Citizens of Rowlett

There were many people who came to voice their opinion on Friday’s meeting and many had good things to say. One lady’s story was about moving from Oak Cliff to live in Rowlett for her children’s sake, however she’s afraid if there’s one more hike in her taxes she would be forced to foreclose and relocate. I don’t believe that she’s the only one, if you go to RealtyTrac.com and search for houses in Rowlett you will find there is currently 138 homes up for auction in Rowlett that are foreclosures. The search results for foreclosures in Rowlett yield a return of 441 homes.

We as citizens can stand up and tell the Mayor Shane Johnson and the council and voice our opinions and tell them NO MORE TAXES!

 

Come to the meeting Tuesday August 29th at 7pm to voice your discontent. Call & or email your neighbors about it. Tell them to get up and take the time to tell the city leaders NO!

---

Below is the work of a concerned citizen of Rowlett, this work below is something that needs to be known and distributed. What you see is 2 weeks worth of research. I believe it is the right of every citizen to know how your city is being run. Especially when they are asking for a tax hike that would make our taxes the highest in North Texas.

Please send a link to this posting to anyone you know that lives in Rowlett.

Public Hearing #1 – Budget 06-07

I would ask that the audience please listen carefully and pay careful attention. Don’t clap, gasp, or cheer – it could result in me being removed from Council Chambers for creating a disturbance during a public meeting. Please bear with me as I have a lot to let you know about and it will take a little bit.

Citizens/Council – My comments are based off of public records, some just not so well known to the public, so you, the citizens, will have to dig to find it.

Ask the right question to the right person and keep asking until you get the answer you want.

EX: Did you know that Commercial Property taxes do not go in to the General Fund, i.e. what the City Budget operates from, until the commercial development in that area is complete?

The Commercial Property Taxes owed to the City, go into a Tax Increment District Fund to support the development within the commercial district, BUT THIS ALSO INCLUDES RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TAXES WITHIN THAT TIF District. Only the Sales Tax generated by the businesses go into the General Fund, until the development in that District is completed. If you didn’t know, it’s because you didn’t ask the right question to the right person. Also, ask as many people as you can to see if you get different answers and question why the answers are different if they are.
To the Citizens in the auditorium and those at home, the city is not required to provide you a copy of the proposed budget, but there is a copy of the proposed budget on the web-site for printing/review or you can purchase the 320 page doc at 10cents/page from the City Secretary.

Unless you have dealt with City Budgets before, which they pray the majority of you don’t and never will, you will just get lost in the numbers. Do your homework and show up next Tuesday to be heard at the next Public Hearing on the Proposed Budget.
Now, the proposed budget presented to and before Council for approval for FY 06-07 is for $98.843M is an 11.2% increase over last years budget of just under $88.887M. Just a little under a $10M dollar increase. The Dallas CAD’s 5.48% appraisal increases raised the ‘tax base’ (or property values) for the City, generating an additional $13.912M in ‘tax revenue’ to the taxes already paid to City’s General Fund by the residents and Commercial properties that have completed the Tax Increment District Fund requirements.

Do you know/realize the city is in debt to the tune of $164.07M?

 

Over one-third (actually over 34%) of the proposed 77.02 proposed tax rate, 26.84 cents, is going to the $164.07M debt the Mayor/Council has placed on the citizens.

ALL property owners/land owners, unless your over 65, will be impacted by the DCAD appraisal increases and the 2.3 cent increase in the ‘proposed budget’ – which is to pay for the same ‘debt’ they have accrued over the years to meet their visions of where the City needs to be.

Ex: Check out the chart at the top of page 10 of the Proposed Budget, under Debt Service – subtract the 2006-07 rate from the 2005-06 rate – it’s the 2.3 cent tax increase being proposed.

Council – To clarify and remind the Citizens, this is not ‘volunteer’ work you do for the City – you are voted into office and paid to perform your duties. I know you’re not in it for the money, at least from the City because it’s not great.

Texas is a ‘Right to Work’ State – you have the right to leave, just as any other employee in the state.

Maybe too much for those that feel you are truly volunteering your services/time to the Community. However, your annual salaries would save the tax payers $9K that could be put toward the debt you’ve put the City in.

