Why did Kingwood not become an independent municipality to avoid annexation by Houston? (Pasadena: 2014, taxi)

[Zhang Fei]

I understand that its residents were opposed to being absorbed into Houston, but never did do what was necessary to avoid annexation - become a city.

[westhou]

Around 1994, the City of Houston began to annex Kingwood. According to Texas state law, a city may annex an unincorporated area if the area is within the city's extraterritorial jurisdiction without the consent of the residents of the area. Bob Lanier, then the Mayor of Houston, believed that the annexation of Kingwood would result in a $4 million annual gain for the City of Houston as well as himself.[8] Lanier argued that inner Houston was losing its tax base due to mismanagement and overspending, and that the city needed to bring in Kingwood to add more to its tax base. On Wednesday August 21, 1996, the Houston City Council asked the Planning and Development Department to create service plans for Kingwood and Jacintoport, another area being annexed by Houston. The annexation of Kingwood and Jacintoport was to add 33 square miles (85 km2) and about 43,000 people to the city limits.[11] Renée C. Lee of the Houston Chronicle said that Kingwood residents "fought an uphill battle for two years." Kingwood residents offered to pay $4 million to the city in exchange for not being annexed. The residents also filed a federal lawsuit against the City of Houston, claiming that the city was taxing residents without representation. At the time, many residents believed that the City of Houston would not follow through on the state law requirement asking annexing cities to provide equal services to the annexed areas as they do to their original territory. Some residents did not like the idea of the city annexing their community without the community's consent.[8]
Houston annexed Kingwood in 1996, adding about 15,000 acres (6,100 ha) to the city limits.[8] During that year, Thomas Phillips, a retired longshoreman and Bordersville resident, joined with representatives of Kingwood and sued the City of Houston in a federal court, arguing that the city could not legally annex areas if it did not provide certain services to some of its existing areas, including Bordersville which never had city water.[12] Imad F. Abdullah, the President of Landmark Architects Inc., criticized the residents who fought annexation in his 1996 editorial in the Houston Business Journal, arguing that a "not in my backyard" mentality in particular communities overall negatively affects the entire metropolitan area.[13]
Kingwood lobbied the Texas Legislature, asking for modifications to the state's annexation laws. In 1999 the legislature successfully passed amendments requiring annexing municipalities to develop plans for services provided to communities being annexed, and municipalities are required to provide a three year planning period prior to official annexation to allow for public comment. The modified law allows for communities to use arbitration if the annexing cities fail to follow through with their service plans. The amendments do not affect prior annexations, including Kingwood's annexation. Some Kingwood residents expressed satisfaction that other suburban unincorporated areas including The Woodlands would not undergo the annexation that occurred in Kingwood.[8]
In 2006, Kingwood has over 65,000 residents. During that year, ten years after the annexation, Lee said that "[a]nger and resentment that colored the early days of annexation" never dissipated and that most Kingwood residents "have settled in as Houstonians, but who still opposed annexation." Lee said that while residents sometimes complain about high rates for sewer and water services and obvious inadequacies in the fire and EMS services, those residents believe that Kingwood "has greatly suffered from being a part of the city." Lee says that most residents "will never come to terms with Houston's hostile takeover."[8] Lee said that "Services have deteriorated, and the community has lost its identity as a suburban haven as most people had feared" and "Many residents believe the community has not maintained its identity as the Livable Forest[.]"[

[Truth713]

Originally Posted by Zhang Fei

I understand that its residents were opposed to being absorbed into Houston, but never did do what was necessary to avoid annexation - become a city.

It not cheap..just ask woodland

[Dopo]

To me annexation is the biggest form of big government.
Once you get annexed to a city like Houston, you say good-bye to any local government representation that you had.

I lived in St. Louis and loved the fact that St. Louis is a collection of about 100 small cities.
When you live there, you feel like you have a group of people in your community actually represent you.
Today's cities are way too big, There's no reason for a city to be more than 100,000 people.

[colcat]

Originally Posted by Truth713

It not cheap..just ask woodland

This. It is easier said than done.

[Truth713]

The woodland were suppose to vote in 2014 to incorprate but a cost est said to cover all the services that Houston currently provides they would have to raise tax by 74 % . Last heard they have put off the vote till 2050 is

[Chicago3rd]

Truth713 - You hit it on the head. And brought up another point in this discussion.....said unincorporated areas sure don't ever bring up their desire to stop taking money from Houston.

[Zhang Fei]

Originally Posted by Chicago3rd

Truth713 - You hit it on the head. And brought up another point in this discussion.....said unincorporated areas sure don't ever bring up their desire to stop taking money from Houston.

Is this documented anywhere? As far as I can tell, those areas lack scale, which is why they're contracting with Montgomery and Harris counties for services, which they pay for. Pasadena is a city with roughly 2/3 the median property tax as the Woodlands, but it is a city with its own PD and fire department because it's got almost double the population of the Woodlands. The delay in making the Woodlands a city is probably related to waiting for the population to increase so that scale economies have a chance to kick in.

[Truth713]

Originally Posted by Zhang Fei

Is this documented anywhere? As far as I can tell, those areas lack scale, which is why they're contracting with Montgomery and Harris counties for services, which they pay for. Pasadena is a city with roughly 2/3 the median property tax as the Woodlands, but it is a city with its own PD and fire department because it's got almost double the population of the Woodlands. The delay in making the Woodlands a city is probably related to waiting for the population to increase so that scale economies have a chance to kick in.

Taxes dampen enthusiasm for Woodlands incorporation - Houston Chronicle

The story is right three the woodlands already has a population of 93,000 in 2010

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-te...te-3783039.php

[Zhang Fei]

Originally Posted by Truth713

Taxes dampen enthusiasm for Woodlands incorporation - Houston Chronicle

The story is right three the woodlands already has a population of 93,000 in 2010

The Woodlands expected to delay incorporation vote - Houston Chronicle

From the artilce:

Legislation passed in 2007 facilitated an agreement that released The Woodlands from the city's boundaries for expansion in 2014, and for a period of 50 years. The Woodlands, in exchange, is paying Houston $45 million over the next 30 years to fund regional projects.

It's clear that the Woodlands is paying for the services it receives from Houston. It would be interesting to find out what makes the Woodlands different from Sugar Land, which has a smaller population, and a median property tax 18% over the Woodlands, yet somehow manages to thrive as an independent city.