Dear Mayor and City Council.
This is an open letter with some observations following the Wednesday
Council Meeting to discuss the Esperanza Development Agreement ("DA").
1) I must say I felt a little sorry for some of the "Boerne Forward"
supporter wearing the "Yesperanza" cards. I spoke with several who
were under the impression this is a vote "for" or "against" the
Esperanza development. I sat next to a young couple and asked why they
were in favor of the "Development Agreement" and they told me how the
town needed more low cost housing so their friends who used to live
here could move back. They had no idea why they were supporting the DA
over annexation. Several speakers talked about how it will bring more
services to our area. This is about the smartest way to move forward
(annexation or Development Agreement), not about whether to move at all.
3) The City manager when asked if he used the same sales projections
for the Annexation as for the DA, said, "no" that he used a 15 year
build out instead of 10 years used on the "cost negative" model. I was
appalled. This deliberately makes the annexation look less favorable
as the payoff is slower than the numbers used in his "cost negative"
model he prefers.
4) The top reasons the City Manager presented that he and his staff
favored the DA over annexation was because it 1) avoided litigation,
and 2) it put "less pressure" on he and his staff during the years
before the annexation paid for itself (which he unfairly pushed out in
the future). Those reasons are based on fear. Fear is not from God.
Making a decision based on fear is not God's will for Boerne.
Jefferson Morgenthaler's open letter to you on February 4, 2008 points
out several issues deficiencies in the DA which need to be addressed
to protect Boerne. Having been made aware of these issues, approving
and executing this document would be negligent.
I would encourage you to annex the property so the city can realize
the tax and utility benefits immediately. The initial cost for
annexation can be financed using bonds just like other growing cities
do. It is a fraction (~10M) of the recent school bond (~98M) we passed
a few years ago. Besides, if the development does not grow as fast as
projected (which many believe it will not) the expenses are far lower.
Thank you.
Thom Dunaway
This is an open letter with some observations following the Wednesday
Council Meeting to discuss the Esperanza Development Agreement ("DA").
1) I must say I felt a little sorry for some of the "Boerne Forward"
supporter wearing the "Yesperanza" cards. I spoke with several who
were under the impression this is a vote "for" or "against" the
Esperanza development. I sat next to a young couple and asked why they
were in favor of the "Development Agreement" and they told me how the
town needed more low cost housing so their friends who used to live
here could move back. They had no idea why they were supporting the DA
over annexation. Several speakers talked about how it will bring more
services to our area. This is about the smartest way to move forward
(annexation or Development Agreement), not about whether to move at all.
3) The City manager when asked if he used the same sales projections
for the Annexation as for the DA, said, "no" that he used a 15 year
build out instead of 10 years used on the "cost negative" model. I was
appalled. This deliberately makes the annexation look less favorable
as the payoff is slower than the numbers used in his "cost negative"
model he prefers.
4) The top reasons the City Manager presented that he and his staff
favored the DA over annexation was because it 1) avoided litigation,
and 2) it put "less pressure" on he and his staff during the years
before the annexation paid for itself (which he unfairly pushed out in
the future). Those reasons are based on fear. Fear is not from God.
Making a decision based on fear is not God's will for Boerne.
Jefferson Morgenthaler's open letter to you on February 4, 2008 points
out several issues deficiencies in the DA which need to be addressed
to protect Boerne. Having been made aware of these issues, approving
and executing this document would be negligent.
I would encourage you to annex the property so the city can realize
the tax and utility benefits immediately. The initial cost for
annexation can be financed using bonds just like other growing cities
do. It is a fraction (~10M) of the recent school bond (~98M) we passed
a few years ago. Besides, if the development does not grow as fast as
projected (which many believe it will not) the expenses are far lower.
Thank you.
Thom Dunaway
3 comments:
Mr Dunaway- you speak so flippant about the dollar cost for annexation as an insignificant amount! Just who do you think will have to pay for the insignificant
$10,000,000(about $3mil up front)
investment to supply water and sewer to the development? The answer is Citizen taxpayers and more importantly, ratepayers!! Of course Kendall County residents out side the city will not feel the weight of the economic impact.I notice a lot of the nay sayers do not pay city taxes or utility rates. Maybe we could figure out away to let them contribute in real dollars instead of cheap lip service!
It never ceases to amaze me how utterly ignorant some people in this world are. Mr. Anonymous, your comments take the cake.
If you don't want Boerne to grow, you might as well pack your bags. Its going to happen regardless. How about we stop bickering and make Boerne a better place to live. Either way if the DA or the Annexation goes through, the benefits way out weigh the costs.
Post a Comment