There is a bill in our legislature this session that would allow cities to strip annex and in some cases leap out and grab land not contiguous. Can you cite and good resources as I am in the process of putting something together for my jurisdictions opposition to the bill?
Can you tell me if your state allows strip annexation? Thanks!
This is all over South Carolina. It makes donut holes out of unincorporated areas, makes emergency services difficult to provide (determine who is responsible party), and usually is only used to get highway miles to write tickets.
I would encourage against it by all means.
After decades of dealing with the after effects of this kind of annexation policy, California passed a law to help cities annex the donut holes that results. You might point this out.
Florida law does not allow annexation to create enclaves of unincorporated land. It also requires annexations to be contigious. Enfourcement is often a bit loose, but one can at least take 'em to court.
Yes but to a point. The island areas need be "wholly" surrounded by a city, as defined by the local Local Area Formation Committee (LAFCO). If it is not, than the annexation can occur, but only through a vote of residents if there are 12 more inhabitants of a proposed annexation area.Originally posted by Gotta Speakup
Non-contiguous annexations are a bum deal for cities. Gotta fight against that.
Brotip #2418 - know when it's time to switch from being "the little engine that could" to the "little engine that said, 'f*ck it'"
I worked on annexations in Mesa, Arizona. Strip annexations are no longer legal in Arizona because of all the problems they caused. Mesa had annexed a 10' border around what they wanted to eventually be the city. If you go on their city website, you can see maps of the crazy borders it has (www.mesaaz.gov). It created county islands and all kinds of problems with infrastructure and jurisdiction (especially for law enforcement). A lot of homeowners get confused on whether they are in the city or the county. Strip annexations are evil. Non contiguous annexations are also really dreadful. Mesa allowed single lot annexations in county islands even if the lot wasn't contiguous. This caused all kinds of problems for providing city services, especially emergency services. Not having to deal with the ramifications of strip annexations and spot annexations is the only reason I was happy to get laid off.
KS permits non-contiguous annexation. It is good and bad. Most often, it is done for economics. An industiral/heavy commercial use needs the city for bonding, for instance. A truck stop wants to sell beer, the city wants the sales taxes. Through such voluntary annexations, full municipal services are not required.
A down side that I know very well is a beef packing plant that was annexed this way. The boundaries of the annexation were limited to the exterior walls. After several building additions, no one could tell were the line was. Imagine the police/sheriff confusion over jurisdiction.
When it provides full municipal utilities and creates leap-frog development, it is bad.
Last edited by mike gurnee; 11 Feb 2009 at 10:17 AM. Reason: elaborate
In Florida, the area to be annexed must be contiguous to the municipality and must not result in an enclave. Here's a link to the state statute.
http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/ind...171/PART01.HTM
A nuisance may be merely a right thing in the wrong place — like a pig in the parlor instead of the barnyard.
I am trying to help our lobbyist z9on staff deputy clerk) put together testimony to indicate why strip and non-contiguous annexation is bad.
I want to make sure to cover my bases for him. Do you know of any good website resources that may have a lot of good information for him to use?
Obviously from a public safety standpoint, taxpayers can get a bum rap, and it can allow/encourage leapfrog development.
On the other hand here a development does not get annexed immediately upon approval. Developers use Santiary and Improvement Districts to fund projects over a long period of time. Then when the city limits are contiguous they will annex if the debt ratio looks good. So we have a little bit of leapfrogging already.
Anyway, all input is greatly appreciated. Thanks!
I am surprised that Mike didn't mention the latest issue in Kansas. In a battle for Gambling $$$$ a small town in southern Kansas strip annexed to get to a Turnpike exit trying to pull the Casino award to them.
The court said, ahh NO.
It is all a matter of perspective!!!
Quote
