San Marcos Mercury | Local News from San Marcos and Hays County, Texas

May 6th, 2009
Letter: Rose’s double standard on property rights

EDITOR:

Please Representative Rose. Give us a break. We didn’t just fall off the turnip truck. Representative Rose tries to dazzle us with BS. In contrast, I will get straight to the point.

Rose says he can’t support taxing authority for the Hays Trinity Groundwater District and he can’t support the idea of District representatives having access to private property.

Give us a break, Patrick. Let’s not pay attention to what you say. Let’s look at what you’re doing.
You’ve got three bills going through the Legislature right now: H.B. 4725; H.B. 4825; and H.B. 2441.

Each creates a utility district and — (everyone needs to be sitting down for this part) — each district has the power of taxation and one with eminent domain power. In short, the Rose districts not only have taxing authority, they go beyond the right of the district to enter property. The Rose districts have the power to take someone’s property.

Yes, Representative Rose. We’ve decided to stop listening to what you say. We’re paying attention to what you do.

CHARLES O’DELL, Ph.D.
Dripping Springs area

Email Email | Print Print

--

7 thoughts on “Letter: Rose’s double standard on property rights

  1. If Charles O’dell supports something, you it definitely gots to be suspect, illegal, or otherwise unethical.

  2. “You’ve got three bills going through the Legislature right now: H.B. 4725; H.B. 4825; and H.B. 2441. Each creates a utility district….”

    H.B. No. 2441 doesn’t create a utility district. It gives Hays County conservation and reclamation districts the authority to issue bonds for recreational facilities.

  3. Monkey,

    Change “utility” to “TAXING” and then re-read my letter and read Rose’s statement wherein he writes:

    “I do not believe that during these difficult economic times homeowners should be asked to pay more taxes on their home and property.”

    Chapter 36 authority does NOT give the Groundwater Conservation District authority to tax…and Rose is NOT being asked to pass a tax for the GCD. Only the voters can approve a small tax to protect their wells (up to 5 cents per $100 valuation, NOT the 50 cents Rose stated).

    Rose can only give the GCD PERMISSION to ask the voters if they will accept a small tax, but Rose won’t give the GCD that permission because he knows the voters approved the GCD by a two to one vote and developers want to drill wells without regard to impact on existing well owners.

    In contrast, Roses’ H.B. No. 2441 GIVES the Hays County conservation and reclamation districts AUTHORITY to sell bonds. How do you believe the bond debt will be repaid? Property taxes.

    “I do not believe that during these difficult economic times homeowners should be asked to pay more taxes on their home and property.”

    How hypocritical is that!

  4. Gee Charles. I believe you might be screeching a bit here. Bond debt can be repaid through other means, like fees. And hey, if you really don’t like it, why don’t you run for office yourself? Oh. Forget it. That means you would really have to put YOURSELF out there on the line. And…people might even criticize you. We all know how well you take criticism.

    I’m with Wilco. If you’re against this – I’m all for it.
    Maybe Rose knows something we don’t.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

:)