Beware of the Affordable Housing Ploy

The City Council was recently presented information and options by the staff on proceeding with "affordable housing" and the integration into the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Council Workshop Download the attachments to see the details.

Here are two of the slides from the workshop:

Click to enlarge

Notice the repeated use of the word "support" in the first slide. Support can mean many things, but, it often means financial support. Financial support can be "cash" like grants, in-kind support like providing all the infrastructure, or indirect support such as tax abatement or reduced fees.

The City should not get financially entangled with supporting affordable housing. Keep in mind that "affordable housing" is often used as a synonym for Federal government subsidized housing such as "section 8".

The next landmine to watch out for is the "public-private partnership". There are many "bad" characteristics of these arrangements and none are good for the taxpayer. To name a few:

1  They provide new opportunities for corruption and cronyism.

2  PPPs are used to conceal public borrowing, while providing long-term government guarantees for profits to private companies.

3  PPPs originated as an accounting trick, a way round the government’s own constraints on public borrowing. This remains the overwhelming attraction for governments and international institutions.

4  There is always a loss of transparency with PPPs because private companies can and do withhold much information on the grounds of commercial confidentiality. We certainly do not need more opaque contracts such as we have currently with GUS.

The list goes on!

Georgetown citizens must be vigilant to make sure the City Council does not get entangled in any agreement that commits the City to financial support of affordable housing. It has been proven in several analyses that the best way to reduce housing costs is to reduce the regulations that are placed on land owners, developers, and builders. That is where the City focus should lie.

Free Speech is Fundamental to Our Liberty

This article was originally published by San Antonio Express-News on April 21, 2019.

The foundations of freedom of speech are under relentless assault. A case in point: the San Antonio City Council recently voted to exclude Chick-fil-A from the city’s airport because the restaurant chain’s Christian owners have donated to organizations that champion the belief that marriage is between a man and a woman. And last week the council narrowly rejected a proposal to reconsider its decision.

Such censorship is blatantly unconstitutional. But this incident is symptomatic of deeper problems. Many people believe they have the absolute truth with regard to issues of morality, sexuality, religion or politics, and that those who disagree are evil and must be censored or excluded. Similarly, many see people as fragile and argue that offensive speech is violence.

Hence, the San Antonio City Council’s fear that the mere sight of a Chick-fil-A would make LGBTQ+ individuals feel unwelcome. This outlook corrodes our free speech foundations and should be rejected by all those who value the First Amendment.

Yet, the United States remains a bastion of free speech compared to other western nations. In England, a journalist is under investigation for the “crime” of “misgendering” a transgender child. And the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights refused to review a decision affirming the conviction of an Austrian politician for making inflammatory remarks about the Prophet Muhammad.

In the U.S., by comparison, President Trump signed an executive order calling out campuses that flagrantly violate the First Amendment. And the Supreme Court stands poised to deliver another victory for free speech by invalidating a law that allows the government to censor trademarks that are too “scandalous” for protection.

Why has the United States stood largely alone in protecting offensive and controversial ideas? And can this protection last as the calls for “trigger warnings” and censorship grow ever louder?

Our dedication to protecting controversial or even hateful ideas has sometimes faltered. Until after the Second World War, the United States jailed those who spoke out against wars or voiced unpalatable positions.

But in the post-war era, a bipartisan consensus in favor of open discourse emerged. This consensus rests on three foundational premises.

First, government bureaucrats are not qualified to decide which ideas deserve protection or which deserve censorship and scorn. Government abuses during the McCarthy and Civil Rights era illustrated how such power could be used to suppress unpopular viewpoints. We recognized that such power did not belong in the government’s hands. The Supreme Court expressed this idea with great power in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette: “If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion.”

Second, while we can hold fervent convictions on all manner of issues, we should not be so certain of our convictions that we would silence others. Instead, we make room even for the expression of ideas we hate. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes expressed this with timeless eloquence: “Persecution for the expression of opinions seems to me perfectly logical. If you have no doubt of your premises or your power. … But when men have realized that time has upset many fighting faiths, they may come to believe … that the ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas.”

