Emmett: NW Harris Needs to Think About Incorporation

[mrfootball]

http://www.hcnonline.com/articles/2009/05/...usiness_cyp.txt

Emmett: time for northwest Harris County to think about incorporation, annexation, future

Harris County Judge Ed Emmett addresses the crowd at the National Small Business Week luncheon hosted by the Northwest Houston Chamber of Commerce and The Sun newspapers.

By AUDREY M. MARKS

Updated: 05.20.09

In order to attract new businesses and retain existing firms, Harris County Judge Ed Emmett said residents and businesses in northwest Harris County need to make a decision about this area

[mrfootball]

I agree with Ed. This area has grown so much, it's time to incorporate. Time to get organized, so that we can develop a plan to keep our communities vibrant and strong. The question is, do we incorporate the entire unincorporated NW Community? Part of it? Or just individual parts like Cypress, Klein, Champions, Spring, into their own towns?

If we incorporated all of it, we'd instantly become a fairly large city with a population of over 1 million residents and would command a much larger voice and presence in State and Local politics. As it stands now, we've suffered with regards to getting transportation money (i.e. freeways/roads) returned to our area because the County authority is limited and we don't have a voice. Our only "voices" are gerrymandered and their focus isn't always on the needs of our growing area.

If we incorporated portions of the NW, then we'd have good-size smaller governments, each about the size of Sugar Land. We'd have more access/representation from our elected officials who will come from our own neighborhoods and communities. We wouldn't command as much legislative muscle as we would together, but we'd have more than we have today and still have a larger, more coordinated voice.

[RedScare]

Not sure where you get those rather lofty population numbers from. The 2009 population estimates for the zip codes outside of FM 1960 and stretching from FM 529 to I-45 show a population of about 450,000. It is unreasonable to think that anyone east of I-45 would want to be part of a city that stretched all the way to Hockley. Additionally, even if Houston gave up its ETJ, Katy and Tomball certainly will not without a fight.

Certainly, Ed Emmett gave good advice. The residents of this area will have serious infrastructure needs in the coming years, and it is not realistic to expect county taxes to pay for it. Whether they look to incorporate or join the City of Houston, they'll need to do something. But, creating a city that stretches from I-10 to Intercontinental Airport ain't gonna happen.

EDIT: I should probably point out that the Houston City Limits run up I-45 nearly to the county line, so an incorporated city could not cross the freeway at all. Likewise, much of FM 1960 is within a narrow strip of the City of Houston. Same with Highway 6. So, any discussion of incorporation separate from the Cities of Houston, Katy or Tomball must only include those areas that are not currently a part of those cities, and does not cross the incorporated boundaries of those cities.

[mrfootball]

Not sure where you get those rather lofty population numbers from. The 2009 population estimates for the zip codes outside of FM 1960 and stretching from FM 529 to I-45 show a population of about 450,000. It is unreasonable to think that anyone east of I-45 would want to be part of a city that stretched all the way to Hockley. Additionally, even if Houston gave up its ETJ, Katy and Tomball certainly will not without a fight.

Certainly, Ed Emmett gave good advice. The residents of this area will have serious infrastructure needs in the coming years, and it is not realistic to expect county taxes to pay for it. Whether they look to incorporate or join the City of Houston, they'll need to do something. But, creating a city that stretches from I-10 to Intercontinental Airport ain't gonna happen.

EDIT: I should probably point out that the Houston City Limits run up I-45 nearly to the county line, so an incorporated city could not cross the freeway at all. Likewise, much of FM 1960 is within a narrow strip of the City of Houston. Same with Highway 6. So, any discussion of incorporation separate from the Cities of Houston, Katy or Tomball must only include those areas that are not currently a part of those cities, and does not cross the incorporated boundaries of those cities.

Again, Emmett suggested the area pursue similar agreements to The Woodlands deal. He suggested that Houston's annexation plans have slowed. Nobody put words into his mouth and he's a lot closer to the levers of power than anyone on this board. Perhaps Houston would rather have a deal like this than wait 30-40 years for another go at annexation (most of the MUDs have signed long-term agreements to stave off annexation in exchange for Limited purpose annexations) and the costs of having to absorb the various MUD's, street projects (30-40 years) etc.

