U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > San Antonio
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-24-2013, 04:35 PM
 
Location: San Antonio, TX
8,400 posts, read 20,075,328 times
Reputation: 4435

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuero View Post
It's all about maintaining the tax base and San Antonio has had an aggressive annexation policy for decades. San Antonio leaders saw what had happened in other major cities and wanted to prevent higher income bedroom communities siphoning off tax revenue from the core city. That's why comparing "city population" is meaningless, it's comparing apples to oranges. San Antonio is really something closer to the 40th largest city in the USA.
What? Care to explain how these "higher income bedroom communities" are "siphoning off tax revenue from the core city?!?" Because people are choosing to live outside the city limits they are not "siphoning off" anyone, they are using county-provided services that they pay for.

We don't get SAPD/SAFD/city garbage/etc. services because we don't pay for them; but to claim this is "siphoning off" tax revenues from the city is simply ridiculous...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-24-2013, 05:54 PM
 
341 posts, read 327,269 times
Reputation: 292
Quote:
Originally Posted by majormadmax View Post
What? Care to explain how these "higher income bedroom communities" are "siphoning off tax revenue from the core city?!?" Because people are choosing to live outside the city limits they are not "siphoning off" anyone, they are using county-provided services that they pay for.

We don't get SAPD/SAFD/city garbage/etc. services because we don't pay for them; but to claim this is "siphoning off" tax revenues from the city is simply ridiculous...

I assume the city subsidizes the waste collection? Because I know I sure as hell pay for it now on the ole CPS bill.

Otherwise, the only real benefits I know of regarding city services are SAPD and SAFD.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2013, 06:14 PM
 
Location: San Antonio. Tx 78209
2,651 posts, read 6,497,181 times
Reputation: 1735
Quote:
Originally Posted by majormadmax View Post
What? Care to explain how these "higher income bedroom communities" are "siphoning off tax revenue from the core city?!?" Because people are choosing to live outside the city limits they are not "siphoning off" anyone, they are using county-provided services that they pay for.

We don't get SAPD/SAFD/city garbage/etc. services because we don't pay for them; but to claim this is "siphoning off" tax revenues from the city is simply ridiculous...
He wasn't talking about San Antonio. Just look at Dallas for an example, Dallas can't annex to the north and doesn't get the tax revenue from Richardson, Plano , frisco ect... Although those cities residents regularly use Dallas roads, parkland hospital which is the Dallas county hospital. They use city of Dallas parks and fine arts venues and sports venues. Meanwhile people in Dallas very rarely go up to Plano or frisco.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2013, 06:39 PM
 
Location: San Antonio, TX
8,400 posts, read 20,075,328 times
Reputation: 4435
Quote:
Originally Posted by smuboy86 View Post
He wasn't talking about San Antonio. Just look at Dallas for an example, Dallas can't annex to the north and doesn't get the tax revenue from Richardson, Plano , frisco ect... Although those cities residents regularly use Dallas roads, parkland hospital which is the Dallas county hospital. They use city of Dallas parks and fine arts venues and sports venues. Meanwhile people in Dallas very rarely go up to Plano or frisco.
That's a weak argument, the same could be said about any small towns surrounding major metro areas.

Plus, people living in those outlying areas regularly spend money in the city thus contributing via sales tax and revenues generated at businesses.

We are only just outside the SA city limits but 90% of the money we spend is in inside it.

Lastly, many residents commonly use roads outside of the city limits without paying for them, so it's quid pro quo.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2013, 06:41 PM
 
Location: San Antonio, TX
8,400 posts, read 20,075,328 times
Reputation: 4435
Quote:
Originally Posted by dastexan View Post
I assume the city subsidizes the waste collection? Because I know I sure as hell pay for it now on the ole CPS bill.

Otherwise, the only real benefits I know of regarding city services are SAPD and SAFD.
City residents pay for waste pickup via their CPS bills. Those of us outside of the city limits have to pay for waste service privately (e.g. Tiger Sanitation, etc).

