BY ELENI HIMARAS
reporter@ltview.com
The Lakeway Municipal Utility district voted 3-2 Friday, Feb. 20, to take all actions necessary to oppose the City of Lakeway’s decision to seek legislation that would allow the municipality to annex the district.

 “There are basically three things we can decide to do here,” Board President Tom Rogers said. “We can agree to go along with it, we can resist it, or we can do nothing.”
General Manager Richard Eason said he believed the city council was not trying to “level the playing field” as it maintained during its Feb. 17 meeting rather “turn the tables” by putting the law in their favor.
Rogers echoed the sentiment, saying the council was being “disingenuous.”
“The committees results are a foregone conclusion,” Rogers said, adding that they would not have spent the money on the lobbyists or “gone behind our backs” if they had not intended on the committee voting for annexation.
“We have absolutely no intention of this task force being a rubber stamp group,” Councilman and liaison to the LMUD Dave DeOme replied. “This will be a group of objective people who give this an honest, forward look.”
Several citizens in attendance voiced concern not only about what would happen to rates in the future, but the fact that taxes of both LMUD customers and citizens of Lakeway were going to spend money on legal fees in this matter.
“As a part owner of LMUD and a citizen of Lakeway, we are being hit from both sides,” Mel Neese said. “Paying attorneys on both sides.”
Neese proposed the idea of forming an independent committee that didn’t involve members of LMUD or the city council to conduct a study on the feasibility of annexation.
Lakeway Mayor Steve Swan said Neese had offered a viable option, telling LMUD directors during open session that he would be willing to bring a proposal for an independent review board to a specially called city council session, if both entities would agree to adhere with a final recommendation by an independent committee.
LMUD Directors Jerry Hietpas and Kay Andrews voted to table the decision to see what the city council would decide in a special session, but President Tom Rogers and Directors Tom Priddy and Alan Hitchcock voted to take all necessary action to fight any potential the legislation.
Shortly after the meeting, however, Rogers sent Swan a letter saying that if the city was willing to withdraw their legislation request, he would be amicable to the creation of a tribunal that would oversee an annexation feasibility study.
No special city council meeting had been called by Tuesday evening at presstime.
Last week, the LMUD passed a new policy stating that while “Directors will communicate a non-unanimous vote by the Board to the public as ‘one voice,’” and “No individual Director has any more (or less) authority or responsibility than any other,” the president has unique duties in that he or she “sets the Agenda, and may speak for the board.”
Earlier in the meeting, Hiepas had voiced concerns about this annexation being part of a long-term plan on the part of the city that would result in eventually annexing Travis County MUDs 11, 12 and 13, and possibly part of WCID #17.
“I’ve never heard of, participated in, or seen minutes of any meeting where the city discussed a long term water and wastewater plan,” Swan said.
Priddy questioned whether the city would continue operating the water company as a non-profit and asked how they would ensure that the money from the district customers would continue to be spend only on the district.
“Don’t you agree that taxing one area of Lakeway to benefit those outside the city is patently unfair taxation?” Priddy said.
Hitchcock added that since Lakeway would be assuming the debt-paying responsibilities of the district, it would also be unfair to residents of Lakeway not living in the district whose taxes would go towards paying that debt.
Andrews’ main concern was a lack of information regarding why cities typically annex MUDs after a period of time.
“The timing is simply driven by the legislature; they only meet every two years,” Swan said in response to all concerns on the timing of the issue.