Election Results: Wash, Rinse, Repeat

4,123 Views | 46 Replies | Last: 6 days ago by cavscout96
duffelpud
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
"What's this button do?"
Cholula Verde
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Maybe the outcome will be different the second time around?
pbain422
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Clown World Order
Aggie1205
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
According to the results on KBTX only three people voted total on the Brazos County MUD bonds?
rstjr04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The MUD bond wasn't on my ballot.
UmustBKidding
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Its only on the ballot of residents of the MUD, and its intentional. They draw boundary such as there are few, usually no residents and then plant residents they know how they will vote (typically the organizers of the MUD). So future residents get no say.
nought
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Absolutely every single option in College Station that has the potential to raise our taxes either locally or at the state level was selected by the voters (except for Proposition 4, thank goodness). Unbelievable.

Proposition 2 -- passed.
Proposition 5 -- passed.
Proposition 6 -- passed.
Proposition 7 -- passed.
Proposition 8 -- passed.
John Crompton -- elected.

Don't kid yourself that Crompton's proposed fee on new housing development isn't a tax. The real question is why is it needed? Because the City is spending too much as it is. $15,000 per new house is nothing compared to the tax revenue that will come from that house and the tax revenue from sales tax on things bought by the resident in that house.
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Prop 5 has no bearing on tax rates. It ensured the current sales tax on sporting goods was used as intended, for conservation and preservation. It is not a new tax or a tax increase.
Tumble Weed
How long do you want to ignore this user?
nought said:

Absolutely every single option in College Station that has the potential to raise our taxes either locally or at the state level was selected by the voters (except for Proposition 4, thank goodness). Unbelievable.

Proposition 2 -- passed.
Proposition 5 -- passed.
Proposition 6 -- passed.
Proposition 7 -- passed.
Proposition 8 -- passed.
John Crompton -- elected.

Don't kid yourself that Crompton's proposed fee on new housing development isn't a tax. The real question is why is it needed? Because the City is spending too much as it is. $15,000 per new house is nothing compared to the tax revenue that will come from that house and the tax revenue from sales tax on things bought by the resident in that house.
The city is addicted to our money. They all need to be put in rehab.

I first noticed it with the bronze statue outside of a fire station. Please show me one Texas town that has found that necessary. The entire building looks like a museum from a district in Houston.

We are so broke that we can't fix the roads, so your fees are going up. Enjoy this new firefighter museum on University! It's really classy!
nought
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cavscout96 said:

Prop 5 has no bearing on tax rates. It ensured the current sales tax on sporting goods was used as intended, for conservation and preservation. It is not a new tax or a tax increase.

I respectfully disagree. Who is to say that the entire amount of sales tax collected from sporting goods should only be used by Parks and Wildlife and the Historical Commission? (Well, a majority of the voters said so...but I wasn't one of the ones who voted that way).

By dedicating what is a large amount collected from sporting goods in this state strictly to those two entities, their budgets are inflated (more than necessary in my opinion), and other departments will have their budgets cut. Except...government doesn't like having budget cuts at all, so the next thing we'll see are other departments saying they need new sources of revenue (read "taxes") to make up for whatever bit of the sales tax they are no longer getting.
Drilltime
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So we've been trying to get real numbers on the fees and based on a presentation done for city council in 2016 when the current fees were established it should work like this:

$21,000: Average cost to city per residence (Avg House is about $240k)

$10,500: This is maximum the State allows a city to recover (50%). The State recognizes the residents will return about half of their cost over time so it only allows the other half to be collected. They call this a 50% " builder credit".

$6,600: The current average fee per house according to the city engineer.

$ 3,900: The maximum additional fee the city can collect by law (10.5k - 6.6k).

So the $15000 was never actually a meaningful number. It came from $21k - $6.6k. It actually is the cost we are not collecting. But it's not the cost we are allowed to collect ($10,500).

Technically, it's correct to say Crompton wants to collect 100% of the allowed. fee but the allowed fee is not $15,000, it's $10,500 and we are already getting $6,600 of that.

I'm not an expert. If I've gotten this wrong please let me know.

We are building about 650 residences a year so the max increase in income we could get by charging 100% of the allowed fee is about $ 585k, which will not even begin to touch our growing debt problem. That is in the hundreds of millions.

It would not make sense to me to ask development to pay the part the residents will eventually give back to the community. However it does make sense to ask for the 50% they never will. If we don't, I would call that a government subsidy of a private developer.

But this is not the answer to hundreds of millions of unfunded liabilities people are talking about being in the pipeline. That should probably be the subject of another thread.
nought
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Drilltime said:


$10,500: This is maximum the State allows a city to recover (50%). The State recognizes the residents will return about half of their cost over time so it only allows the other half to be collected. They call this a 50% " builder credit".



This is the part I don't get. A $240,000 house is only going to result in $10,500 of tax revenue to the City over time? I have a hard time believing that.

