New Territory MUDs and City of Sugar Land Reach Agreement for Annexation

Annexation negotiations between the City of Sugar Land and the five New Territory MUDs nearly fell apart following a September 25 joint, MUD meeting but a last-minute concession by the MUD 112 board resulted in an agreement by all parties.
The draft Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA), which has been in the works for five years, will be presented this month at various City and MUD public hearings and brought before City Council at their November 6 meeting.
The item of extreme controversy related to the City’s proposed expansion of the wastewater treatment plant at the far west end of New Territory Blvd. as MUD 112 directors fought to limit the size of the site.
Ultimately, the board reportedly conceded to the City’s terms on this issue as long as the City agreed, in the SPA, to preserve existing landscaping and natural vegetation on the north site of the site and to construct any necessary berms or walls on our inside the boundary line.
Because an SPA with the City can only be adopted if all five MUDs sign it, the expansion site controversy created a rift between MUD 112 and the other four districts who expressed support for the proposed agreement.
MUD 112 wanted to negotiate further on the wastewater treatment plant expansion site, saying they didn’t believe the City would walk away from the opportunity to annex New Territory. “We are a pretty good prize for the City. They want us to participate in the expense of the fire station (to be built in Telfair) and their ground water reduction plan,” said MUD 112 Director Jim Grotte. “We’ve negotiated a pretty decent agreement, the best we could...but I am not satisfied,” he said in the meeting.
But the City’s representative at the meeting, Director of Utilities SuEllen Staggs, said the City’s proposed SPA is their best and final offer and that city officials had not expressed a willingness to negotiate further on the issue.
“The decision is yours, whether you are comfortable with this agreement or not...and whether or not you want to be part of the City,” she told the 22 MUD directors present at the meeting.
Several years ago, the City purchased the land surrounding the New Territory wastewater treatment plant with the long-term plan to increase treatment capacity in order to serve future development in their ETJ. These developments include what has become Telfair and two other tracts north of US 90A.
The current plan is to expand the New Territory plant, now 2.5 million gallons per day capacity, to 6.5 mgd by 2012, and to 7.5 mgd in 2019. The most they would expand it would be 10.5 mgd when their north plant behind Target on US 59 reaches the end of its useful life (perhaps around 2025), Staggs said.
The City also agreed to certain terms in their proposed expansion, including minimizing noise pollution by installing blowers inside the buildings, complete odor control mitigation, minimizing light pollution, providing landscape screening, and building the expansion facilities as far west and south as possible, she said. “You’ll just see the trees, you won’t know the plant is there,” said Staggs referring to heavy landscaping that she promised would not be removed during the expansion process.
While these terms were acceptable to MUD 112, they expressed concern that the SPA ties the treatment capacity of 10.5 mgd to the City’s master plan, a document that can be amended in as few as two city council meetings. “They are a City, they are bureaucratic. There is no telling what will happen five or ten years from now,” said Grotte. “They are unwilling to give us a binding commitment on capacity so the only way is
to bind the size of the site,” explained MUD 112 President Carl Dase.
At their regular board meeting in September and at the joint MUD meeting, MUD 112 said they would sign the SPA if the City restricts land usage to an area south and east of the existing facility for a 35-year period. The rest of their acreage would be designated parkland and placed under the control of the NTRCA.
Staggs said the City would agree to MUD 112’s preferred site, but only if certain contingencies were attached to agreement. The City needs the flexibility to expand into an additional 250-feet of property east of the site if necessary, Staggs explained. These contingencies include: equipment failure at the existing plant which would necessitate the construction of new treatment structures, future regulatory changes that would require additional treatment and facilities, and an increase in the flood hazard area determined by FEMA which would eliminate use of some their land.
Staggs said if the MUDs didn’t agree to the contingencies, the City would build their own 8 mgd facility adjacent to New Territory’s plant. Referring to a diagram presented by Staggs showing an example of an 8 mgd facility on the city-owned property, Dase said, “I really don’t think that what they have laid out is useable. But that’s the $68,000 question.”
“The question is, is it reasonable for the City to build a plant in an area that is very limited and where they would have to deal with, possibly, a very messy permitting process. Can they, will they? Nobody really knows,” commented the MUD attorney.
“You may be willing to call their bluff, but we are not,” commented MUD 111 Director Jennifer Weinecke. Matt Shepard, also a MUD 111 Director, said he supports the proposed SPA because it establishes a site for a fire station near the New Territory border. If the proposed SPA is not approved, the City could elect to move the fire station to a more central location within Telfair—further east from New Territory. “We are talking about life safety, response time, and human life,” he said. That wastewater treatment plant isn’t going to kill anyone. But response time is critical,” he said.
Directors with MUD 68, the district furthest from the proposed fire station site, said they are not happy with all the terms of the SPA but want to “stick with New Territory as a whole.”
MUD 67 concurred. “You have more power working from within rather than being the rebel district,” advised Director Leanne Pfister. “For the good of the whole team, it is in our interest that 112 signs the SPA,” she urged.
“We’ve got no aces,” said MUD 69 Director Bart Hatfield. “It comes down to trust and there is no way to answer that,” he said. “Going away from this agreement will cost us a lot,” he said, referring to the possible loss of opportunity for annexation.
The attorneys said that the four districts could possibly negotiate an SPA with the City, without MUD 112, but advised that it would be in the best interest of residents to maintain unity within the community. “The appeal of a master planned community is the uniformity it offers,” said the attorney.
Hatfield, who is also on the NTRCA board, said splitting New Territory into “city” and “non-city” units would be a disaster for the homeowner’s association. “Almost everything in the NTRCA’s structure is consistent with us existing as one political entity," he said.
Following the meeting, MUD 112 directed their attorney to contact the City and express their willingness to accept the SPA as long as no landscaping or vegetation in front of the plant site is removed without their permission and that any flood plain protective barriers are located on or within the proposed boundary line.