Finally, our commitment for free speech rests on the belief that citizens in a free society are resilient individuals capable of hearing and rejecting offensive ideas. As Justice Louis Brandeis explained, “Those who won our independence by revolution were not cowards. … They did not exalt order at the cost of liberty.”

Our belief in equality and fairness for all will remain strong even if we allow Nazis to march on Skokie or Charlottesville — or if we stop to enjoy a chicken sandwich at the airport. San Antonio leaders should reaffirm their commitment to free speech by stepping back from this ruinous attempt at punishing views they don’t like.

Daniel Ortner is an attorney with Pacific Legal Foundation.

The Mayor Uses Fuzzy Math

In an interview with CBS News the Mayor comes up with a completely different set of $ numbers for the losses incurred by Georgetown Utility System (GUS). As some "smart pundits" have observed over time, "when you are in a hole, stop digging". It looks like the Mayor should stop digging!

"We did have a bad year last year and I think we lost about $3 million," Ross said. "But in the five years that we've been doing this, the net is over $15 million so this is a 25 year plan not a 25 month plan."

More Texas $ Going to France!

Houston-based Engie North America Inc. — an arm of France-based Engie SA (EPA: ENGI) — has started construction on the 160 megawatt Jumbo Hill Wind Project according to the Houston Business Journal.

Texas Tax Code Chapter 313, also called the Texas Economic Development Act, allows school districts to give tax breaks to certain kinds of industrial projects as a means of drawing investment into Texas. Because of the way the Texas school funding formula works, school districts can sometimes make more money — at the expense of broader state education funding — by abating taxes on a project, even if the project would have been built otherwise.

If it secures all the incentives for which it applied, Jumbo Hill will reap a tax benefit of over $20 million, according to the comptroller document. One of those benefits is a Chapter 313 agreement with Andrews Independent School District to the tune of about $9 million over the course of 10 years.

Isn't it great that Texans give tax breaks to French companies. Maybe we can pay them in gas and oil! It is like giving Spanish companies the authority to build and operate toll roads - thank you Governor Perry!

I am sure the foreign companies laugh all the way to the bank about the stupid Texans.

Tell your state legislators it is time to eliminate tax breaks for renewable energy companies!

Texas Comptroller was Prescient

The view on renewable energy of former Texas Comptroller, Susan Combs, was published in the Texas Tribune in 2015 when Georgetown announced it had signed long-term wind and solar energy contracts.

Not all leaders in Texas have emphasized solar as a path forward for Texas. In a report last fall, for instance, former Texas Comptroller Susan Combs derided renewable energy sources such as wind and solar as unreliable (the sun doesn't always shine and the wind doesn't always blow) and too expensive, saying that long-term contracts for solar energy could lock utilities into rates that might look too high in the future.

Household Hazardous Waste Disposal

The City Council will vote at the next council meeting on a proposed agreement between Georgetown and Round Rock to allow Georgetown residents to acquire vouchers from Georgetown to allow household hazardous waste disposal at Round Rock's disposal site.

This is an interim, limited solution to the issue of household hazardous waste in the city as it only provides for up to 50 vouchers per month.

SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible action to approve an interlocal agreement between the City of Georgetown and the City of Round Rock for the purchase of Household Hazardous Waste vouchers -- Octavio Garza, PE, Public Works Director

ITEM SUMMARY:
The City of Georgetown's former Household Hazardous Waste contractor is unable to continue collecting household material from residents due to going out of business in December 2018. The inter-local agreement will enable Georgetown residents to participate in the City of Round Rock's collection program. The inter-local agreement has been reviewed and approved by the legal staff of both cities.

City off Georgetown residents will be able to obtain vouchers for disposal of household hazardous waste from the Georgetown Municipal Complex and redeem the vouchers at the City of Round Rock disposal facility located at 310 Deep Wood Dr in Round Rock, Texas. The Inter-local Agreement is a stop-gap measure until a longer term, sustainable solution is developed.

