|
Annexation a Distasteful, Painful Process for All |
|
by Dr. Carl Mumpower
Op-Ed
Asheville Citizen-Times
May 19, 2002
[ED.
NOTE: This article is dated, but is reproduced for the quality of its
content. Dr. Mumpower consistently votes against all involuntary
annexations, referring to them as "forced participation." When asked
about this op-ed, Mumpower replied, "I did vote for annexation at least
one time - changed my mind for specific reasons."]
The menu of
items crossing the table of City Council varies dramatically. Some
issues are sweet and rewarding, while others are decidedly
unappetizing. There are few, however, that leave such an objectionable
aftertaste as an unsolicited serving of annexation. It is a bittersweet
meal that makes few friends, lays heavy on the heart, and presents a
buffet of confusing complexities guaranteed to disappoint.
At
the top of that list of the disappointed are those who are annexed.
Some might define it as legal kidnapping for statutory annexation
provides no option of participation. Per the laws of North Carolina, if
your community meets the annexation standards of our city, we are free
to legally invite you in with or without your consent. Whatever we call
it, it still feels like forced participation. With that invitation
comes the services, rights and privileges of being a citizen of the
city of Asheville. There is also the matter of additional ad valorem
taxes that almost double the average annual property tax bill. It
rarely feels like a fair exchange. In that many people in our area live
mostly from paycheck to paycheck, that tax increase will nudge aside
vacations, medical bills, transportation needs,!
educati
on costs, and
other day-to-day living expenses with an indifference that is not
easily offset by the tangibles of city residency. It is hard to blame
those who resent and resist annexation. It is an intrusive and
expensive experience that runs against the grain of the freedoms that
we count on as Americans.
From an outside view it may seem that
city employees have everything to gain and little to lose through their
part in the annexation process. After all, it is those additional taxes
that help subsidize their positions. Yet that formula is far too
inexact to support a passion for annexation. The tangible impact on
city employees of newly impacted areas is like pouring a glass of water
into a pond. It would be the rare city staff member who takes personal
pleasure in the challenges of annexation. It is complex, time-consuming
and unrewarded work that is necessary and little more. It brings only
the satisfaction of doing what one believes is best, and trying to do
it in the best way that one can.
Then there are the elected
officials of the city. Annexation is not a quick or painless process.
City Council has to wade through a series of decisions that take months
to complete. Each step of the process finds us singled out for a
phalanx of abuse and criticism that comes in every imaginable form.
People who are forcibly annexed do not go quietly into the night, and
being the decision makers, we are often the most visible targets for
their resentments. Asheville is blessed with a City Council that takes
no delight in the use of a heavy hand and the personal attacks are
poorly invested.
So why do we do it? With all we have before us,
why would a diverse group of elected officials choose to reluctantly
support such an unpopular activity? It comes down to three words–the
right thing. Annexation, with all its limitations, prevails as a
necessary evil that, as yet, has no s!
upportab
le alternative.
The
City of Asheville, unlike most metropolitan areas in North Carolina, is
stuck with forced annexation partially because we do not control our
water and sewer assets. Elsewhere, most annexation is voluntary because
that is the only way a home or business can tie into water and sewer.
Other cities approach annexation differently not because they are
blessed with more enlightened leadership, but because their
predecessors looked forward and saw the advantages of the carrot over
the stick in motivating civic participation.
Then there is the
matter of proximity as an annexation issue. Most people in America
choose to live in or near population centers–cities. There are tangible
reasons like fire and police protection, jobs, hospitals, public
transportation, shopping and restaurants. There also are intangible
reasons like our need for fellowship and belonging. It all costs money
to provide, and someone has to foot the bill. Fully half of the
properties of Asheville are exempt from city taxes due to nonprofit,
religious, or governmental status.
Whereas it is true that
visitors to our city contribute to our economic wellbeing, the
day-to-day costs of our infrastructure are disproportionately assigned
to the people who live here. When those in close proximity reach a
point of density that mirrors the makeup of Asheville, fairness calls
that they be asked to join with us and help share that burden. Over 80
percent of those being annexed this year must drive on streets that
Asheville residents build and maintain in order to travel into and out
of their respective communities.
Then there are the legislated
realities. Contrary to popular lore, Asheville exists only at the
pleasure of the state. Recently, for example, the states pleasure has
been to take and keep fee and tax monies that are generated in and for
Asheville. They can do it !
because
they make the laws and those laws say
that the only tax that Asheville city government controls is the
property tax we charge our citizens. That tax covers only 40 percent of
the costs of city government, but it is our only secure source of
revenue.
The reality is further aggravated by state and federal
revenue distribution structures that are specifically tied to the
number of people and miles of roadway a city has. It is this dubious
arrangement that further necessitates that a city grow its boundaries
as areas develop around the city. The convoluted revenue system of our
state and national governments creates an environment whereby any city
that is not growing is locked into the unenviable process of dying.
Then
there is the matter of the costs of city government. I hesitate to
break the news, but you can lay aside the popular misconception that
our city is fed on pork barrels of fat. Its a leaner machine than I
would have imagined, and although improvements can and will be found,
the city generally serves us with collective efficiency. The fact is
that people have a natural tendency to want more in the form of service
and benefits, but not necessarily with an equally keen eye on the
responsibility of paying for it.
One need only look at the costs
and complexities of their own place of residence to understand the
mammoth expenses and demands of a whole city. If you think a loaf of
bread is expensive, try building a road, sidewalk, or purchasing a fire
truck. If people insist in having a neat, maintained, safe and
attractive city, then someone is going to have to pay for it.
That
someone turns out to be you and me, and, in this case, close neighbors
who voted with their feet on the benefits of living near Asheville.
The
responsibility for implementing annexation does not lie easily on the
mind. I find no pleasure in the proces!
s of for
cing people to join us.
Still, as of today, when I put the pluses and minuses on a scale, the
balance tips in favor of the necessity of requesting areas that look
like the city to be part of the city. Between now and our final vote, I
plan to keep an open mind and listen to both sides of the argument.
Unless
some new information comes along to alter the scale, the facts will, in
turn, force me to vote in favor of annexation. It is this intrusive
five-lettered word that makes all the difference in a process that is
guaranteed to be no fun–for anyone.
|
|
|
|
|