I volunteer for a local Youth Sports organization and I don’t get paid, nor do I have a child in the organization. I also volunteered when my son did play Little League Baseball at Herfurth Park.

This is the City of Rowlett – not Shanesville, Alsville, Davidsville, Dennisville, Cindyville, Beckyville, or Steveville – it belongs to the Citizens of Rowlett.

The City is in this ‘debt’ situation because of your decisions, not the citizens. The majority of citizens don’t care about what you think until you, as leaders in the community, can show that you care about what the majority of the citizens think. Everyone knows ‘You can’t please everyone, all the time’, but in your position, one should be focusing on the ‘majority’, not just the folks that voted you into office. Candidates are elected by the voters on the perception they are leaders and will listen to ALL citizens concerns, not because they are followers of a few folks able to write checks on an open-ended checking account. You were all voted in to be a voice of ALL citizens, not just those that agree with your direction or vision. Maybe it’s another difference of philosophies Mr. Hager was referring to. You’ve gotten everyone’s attention w/ the water restrictions and I’m sure when they see this on TV, if shown, they will see what’s going on and want to have their voices heard in the next Public Hearing on the Budget, Council Meetings and next couple of elections.
You are putting the cart way before the horse in many ways and using a ‘new paint/old car’ approach – Let’s make the highest priorities the projects that make the town ‘look good’, while not repairing the motor, drive train, interior (i.e. infrastructure such as water, sewer, roads). Was the $9M to rebuild downtown more important than water, sewer, and roads in the immediate future since DART Rail won’t be here until 2013 – Evidently it was. Your ‘visions’ are being ‘realized’ using OPM or ‘other peoples money’, i.e. the Citizens of Rowlett, for clarification and we’re not seeing any ROI. Who wouldn’t shoot for the moon if they felt they had an open check book – You have.

Some of you could leave office or not be re-elected and move to another city, never having to pay for what debt you built. Most citizens say no to the vision, but the ‘vision’ is priority, but with the Mayor and his ‘3 votes’ in tow to give complete the majority vote. Why would the others that really oppose the vision, vote ‘No’ and have to face the wrath for not showing solidarity in City Government, just to make the citizens feel like everything is smooth and everyone agrees on everything in the meetings (new paint/old car again). Open Discussions/Debates and disagreements are good for everyone, even closed minded, myopic people, and foster good team building skills, along with taking the time to learn other people’s view than your own. Open debates/discussions are really limited when the 4-3 majority vote required to pass anything/everything, is already a shoe-in.

Mayor, I read your response in recent Council Meeting minutes regarding the failed bond votes, essentially squashing any tax increase. You stated you see it as the citizens saying ‘not now’ vs. ‘No’. In all fairness, (I don’t have a crystal ball either)

I seriously doubt the voters meant ‘add it to the next budget, change GO’s to CO’s, sign the dotted line and raise our taxes anyway’. Even though there was only a 6% voter turnout, that voting 6% said NO to all 4 Propositons for the City, therefore no new taxes.

In regards to Prop 1 for Parks/Recreation, it states ‘improvements to Existing parks, including WetZone wave pool and Rapid River – yet there is money in the proposed budget to do just that with additional shading at WetZone. The ‘Implementation of UDC requirements for parks/trails’ sure smells like ‘improvements to existing parks’ too – just that it’s now possibly ‘based’ off of new UDC requirements. This is all aside from the fact that we are currently in Drought Stage 3, which may never go away, and you can’t water new landscaping. And we could be forced into Drought Stage 4. The City’s Drought Contingency Plan for Stage 3 prohibits new landscape, which would include new landscaping as park improvements, hike/bike trails, etc., Rowlett HS’s new parking lot landscape, along with new landscape along the new Downtown area, which I understand is being delayed until later months, hoping the weather patterns improve and we get rain.

The Drought Contingency Plan, as approved by the Council, states in item “3.5.8 Non-essential Water Use: water uses that are not essential, nor required for the protection of public health, safety, and welfare, including – item 3.5.8.1 ‘Irrigation of landscaped areas, including parks, athletic fields, and gold courses, except otherwise provided under this plan.’ (The golf course is OK due to utilizing the raw water from Lake Ray Hubbard), and item 3.5.8.9 – ‘Use of water from hydrants for construction purposes or any other purposes other than fire fighting’. Obviously, TCEQ and your own definitions don’t feel that these items are related to health, safety and welfare, nor or they ‘otherwise provided’ in the plan, therefore, athletic fields (including Rowlett HS) and parks should not be watered.

