84° F Friday, July 28, 2017

Lakeway Mayor Dave DeOme was adamant during a telephone call with the newspaper two weeks ago. He wanted to make certain that all residents that could possibly be affected by the city’s preliminary plans to annex certain areas within its extra territorial jurisdiction were fully informed and that the process would be a model of civic government in action.
As Lakeway has grown, pockets of unincorporated areas — some completely surrounded by its city limits — now exist. For numerous reasons, the city is now considering annexing some of these areas in its ETJ.
The purpose of this editorial is to neither support, nor oppose what the Lakeway City Council and its staff eventually decides to do concerning annexations. Rather, the purpose is to let residents know that Mayor DeOme knows there will be concerns about some of these decisions with residents in the affected areas. He has made it quite clear to the newspaper that he wants the process as public as possible and that the city will work diligently to explain what areas will be annexed and which will not. This process will include opportunities for citizen comment during the associated meetings, which include Lakeway’s Zoning and Planning Commission and City Council meetings.
While the notion of annexation may or may not be popular with some residents, Mayor DeOme’s candor and commitment to making potential annexations a free exchange of ideas with all subsequent decisions made in the appropriate public forum deserves commendation.
— Charles McClure


  1. Sven Nilson says:

    Why is lakeway expanding during these hard times. I wish they would fix what is wrong with the current city and let a few areas that are not working out go back to Travis County. Now is not the time to be over extending city services. They should be saving up for repairs and improvements withing the aging city. Perhaps a wider commercial zoning area as Lakeway transitions from a retirement/Golf community to a bedroom comuter community, to reduce transportation maintanance costs and increase services in the city itself.

  2. Debbie Harris says:

    Living outside of Lakeway was a choice we made 18 years ago. We are in Travis Oak Trails and have no need for Lakeway sewer, police, rules and regs. The County Sheriff’s Dept. comes quickly if needed. I’d like to know how we would benefit from being annexed? We are a peaceful neighborhood coexisting with each other, many of us for over 10 years. We do not care to change our lifestyle to suite Lakeway. Is Lakeway going to bury the overhead wires? Will they pave our road and put sidewalks in? Or are they just looking to increase their tax base while expecting us to conform to their codes? I say thanks but no thanks Lakeway.

  3. Ralph and Tandy Fuller says:

    When we moved to the area several years ago we specifically looked for a home that was not in the city limits of Lakeway. We could have afforded otherwise but we did not want to live under the City of Lakeway ordinances. We chose to live outside the City limits and are quite content with the services we receive from the county. The mayor is only being candid because he has been confronted by county residents who do not appreciated being taken over! In many ways the mayor has already assumed this is a done deal. Well not yet.

  4. Kim Eastburn says:

    I am a resident of Brooks Hollow (North) and our property has been in the family since 1961. We have tried to come to terms with Lakeway, and they have lied at every turn, below are their comments, which now they have retracted their statements and feel we need to be annexed….Please see Lakeway City Staff comments:

    “Some of the issues they feel are going to be of concern to them actually will go away because we’ll change the zoning so it adapts to their way of life,” DeOme said.

    Councilman Bruce Harris was worried about what the council’s decision might do to the landowners.

    “In all my years in Parks and Recreation and Council, this is by far the most troubling issue. I’m concerned that the decision we make in June may have unintended consequences,” Harris said. “We all acquire property with certain expectations as to what we can do with it, how we can develop it. And if we annex this neighborhood, we’re changing these people’s expectations. I think it will have a profound effect on their property rights. In this case, I do not feel the value for the city is worth the burden it puts on these [landowners].”

    He urged the other council members to follow ZAPCO’s recommendation to not annex Brooks Hollow.

    Councilman Alan Tye, who lives near Brooks Hollow Road in Edgewater Cove, said, “The arguments for annexation just don’t hold water for me.”

Leave a Reply