Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums (
-   San Marcos (
-   -   No for roads, Yes for schools and parks (

shiner6 05-14-2007 08:40 PM

No for roads, Yes for schools and parks
So how does everyone feel about the latest vote this past weekend? Looks like it turned out that we got no road bonds passed, but we did get the remainder of the construction money to complete our school projects and to purchase additional park land.

Two interesting notes are apparent with this election. 1) Apparently the negative votes were reported coming primarily from western Hays County (ie Wimberley). I would suppose that they don't want a 4-lane coming there in the form of Ranch Road 12 because that would mean more development and bringing Wimberley into this century...screaming and kicking. 2) According to the San Marcos Record, it appears that only about 2936 votes were cast in the San Marcos area. Out of how many people who live here? That's a pitiful turnout I would think. There have to be nearly 40,000 permanent residents here and I don't know how many students may also be registered to vote. But even out of 40,000 or so permanent residents, only 2936? 7%?

I guess it remains to be seen how more parkland is going to help the San Marcos area. Sure, we need to complete our school projects. But how are we to progress without the road systems and infrastructure in place to ensure a bright future?

A2 05-15-2007 04:56 AM

Well said Shiner.

semi-native 05-15-2007 07:59 AM

I was opposed to the school bond, only because both of the school board candidates raised serious concerns over whether the money was being wasted and whether the projects could be brought within the original budget.

Overall, I agree that our schools need help and funding, I just want to be sure the money is being well spent and the projects are being managed properly before I agree to pay any more.

The roads issue is a real bummer, IMO. I would like to see 12 widened, but even more, I want to see the big shoulder that comes with the widening, which would have made it possible to ride a bike out to the junction again.

The real shame is that the county would have been reimbursed by the sate, up to about 75% of the bond amount. It is my understanding that the state has stopped offering these kinds of deals. This was our last chance, for the foreseeable future, to get the state to foot the bill.

So, I lost on those two, not to mention the senior tax crap.

That leaves the parks, which I supported and that bond passed.

brete 05-16-2007 10:23 AM


Originally Posted by semi-native (Post 2670)
So, I lost on those two, not to mention the senior tax crap.

What was wrong with the senoir property rax amendment? It would allow the legislature to give seniors who taxes have been frozen the property tax cuts given to everone else.

semi-native 05-16-2007 03:56 PM

The tax cut is meant to offset the increases that the rest of us have incurred. It is a double-benefit for them. They were exempt when my taxes went up and then they get a break when mine go back down?

Part of the increase for me in the first place was to compensate for theirs being frozen.

In super over-simplified terms, think of it this way. Imagine that you have a population of 1000 people, each paying $5000 in property taxes. Each year, you generate $5 million in tax revenue. The city needs some work done and your budget calls for $5.5 million.

You would raise property taxes by 10%, but 500 of those people are senior citizens and their rates are frozen. So, you raise everyone else's by 20% to get to $5.5 million.

Then, you find out that the numbers were screwed up and you only needed $5 million after all. You have 500 people paying $5000 each and 500 people paying $6000 each.

Do you cut everyone by $500, or do you cut the people who got raised $1000?

A2 05-17-2007 05:47 AM

when the city needed more work done, and the seniors rates where frozen, the RICH should have paid extra. The property owners that DO NOT have homestead exemptions should be taxed EXTRA. That time and every time .....

semi-native 05-17-2007 07:52 AM

I'm not rich. My taxes went up. I'm not complaining about that. I'm saying that when they go back down, the people who had frozen taxes should not have theirs go down.

BTW, I have a homestead exemption. That does not prevent my taxes from going up.

shiner6 05-17-2007 07:38 PM

Points well taken. Looks like San Marcos is finally stepping up to the plate and selling $12.5 million in bonds to complete someo ther projects including the purchase of additional rights of way on the Wonder World project according to this article. Bravo! And trimming about $2.5 million off the construction estimates for the Wonder World Extension by removing bike trails from the main overpass on Purgatory Creek in this article. Great work, however, I can imagine that if this keeps up, the Wonder World extension will eventually be nothing more than an old cattle trail through the woods by the time the action is palatable enough to suit anyone :-)

smeagel 05-18-2007 10:53 AM

Go Mayors Go!
According to the San Marcos Almost Daily Record, The Mayors of San Marcos, Kyle, Buda and Uhland are meeting with TXDOT to try and salvage the State money for roads for the IH35 cities. I guess the vacuum of leadership from the County is being filled.

AndrewJMorgan 06-27-2007 07:18 PM

Beeeeeep... Beeeeeeeeeeeep... Honk Honk...

Originally Posted by shiner6 (Post 2668)
But how are we to progress without the road systems and infrastructure in place to ensure a bright future?


As these things go...

Looks like a new bond election for THAT may have to happen after the
new High School is in full swing. Have you seen the itty-bitty roads that are to service that monster of a school?

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:59 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.