Today there are over a million people in unincorporated NW Harris County (over 750K in CFISD alone).

Whether we'd want to incorporate all of that, I doubt it.

Personally, I'd like to see the areas of Cypress, Klein, Champions and Spring incorporated (together or individually).

[CDeb]

(over 750K in CFISD alone).

I believe that is a future projection, not today's number.

[RedScare]

I believe that is a future projection, not today's number.

Additionally, much of the densest portions of the district are inside FM 1960/Highway 6. A close look at the City of Houston's boundaries reveals that the city limits run along 1960. That area cannot be incorporated. Using CFISD population figures to suggest the population that could incorporate is simply comparing apples and oranges. If you add up the population of zip codes outside the city limits, it is far lower, more like 450,000 people.

[Porchman]

A close look at the City of Houston's boundaries reveals that the city limits run along 1960. That area cannot be incorporated.

Only around Willowbrook and some bits near 45, though, right? Do you have a map you could post?

Personally, I'd like to see the areas of Cypress, Klein, Champions and Spring incorporated (together or individually).

Oh, I can hear the conversations around whether the areas north of 1960 and south of 1960 should incorporate together. I'll stay tuned for that.

All kidding aside, it's a tough matter. The capital outlay is going to be serious. I don't see much impetus for COH to be proactive on annexation. The drive for annexation or incorporation is going to have to come from the NWHC residents. Some serious engagement needs to be initiated across whatever boundaries exist.

[cnote]

Additionally, much of the densest portions of the district are inside FM 1960/Highway 6. A close look at the City of Houston's boundaries reveals that the city limits run along 1960. That area cannot be incorporated. Using CFISD population figures to suggest the population that could incorporate is simply comparing apples and oranges. If you add up the population of zip codes outside the city limits, it is far lower, more like 450,000 people.

IF there was an organized effort by the residents of the Cypress, Klein, and Champions areas outside 1960 to incorporate I think that would be a great thing. The deal with the Woodlands has certainly set a precedent, but that is going to take a lot of work and organization from local residents and I am not sure the will is there, but I sure wish it were.

I realize there is a big difference from 750,000 to 450,000 or whatever the real number is, but either way that would be considered a large city, and would be ranked what, 6th or 7th in the state???

[TheNiche]

Personally, I'd like to see the areas of Cypress, Klein, Champions and Spring incorporated (together or individually).

The big problem is going to be determining jurisdictional boundaries. Exactly what are all of these places? It'll take something more than an approximation. And when you start sorting it out, you'll recognize that there are parts of the northwest suburbs that nobody is going to want to incorporate or provide services for. Older apartments are a good example, as are subdivisions of patio homes, which aren't going to age well. Are the folks in Longwood going to want to have to pay taxes into a municipality that has to bear the brunt of poverty and crime issues? Your answer might be yes if they were adjacent to your community--making them your problems--but what if they're three miles away and on the other side of a freeway? Is it OK, then, to throw those problem areas under the bus? How does helping them help you? And who will be their voice?

Another issue is that many of the newest MUDs have outstanding debt that is just ridiculously high. Any attempt to incorporate them into a municipality that is chiefly comprised of MUDs that have had an opportunity to pay off a lot of their debt is going to result in the same municipal tax rate affecting the residents of all MUDs, effectively redistributing the burden. And then there are the oldest MUDs, which have emerging infrastructure problems and will be an especially large burden on a municipality...coupled with the fact that the housing stock in such places is deteriorating and that that leads to undesirable demographic change. ...which brings us back around to the question of who is willing to adopt the problem children.

There aren't any easy answers. The null state isn't especially desirable, either, however I suspect that the best way to tackle neighborhood-level infrastructure issues is going to be by getting the State legislature to authorize special powers for older MUDs, allowing them to issue new debt in order to repair existing infrastructure. It's either that, or authorize the creation of a Management District that is a taxing entity but with powers more limited than a municipality, and assign them the responsibility of taking care of the neighborhood infrastructure problem; they can also be authorized to do other things, such as mobility improvements and hire extra police patrols. And since it wouldn't be a municipality, it wouldn't step on the City of Houston's toes quite so much, perhaps making the deal sweet enough to garner their support without northwest Harris County paying tribute to Houston, the way The Woodlands deal was arranged.