The proposed agreement with limitations and conditions can be accessed here.

One College's Experience with Wind Turbines

More information here.

Councilman Pitts Misses the Point

Councilman Pitts penned the following editorial in the April 14 edition of the Wilco Sun.

"The Texas Legislature is considering a bill that would slow city and county property tax growth. I wholeheartedly support reducing the amount of taxes I pay; however, the proposal moving forward is short-sighted.

The current proposals, Senate Bill 2 and House Bill 2, would require local governments to hold an election if their tax revenues increase 2.5 percent or more over the previous year. This election would not be required to raise your tax rate; it would be held if collections were increased by 2.5 percent, regardless of the tax rate. The City of Georgetown has a tax rate of $0.4200 per $100 of property valuation. (The rate was lowered from $0.4240 in 2017 to $0.4200 in 2018.)

If you own your home, you recently received your Notice of Appraised Value from the Williamson Central Appraisal District. I thought I would use the average Georgetown home as an illustration of how this new law, if passed, would affect people. Let’s assume the average home value increased six percent. Below is a comparison of Georgetown’s 2018 and 2019 real estate taxes, assuming no exemptions:

Year      Home Value        City Tax Rate     City Tax Bill

2018     $279,521             .0042                 $1,173.99

2019     $296,292             .0042                 $1,244.43

The increase in value of the average home with no increase in the tax rate resulted in $70.44 in additional revenue for the City of Georgetown. However, with SB 2, the city would collect only $29.36, a savings of $41.09. That means SB 2 saved $3.42 a month. If the city needed to collect more than $29.36 to fund city services at the same level of the previous year, it would have to hold an election.

This is all well and good. Should the proposal pass, I am sure our representatives in Austin will claim a great victory for taxpayers.

However, legislators claim SB 2 will slow property tax growth but they will fail to address the largest individual tax on my bill: Georgetown ISD taxes. The rate I pay Georgetown ISD is more than three times what I pay the City of Georgetown. With a tax rate of $1.409 per $100 valuation and the increased values mentioned above, you would pay $236.31 more to GISD in 2019 than in 2018.

No election would be required to collect six percent more for school taxes. Additionally, from the way I understand it, 13 percent of my school taxes go to the state for recapture. That means the average homeowner will be sending $542.72, or $45.23 a month, to the state because of the current school finance calculations.

The Texas Legislature is trying to address school taxes through a bill that would lower school tax rates by four cents. While I applaud their efforts, this measure won’t reduce the school taxes I pay in a meaningful way long-term.

I also have a problem that legislators are not willing to hold themselves to the same standard. The Texas House passed a budget that includes a six percent increase with no approval from voters. If the Legislature truly believed in tax reform, they would hold every level of government to a similar standard, and not use cities as scapegoats to avoid making meaningful change.

I appreciate the work of our elected officials at the state. I appreciate the attempt to try and reduce the amount of taxes you and I pay. But I don’t agree with their approach. Please join me in reaching out to those elected and ask them not to approve SB 2 in its current form. First, ask them to keep local decision-making intact so we can continue to provide the services, infrastructure, and resources our citizens and businesses need to thrive. Second, ask them to address the real issue facing Texans — to what level and how should the state fund public schools."

Kevin Pitts is Georgetown City Council member for District 5.

Here is my response, published April 17 in the WilcoSun.

Councilman Pitts Misses the Point

Councilman Pitts thinks the proposed tax bills in the state legislature are unfair to the City. He should be focused on the City tax burden placed on the property owners of Georgetown--that is what is unfair.

Councilman Pitts uses the classic technique of asking the reader to focus on the taxes imposed by the school district, not so much on the City imposed property taxes, over which he and his fellow councilmen have total control.

