The Kendall EDC paid Texas Perspective Inc. to do a study on Esperanza. Texas Perspective’s website says that it “is dedicated to helping its clients strengthen their cases to achieve particular goals.” The Esperanza report they produced for the EDC states that: “much of the underlying data used in this analysis was provided by the developer Marlin Atlantis.” This report did not take into account any of the costs that will be related to this development, therefore presenting an incomplete and one-sided picture.
This year, the Alamo Area Council of Governments convened a Committee for Economic Development Strategies. Eleven of the members were area economic development representatives, including Mr. Rogers. The goal of this committee was to identify key projects that are considered important to the economic vitality of the 12 county region. The short list chosen by ACCOG includes such major economic projects as base closures and realignments, the new Texas A&M campus coming to San Antonio, the establishment of a foundation to bring university courses to Fredericksburg, public transportation needs and the development of an industrial airpark in Hondo County. In contrast to these major business endeavors, the Esperanza development was also adopted as a regional economic goal. AACOG has verified that they based this decision solely on the Texas Perspective Report paid for by the Kendall County EDC, so the same accounting principles were used- relying on the developer’s input and projecting income without factoring in the costs in services, roads, schools and infrastructure.
With major residential development taking place throughout the 12 county region, how was Esperanza chosen as a regional economic goal? Why would AACOG unquestioningly accept figures provided by a local economic development group whose paying members include Esperanza’s developer and several others with current or potential financial connections to him? The support of AACOG, a regional quasi-governmental body, has been thrown behind a residential development that is still very much in the discussion and approval stages with our own local officials. No approval, costs, traffic impacts and infrastructure evaluations or development agreements have been made. Did this Council sanction this action prior to these important benchmarks? Was the EDC acting on behalf of the City? It seems reasonable to ask whether the interests of some members of the KCEDC are being promoted ahead of the interests of the majority of tax-paying citizens, and whether citizens’ elected representatives are being undermined. I believe the EDC can do a great service by building our commercial tax base, but I would like to see more accountability to tax payers. I have expressed these concerns to my commissioner as well.
Paula Cairns
This year, the Alamo Area Council of Governments convened a Committee for Economic Development Strategies. Eleven of the members were area economic development representatives, including Mr. Rogers. The goal of this committee was to identify key projects that are considered important to the economic vitality of the 12 county region. The short list chosen by ACCOG includes such major economic projects as base closures and realignments, the new Texas A&M campus coming to San Antonio, the establishment of a foundation to bring university courses to Fredericksburg, public transportation needs and the development of an industrial airpark in Hondo County. In contrast to these major business endeavors, the Esperanza development was also adopted as a regional economic goal. AACOG has verified that they based this decision solely on the Texas Perspective Report paid for by the Kendall County EDC, so the same accounting principles were used- relying on the developer’s input and projecting income without factoring in the costs in services, roads, schools and infrastructure.
With major residential development taking place throughout the 12 county region, how was Esperanza chosen as a regional economic goal? Why would AACOG unquestioningly accept figures provided by a local economic development group whose paying members include Esperanza’s developer and several others with current or potential financial connections to him? The support of AACOG, a regional quasi-governmental body, has been thrown behind a residential development that is still very much in the discussion and approval stages with our own local officials. No approval, costs, traffic impacts and infrastructure evaluations or development agreements have been made. Did this Council sanction this action prior to these important benchmarks? Was the EDC acting on behalf of the City? It seems reasonable to ask whether the interests of some members of the KCEDC are being promoted ahead of the interests of the majority of tax-paying citizens, and whether citizens’ elected representatives are being undermined. I believe the EDC can do a great service by building our commercial tax base, but I would like to see more accountability to tax payers. I have expressed these concerns to my commissioner as well.
Paula Cairns
2 comments:
More residents = more expense
I have never been accused of being overly intelligent but then I am not as dumb as some of the politicians think I am. Has anyone in Boerne and the surrounding area found it funny that when in a time that development is being discussed, the local government, water and trash bureaucrats are talking rate hikes in the magnitude of 100 percent? Then they throw out the little tidbit that development should be encouraged to lessen the rate impact on the present residents.
Correct me if I’m wrong but on the “trash front,” wasn’t the humongous can deal to make the system more efficient? If it’s so much more efficient, then why are we being hit up for more and more money?
Again, correct me if I’m wrong, but last year weren’t we in water rationing? If we don’t have enough water for the present population, how is doubling the population with new development going to remedy that? Does new development mean that a miracle will happen and new unlimited sources of water will appear? Does building a new water treatment plant mean that same miracle will occur?
The developers want us to believe that all will be well when the population doubles. The politicians and bureaucrats want us to believe that doubling of the population will in effect double the city and county’s revenues and all will be well.
Where will all the new children go to school? Have the new schools been built or even discussed? With new schools there will be a need for new teachers, maintenance people and administrators. How much will our taxes increase to accommodate that?
With the population doubling, are we going to allow all the streets and roads to be widened to accommodate all the new cars and trucks? Howabout the “first responders” - police and fire departments? Won’t those two entities have to be enlarged or are the politicians and bureaucrats willing to have them work longer hours just to make do?
Oh, it would be nice to have an additional 12,000 taxpayers but what about the consequences? When are the politicians and bureaucrats going to start talking about the reality of their ambitious plans in legacy building and the truth about the tax dollars.
At the KCCC meeting on October 22nd, Mike Luckey was the first to speak about the agenda items complaining that Dan Rogers was not invited; that Gene needed to explain why it was on the agenda since the "gentlemen's agreement" with the KCEDC still had a year to go; and complained that Boerne Together was probably behind these items since they are no-growthers.
Jim McCormick and myself spoke on the other side of the table. Jim, as always, spoke perfectly about EDC's original purpose (which did not include residential promotion). I said I was not against the EDC or commercial development; however, read the following to them regarding non-profit 501(c)(6) organizations:
501(c)(6) organizations may engage in limited political activities that inform, educate, and promote their given interest. They may not engage in direct expenditures advocating a vote for a political candidate or cause.
I also talked about how Steve Mack said they could raise $100,000.00 (which by the way contributors to a 501c6 do not have to be disclosed by law), which I advocate. I also spoke about how my commissioner said he could use the $50,000. for road and bridges in his precinct and reminded the court that their purpose was to the health, safety and welfare of the county citizens (KEDC does not fall in that category). I told them they needed to think carefully about their decision and use common sense. The court, on numerous occasions, has indicated they do not have the monies for road repairs, etc.
Steve Mack gave his usual EDC speech. But in the spirit of open discussion and mending bridges, I did spend some time talking to Mr. Mack after the meeting (and before executive session). Nothing to report that would change my mind, but at least a dialogue.
Two motions were made on the EDC items: 1. Have County Attorney Don Allee draw up a written agreement with them so the county has an understanding of what they expect from each other; and 2. The county will not disburse any funds to them until an agreement is in place.
Kudos to Commissioner Gene Miertschin who put these items on the agenda, and the other commissioners willing to listen in order to promote open and public discussion on yet another hot button issue.
Post a Comment