1. PEWG Annexation Meeting #1 January 7, 2016

2. Overview 9:00 – 9:05Introduction and Meeting Purpose 9:05 – 9:10Annexation PEWG Process and Schedule 9:10 – 9:30Current Annexation Policy and Evaluation Criteria 9:30 – 9:50Case Studies 9:50 – 10:30Integration of SA Tomorrow Comprehensive Plan Policies 10:30 – 10:55Facilitated Large Group Discussion 10:55 – 11:00Summary & Next Steps 11:00 AMMeeting Close

3. Meeting Purpose Review San Antonio’s existing annexation policies Understand how other communities address annexation Identify SA Tomorrow policies that should be a part of the annexation policy

4. Schedule Overview February - Meeting #2 Review draft of revised annexation policies Early March – Meeting #3 Evaluate the current annexation strategy based on revised policies Give direction on current general annexation strategy Recommendations on revised annexation strategy and High-level direction on areas for consideration (if existing areas are deemed to be not in line with new policy direction) Late March – Regular PEWG Meetings Presentation of recommended annexation policies to all PEWGs April Final Report

5. PEWG Annexation Process

6. Goals for the Annexation PEWG Integrate SA Tomorrow policies into the annexation policies Develop recommended revisions to annexation policies and evaluation criteria Evaluate how the existing annexation strategy fits with the revised policies Provide recommendations on next steps for annexation strategy

7. Current Annexation Policy

8. Annexation Policy versus Strategy Policy Why annex What are the characteristics that need to be present How will it impact the City Strategy Where the City is going to annex land When will the City annex the land identified How much land will be annexed

9. Reasons for Annexation 1.To apply zoning and development standards 2.To create efficiency in service delivery 3.To maximize return on the city’s investment in infrastructure and business incentives 4.To protect and expand the tax base 5.To provide municipal services beyond those available in rural areas

10. Evaluation Categories 1.Existing or planned level of development 2.Service delivery needs 3.Need to protect public health, safety, and welfare 4.Intergovernmental relations 5.Fiscal considerations

11. Existing or planned level of development City should consider annexation of: –Undeveloped areas –Areas for which dense development activity is anticipated –Areas planned or designated in the Comprehensive Plan as Mixed Use or Regional Growth Centers –Areas that have become developed

12. Service Delivery Needs City should consider annexation to provide municipal services to: –Residential, commercial, and industrial land uses that would benefit from a level of service calibrated for a city rather than an unincorporated area –Jurisdictional Islands to provide logical planning and/or service delivery boundaries –Territories that do not adversely impact service to areas already within the city limits –Territories that establish contiguity required for strategic expansion of the city and its services

13. Protect Health, Safety and Welfare City should consider annexation to: –Provide zoning, land use, building codes, and other development regulations to promote and maintain safe living and working conditions and sustainable development –Extend regulations before development occurs, on undeveloped land, where growth is anticipated –Areas that, without regulations, could have an adverse impact on adjacent areas within the city –Areas where unregulated development could have an adverse environmental impact –Areas where unregulated development could have an adverse impact on Military missions/operations

14. Intergovernmental Relations The city should: –Protect its ability to expand its city limits –Consider annexing city-owned properties as soon as practical –Consider annexation to preclude the creation of other competing political jurisdictions –Consider the impact on the city’s ability to expand in the future and potential economic competition when evaluating requests for incorporations of new cities or expansion of existing cities within San Antonio’s ETJ

15. Intergovernmental Relations Continued –Consider the impact on city-owned utilities when evaluating requests for Utility Districts or other Special Districts in the ETJ –Ensure that Special Districts in the ETJ do not create regulations that would not be in the best interest of the city –Prior to releasing any portion of its corporate limits or ETJ to another jurisdiction or accepting territory from another jurisdiction, consider: the exchange of areas of equivalent value; adequate land use control by the other municipality; the existence of clear and logical planning boundaries; potentially significant negative fiscal impacts on the City’s budget; the need for City protection of environmental or other resources; the long-term effects of cumulative ETJ releases to other jurisdictions

16. Fiscal Considerations The city should consider: –An Annexation Program that is fiscally feasible for both operating and capital improvements –Annexation to ensure that areas benefitting from proximity to a large urban City are contributing revenue to offset the cost of providing services within an urban environment –The impact of additional population within the City limits to help procure federal funding for transportation and other services that are provided on a per-capita basis –Annexation of areas that have a mix of residential and commercial land uses that generate revenues to support future services –Annexation to keep economic activity, and associated tax revenues, within city limits –Opportunities for agreements with other municipalities and service providers to assist with provision of services

17. Small Group Exercise #1

18. Work in small groups organized by PEWG. Key Questions: Which existing policies and criteria make sense? Which existing policies and criteria don’t fit?

