“We have to go to court on this,” said Ken Miller, a member of the Nolanville City Council. “This is basically our survival. There is no proof we were fraudulent with what we did. It was an honest effort.”
Last week Belton and Harker Heights received a report from an independent study conducted by the Central Texas Council of Governments concerning Nolanville’s population. It determined the population to be about 3,801, a figure well short of the estimate of 5,024 made public by Nolanville after its own study in December.
For Belton and Harker Heights the third-party study was confirmation that Nolanville used an inflated population estimate to project its extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) outward by another half mile from its city limits.
The move sparked a land boundary dispute in an area that was part of an agreement negotiated between Belton and Harker Heights before each completed annexations in January.
The agreement was based on logical service boundaries and was an attempt to avoid conflict in an area west of Nolanville Hill that is no longer unincorporated county land, Belton City Manager Sam Listi said.
Nolanville leaders continue to stand by their most recent population count and insist that some of the land in the Belton and Harker Heights agreement should become ETJ for their city. The leaders are on record saying the land is important because of its future potential for economic development.
Even though the study appears to give negotiating leverage to Harker Heights and Belton, Listi said he still hopes an agreement can be reached with Nolanville.
“If we can all stay out of court that would be in everybody’s best interest,” he said.
For Nolanville, the dispute is about more than just a strip of land on U.S. 190. With a population of more than 5,000, Nolanville meets a state threshold that allows the city to move from general law to home-rule status.
A home-rule government is desirable for the autonomy it brings to local entities. If Nolanville’s population is ruled to be 5,000 by the state - determining population figures is an imprecise process and the counts are rarely questioned - all the city would have to do for home-rule status is have a charter approved.
A charter has already been drafted and is awaiting City Council approval. The goal is to have it approved by voters in November.
“It gives us a chance to play the game on the same playing field as everyone else,” Miller said. “Right now, the state tells us what we can do. Under home rule it will tell us what we can’t do.”
One reason Nolanville wants home-rule status is because it would allow the city one final opportunity to expand its boundaries outward through annexation, which is not available to cities operating under general law status.
For Nolanville, the last great frontier available is on the other side of its northeast border, a swath of unincorporated land that includes portions of FM 439 and FM 93.
In addition to Nolanville’s ETJ, the land is surrounded by the ETJs of Killeen, Temple and Belton. Relatively minor annexations from any of these cities in the direction of the swath would claim that land.
When Miller was asked if that swath of land has been discussed by Nolanville’s city council for potential annexation in the future he said, “absolutely.”
“I think the bigger cities are just trying to play bully-boy government,” he said about Belton and Harker Heights questioning the city’s population totals. “It’s a ‘we’re bigger than you are’ type of thing. That’s not the game we’re going to play.”
Miller said Nolanville really doesn’t have money to spend on a lawsuit but said the city would fight anyway.
“I know we’ll be shown to be right when the census is done next year,” he said.
If the population issue ends up being litigated, one of the hurdles Nolanville would have to overcome is official action it took regarding the issue.
In August 2008, the Nolanville city council declared its population to be 6,061, a figure challenged almost immediately by Harker Heights City Manager Steve Carpenter.
In December, Nolanville issued the revised count, which its city council still stands behind. Carpenter again questioned that count.
In January, Harker Heights conducted its own population count for Nolanville and determined 4,326 to be an appropriate estimate. The Harker Heights estimate included some 500 people more than the third-party estimate.
On Jan. 5, the Nolanville City Council passed a resolution requesting confirmation of the counts by an independent third party, a move it later rescinded.
The third-party count was two-pronged. It included cataloguing each residential property within the city limits. The total was then multiplied by an occupancy rate established by the census and adjusted using a conservative vacancy rate.
The study also took the population estimate from the 2000 Census and adjusted it by applying data derived from building permits to the population total. In both cases, Nolanville’s population was determined to be below 5,000.
In spite of the empirical evidence, which Miller said he has reviewed, he still stands by Nolanville’s count. He said he looks forward to Nolanville having a stronger influence in the area.
“Anybody that thinks this area isn’t going to be a metroplex is just silly,” Miller said.
