The Strange City Limits of Bulverde, Texas

Topics that do not fit anywhere else. Absolutely NO discussions of religion, race, or immigration!

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

Post Reply
User avatar

Topic author
puma guy
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 7609
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 2:23 pm
Location: Near San Jacinto

The Strange City Limits of Bulverde, Texas

#1

Post by puma guy »

If you never believed that cities don't set up their city limits just for revenue from tickets, consider the city limits of Bulverde. I don't speed, so I'm not worried, but they have the area covered when the constabulary is not at Whataburger. I've been hunting on a nearby ranch for 25 years and one guy has been on the lease since 1962. He's appalled at what he's seen happening as are many I've talked to in the area, including the property owner who has been notified the city is going to build a road from Hwy46 just east of Hwy 281 SE to a two lane curving road with 4 low water crossings their property is on. It will split their ranch in two as well as many other properties. Progress for the influx of city dwellers.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Bulve ... 98.4530729
KAHR PM40/Hoffner IWB and S&W Mod 60/ Galco IWB
NRA Endowment Member, TSRA Life Member,100 Club Life Member,TFC Member
My Faith, My Gun and My Constitution: I cling to all three!
User avatar

troglodyte
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1314
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2004 4:16 pm
Location: Hockley County
Contact:

Re: The Strange City Limits of Bulverde, Texas

#2

Post by troglodyte »

Looks like they are staking claim to the territory before some other municipality snaps it up. I bet they are speculating that some developer is going to start putting up cookie-cutter housing developments and they want to have the ability to annex the addition. The developer can potentially acquire the land and build cheaper since no services are supplied then the city can turn right around and annex them since the city limits all around. I really don't know anything about such but that's my first impression.
Talon Firearms Training
Instructor - License To Carry, School Safety, First Responder: Texas DPS, Certified Instructor: Rangemasters/Tom Givens
NRA Instructor - Basic Pistol, Personal Protection in the Home, Personal Protection Outside the Home, Range Safety Officer
Stop The Bleed Instructor

srothstein
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 5273
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:27 pm
Location: Luling, TX

Re: The Strange City Limits of Bulverde, Texas

#3

Post by srothstein »

Part of the explanation of Bulverde's city limits lies in knowing the history of the city. It was created expressly to stop San Antonio from expanding its limits.

A few years back, they started putting some rural subdivisions in that area and the residents did not want to be in San Antonio. They tried to incorporate the city with a border that met Boerne and New Braunfels so there would be a wall of incorporated city blocking San Antonio from coming north. They got stopped by the state because the proposed city did not meet the required population density guidelines. They decided to incorporate four cities as North Bulverde, South Bulverde, East Bulverde, and West Bulverde. The next year East and South Bulverde merged and North and West Bulverde merged. The following year, the two remaining cities merged to form the new Bulverde. I may have the exact names and order of merging off a little, but the concept illustrates how they did it.

I remember being amazed at two things. The first was how they got around the state laws, which I saw as a smart move. The second was the concept of avoiding being in a city by becoming a city. Somehow that did not seem to make sense to me.
Steve Rothstein
User avatar

Jago668
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 992
Joined: Sun May 03, 2015 12:31 am

Re: The Strange City Limits of Bulverde, Texas

#4

Post by Jago668 »

I saw something about a new state law where people could basically opt out of joining a city. Maybe the city is doing this before that law goes in effect?
NRA Benefactor Member
User avatar

Topic author
puma guy
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 7609
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 2:23 pm
Location: Near San Jacinto

Re: The Strange City Limits of Bulverde, Texas

#5

Post by puma guy »

srothstein wrote:Part of the explanation of Bulverde's city limits lies in knowing the history of the city. It was created expressly to stop San Antonio from expanding its limits.

A few years back, they started putting some rural subdivisions in that area and the residents did not want to be in San Antonio. They tried to incorporate the city with a border that met Boerne and New Braunfels so there would be a wall of incorporated city blocking San Antonio from coming north. They got stopped by the state because the proposed city did not meet the required population density guidelines. They decided to incorporate four cities as North Bulverde, South Bulverde, East Bulverde, and West Bulverde. The next year East and South Bulverde merged and North and West Bulverde merged. The following year, the two remaining cities merged to form the new Bulverde. I may have the exact names and order of merging off a little, but the concept illustrates how they did it.

I remember being amazed at two things. The first was how they got around the state laws, which I saw as a smart move. The second was the concept of avoiding being in a city by becoming a city. Somehow that did not seem to make sense to me.
I supposed there's some logic there but the folks I've heard from especially in Spring Branch are not thrilled. I know there are probably those who think it's OK or maybe even a good move but I haven't found one. It hasn't stopped development at all. In fact mostly high dollar developments are the norm, driving up property values for every one. I agree with you. Why trade one city for another. I don't have any info other than anecdotal, but I was told there are a couple of families that drive most of the politics and decisions. I witnessed the ruination of New Braunfels from the 1960's to present and the effect of Schlitterbahn on what takes priority in that city. I think the old adage "follow the money" comes to mind.
KAHR PM40/Hoffner IWB and S&W Mod 60/ Galco IWB
NRA Endowment Member, TSRA Life Member,100 Club Life Member,TFC Member
My Faith, My Gun and My Constitution: I cling to all three!
User avatar

jmorris
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1531
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 4:41 pm
Location: La Vernia
Contact:

Re: The Strange City Limits of Bulverde, Texas

#6

Post by jmorris »

Jago668 wrote:I saw something about a new state law where people could basically opt out of joining a city. Maybe the city is doing this before that law goes in effect?
IIRC, the bill that would allow residents to vote on whether they wanted to be annexed died.
Jay E Morris,
Guardian Firearm Training, NRA Pistol, LTC < retired from all
NRA Lifetime, TSRA Lifetime
NRA Recruiter (link)
User avatar

