Thursday, December 07, 2006

HOUSTON METRO | | News for Houston, Texas

HOUSTON METRO | | News for Houston, Texas: "Since Houston annexed Kingwood 10 years ago, The Woodlands has been looking over its shoulder expecting a land grab.

But residents of The Woodlands who were against annexation could breathe a sigh of relief after an agreement was announced Thursday by Sen. Tommy Williams and Houston Mayor Bill White.

It’s a dream come true for residents of The Woodlands. Houston has agreed not to annex them, but because of that residents there might face higher taxes."
"Never" is a nice word in a case like that. My water district struck a deal with the city a few years ago and got a promise of not annexing any of us in the water district that aren't already in Houston for 25 years. Part of the deal was to furnish water to a section that is located in Houston's city limits and under development. I don't recall the exact details, but I know the city gets a piece of the utility district's taxes too. If I wanted to live in the city of Houston I'd of stayed in Spring Branch. My neighborhood is not the greatest in the area, but it's not the worst either and the location is great. I sure don't want to move out any further than I already am. It's taken years and years for us to NOT be in the sticks! Be it ever so humble.....


Anonymous said...

Houston has made scores of pocket annexations with utility districts all over the ETJ; the partner's split the extra penny of sale tax so the only losers are the ones that live in the areas covered. You don't get a vote, the city gets it's hand in your pocket forever, and you pay more taxes that profit the city (as well as subordinate your right to water in certain cases, to the city).

The Woodlands residents were very happy during Lanier's reign to work out a deal where they wouldn't be annexed just so long as they paid ~12 million dollars (give or take) which effectively amounted to blackmail that they were happy to pay. This current deal is yet another time when a slightly closer look at the "deal" makes it apparent that the people living there are getting screwed over; they'll get no better services for their money, can't retract the agreement, and get no representation for the money they'll be sending south to finance the city.

As it stands though, if the changing demographics of Woodedge continue to proceed as they have been, the difference between formally living in the city and simply living in an area that "looks" like the city will be so slight that it won't make any difference (and the politicians that seek the vote of the new arrivals will eventually find that the newer majority is more important to them then the residents that have lived their for decades; I've seen the numbers of For Sale signs littering the community...).

In short, there is no escape for suburbanites wanting the benefits of proximity but not the costs associated with them. Sorry... lol

TxGoodie said...

Oh geez why not just give out my physical address while you're at it. I think we had THIS talk before.

I can appreciate that you know it all, but unless I'm mistaken I'm still entitled to my own POV no matter how little regard you give it. So long as I'm happy in my little world I'll continue to live where I want to despite any of your dire predictions or civics lessons.

Anonymous said...

The kid's got a point. Taking him to task for it doesn't make him wrong and it looks like he was agreeing with ya.

TxGoodie said...

It's the know-it-all attitude that gets on my nerves. Reminds me of my older brother who also knows it all and never lets me forget it. As for the 'kid', I couldn't take HIM to task on my best day. The lad is just fine I assure you.