So yes, the only real benefit would be having SAPD/SAFD coverage; but since most of the county resources are located just outside of the city limits, it's not a big issue.

I honestly don't see any "benefit" to being annexed besides more taxes...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2013, 06:53 PM
 
Location: San Antonio. Tx 78209
2,651 posts, read 6,497,181 times
Reputation: 1735
Quote:
Originally Posted by majormadmax View Post
That's a weak argument, the same could be said about any small towns surrounding major metro areas.

Plus, people living in those outlying areas regularly spend money in the city thus contributing via sales tax and revenues generated at businesses.
We are only just outside the SA city limits but 90% of the money we spend is in inside it.

Lastly, many residents commonly use roads outside of the city limits without paying for them, so it's quid pro quo.
Sorry if you choose not to believe it, but at least in Dallas that's not the way it works. Dallas even has billboards that say " live in Dallas Shop in Dallas, it pays". Referring to the lost tax revenue to the suburbs. So all though you may believe it's "weak" the city of Dallas doesn't, and I trust their studies more than you anecdotes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2013, 07:11 PM
 
341 posts, read 327,269 times
Reputation: 292
Quote:
Originally Posted by majormadmax View Post
City residents pay for waste pickup via their CPS bills. Those of us outside of the city limits have to pay for waste service privately (e.g. Tiger Sanitation, etc).

So yes, the only real benefit would be having SAPD/SAFD coverage; but since most of the county resources are located just outside of the city limits, it's not a big issue.

I honestly don't see any "benefit" to being annexed besides more taxes...

That's basically what I meant by and large.


I see it the same way, but the people in these areas have no real say over whether or not the city can have their way; I guess unless they all band together and incorporate or something.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2013, 07:17 PM
 
341 posts, read 327,269 times
Reputation: 292
Quote:
Originally Posted by smuboy86 View Post
Sorry if you choose not to believe it, but at least in Dallas that's not the way it works. Dallas even has billboards that say " live in Dallas Shop in Dallas, it pays". Referring to the lost tax revenue to the suburbs. So all though you may believe it's "weak" the city of Dallas doesn't, and I trust their studies more than you anecdotes.
Well Dallas has numerous issues. It really is a different argument as to annexing residential neighborhoods.

From what I recall from my time in that hell hole:

There was a ton of waste (in terms of the city management, et al)

There was a ton of crime, so people didnt really feel safe there at any time of the day.


You are trying to discuss a lost amount of sales tax reveunes along with residential property tax. Not exactly the same scenario here by and large...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2013, 07:55 PM
 
6,996 posts, read 10,209,329 times
Reputation: 5381
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neshomamench View Post
They pay for those services.

BTW, all Officers depend on all Officers for backup.

(example) If you are a Shavano Park PD and County is doing there thing in Shavano (or very close by) and they need backup...Shavano would back them up.
Yes, they do pay for those services; but, the point was that many cities do not provide their own making void the faster response time argument. BCSO rarely needs backup from the other cities. It's more common for BCSO to respond to calls in Somerset, China Grove, and Elmendorf because no one is on duty. They also have to back them up often when a call requires more than one officer because they rarely have more than one officer on duty.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2013, 08:28 PM
 
1,007 posts, read 1,208,673 times
Reputation: 1009
Quote:
Originally Posted by L210 View Post
Yes, they do pay for those services; but, the point was that many cities do not provide their own making void the faster response time argument. BCSO rarely needs backup from the other cities. It's more common for BCSO to respond to calls in Somerset, China Grove, and Elmendorf because no one is on duty. They also have to back them up often when a call requires more than one officer because they rarely have more than one officer on duty.
Most incorporated cities have their own, 24/7 police departments. Your argument is the exception, not the rule.

And again, for those cities that are deficient, they have to pay for those services. I also need to note, police back up police, no matter where. Of course, larger agencies are going to end up backing up smaller agencies more than the other way around, because of simple math, how else could it possibly work? An agency with two officers on duty is not going to rack up "agency assists" as fast as an agency with 100 officers on duty. Again, that is just math.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > San Antonio
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top