The big picture
Austin's extraterritorial jurisdiction, or ETJ, includes unincorporated land within 5 miles of city limits that isn't part of another municipality. The ETJ is set aside as land that a city could potentially annex, and residents in the area aren't taxed by the city and don't receive most city services.
In 2023, state lawmakers approved Senate Bill 2038 allowing property owners in civic ETJs to remove themselves from that authority and shift their land to unincorporated area. The process has been widely used around Austin, and other Central Texas cities and counties, including by landowners and developers seeking to avoid municipalities' more stringent environmental and land-use regulations.
Under SB 2038, cities must accept property owners' ETJ removal petitions if the request covers their land only. Petitions can also be filed to cover multiple parcels, in which case those property owners must approve the removal in an election.
In South Austin, local developer James Stinson filed an ETJ removal petition for about 100 acres of land along Menchaca Road as part of his plans to build out a local entertainment district dubbed Music City. The removal ballot item Proposition P was approved by area voters this fall.
Stinson said the release from Austin's ETJ could help streamline the development of a trail through Music City he's planned in response to pedestrian safety concerns on Menchaca. The district is already home to several bars and venues, with room for additional restaurants and businesses that are anticipated in the future.
What happened
Despite the proposition's passage, several residents whose land was included in the petition weren't in favor of leaving Austin's ETJ.
They sought to rejoin Austin's limited area through their own petitions requiring City Council review, and those requests were approved in December. As of press time, Stinson didn't share how the updates might affect the district trail plans.
"Our property was included without notice to us, without our consent, and entirely against our wishes," Susan Harris, the petitioner for several properties off Old Manchaca Road, told council Dec. 12. "After a steep learning curve and much strategizing, we decided that under Senate Bill 2038 ... we would use that to protect ourselves, and we petitioned the city to release our property voluntarily from the ETJ so that following the election which you approved—because you had no choice—that we would ask the city to rejoin us into the ETJ.”
Stinson doesn't expect the ETJ updates to affect the district project, as he said most of the landowners already agreed to provide easements for the proposed trail on their land.
Council approved multiple petitions to incorporate land back into Austin's ETJ in December. Officials noted that they'd had no choice but to approve the ETJ petitions or elections under the law in the first place, with council member Vanessa Fuentes saying it was "unfortunate" residents had to take on the reincorporation process themselves.
“We did not have discretion, and I would ask that the city manager be sure that our intergovernmental relations office is very much aware of these cases and the challenges," council member Alison Alter said. “It’s a lot for [property owners] to have to hire someone and come in here and change this process around, and a lot of headache for them.”
Austin's official state legislative agenda for 2025, also approved Dec. 12, directs city lobbyists to oppose any new laws limiting the enforcement of local building and environmental regulations tied to community "health, safety, and public welfare" in the ETJ.
