The contract term was extended from five years to 15 years. And all homesteads on agricultural land will now come under the agreements thereby protecting them from annexation and city taxes.
A crowd of some 25-30 landowners attended.
The item was placed on the agenda for city staff to brief the council on five major tracts being considered for annexation. The item was also meant to give council members answers to questions posed by landowners during an Oct. 24 public meeting at city hall, said Mayor Tim Hancock.
Hancock asked property owners to hold their questions until council members first had an opportunity to question staff on the service plans to annex the five areas that total 7,694 acres - the equivalent of 12 square miles of land.
At issue during the last week has been the status of exemptions granted to owners of acreage parcels appraised for use as agricultural, wildlife management or ranching activities.
House Bill 1472 passed by the 80th Legislature in March requires that a city offer the owner of such a tract a development agreement. It stipulates that the owner will continue to use the land as it has always been. The state law specifies a period of time up to 15 years with two renewals if both parties so agree.
Killeen offered development agreements to qualifying landowners using a term of five years. The agreements further stipulated that a homestead with a survey and county tax I.D. separate from the agricultural acreage would be annexed into the city while the agricultural land around it would be exempt from annexation.
However, a homestead inside an agricultural tract that did not have a separate survey and tax I.D. - also called a floating homestead - would get the agricultural exemption. It would not be annexed or subject to city taxes.
City Attorney Kathy Davis advised the council that extending the term of the development agreements was a viable option and including any homestead - whether separately platted or “floating” was also a viable option if they wished to make the change.
When the floor was opened for landowners to speak, most bridled at having already been given the old agreements when they would prefer the new one if the council authorized it. The timetable for submitting a signed development agreement is Friday. Any landowner that does not submit one is subject to annexation, Davis said.
Dorothy Conder who owns land in Tract 1 west of Clear Creek Road said she believed anyone who has always used their property for agricultural and intends to continue should be totally exempt from annexation.
“It’s been in the same family for generations,” she said. “My husband, who is 83, has cows and horses. He’s lived there all his life.”
Karen Walinder of Killeen, who also owns property in Tract 1, said the development agreement she was sent will delay annexation for five years. Afterwards it’s annexed.
“Now tonight they say they might make concessions,” she said. “However, we are being told to sign by Friday and then afterward maybe they will change it ... or maybe they won’t. The hard part is that if you don’t sign it you will be annexed regardless.”
Rita Seghers of Austin said she too wanted to opt for the new agreement if the council authorized it.
“But they want the old one signed by Nov. 2,” she said. “I didn’t have much choice but to sign even though it’s not totally what we wanted.”
Hancock polled the council for a consensus on increasing the development agreements to 15 years and on including any homestead within an acreage tract in the agreement whether it is platted separately with its own tax I.D. or a “floating homestead.”
The vote was unanimous on both counts and drew a sustained applause from landowners.
A formal, binding vote will be taken at the next regular meeting when the item appears on the regular agenda.
Davis reminded landowners that owners must still sign and bring in their old agreements by 5 p.m. on Friday.
“We will issue them a new agreement when the documents are ready,” she said. “But we need to know by Nov. 2 their intentions.”
Hancock said he was extremely pleased it went so well because he was initially hesitant to put the item on the workshop agenda.
“But I felt we needed to get it on before the Nov. 2 deadline and the Nov. 13 public hearing on annexation if just to make them feel more comfortable,” said Hancock.
“Anything we do has room for negotiation or compromise.”
hclark@temple-telegram.com