Although I reported at the last Council Meeting the developer/construction company at the Super Target complex has water trucks hooked up to fire hydrants and wasting our ‘ treated water’, it’s still being allowed to be done. Is this not a waste of Tax Payers money, even though the City is making $2/1k gals?

If nothing else, it’s definitely wasting the water from NTMWD while the ordinance is forcing the Citizens to conserve. I would think the Developers would be partners and utilize the same raw lake water that the City is using to irrigate the city landscaping and new trees from a TxDot project along Hwy 66/Lakeview Pkwy. I’m sure if the Council told the City Manager/Public Works Director to force them to use the raw lake water, it would happen.

Why are you forcing the Citizens to carry the burden for the big companies and commercial meters?

The Mayor has assisted 3 council members in their efforts to be elected/re-elected in May 05 by creating a PAC, paying for the PAC office, lobbying for funds and receiving a $6K donation form the Developer of the Super Target complex after an agreement, with restrictions/conditions, was reached to pay $2M in 04 or 05, for the 190 ROW when the developer WOULDN’T pay full asking/negotiated price for the land from Mr. Shrade and have to give the 190 back to the City. The Developer would have backed out of the deal and gone to another city if the Mayor hadn’t stepped in and offered to pay the $2M.

In the end, the ‘3 Votes’ have become the majority vote required to maintain the vision. One for ALL and ALL for one – check voting records on Council related issues to see who has always and who has never voted against the Mayor. Their voting has given the Mayor the ability to change most General Obligation (GO) Bonds requiring citizens to vote and approve, into Certificates of Obligations, or CO Bonds only requiring the Council to approve, mainly under the guise of his authority behind the ‘Public Health, Safety, and Welfare’ umbrella because he wanted the projects to happen.

Ask yourself if this is how the June 06 Bonds, including $3M for the relocation of Fire Station 2 to a more convenient location for a non-developed Commercial Development, which is also closer to his house, when the citizens had already approved monies for ‘refurbishing or remodeling’ of Fire Station 2 which is adequate for the current situation, and making it the 3rd new Fire Station in 3 years.

One could argue that growth is coming, but the ‘new’ Fire Station #4 is still understaffed and doesn’t even have an ambulance. There are two trucks, but they didn’t have a place to store the second truck and still there is not staff to drive it. Yep, let’s build a new one to replace one that is serving the community adequately. Rowlett Road phases 2 and 3 increases of $194K+ and $944K, which is in addition to the $2.909M (phase 2) and $2.662M+ (phase 3) just funded last year and we’re not even to the point of bidding the engineering yet; basically $9.5M in water/sewer repairs to be paid by increased usage fees when there’s probably over $3M in the water fund now, which again, according to the City Atty, can only be used for water/sewer repair/new construction. Council Member Alberts said the ‘pay more as you go plan’ will cost more and it sure is.

Citizens, the debt we are paying for is for Bonds that are 20 or 30 year bonds. You will find the 26.3M CO Bond in June of this year, is included in the $164M the citizens are already locked into. All while pushing back/delaying the infrastructure projects within and throughout the City under the guise of adjustments in priorities to the CIP, which, by the way, is also a sliding 5 year window.

That means that every year, they can change the priorities of projects we, as citizens, have already voted on/paid our taxes for, and they can siphon the money elsewhere as Council Member Alsup has stated, the City has done so in the past.

See why the $9M Downtown project didn’t take long, it was reprioritized ahead of roads, water, and sewer to it would be ready for the ‘Economic Boom’ when DART Rail gets here in 2013 – yes 7 years from now, IF everything goes according to plans.

So those projects that have already had the monies allocated, then siphoned to somewhere else, may never get done, unless new funding is approved. Some of the $26.3+M CO Bond is for projects that have already had bonds against, but aren’t even out for Engineering bids yet.

