79° F
4 Rollingwood voters will have the opportunity this November to decide the future of the Rollingwood Development Corporation, following a decision by the Rollingwood City Council last week.
The City Council unanimously decided to place an initiative on the Nov. 2 ballot to allow voters to decide if sales tax collected through the RCDC could be used for water supply facilities or water conservation programs.
In a second item, the City Council voted 3-2 to place a second initiative on the ballot that would abolish the quarter cent sales tax that funds RCDC and allow the city to use that for property tax relief. Alderwomen Roxanne McKee and Sara Hutson voted against the item.
The second initiative would effectively cut off funding to RCDC and once the group’s current funds are exhausted, the council could vote to dissolve the organization, effectively killing it.
At that point there would be “no more need for the RCDC and their business would be completed,” said City Attorney Monte Akers.
Since it was formed by a ballot initiative in 2002, the RCDC has primarily used its funds to pay for improvements parks facilities and grounds in Rollingwood.
“The park is a real jewel of our city, and we need it finished and maintained in good condition,” said Brian Rider, a member of the RCDC board who was a part of the original campaign to start the group. He added that part of the original campaign in 2002 was that the money would be used for parks. “It was important to me and my children growing up in Rollingwood and it should continue to be important given how many young families are moving here.”
The RCDC currently has over $600,000 in its accounts and has not been writing checks while the board and the city council work out new procedures for funding items. The council has become more cautious following a lawsuit from residents over the parking lot that was built near the park using RCDC funds.
Rider has come out in support of using future RCDC funds for park maintenance. City officials and RCDC members disagree over what RCDC can fund and legal opinions differ person to person. Because community development corporations are relatively new in Texas, and are typically used to fund economic development, there is little legal president or consensus on the vague wording used in statutes passed by the Texas Legislature.
“The primary function of a 4B corporation is to do job development in the community,” Rider said. “As for other uses, it’s purely a matter of statutory interpretation. This is not a 10-second sound bite issue.”
Rider fears that if the second ballot initiative passes, park maintenance will take a backseat to other priorities within the city budget.
“The park won’t be maintained well unless we have an RCDC that can force the spending on that purpose,” he said.
The park is FULLY developed and has over $600,000 reserved for it in the bank, while the city is scarce of funds and raising taxes and utilities for its citizens. The city, not the RCDC fund, has been maintaining the park anyway. Why keep on looking for unneeded items (more fencing and more paving believe it or not) and other ways to spend money in our small park? It is a jewel and will remain a jewel thanks mostly to the city, not the RCDC. It does not need to be the only thing taken care of in our city at the expense of all else. Enough is enough. Say “Yes” to the ballot initiative for quality of life and smart priorities.
Let’s say voters give RCDC authority to undertake “water conservation” and “water supply” projects. What comes next? What if RCDC wants to put a new water line in a street? Would that be a “water conservation” or “water supply” project? Arguments will be made on both sides. Lawyers will be consulted. No clear answers will be forthcoming. But one thing is certain – money will be wasted on lawyers, and time will be wasted endlessly debating what RCDC can and cannot do. And the City will end up in a muddle, paralyzed by the inability to get a clear answer on whether the project is even legal. In the meantime, nothing gets done on the water system.
RCDC Director Brian Rider is quoted in this article, “The park won’t be maintained well unless we have an RCDC that can force the spending on that purpose.” But park maintenance can be and has been paid for out of the City’s general fund. Although RCDC agreed to maintain the park facilities that it built, during the current fiscal year so far, all park maintenance has been paid for out of the general fund, and none has been reimbursed by RCDC due to confusion over what RCDC can and cannot pay for.
There is no question but that the City can use the general fund to pay for park maintenance, water projects, and street repairs. Why is the City wasting so much time and money trying to work with RCDC? Please vote to redirect our sales tax to the general fund where it can be used to fund water system repairs, street repaving, and park maintenance with no burdensome procedural encumbrances, legal entanglements, or other strings attached. Please vote to set our sales tax free!
RCDC can fund the park maintenance yearly as a park project. It can also vote to fund the water projects which voters should vote to do. It can also fund economic development which we badly need to increase the sales tax revenue.
If we vote Yes to the prop to remove it it becomes a wash. Yes it put it back to the city but with the rollback rate we will actually lose the money. Keep the sales tax in RCDC and begin to use it elsewhere and allow it to build up as we need it for various projects- water, parks, econ dev, etc… Let the full potential of RCDC move forward…
“Pay Attention” is mistaken about the effect of the sales tax Proposition. If the Proposition passes, far more money will be available to the City to maintain the park, pave the streets, and repair the water system.
If the Proposition passes, the ¼% sales tax will simultaneously stop going to RCDC and start going into the City’s general fund, with no loss of sales tax revenue. Indeed, given the inaccessibility of RCDC revenues to the City for most purposes, this sales tax change can only reasonably be seen as an increase in the City’s sales tax revenue.
Property taxes will not necessarily be reduced. The rollback rate (the property tax rate that triggers voters’ right to petition for a rollback election) will be reduced. However, the City will remain free to set any property tax rate it wishes (subject to voters’ right to petition for a rollback election).
Passing the Proposition would redirect the sales tax now piling up in RCDC’s bank account to the general fund. Even more important, passing the Proposition would allow the City Council to dissolve the RCDC, redirecting the $600,000 plus now held captive in RCDC’s bank account to the general fund. This new revenue flowing into the general fund would give the City Council the latitude it needs to maintain the park, fix the water system, and repave the streets without raising property taxes. And redirecting this revenue to the general fund may even permit a property tax reduction.
Please vote to set our sales tax free!