[Velofellow]

At least in Texas, I've seen this go both ways in practice. There is definitely some 'give something to get something' action that helps grease the wheels early on in the permitting or development process.

Years later, Some developments / developers will petition to annex themselves from the outer reaches of their adjacent jurisdictions to prevent the city from growing into these areas and 1) exerting control and 2) obtaining the roads, utilities and treatment facilities, and drainage facilities. Municipal Utility Districts (MUDs) are a popular avenue for this, and arguably works in some cases. Adjacent cities may not have the existing tax base, utility infrastructure and operations, and public works to support the type of growth in some areas. My experience is just in the past ~7 years working in the Civil field in Texas. Probably variations on this across the US at least.

Funny you mention schools, because on at least one project of mine, we've constructed a public middle & high school along with a charter school on-premise. No doubt that was a big selling pitch during the early development meetings.

[bombcar]

Schools are really the big one - utilities are cheaper and simpler (for some value of simpler!) and existing cities really don't want that to get out of control.

(This is one of the reasons that senior developments slide through easier, as they don't impact the student base much but do provide tax revenue, which usually makes the city's job better.)