19. Annexation Policy Comparisons

20. Annexation Policies Policy Source Document –Comprehensive Plan –City Code –Standalone policy –Informal guidelines Scope –General guidelines –Specific process and framework

21. Annexation Policies Reasons for annexation –General growth –Efficiency –Expand tax base –Apply zoning/building standards –Other goals Decision criteria –Fiscal feasibility –May include other/multiple factors Greater level of detail in policy often reflects a city more actively looking to annex land

22. Austin

23. Annexation is governed by two sections of the Code of Ordinances and a small section in the Comprehensive Plan Annexation is used to: 1.Apply zoning and development regulation 2.Protect and expand the tax base 3.More efficiently deliver municipal services 4.Provide municipal services to development areas

24. Austin City looks for developing areas and gaps in the current jurisdiction where annexation would create efficiencies in service provision Criteria used in evaluating potential annexations include: –Current land use –Pending development applications –Current and build-out population estimates –Current service providers for fire, utilities, and schools –Taxable assessed value –Ag exemption status

25. Austin Annexation decisions are made based on 6 policies: 1.Annex areas that can be most economically served with existing and proposed infrastructure and services 2.Annex areas that will be provided with municipal services and utilities through coordinated service extension plans and the capital improvements program 3.Continue to annex major industrial and commercial areas on the periphery of the city 4.Use limited purpose annexation in cooperation with landowners to expand environmental land use and development regulations on land currently in the ETJ 5.Consider annexing areas served by aging or substandard septic systems where water quality degradation is probable 6.Annex residential areas to broadly distribute the cost of services

26. Houston

27. No fixed annexation policy The city no longer annexes large areas Any annexation must be contiguous with city limits

28. Houston Full-purpose annexation only happens on a case-by-case, parcel-by-parcel basis, and only by owner petition –When a request is made, the city undertakes a feasibility study to determine the cost of providing services to that parcel –Cost is the only decision criteria used Limited-purpose annexation is used to annex commercial areas

29. Fort Worth

30. Annexation policy is a chapter of the Comprehensive Plan Part of the strategic goal of promoting orderly and sustainable growth

31. Fort Worth Goal is achieved through 4 strategies 1.Promote economic growth Use annexation to facilitate public-private partnerships to stimulate local and regional economic growth 2.Facilitate long-range planning Use annexation to manage and regulate development on the fringe of the city 3.Protect future development Use annexation to extend land use regulations and building codes to protect future development from inadequate standards 4.Foster intergovernmental cooperation Use annexation to alleviate jurisdictional conflicts and to coordinate service delivery arrangements

32. Fort Worth To annex land, the City must be able to provide municipal services and the area must meet at least one of these conditions: –Enclave: be an enclave within the ETJ –Urban Development: have development activity of an urban nature, and have a positive fiscal impact –Growth Center: be a designated growth center, and have a positive fiscal impact –Adverse Impact: have an adverse impact on the city if not annexed –Option to Expand: be a detriment to the city’s orderly growth if not annexed

33. San Marcos

34. Annexations are governed by the Annexation/Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Management Strategy, created to fulfill a Comprehensive Plan Objective In evaluating annexation candidates, city staff look at: –Unique land use –Environmental characteristics –Fiscal characteristics –Demographic characteristics

35. San Marcos Evaluation is not an additive process – some considerations outweigh others, and relative weights are not constant There are two categories of considerations for annexations: –Threshold considerations Location, contiguity, fit with the Comprehensive Plan, ability to provide services –Additional considerations to evaluate suitability Land status, development status, fiscal impact

36. Oklahoma City

37. Annexation policy is contained within the Comprehensive Plan Used to implement 3 Comprehensive Plan initiatives: –Increase efficiency of city services provision –Increase and stabilize tax revenues –Maximize service and staffing efficiency

38. Oklahoma City The city will support annexation that: –Improves city service efficiency –Improves fiscal sustainability –Contributes to regional goals related to transportation systems or environmental resources Primary concerns are mutual benefit and service efficiency Services are weighted to create a combined service efficiency map - decision makers then assess the impact a change would have on service efficiency –Indicators include existing capacity, connectivity, contiguity, cost, and level of service

39. Policy Comparisons

40. Policy Comparison - Source Policy Source San Antonio AustinHoustonFort Worth San Marcos Oklahoma City Comp. Plan City Code Standalone Policy Informal Guidelines

41. Policy Comparison – Reasons for Annexation Reasons for Annexation San Antonio AustinHoustonFort Worth San Marcos Oklahoma City General Growth Provide services to new and/or development areas Improve Service Efficiency Expand tax base Apply zoning/ development standards Other

42. Policy Comparison – Annexation Criteria Annexation Criteria San Antonio AustinHoustonFort Worth San Marcos Oklahoma City Fiscal impact Need for or ability to provide services Level of development Spatial relation to city Inter- governmental relations Other

43. Small Group Exercise #2

44. Work in small groups organized by PEWG. Key Questions: Which aspects of the case studies are most applicable to San Antonio? Which aspects of the case studies are missing from San Antonio’s policy?

45. Small Group Exercise #3

46. Work in small groups organized by PEWG. Exercise: Identify your plan element’s policies that relate to annexation. Prioritize these policies. Top Tier (Most applicable/highest priority) Middle Tier (Applicable but not highest priority) Bottom Tier (Not applicable

47. Discussion

48. Discussion Questions What is missing in the current policy? What are major changes? What should the primary drivers for annexation be? Should we weight criteria?

49. Summary and Next Steps

50. Next Steps February - Meeting #2 Review draft of revised annexation policies Early March – Meeting #3 Evaluate the current annexation strategy based on revised policies Give direction on current general annexation strategy Recommendations on revised annexation strategy and High-level direction on areas for consideration (if existing areas are deemed to be not in line with new policy direction) Late March – Regular PEWG Meetings Presentation of recommended annexation policies to all PEWGs April Final Report

51. PEWG Annexation Meeting #1 January 7, 2016