Jersey Village residents have witnessed a shift in funding project developments within the past several years. Some exceptionally large projects involving millions of dollars have been approved and funded by the city council without being presented to the voters in Jersey Village. The most recent being the construction of new buildings at the golf course. Other examples include the purchase of the land on the other side of 290 for about $8.2 million, the contract with Harris County to extend Jones Road to 529, and even the repurchase of the golf course. About two years back, the city council was ready to sign a contract with a builder to construct a new city hall on the land across 290 for $11.5 million even after they knew more than nine hundred residents had signed a petition to force approval by the voters before the city hall could be relocated.
Many residents have questioned how they could do that without voter approval. Another question is why would they want to do that? The voters are now being asked to approve three bond propositions that total about $53 million of new property tax-backed debt. It is important for the taxpayers to understand how the projects identified above have been approved by the five members of the city council and where the funding came from. When council members have been asked to explain how they can approve projects like the golf course and the new city hall, they have stated that voter approvals are not required for any project if the money is available without creating new city debt. They have the money in an account, and they can just write a check to cover the cost, so it is a “done” deal without the voter’s involvement.
When asked about overtaxing the property owners to accumulate surplus funds, they deny that and answer with “The money comes from spending less of the approved funds”. What does that mean and how does it work where around $20 million in surplus funds are available for projects where the voters don’t get to be involved in those decisions?
Example: A bond issue gets voter approval for say $20 million to reconstruct some streets, water, sidewalks, and street lighting. Bonds are sold incurring new city debt and property taxes are increased to pay off that debt. City Hall applies for Federal grants to help pay for those projects and the city receives $8.5 million towards the projects. Federal laws require the money to be spent on the projects included in the grant and the city takes the $8.5 million that is not needed from the bond money and moves that money into a surplus account. The bond debt continues for the duration of the contract and the city property taxes continue to be set at a level required to pay off the debt for 25 or more years. After a few of those grant money swaps, the city has $20 million in funds which they can just spend how the five council members decide.
That answers the “How do they do it?”, but why do they do it? Back around 2000, the city council wanted the voters to approve millions in new debt for street reconstruction, a new fire station building, and a new city hall. The city council wanted all the funding to be included in one proposition – an “all or none” vote, assuming the voters would approve the new debt. Many residents got together and forced the city council to split the proposition into three separate propositions, streets, fire station, and city hall. The voters approved the streets and fire station and rejected the city hall proposition. It is possible that various city councils since that election have not trusted the voters to agree with their plans and they have found a method to exclude the voters from the process involving millions of taxpayer dollars.
The three current bond debt propositions are so vague in detail, that none of the money, if approved, would be tied to any specific projects. One can only assume that it was done intentionally to allow more of the same swapping of funds and fewer approvals by the voters for actual projects.
I have been a resident and taxpayer of Jersey Village since February 1977. My family represents four generations currently living in Jersey Village. Both of my daughters graduated from Jersey Village High School as well as two of my granddaughters. Jersey Village has been our home for over 46 years. I have never been against the needs of Jersey Village, but I believe firmly that the residents be given all the information necessary for them to make informed decisions. That means all the facts and not just what a few people want you to know. I normally come down on the “trust side” unless I have been given reason to need more answers before getting my vote.
At this point, I have zero trust that anyone on the city council will feel they must follow any of the expectations they have presented within the documentation on the city website or presented elsewhere. It is truly clear to me that they have presented estimates for the increases in future property taxes that are not reasonable and are trying to paint a picture of minimal increases. They have yet to provide an answer to why they did not use the $20 million in surplus for the street and sewer projects and then seek voter approval for new buildings at the golf course. The same golf course that has been subsidized by the taxpayers for over 20 years.
Richard Ray