R-91-1657 - 9/26/1991WHEREAS, the Texas Legislature has provided that certain taxing districts
may be created such as Rural Fire Prevention Districts and Emergency Services
Districts, and
WHEREAS, these districts may incur debt and tax the property owners of said
districts for emergency services, and
WHEREAS, the property owners of said districts would remain liable for such
debt even after annexation by the City, Now Therefore
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROUND ROCK,
TEXAS,
The City Council of the City of Round Rock is opposed to the creation of
additional taxing districts for emergency services in its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction.
RESOLVED this
ATTEST:
RESOLUTION NO. /6.1
7/2
day of September, 1991.
MIKE ROBINSON, Mayor
City of Round Rock, Texas
s•
DATE: September 24, 1991
SUBJECT: City Council Meeting, September 26, 1991
ITEM: 9.A. Consider a resolution stating the City Council's position on the
creation of certain taxing districts in Round Rock's ETJ.
STAFF
RESOURCE PERSON: Joe Vining/Lynn Bizzell
Chief Bizzell has been approached about the conversion of the Travis County
Rural Fire Prevention District #3 (TCRFPD #3) into Emergency Services District
#2 (ESD #2). This action would have a minimal effect on area property owners
now but could have an adverse impact at a later date.
Ba kEround
Rural Fire Prevention Districts are taxing districts established to provide services
to non - incorporated areas of the county. The Travis County Commissioners Court
established TCRFPD #3 in the early 1980's. At that time only a small portion of
our ETJ extended into Travis County along IH -35. The district boundaries were
drawn to exclude.
In 1986, we concluded an ETJ exchange with the City of Austin. This agreement
brought a small amount of land south of Gattis School road into our ETJ. Some of
the land is included in the partially developed High Country Subdivision. This
land (approximately 34.69 acres) is the primary subject of this agenda item as it
would become part of the proposed ESD #2.
Analysis
State law requires the Commissioners Court to receive permission from any City
that has ETJ is a proposed ESD. The reason for this is the future taxation issue.
These districts may levy a tax of up to 10 cents per $100 of assessed valuation to
finance any debt. The obligation to pay this tax would remain with the property,
even after annexation by the City. Thus the property would be "double taxed" for
certain emergency services.
Our recommendation, as in previous requests, is to not grant permission to
include any land in our ETJ in another taxing district. The land is vacant now
and we expect it to be fully developed with the High Country Subdivision. Adding
the possibility of another tax burden on this land could have a negative impact on
future development.
t~, 1069 660
30.)000.
O/
NOY 1.1.1.1770
14109 COUNTRY 0E0 CORP. 1 795
1376/699 ' ' " T-7
(03.361 Ac
PENT 1 VENT
yy 0.0 )
10.9.14: ,0.685
( •PENTAD JOINT VENTURE
• 070/029 B 1071/627
L � (6.00) (1:99562 AL)
38510C
16.600 4
49X8 �.�N 6E -6
11.3,979
` �HSY
W7,- '
Recommendation
90.627.
FE 1 ER 71
i3ST. 200
0 °54 d
• sa e nN
ss.,
268040 44.170E67066
4074/994
26.AOS A
e, /18 slsrER
0
60
0 I
1
1
9
11 _....L
MERMAN 3. MEI9TE11
2 3)7 A