Sugar Land Housing Remains Strong

Texas housing remains strong, with risk scores below 140, which means that there's less than a 14% chance that our markets will decline over the next two years, vs. California, Arizona, Florida and Nevada metros that predict at least a 50% or more chance that their housing prices will decline over the next two years. This may help buyers understand that Texas is the place to buy. According to the scale, the risk factor for Houston is about 8% according.
The top 50 major metros rated by their risk of a decline in the next two years , by Marilyn Lewis
PMI Mortgage Insurance Co.'s new U.S. Market Risk Index tries to assess the future direction of markets across the U.S. by looking at recent price volatility, affordability (including per-capita income, appreciation and mortgage rates) and employment, among other factors.
On average, there's a 34.6% chance that home prices will drop in the nation's top 50 markets in the next couple years, with many of the riskiest markets falling in areas that saw steep run-ups in prices in recent years, followed by decreased affordability and drops in the rate of appreciation.
The risk scores for the top 50 major metros are listed as whole numbers in the table below. A score of 652 means there is a 65.2% chance that market will decline over the next two years.
Metropolitan statistical area
*Risk score
Annual house price appreciation


1st qtr 2007 (in %)
1st qtr 2006 (in %)
% change
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, Calif.
652
4.14
21.64
-17.49
Phoenix-Mesa-Scottdale, Ariz.
646
4.52
37.33
-32.81
Las Vegas-Paradise, Nev.
614
1.69
16.08
-14.39
West Palm Beach-Boca Raton-Boynton Beach, Fla.
607
-2.16
28.12
-30.28
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Glendale, Calif.
586
4.82
23.57
-18.76
Santa Ana-Anaheim-Irvine, Calif.
577
0.85
19.85
-19.01
Oakland-Fremont-Hayward, Calif.
572
-0.90
18.63
-19.53
Orlando-Kissimmee, Fla.
563
7.94
32.52
-24.59
Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville, Calif.
560
-4.41
12.98
-17.39
San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, Calif.
555
-1.92
8.20
-10.12
Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach-Deerfield Beach, Fla.
542
2.68
29.38
-26.70
Miami-Miami Beach-Kendall, Fla.
524
11.44
28.70
-17.26
Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, Fla.
506
5.11
26.74
-21.64
Boston-Quincy, Mass.
501
-1.32
5.45
-6.76
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, D.C.-Va.-Md.-W.Va.
500
3.65
21.67
-18.03
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, Calif.
491
2.28
17.56
-15.28
Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, Va.-N.C.
476
7.88
22.01
-14.14
Nassau-Suffolk, N.Y.
445
2.25
12.91
-10.66
San Francisco-San Mateo-Redwood City, Calif.
411
1.32
14.83
-13.51
Baltimore-Towson, Md.
400
6.64
19.94
-13.30
Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, R.I.-Mass.
397
0.85
9.13
-8.27
Jacksonville, Fla.
394
7.46
21.95
-14.49
Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, Ore.-Wash.
389
11.00
21.46
-10.46
Edison, N.J.
362
2.21
14.97
-12.76
Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, Wash.
343
12.56
18.62
-6.06
Cambridge-Newton-Framingham, Mass.
336
-0.50
4.41
-4.90
Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, Minn.-Wisc.
322
1.69
6.59
-4.90
New York-White Plains-Wayne, N.Y.-N.J.
322
3.93
16.07
-12.15
Newark-Union, N.J.-Pa.
314
3.63
13.65
-10.02
Detroit-Livonia-Dearborn, Mich.
284
-2.98
1.20
-4.18
Philadelphia
237
5.63
13.72
-8.08
Warren-Troy-Farmington Hills, Mich.
236
-1.75
1.36
-3.12
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, Ga.
212
4.02
4.85
-0.83
Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, Wis.
189
3.42
7.83
-4.41
St. Louis, Mo.-Ill.
182
4.22
7.17
-2.95
Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro--Franklin, Tenn.
177
8.32
9.02
-0.69
Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, Ill.
175
5.07
10.66
-5.59
Denver-Aurora, Colo.
156
1.09
3.12
-2.03
Austin-Round Rock, Texas
136
10.94
7.63
3.32
Kansas City, Mo.-Kan.
136
2.51
4.71
-2.20
Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, N.C.-S.C.
125
8.47
6.06
2.41
Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, Ohio
121
-0.31
2.29
-2.60
San Antonio, Texas
102
10.53
9.31
1.22
Cincinnati-Middletown, Ohio-Ken.-Ind.
97
2.27
3.99
-1.72
Columbus, Ohio
93
0.97
3.61
-2.63
Indianapolis-Carmel, Ind.
84
2.31
3.07
-0.76
Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, Texas
79
5.93
5.52
0.41
Dallas-Plano-Irving, Texas
75
3.66
3.80
-0.14
Fort Worth-Arlington, Texas
74
4.02
3.43
0.59
Pittsburgh
64
2.66
5.22
-2.57
NOTES: *For the first quarter 2007; **Scores show risk of home values falling in 2009 in all U.S. metropolitan statistical areas and divisions. Risk index scores are whole numbers. By moving the decimal one point to the left, they are expressed as the % chance of dropping prices. For example, Riverside has a risk score of 652 --- a 65.2% chance home values will fall in two years. Also shown: appreciation in first quarters of 2006 and 2007. Source: PMI Mortgage Insurance Co.