Mud

[jasonamd]

Originally Posted by newtopearland

Hi jasonamd,

I've looked through the Pearland city budget and everything you listed is covered by the city. Also, the houses in my part of my subdivision (not even the whole sub division) are the only ones in the area with both MUD and Pearland City taxes.

Yes, in a way you are being double taxed since you are paying the city taxes on something that you aren't getting from them. But if you do all the research and find out what the city budget is and what percentage of the overall budget it is you can figure out how much you pay towards those services you aren't really getting from them.

I live in League City but also in a MUD. The MUD was created to install the water, storm water, and sewers. The city still provides waste treatment and water services. My tax from the city for those services which they only have partially provided, is around $120 a year. Hardly enough to get worked up over, especially since I did my research and knew about it up front.

It would be nice to not have the MUD tax, but for the location I wanted and what I wanted, it is what I ended up with. But I knew when buying my house that it was in a MUD.

[newtopearland]

Thanks jasonamd. That's a pretty good point. The counter argument would be that you only pay $120/year because the costs are distributed through the whole city, not just one MUD, but I'm not sure how strong that argument actually is.

[newtopearland]

Another question I have about MUDs: Our MUD has issued $30,000,000+ in bonds over the last 5 years. The houses in the area are about 10 years old, so the original bonds were running out. The total taxable housing value in the MUD is about $429mm. Is it typical for a MUD to raise that much debt (relative to the taxable housing value)?

[Johnhw2]

Originally Posted by newtopearland

Another question I have about MUDs: Our MUD has issued $30,000,000+ in bonds over the last 5 years. The houses in the area are about 10 years old, so the original bonds were running out. The total taxable housing value in the MUD is about $429mm. Is it typical for a MUD to raise that much debt (relative to the taxable housing value)?

I dont know about the typical ratio of outstanding bonds to assessed development value but it is possible the new bonds were issued to refinance at lower interest rates we see today. I am speculating of course.

[usc619]

LOL some coward left me a rep, feel free to PM me.