The property tax revenue extracted from property owners has been growing at a compound annual rate of 9.72%, based on City budget documents. Yet, population plus inflation has only been growing at a 4.9% rate over the same period. So, why are the property taxes growing almost twice the rate that City growth should require?

Let us examine the average home owner’s tax bill like Councilman Pitts. This data is calculated from the 2019 Budget:

Fiscal Year           Avg Home Value             City Tax Bill

2014                     $190,800                           $838.57

2015                     $210,200                           $912.27

2016                     $234,500                         $1017.73

2017                     $253,500                         $1074.84

2018                     $266,600                         $1118.46

2019                     $279,500                         $1173.90

The City tax bill on the average home has increased at a 7% annual rate. What is the justification for annual tax bill growth greater than population plus inflation?

I disagree with Councilman Pitts and believe the Council should focus on what is best for Georgetown’s home owners and hold their property tax increases to no more than population growth plus inflation annually.

Georgetown WatchDog

Taxpayer Funded Lobbying

The Texas Senate passed SB29 today, 4/16/2019, which prohibits spending taxpayer money to hire lobbyists.

The Texas House has passed HB281 out of committee and the bill is ready to be voted on by the full House when the Calendars Committee recommends it for consideration.

It is time for this legislation to be passed and reconciled into a bill for the Governor's signature.

Georgetown can save taxpayer dollars by eliminating the contracts for lobbyists and withdrawing from organizations like the Texas Municipal League(TML) which lobbys using dues paid by cities. Often TML lobbys against taxpayers interest, such as against lowering the property tax rollback rate and transparency.

Is City Staff Growing Too Fast?

To answer the question posed in the title, let us examine the data graciously supplied by the City.

Click to enlarge

We see the City staff is growing at a 4.3% annual rate over the last 7 years. Is this appropriate?

What has been happening to the population within the City?

Click to enlarge

It is observed that the population of Georgetown is growing at a 3.3% annual rate over the last 10 years.

A logical question would be is: why is the City staff growing at a faster rate than the population? Unless there are major new functions added to the City, why would the employee count grow faster than population?

One might argue that the uptick in employment in 2015 was caused by the acquisition of Chisholm Trail water district and the establishment of the Emergency Medical Services(EMS). However, those functions are fully integrated and incorporated, and the employee growth rate is 1% greater annually than population growth.

If the City staff had grown at the same rate over the past 7 years as the population, 3.3%, the City would have 48 fewer employees on the payroll.

Perhaps its time to bring City employee growth rate in line with City population growth rate.

Statute of Limitations on Bond Use?

Georgetown has general obligation bonds that were issued in 2008 that have not been used.

Click to enlarge

Over 50% of the authorized general obligation bonds have NOT been issued or used!

Is there a time limit for the use of these bonds? Why hasn't the money been spent on the roads and parks that the City promised the voters when the 2008 bonds were authorized?

Is there a plan to use these authorized bonds on projects?

Inquiring minds would like answers.

Property Tax Increases

Wouldn't it be great if the rate of increase in our property tax bills were reduced to population plus inflation growth?

Here is the current growth rate in the Georgetown property tax revenue.

 Click to enlarge

9.72% compound annual growth rate. Is your income increasing at that rate? Probably not!

Call your State Senator or Representative and let them know it is time for them to enact legislation to curb these out of control increases!

Property Taxes a Problem All Across Texas

Property tax growth in all of Texas is a problem that needs to be fixed. The Texas Legislature is diddling around without any real solutions to stopping the unsustainable growth in property taxes.

There is no rational reason for property taxes to grow faster than population growth plus inflation.

Mayor Ross Against Tax Payers Again

"Mayors Steve Adler and Craig Morgan along with Bastrop Mayor Connie Schroeder, Georgetown Mayor Dale Ross and Pflugerville Mayor Victor Gonzalez — want you to understand the impending crisis. The Statesman

State legislators will soon consider 2.5 percent property tax “revenue cap” proposals that endanger Texans and provide no real property tax relief. The proposals, House Bill 2 and Senate Bill 2, limit what cities can raise in property taxes to fund city services."