[RedScare]

Only around Willowbrook and some bits near 45, though, right? Do you have a map you could post?

Here's a map that shows full service city limits, limited service city limits and ETJ.

Houston City Limits

Even though much of the area on FM 1960 is limited service jurisdiction, it is unlikely the City would deannex those areas for the purpose of incorporating into another city. So, for all intents and purposes, that would be City of Houston. That leaves only the area outside FM 1960 available to incorporate.

[mrfootball]

Getting ahead of the game here, but....you gotta have a "flag" to rally around. My growing list of names for these budding towns/villages/cities

"City of Cypress"

"Village of Cypress"

"Cypress Township"

"The Cyp"

"City of Klein"

"Village of Klein"

"Klein Township"

"K-town"

"City of Champions" (sounds pretty damn cool)

"Champions Village"

"City of Spring"

"Town of Spring"

"Village of Spring"

"Northwest Villages"

"The Great Northwest Villages"

or....

"CyKleChampS"

[TheNiche]

You're getting a little ahead of yourself. Leave the alternately self-aggrandizing and/or 'borrowed' names to overpaid consultants, please.

[mrfootball]

You're getting a little ahead of yourself. Leave the alternately self-aggrandizing and/or 'borrowed' names to overpaid consultants, please.

[plumber2]

I agree with Red. Deannexation by the City of Houston of these 100' strips is highly unlikely. Altough Houston did work out a swap deal with Pasadena back in th 60's to secure NASA and the Port Authority district, there is little imputus for Houston to release territory in the FM 1960 area. Also, the legislature has recently made it very cumbersome for cities to annex new territory. Cities now have to file a service plan and have public hearings three to five years out.

It does happen though. The City of Hitchcock released it's 10' strips back in the 70's so that Santa Fe could incorporate. At first Hitchcock refused to release the strips. The Santa Fe incorporation committee then decided to call their bluff. They requested to be annexed immediately and also threatened to take Hitchcock to court if they did annex the area. Hitchcock realized that if they did indeed annex unicorporated Alta Loma and Arcadia, that they would easily be outnumbered and loose control of their council in the next two election cycles. Hitchcock therefore released the 10' strips and the adjoining ETJ allowing Santa Fe to incorporate. They have lived happily, side by side, ever since.

The FM 1960 area could use this type of threat, but it could possibly backfire on them.

[VicMan]

I wouldn't mind seeing the Old Town Spring area become its own city - Spring could use the Old Town Spring development as a tourist attraction to fill municipal coffers. It should also aggressively fight to keep Splashtown in Spring.

[lockmat]

I think it's odd that we're sort of encouraging the NW side to be annexed when in previous threads some criticized Dallas for boxing itself in by other areas becoming cities, not allowing themselves to annex. I guess we can afford to do this when we're almost twice the size?

What will we do when west Houston get's even bigger, allow them to become their own city, or let Katy incorporate them?

[TheNiche]

I think it's odd that we're sort of encouraging the NW side to be annexed when in previous threads some criticized Dallas for boxing itself in by other areas becoming cities, not allowing themselves to annex. I guess we can afford to do this when we're almost twice the size?

Houston doesn't really want to have control over the residential sections of northwest Harris County. In the subdivisions with new MUDs, the City would have to pay off bond debts. In the subdivisions with old MUDs, the City would have to manage decaying infrastructure. Also, residents of nearly any location consistently demand more services as a proportion of the property taxes paid than do commercial districts. And adding new suburban areas into Houston's municipal politics would introduce more Republicans into the City Council, and that's not in the interests of most of the City Council.

If Houston can allow an area to become incorporated with Houston keeping all the commercial districts and demanding that the neighborhoods pay some kind of ransom or tribute, that's a great deal for the City of Houston. But it's a terrible deal for the newly-incorporated Cities. I can't imagine why they'd want that. A legislatively-created special district would be so much more efficient.

What will we do when west Houston get's even bigger, allow them to become their own city, or let Katy incorporate them?

The residents of the City of Katy are not going to be interested in annexing new suburbs. The City of Katy's psychographic characteristics are very different from the new suburbs nearby.