This sounds like the ‘pay more as you go plan’ Council Members Alberts opposed during his bid for re-election, but he has voted for every CO BOND and tax increase over the past two years. To be fair, he also stated that the City hadn’t raised taxes in the 6 previous years and we would have to pay, but it seems like the $13.912M in appraisal increase revenue would have covered this year at least. I do know that if this tax increase passes, it will be the third in a row.
Do any citizens see an issue yet? Do you see where any attempts were made to control spending or work within increased tax revenues to cover the proposed budget, or just an effort to suck up the $13.912M revenues from the appraisal increases, thinking the citizens will put up with the proposed additional 2.3 cent tax increase to cover the debt the Council has placed on the citizens.

Keep in mind, the $13.912M increase and the 2.3 cent increase is also in addition to increased water/sewer charges, an increase of 6.1% in Sales Tax, a 3% increase in Electrical Franchise Fees, a 4.3% increase over 2005-06 amended Budget, 3% for Natural Gas franchise fees which will increase if Natural Gas prices increase, a 1% Franchise Fee for Cable. If you check your bills, you will see a franchise fee/City Sales Tax that means YOU are actually paying for these increases, but they are disguised as ‘franchise fees’, not ‘taxes’ to the citizens.
There is a $1.99 refuse (garbage) rate increase for new services, Municipal Court fines were over $1.7M for 2005/06 and expected to reach $3.5M which of $1.75M is from the ‘Red Light cameras at Rowlett Rd/Beech St and Rowlett Rd/Hickox Rd, with more to come along Hwy 66 paid for by TxDOT, and expected to provide another $3/4M and is supposed to be used to fund additional staff/improvements to Rowlett Police Department.
There’s the $2 increase in drainage fees, the temp to perm increase to Sewer base charges has almost tripled your base charge from May to June this year. The temporary sewer charge increase is due to being sued by City of Garland over a disputed $2M, roughly, in sewer charges. Rowlett has a meter on one side – Garland has a meter on the other side. Rowlett disputed their readings and claimed the meter on the Garland side was broken. While the broken meter argument ended up to be somewhat valid, we still settled to pay Garland somewhere close to the $2M – I don’t know the exact number.

However, now we’re not only paying for that difference, but we’ve wasted tax payers money on legal fees over the past two years to the City Atty, that could have been spent elsewhere, and they want the temporary increase to become permanent to pay for $9.5M in new water/sewer projects, also part of the June 26th CO Bond that the Mayor signed. There’s a $7 increase in Base water to over $11/month.

Keep in mind, the City is already making $2/1000gal utilized and more than that $2.50 for every gal over 25,000, not including outrageous tier rates schedules in place under Stage 3 of the Drought Contingency Plan, if you can’t show a 10% reduction in use, when we’re only required by NTMWD to reduce 5%. Those of you under 15Kgals are not impacted by the per usage fees under the Drought restrictions. The water/drainage fees are expected to increase more by 2012. I haven’t researched the proposed budget enough to know if or where the $1.8M for 2004-05 water revenues and the $1M+ YTD for 2006-07 are being utilized at all, but according to City Atty, that money stays in a fund specifically for water/sewer repair and new projects.

Did anybody see where $1.8M went for water/sewer projects?

The Council continues to approve rates increases for these services to prevent them from being seen/viewed as a real tax, but if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and smells like a duck, by golly it’s a duck.

Exactly how many City projects have the City Bonded out that have been pushed out or delayed?

Rowlett Road, Kenwood Heights, Point Royal are a few in the road improvement areas.

New pumps to improved water pressure for West and Southwest Rowlett which would require new pipelines because the old pipelines may or may not be able to handle the additional pressure of the new pumps.

There’s money in the water revenue fund already being funded by residents paying $2.00 more per 1Kgals for water than what the city pays NTMWD, which was $1.8M+ for last year and the $1M+ for this year to date. The water revenues from the Water rates are supposed to be used for – and according to the City Atty that money can only be used for – water/sewage repairs and future water/sewer projects. And you’ve even raised base water rates recently and will change some temp rates to permanent to increase that fund, to pay for the CO bond signed this past July.