And, unless we have unoccupied houses being built, we can assume that the residents of that house will also be contributing to the City via sales tax, year after year after year.

I don't understand why the City would want to disincentivize growth and new residents.
happyinBCS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Were you at the coronation of Lord Crompton it is obvious you are his spokesperson It is a disaster that he is back on the city counsel May we as CS residents have help from above
chucktheaggiejeweler
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sponsor
AG
I'm assuming all comments are coming from those in the 7% who voted (excluding those not able to vote in CS)
God's Peace,
Chuck

Fifth C Jewelry
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Compelling the legislature to follow the law..... Novel I know.

Personally, I'd much prefer spending money and TPWD and THC than bailing out the mega cities who don't understand that concrete and asphalt aren't permeable materials. That's a problem of their own making, and thusly, theirs to solve.

Plenty of places to trim I'm sure. TPWD and THC are not in that category IMO.

Clearly, you disagree. I'm alright with that.

cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I voted...
JM84
How long do you want to ignore this user?
How much is that residence going to pay in property and other taxes over time? I bet it's a s***load more than $15,000. Never mind the commercial growth it would also encourage. We just pushed every single bit of development into Bryan for the foreseeable future. Let's see how that works out, but I bet I can guess.
Drilltime
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's a good question. The 50% builder credit ($10500) obviously is not the total tax you pay. I think the city sees taxes as just being your share of what they need to balance the budget.

As I think about it, this isn't even a credit to the resident. Its called a 'builder credit" for a reason and the benefit goes to the builder. I would assume builders sell for whatever they can get, and how much of the subsidy becomes a cost reduction to the purchaser will vary greatly with the market.

The logic for the 50% may have nothing to do some long term effect of the resident on the economy, but some impact developments have (i.e., more HEBs). I have no idea.
legalbird
How long do you want to ignore this user?
government provided housing is the answer
duffelpud
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
All hail Lord Crompton.
"What's this button do?"
nought
How long do you want to ignore this user?
chucktheaggiejeweler said:

I'm assuming all comments are coming from those in the 7% who voted (excluding those not able to vote in CS)
SO and I voted, not that it helped. :-(
chucktheaggiejeweler
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sponsor
AG
Still the right thing to do.
God's Peace,
Chuck

Fifth C Jewelry
happyinBCS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
All hail Lord Crompton
RafterAg223
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Can't wait to see the next useless Highway 6 median tree planting and irrigation project for more than $500,000. Maybe he can convince everyone to buy another city hall site again and then turn around and sell it for less than the taxpayers paid for it. Voter turnout was shameful. This arrogant career academic will do nothing but make it more expensive for everyone not subject a tax freeze, to live in this city. But that's exactly what all you east side and Southside NIMBY types with your "I was here first" attitude would love to see. I'm all for neighborhood integrity and protection against things like stealth dorms. But the complete anti development agenda subscribed to by this guy and his cronies, is downright poisonous.
Oogway
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IIRC, both you and JM84 are in the trades, so it makes sense that you're not a fan of Crompton or impact fees. I mean, if I were in your shoes, I wouldn't be either.
What interests me the most will be whether Crompton joins forces with those on the council to issue more debt without an election or if he holds to his campaign platform of fiscal transparency. FWIW, Rektorik was a good councilperson and served the citizens well. I will be watching to see if Crompton does too. I'm not bitter about it, there ain't no crying in baseball politics.
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Not anti-development.

Anti-subsidies to developers. Also...... I don't want to live in "Little Cypress." We're already there as it relates to driver stupidity.
pbain422
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Tumble Weed said:

nought said:

Absolutely every single option in College Station that has the potential to raise our taxes either locally or at the state level was selected by the voters (except for Proposition 4, thank goodness). Unbelievable.

Proposition 2 -- passed.
Proposition 5 -- passed.
Proposition 6 -- passed.
Proposition 7 -- passed.
Proposition 8 -- passed.
John Crompton -- elected.

Don't kid yourself that Crompton's proposed fee on new housing development isn't a tax. The real question is why is it needed? Because the City is spending too much as it is. $15,000 per new house is nothing compared to the tax revenue that will come from that house and the tax revenue from sales tax on things bought by the resident in that house.
The city is addicted to our money. They all need to be put in rehab.

I first noticed it with the bronze statue outside of a fire station. Please show me one Texas town that has found that necessary. The entire building looks like a museum from a district in Houston.