Mayor Ross and the others continue to cry crisis if the voters are allowed to approve any budget that grows over 2.5% year over year. They say they will have to cut public safety. That is hogwash!! There are many other items in the budget that could be reduced or eliminated. They are just afraid that they will not be able to convince voters that new city buildings, new tax abatements and new programs are essential and a budget increase over the 2.5% trigger is required.

After all, Georgetown's EMS for example is now paying its own way as is the airport, waste water and storm water programs.

Maybe the City does not need to spend thousands of dollars on things like the Grace Heritage Center. There are many budget items that could be reduced, other than public safety, if the voters declined budget growth over 2.5%.

The Mayors are putting out so much disinformation that one might think we were living in a communist state.

First of all, the 2.5% is NOT a cap, but, a trigger for a vote.

Second, the 2.5% trigger only applies to revenue growth from existing property. New property and the development on new and existing property is exempt from the trigger. Therefore, the proposed legislation accommodates growth.

Mayor Ross needs to stop with the scare mongering and get on the side of the Georgetown tax payers.

Williamson County to Issue More Bonds?

The Citizens Bond Committee held its first meeting on Thursday, March 21, 2019 in the Commissioners Courtroom of the historic courthouse, 710 S. Main Street, Georgetown. The purpose of a Williamson County Citizens Bond Committee is to review and analyze the infrastructure needs of Williamson County to determine if the county should consider a bond election in November 2019. Information on the committee and its upcoming meetings and agendas can be found at www.wilco.org/bondcommittee.

On March 5, the Williamson County Commissioners formed a Citizens Bond Committee to discuss future needs for county roads and parks. If the committee decides that bonds are needed to fund projects, then the committee is to propose projects to the Williamson County Commissioners Court for potential funding in November 2019 Bond Referendums. The Commissioners Court will then consider their recommendation and make a final determination regarding bond language to be placed on the November 2019 ballot.  

The bond advisory committee was created with the County Judge selecting the committee chair and each commissioner naming two people to serve on the committee. Committee members are:
Committee Chair: David Hays
Precinct 1: Meg Walsh and Mitch Fuller
Precinct 2: Joe Bob Ellison and Matt Powell
Precinct 3: Tim Lear and John Marler
Precinct 4: Ron Randig and Bryon Brochers

Williamson County

Remember that the County allready has over $1 Billion in debt.

Principal            Interest             Total Payment

$878,234,942   $325,792,404    $1,204,027,346

Council Workshop on Affordable Housing

The Georgetown City Council will meet on April 10, 2019 at 5:30 PM at Georgetown Public Library, 402 W 8th Street Georgetown, TX 78626 to conduct a workshop on affordable housing. Follow this link to see the agenda and the staff recommendations. Council Workshop

It is interesting to note that there is zero discussion of relaxing land use or zoning ordinances as a method of reducing housing costs even though these ordinances are universally recognized as a major housing cost driver. Affordable Housing

It is likely that there would be push back by existing home owners to relaxing the density and parking rules, but, that would definitely increase the housing stock in Georgetown. In addition it would give property owners more authority over how they want to develop their property within the city limits.

Why is the City avoiding this potential housing cost reducer?

Solar and Wind Generators Decrease Grid Reliability

An energy mix that includes solar and wind, would have to increase oil or gas-burning in order to maintain electric reliability.

That’s because the electric system requires fast-ramping energy sources like oil and natural gas when the sun stops shining and the wind stops blowing. Forbes

"Some solar and wind advocates suggest that batteries will play the role of fossil fuels and prevent that from happening, but consider that the calculations done by my colleagues Mark Nelson and Madison Czerwinski:

• Tesla’s much-hyped 100 MW lithium battery storage center in Australia can only provide enough backup power for 7,500 homes for four hours;
• The largest lithium battery storage center in the U.S. (in Escondido, California) can only provide enough power for 20,000 homes for four hours;

Are a few hours of battery backup sufficient to integrate solar and wind onto the grid? Not in the slightest.

