Questions Raised over Flatonia Public Hearing

To the Editor:

A long time ago, I learned a principle from a great teacher that a right thing done in a wrong way is wrong.

On Dec. 1, 2022 FISD Board of Trustees advertised in the Flatonia Argus and on Dec. 2, 2022 in the Fayette County Record a Public Hearing to be held on Dec. 12, 2022 “to consider and act upon a resolution designating certain areas as a Reinvestment Zone under Texas Tax Code 312.0025, in portions of Fayette County, Texas…” The Texas Tax Code Sec. 312.0025 titled ‘Designation of Reinvestment Zone by school district’ can be found on the Internet. I find the legal language somewhat confusing. It states, “the governing body of a school district …for the purposes of Subchapter B or C, Chapter 313 (?) may (?) designate an area entirely within the territory of the school district as a reinvestment zone…if the designation is reasonably likely to: attract major investment, contribute to the expansion of primary employment, be a benefit to property in the reinvestment zone, contribute to economic development in the region” HB 3142 extends the Chapter 312 property tax abatement program for a period of 10 years and according to https://www. jdsupra.com/legalnews/texasextends- chapter-312-propertytax- 11385/, “school districts, whose ad valorem property tax rates are typically greater than those of the other local taxing units, are prohibited from entering into abatement agreements under Chapter 312.”

Texas Tax Code Chapter 313 allows school districts and property owners to enter agreements to limit the appraised value of property for ad valorem property tax purposes. The Wild Peach Solar Farm project applied for the Chapter 313 application through the Flatonia ISD in order to be “grandfathered” in should Chapter 313 be eliminated as of December 31, 2022.

The December 12th public hearing was a last minute effort to allow for this ‘grandfathering.’ This meeting did not meet the purpose of a public hearing. I did not find any history of a public hearing on the Application of Appraised Value Limitation, or the reinvestment zone I did not find on the FISD website required postings of the “established guidelines and criteria governing their tax abatement policy.” The board did not give 30 days notice in order for the public to prepare testimony; did not communicate or clarify terms of agreement offered to the Wild Peach solar project; did not open public dialogue on the issue, which was initially discussed as an action item on the March 2022 school board agenda; and did not give an estimated cost of the improvements (project abatement?)

I asked several questions when given the opportunity and received limited answers. It seems the board was ready to approve all the agenda action items with very little public input.

I left the school extremely disappointed, confused and frustrated that the FISD School board trustees sought funds to repay ISD debt (a right thing) but did not seek public approval for how they were going to obtain it (the wrong way.) I do not think the actions taken at the Dec. 12 board meeting were in the best interest of the school students or the community.

So, what’s next? Is the approval to enter into this agreement legal? Did the board wait to schedule a public hearing until the last moment to thwart any opposition? The fact that so few community members showed up at the Dec. 12 meeting begs the question does the community care?