Annexations provide city protection, spark conflict

Annexations provide city protection, spark conflict

Written by Kara Vaught Thursday, 07 June 2007

The Leander City Council finalized the addition of six portions of land to the city limits June 7, but controversy about the annexations remains.

Defining the terms

Annexations can occur with or without the consent of landowners. State law mandates a three-year process for annexations of more than 100 residents, but an expedited plan is available if fewer than 100 are affected.

A strip of land 1,001 ft. wide, such as the three annexed June 7, is the smallest amount of land a city can involuntarily annex, said Paige Harbison Sáenz, assistant city attorney for Leander.

Also annexed June 7 were two areas surrounded by the city limits and one parcel of land annexed at the request of the landowner.

Cities have regulatory authority on zoning, taxes, development, traffic and other activities within the city limits. A city also has some authority over the area surrounding the city limits, known as extraterritorial jurisdiction. On May 8, Leander’s city council declared a population of 25,214, which by law entitles the city to two miles of ETJ from all points of the city limits. A city with a population less than 25,000 is allowed ETJ one mile from the city limits.

Annexations can occur only from land within a city’s ETJ, which is protected from encroachment by developers and other cities by a Certificate of Convenience and Necessity. Granted by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, a CCN gives a city the exclusive right to provide water and sewer services within its ETJ.

A CCN is important, Sáenz said, because planning for capital improvements costs the city money that would be wasted if another entity moved in on the land. By annexing, a city expands its limits and ETJ, protecting more land for the city’s future use.

Trade off

In a letter to landowners facing the possibility of involuntary annexation, the city cited the services it provides, such as response from police, firefighters and animal control, as benefits to annexation.

David Bradley, who owns portions of the newly annexed Bradley Ranch, told the city at its May 3 council meeting that he had no use for city services.

“I’ve got a .22 and a .38. I don’t need animal control,” he said.

Availability

Once annexed, the city is obligated by law to make services, including utilities, available to landowners.

However, the law does not mandate that the city pay for lines to connect each landowner to the nearest city water artery, an expensive venture if no line is nearby.

No city has the financial capability to install utility infrastructure right up to every business and home, said Barney Knight, Leander city attorney.

Instead, cities often rely on developers to lay lines in the course of independent building projects such as shopping plazas and subdivisions. Such activity shortens the distance from surrounding landowners to water arteries, thus lowering their cost of tapping the line.

If no developer is building in the area of a newly annexed landowner, the burden of laying a line falls to them if they want city water.

If a landowner decides to fund the connecting water lines, the city will generally reimburse portions of that cost as other entities tap the new line and pay the corresponding connection fee, Knight said.

Here, not there

A portion of Alynette Farley’s land on CR 279 was added to Leander in 2002 in a strip annexation. Homes of landowners near her were within annexed strips, while hers is not. Farley sees city trash collections drive by her house to serve others, but she cannot receive the same services. Because the home is outside the legal limits of the city, it is also outside the jurisdiction of EMS and fire response services, Sáenz said.

In a statement to the Leander City Council May 17, Farley requested full city services for landowners affected by strip annexations, contending the city is increasing its tax base without meeting obligations.

Strip annexations are done for the purpose of expanding a city’s limits and ETJ, not its tax base, Sáenz said.

“If the city wanted to bring in tax revenue, it would annex whole areas rather than strips. A strip annexation just allows us to expand our ETJ so that we can plan in order to be able to manage our growth.”

Gabriel’s Overlook subdivision residents protest inclusion in Leander’s ETJ

More than 100 residents of Gabriel’s Overlook subdivision attended the June 7 Leander City Council meeting wearing red in protest of the strip annexation of 103.6 acres near their homes. Although their land was not annexed, it now lies within Leander’s ETJ.

Multiple speakers from the group accused the city council of ignoring requests to stop the annexation, land grabbing and using fuzzy math to determine a population of more than 25,000, which gives the city a larger ETJ.

Mayor John Cowman said the city followed the law, and he offered his cell phone number to anyone who wished to discuss the matter.

A director of the Gabriel’s Overlook homeowners’ association, David Moore, told the council the residents would not let the annexation stand.

“You’ve met the red shirts now,” Moore said. “Be cautious how you treat us.”

Terms at a Glance

Annexation — The ability of a city to add land into its area of authority. Once annexed, residents are subject to city taxes and receive city services.

CCN — A Certificate of Convenience and Necessity gives a city the exclusive right to provide water and sewer to a given area, and is often granted for a city’s ETJ land.

ETJ — Extraterritorial jurisdiction is the ability of a city to govern areas beyond the city limits. A city may annex land from within its ETJ, which is one mile around the city limits for cities with a population less than 25,000 and two miles for a city with more than 25,000 residents. In a May 8 meeting, Leander’s city council declared a population of 25,214.