Solar and wind are unreliable over months and years, not just hours. That means unfathomable quantities of electricity would need to be stored over months or years. Consider that:

• It would take 696 storage centers the size of Tesla’s in Australia to provide just four hours of backup power for the Australian grid — and cost $50 billion;
• It would require 15,280 storage centers the size of Escondido to provide just four hours of backup power for the U.S. grid — at an estimated cost of $764 billion."

Whoop-de-Doo, Southwestern University #1

Two schools in Texas led the nation's colleges and universities in using the most renewable energy sources while another took third place for electric campus vehicles. 

Southwestern University in Georgetown was ranked first by the Denver-based advocacy group Environment America Research and Policy Center for its renewable energy use after students lobbied university leaders a decade ago to use wind power-fueled electricity. The university agreed and began buying renewable energy credits in 2010 from wind energy installations. Houston Chronicle

No Relief From Texas Legislature from Georgetown's Secrecy on GUS

State representative Terry Wilson held a townhall today at the Cowan Creek pavilion in Sun City. He cited HB 2189 as a bill that would improve transparency with respect to contract information.

HB 2189 - Disclosure of Contracting Information (Joint Author with Rep. Capriglioni)"Makes all information on contracting done by a government entity public information by default unless specifically excepted by legislation."

The key phrase with respect to Georgetown's energy contracts is underlined. Georgetown uses the "competitive" exemption in the open records law allowed for municipal utilities. Thus, the City is specifically allowed to withhold utility contract information, even though they are not required by law to withhold the contracts or related information.

Do not expect any relief from the legislature this session. The open records law needs to be changed to remove the exception for municipally owned utilities. Until that is done, Georgetown will likely continue it secrecy.

Court Orders Removal of Wind Turbines

Iowa court orders removal of 3 wind turbines. Hot Air 

Developers who invested $11 million to install three wind turbines in eastern Iowa are tearing them down, after losing a legal battle waged by nearby residents. 

It’s only the second time nationally a judge has ordered wind turbines to be torn down and a first in Iowa. 

“It’s great. We love it,” said Cheyney Hershey, whose young family lives near the turbines. “You can’t sit outside on the deck and have a conversation without the constant thumping of the blades going round.” 

The noise can even be heard inside his home, Hershey said: “There was nowhere to get away from them.”

The Mayor Thinks He Is a Hero

The Mayor is in denial about the city contracts for green energy. US News 

The headline of the article is: 

"Texas City Leaders Face Wrath of Residents Over Green Energy Deal"

Yet the mayor gives the following quote: 

"I don't think I've let citizens down," Ross says. "We did what we believe was the right thing. I was very effective at spreading the message of green and our success story. I think the long term is going to prove that to be true."

Of course the issue is the money. $28M+ has already been lost and even if the energy prices recover so that the energy contract prices are cheaper than those available through ERCOT in the future, the $28M+ will not be recovered and paid back to the rate payers through lower electric prices.

So it is unlikely that the green energy contracts will ever be a "good deal" for Georgetown rate payers.

In the meantime the rate payers are paying higher prices for electricity!

The Secrecy at Georgetown Utilities Continues

The City Council approved the mayor sending a notice of contract default to the owner of the Buckthorn solar farm near Ft Stockton. This is the solar plant that provides Georgetown with its solar generated electricity. March 31 edition of WilcoSun

Council voted 7-0 Tuesday to authorize Mayor Dale Ross to sign a notice of event of default of the solar project power agreement with Buckthorn Westex, which comes four months after the city sustained a major budget shortfall after selling power at prices substantially below the purchase price. 

Councilman John Hesser made the motion and Councilman Steve Fought seconded it. Council spent just over a minute on the motion and made no comments. 

The vote was done as the first item on the agenda “Action from Executive Session.” Both City Attorney Charlie McNabb and Jack Daly, city spokesperson, declined to comment on the notice.