City annexations could prove costly
New residents would have to pay hook-up costs, water bills will rise
By SHANNON CRABTREE scrabtree@leader-news.com

Expanding the city limits of El Campo won't be cheap, City Council members agreed Tuesday, learning it could prove costly not only for homes and businesses annexed, but also for the average city taxpayer.

All will have to pay, City Manager John Steelman said. For the potential incoming resident or business, costs will be generated by connecting with municipal water and sewer lines as well as accepting city garbage services - a bill which could potentially run several thousand dollars when taps are made, new lines run, meters installed and septic tanks abated.

But having that new utility customer is a vital part of the process, City Council members agreed, saying all sites in annexed areas should be connected within six months of service becoming available.

For the current city resident, annexation could mean several additional dollars added to each water bill over the next 20 years.

It all comes down to cost, which at this point, is anticipated to be in the $5 million range although it could be be dramatically reduced by reshaping annexation territories and city tax participation in the program.

Even reduced, Steelman said, it would likely mean $3 or more added to each water bill.

At $5 million, the expense would be $7 to $8 per month.

Whatever happens following public hearings Nov. 6 and Nov. 13, Councilman Robert Boone urged Council to be ready for action.

"We should already know what the cost will be to run water and sewer. We should have all our eggs in a basket," he said.

Upcoming public hearings, Councilwoman Gloria Harris said, could significantly change the course of Council action.

"If at that public meeting there is a big outcry, y'all are going to back off," Harris said, adding, "If they don't want to be annexed, we've got big headaches."

Steelman continued to advocate capturing land on U.S. 59 east of the city - as much as possible to grow the city and protect boundaries.

As to Council's question of cost, he problem, Steelman said, is the volatility of plastics prices and the unknown time line for service expansion.

Moving quickly, he added, could be a two-year process as engineering studies are completed, bids sought and let, and work gets under way.

"We need to get out there as quickly as we can - especially to the places where people live," Mayor Phillip Spenrath said, specifically pointing out the Sandy Corner area.

One concern, Harris said, is the effect ag land exemptions could have on the annexation process - questioning whether the tracts themselves should be reviewed.

Under state law, a working agricultural land site can "optout" of annexation with proof of productivity and a 15-year nondevelopment agreement. That land would then be circumnavigated and absorbed with area zoning when developed (please see related story).

Annexing exempt ag land still allows the city to protect its boundaries and limit the types of development which could ultimately take place on a piece of property, City Attorney Ronny Collins told Council.

"We wouldn't want to abandon (a tract) just because they have ag. We may want to force them to sign a non-development agreement.

Possible annexation costs aside, the city of El Campo needs to consider raising utility rates.

"We've discussed the need to do a rate study on water and sewer. Our rates are low," Steelman said, adding the city hasn't had a rate increase in four years. "Are you going to spend all those dollars for the utility fund on new projects?"

That's another problem with the annexation question, Harris said.

"You're looking at passing (the expense) on to people already in the city," she said.

If areas are annexed, all other city ordinances will become effective in those areas.

That includes restrictions against outdoor burning, Boone said.

That's why efforts should be made to extend garbage pickup into those areas as quickly as possible, Spenrath said.