Topic author
puma guy
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 7609
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 2:23 pm
Location: Near San Jacinto

Re: The Strange City Limits of Bulverde, Texas

#7

Post by puma guy »

jmorris wrote:
Jago668 wrote:I saw something about a new state law where people could basically opt out of joining a city. Maybe the city is doing this before that law goes in effect?
IIRC, the bill that would allow residents to vote on whether they wanted to be annexed died.
:shock: What a surprise!
KAHR PM40/Hoffner IWB and S&W Mod 60/ Galco IWB
NRA Endowment Member, TSRA Life Member,100 Club Life Member,TFC Member
My Faith, My Gun and My Constitution: I cling to all three!
User avatar

ELB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 8128
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 9:34 pm
Location: Seguin

Re: The Strange City Limits of Bulverde, Texas

#8

Post by ELB »

srothstein wrote:...The second was the concept of avoiding being in a city by becoming a city. Somehow that did not seem to make sense to me.
It makes perfect sense because in Texas the only way to stop being annexed by a city is to a) be a city AND b) have your city limits abut others in a manner that a bigger city cannot simply annex its way around you. Once it surrounds you, you can be brought within its jurisdiction.

As far as annexation goes, city versus county, or incorporated vs unincorporated, is no context. Texas law gives the power to cities, there is virtually nothing people in an unincorporated area can do to avoid annexation except be so far away the city doesn't get to you before you die) or incorporate themselves as a city with boundaries that prevent another city from engulfing them. You don't get a choice between "city or not city." At best you get a choice between "Big city where I have no say versus small city where we can try to keep taxes and regulations down."

(There is a third way, sometimes, if you have a lot of land. Some ranches on the outskirts of cities have made deals with the city whereupon the city agrees not to annex them until the owner dies, but when he dies, the entire ranch gets annexed (and suddenly subject to taxes, zoning, etc). This preserves the ranch for the life of the owner, but it will make it hard for any of his neighbors to incorporate against the bigger city).

The steps that Boerne went through were not really meant to prevent development, they were meant to keep San Antonio government, regulations, and taxes at bay. Once you are in the path of an expanding city there is no way to preserve your unincorporated status - you can either accept being taken in by the advancing city and have no control over it's government, regs, taxes, or you can start your own and have some control, and hopefully keep the regs and taxes to a minimum (and you have some control over local development). Kind of like starting a backfire in the face of an advancing wild fire - yeah you get some burned turf, but you choose the limits, control it yourself, and start the wildfire of fuel.

These smaller incorporations are often opposed by people who don't look down the road to see what's happening, and who will one day wake up in San Antonio's Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) and wonder why they suddenly can't do squat on their own property following all of SA's building codes and property rules. People who look down this road and see what's coming are the ones who start incorporation projects and get labeled troublemakers by the others.
USAF 1982-2005
____________
User avatar

spectre
Banned
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2017 11:44 am

Re: The Strange City Limits of Bulverde, Texas

#9

Post by spectre »

ELB wrote:
srothstein wrote:...The second was the concept of avoiding being in a city by becoming a city. Somehow that did not seem to make sense to me.
It makes perfect sense because in Texas the only way to stop being annexed by a city is to a) be a city AND b) have your city limits abut others in a manner that a bigger city cannot simply annex its way around you. Once it surrounds you, you can be brought within its jurisdiction.
There's another way but the State of Texas frowns upon people resisting municipal annexation in the same manner the maquisards resisted German annexation. Unfortunately, they killed legislation to give Texans the ability to opt out peacefully.
I'm in a good place right now
Not emotionally or financially
But I am at the gun store
User avatar

jmorris
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1531
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 4:41 pm
Location: La Vernia
Contact:

Re: The Strange City Limits of Bulverde, Texas

#10

Post by jmorris »

puma guy wrote:
jmorris wrote:
Jago668 wrote:I saw something about a new state law where people could basically opt out of joining a city. Maybe the city is doing this before that law goes in effect?
IIRC, the bill that would allow residents to vote on whether they wanted to be annexed died.
:shock: What a surprise!
I sit corrected. The original bill died but was resurrected during the special session.

http://www.statesman.com/news/state--re ... MgihjgOWL/
Jay E Morris,
Guardian Firearm Training, NRA Pistol, LTC < retired from all
NRA Lifetime, TSRA Lifetime
NRA Recruiter (link)

ninjabread
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 647
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2017 7:12 pm

Re: The Strange City Limits of Bulverde, Texas

#11

Post by ninjabread »

Mayor Steve Adler called the bill “unnecessary and redundant” in a statement.

“There is ample evidence that how Austin currently handles annexation works, and it allows us to meet the growing need for city services in the rapidly urbanizing areas right outside Austin,” Adler said.
Really? So why are you opposed to We The People have the right to democratically vote on being annexed?
The city did win a small victory when an amendment, which would have exempted annexation areas scheduled for annexation as per agreements with cities, was removed from the bill in later stages.

Residents of River Place, which is set to be annexed by Austin in December, had been hoping the bill would offer them the chance to fight annexation, which they say unfairly subjects them to higher tax bills without a say in the matter.
The Founding Fathers knew what to do about governments imposing taxation with representation. Just saying. :angel:
This is my opinion. There are many like it, but this one is mine.


wheelgun1958
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 10:40 pm
Location: Flo, TX

Re: The Strange City Limits of Bulverde, Texas

#12

Post by wheelgun1958 »

The town of Hebron did such a thing to prevent unwanted annexation.
The town was first incorporated in 1961 as a method to prevent Plano and Carrollton from annexing the territory and imposing taxes.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebron,_Texas
Post Reply

Return to “Off-Topic”