We are so broke that we can't fix the roads, so your fees are going up. Enjoy this new firefighter museum on University! It's really classy!
Have you ever toured that thing? They have a $10000 stove in there. The firefighter giving us the tour said the bought the best of everything to "make it last". The city has a $1.3 million dollar tractor to mow the ditches (he was proud to brag about how much it cost and that only two others exist in the US... like that is a good use of our money). Expect much of the same with the new PD and city hall. Gold toilets if they really had their way. There is a big difference between getting stuff that lasts and having to have the most expensive equipment because they can.
pbain422
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RafterAg223 said:

Can't wait to see the next useless Highway 6 median tree planting and irrigation project for more than $500,000. Maybe he can convince everyone to buy another city hall site again and then turn around and sell it for less than the taxpayers paid for it. Voter turnout was shameful. This arrogant career academic will do nothing but make it more expensive for everyone not subject a tax freeze, to live in this city. But that's exactly what all you east side and Southside NIMBY types with your "I was here first" attitude would love to see. I'm all for neighborhood integrity and protection against things like stealth dorms. But the complete anti development agenda subscribed to by this guy and his cronies, is downright poisonous.
I'm still waiting for a consistent definition of what "neighborhood integrity" means. It is an ambiguous term that the local politicians use to stir up emotions and get votes. It really has no meaning. If you don't want stealth dorms then say no stealth dorms. Don't use an umbrella term that means whatever the listener wants it to mean. Classic politics I guess.
techno-ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
pbain422 said:

Tumble Weed said:

nought said:

Absolutely every single option in College Station that has the potential to raise our taxes either locally or at the state level was selected by the voters (except for Proposition 4, thank goodness). Unbelievable.

Proposition 2 -- passed.
Proposition 5 -- passed.
Proposition 6 -- passed.
Proposition 7 -- passed.
Proposition 8 -- passed.
John Crompton -- elected.

Don't kid yourself that Crompton's proposed fee on new housing development isn't a tax. The real question is why is it needed? Because the City is spending too much as it is. $15,000 per new house is nothing compared to the tax revenue that will come from that house and the tax revenue from sales tax on things bought by the resident in that house.
The city is addicted to our money. They all need to be put in rehab.

I first noticed it with the bronze statue outside of a fire station. Please show me one Texas town that has found that necessary. The entire building looks like a museum from a district in Houston.

We are so broke that we can't fix the roads, so your fees are going up. Enjoy this new firefighter museum on University! It's really classy!
Have you ever toured that thing? They have a $10000 stove in there. The firefighter giving us the tour said the bought the best of everything to "make it last". The city has a $1.3 million dollar tractor to mow the ditches (he was proud to brag about how much it cost and that only two others exist in the US... like that is a good use of our money). Expect much of the same with the new PD and city hall. Gold toilets if they really had their way. There is a big difference between getting stuff that lasts and having to have the most expensive equipment because they can.


RafterAg223
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
cavscout96 said:

Not anti-development.

Anti-subsidies to developers. Also...... I don't want to live in "Little Cypress." We're already there as it relates to driver stupidity.
Still looking for one of those magical "developer subsidies". Mind telling me where I can find one?
jaypop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You are right that the developer puts pseudo residents out then when the district is initially created, but in this instance you are wrong. The current home owners weren't "picked" as they purchased homes there. There just happens to not be many residents yet and the vote only needed majority, so 2 votes lol.
Drilltime
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"Subsidy" just seems like the right word. I've stated this before and no one has disagreed with the numbers:
- It costs the city an average of $ 21k per residence when you build a new neighborhood (auditable calculation)
- By law the formula doesn't include anything anyone other than your business clients , and only your business clients, can use
- The state says your development will create value over time and you get a 50% "builders credit" off what you owe to account for this
- If there is no impact fee, the tax payers cover the other 50% of your investment cost ($ 10500) . Not you
- We already have a fee ($ 6600), and some council members would eliminate even that. The maximum it can now be increased is $3900 ($ 10500-$ 6600).

When I pay for your costs, I like to call that a subsidy.

But you can call it something else if you like.

Justin2010
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I thought the impact fee could, by state law, be up to 100%. Not 50%. Am i wrong?

Not saying it should be, just curious.
Drilltime
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I found a presentation to city council that staff did when they approved the levels of fess we do have. It clearly states there is a 50% builder credit..

Blanch Brick also confirmed this in her long Eagle Article before the election and she lead the effort to structure the original fee.

I think the confusion is over the way people use the 100%. It is correct that Crompton wants to collect "100% of the allowed fee", but the allowed fee is only 50% of the impact calculation.

It is also correct to say the developer's average residence costs the city $15k more than the current fee. That number is large and made me think there was no 50%. Its correct to say the average residence the builders are creating costs us $15k right now. It is not correct to say we can collect this much. In theory we will get 10.5k of this back over 20-30 years. Unfortunately we have to borrow to pay the bills right now.

AggieBarstool
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Same. I get the concept of having nice stuff that lasts, esp. for our first responders, but the excess is ridiculous.

I, too, toured the facility and I specifically asked our tour guide if the place was a bit over the top. His response: "Well, it's for the public, too."

Cool. So I'm gonna waltz right on in tomorrow morning and use their conference room. Because, you know, it's for the public.
Page 1 of 2
 
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.