These increases are in addition to the tiered rate structure, included in the Drought Contingency Plan, you voted in as an ordinance that only impacts residential service and irrigation meters, excluding commercial meters which are Businesses, GISD Schools, Apts, Condos, Townhomes, and Home Owner Associations. They are not required to follow the watering every 7 days restriction and there is no penalty applied.

Since there’s no equality or fairness, the resident must carry the burden or pay through the wazoo. This wouldn’t be so hard for the normal citizens to swallow if the seven of you, actually only 4 of you are required to obtain the majority vote, were spending OUR money wisely, as the citizens see as being spent wisely, not as your personal agendas dictate.

As Mayor/Council Members, you are not psychics, nor have a crystal ball that guarantees your vision is going to happen, neither will it necessarily happen in the timeframe you see because ‘everything changes’, again as evidenced in the delays and increasing costs of projects the citizens have already voted for via Bonds or tax increase we had no vote on.

If your visions were ‘right on’ – you wouldn’t be going after tax increases on citizens because the ‘Economic Development’ would have covered that increase, relieving the burden on the citizens.

If the ‘Economic Development’ wasn’t expected until 190 and DART Rail are completed, why are you spending money now on projects that won’t impact the Economic Development in the short term?

While you seem to be having problem with project time lines on other Capital Improvements Projects, it didn’t take long to get the Downtown project going and completed. What incentives were given away to Home Depot that the Mayor negotiated. So what if they built a 4 lane road beside their complex in the Council’s hopes of future development behind them. Any developer wanting to build behind them could have been required to do that anyway. It’s hard for me to believe that Economic Development is going to save the City, when you seem to be giving the farm away, plus, the citizens haven’t seen that tax relief yet.

The City Staff/Council would have you believe that every one of the items they are requesting are ‘really needed’ to make the City function. Does the city need to build/run a day care and summer camps at the community center and the staff required to manage/run those ‘new services’? Keep in mind, these would take away from the private day cares, dance/cheer businesses, Rowlett HS, private youth organizations that provide these services already. Wouldn’t it make more sense for the City to partner with these organizations/businesses vs. try to take a piece of the already shrinking pie.
There’s $125K for a new Spring Festival. I wonder if this is to generate extra revenue in alcohol sales that the Council is considering or already modified the ordinance to allow at these ‘City Functions’.
There are 15 new employees to City Staff; 19 new vehicles to the City Fleet; and a $50K ‘Salary Compensation Study to update a 3 years old study. The $26.3M CO Bond above includes $320K to remodel and furnish City Hall Annexes I and II – mmm is that needed immediately as part of the Downtown project for when DART Rail shows up 7 years down the road. By then, I’m figuring it will need new furniture and paint again.

I hope someday the Council will wake up and realize that ‘No’ means exactly that – NO.

You may be willing to pay the extra individually, but the voting public said ‘NO’ to spending more money and I doubt (again no crystal ball) they felt they were just allowing you to figure out a way to get what you want anyway. If any of you ever wonder why people don’t vote, it’s because they know you don’t care and will use whatever means available to get what you want anyway. This is evidenced above with increased taxes/fees to pay debt you’ve put on the citizens, the change of GO to CO Bonds to get what you want and in the proposed budget where there are proposals to some of the very things the voters shot down in the Bond voting in May 2006. Again, you’ve gotten their attention and hopefully they will become more active in how their City is run, by voicing their opinion and voting for a group that will consider what they have to say.

In a recent Council Meeting, the City Atty mentioned the Council’s directions and decisions are just differences in ‘philosophies’. I took that to mean ‘for citizens to change differences in the philosophies, they need to vote for a new Mayor in May 2007’. My hat is off to you, Mr. Hager. Thanks for that insight.

These are just a few of the budget items and a bit of info you as citizens may not realize. But please, get or make a copy of the proposed budget, do the research, do the math, ask the right questions, make your own decisions, then make your voices heard. Make an effort to get other people’s voices heard by alerting everyone in your neighborhood, HOA, friends, relatives, Church Members, Civic Organizations, Quilting Clubs – anyone that lives in or owns property in Rowlett and get them to the meeting on Tuesday. Thank you Council for the opportunity to bring these items up to the Citizens so they can see what the City Leaders are doing to support your vision and how they can help by becoming more active in the way their city is run.