $1148 per person. Santa Fe's budget is 33% of League City's. League City has higher costs for reasons I outlined in the previous post, plus the city is playing catch up after years of lagging behind demand for infrastructure.
So, Anonymous, if you want to live cheap, just go live in Santa Fe. Or go to unincorporated Galveston County. Why stop there, just go live up in east Texas, get a couple cows for an ag exemption. Low taxes and cost of living, if that's what you want. No amenities, though. And you're on your own as far as water, sewer, public safety, and EMS. And you don't mind low rated school districts. Yet population is booming in League City. It's for the quality of life, not cheap living.
ReplyDeleteHaving some experiance with the type of people in Santa Fe.... I am glad i live in League City.
ReplyDelete