By John Fuquay
Staff writer

RALEIGH — Residents across the state who believe cities misuse annexation laws are planning a legislative battle next year that will have more support than in past years.

But the state’s most powerful organization representing the rights of cities and towns is ready to fight any law that would weaken annexation powers.

“We’re looking forward to the 2006 session and to the 2006 elections,” said Cathy Heath, a Wake County resident and an organizer of www.stopNCannexation.com. “We’re going to continue with the Web site and pull together groups and work on a more united front. We’re going to continue working with legislators on statutes that allow involuntary annexations that need to be fixed,” she said.

More than 10 bills were introduced in the past legislative session seeking voter approval before annexations could take place, a study of current law or a moratorium on annexations. None of the bills made it beyond the committees to which it was referred. The next session begins in May.

People from nearly a dozen communities, including Fayetteville, are associated with the group that Heath started with a friend in 2004.

About 46,000 residents were annexed by Fayetteville this year. Andrew L. Romanet Jr., chief counsel and lobbyist for the North Carolina League of Municipalities, said that massive annexation, called the Big Bang in Fayetteville, was an exception.

Legislation specifically barred Fayetteville from annexing territory for many years, and it was necessary to catch up, he said. As for other communities around the state, Romanet said the league will vigorously defend their rights to annex land.

“One thing we are totally opposed to is putting it to a vote,” he said. “People don’t want to annex, they want to veto it.”

He said annexation laws allow cities to take new territory to accommodate growth. The laws have been studied and have survived numerous court battles.

“You don’t build a wall around a city. People go into a city, and a city needs to cover the costs of things that are necessary, like fire protection and police protection,” he said. “It’s not popular with people being annexed, but they’re happy to sit on the edge of the city and enjoy all the things in the city.”

Laws prohibit cities from taking land unless the territory meets several requirements, including certain population densities, contiguous borders and specific land uses. Once territory is annexed, the city must have a plan to provide water, sewer, police and fire protection, inspections and other services.

Opponents say they believe cities use annexation to boost their tax bases rather than provide orderly growth and protection of public health, safety and welfare.

“Some areas with a low tax base that could benefit from annexation have been ignored,” Heath said. “But sometimes a city will reach way out beyond its limits to take a higher tax base because it’s a more attractive neighborhood.”

Heath became involved in annexation issues after opposing an attempt by Cary to annex several subdivisions, including hers. Her efforts delayed the annexations, and city officials agreed to draft a comprehensive annexation plan for growth.

She said her group has joined annexation opponents in Cabarrus and Forsyth counties and in the cities of Goldsboro, Wendell and Marvin.

Another affiliate is based in the Moore County town of Pinewild, where residents are challenging annexation plans by Pinehurst that could annex Pinewild’s 1,100 residents within two years.

Pinewild resident John Boesch said he wants lawmakers to suspend annexations so the laws can be studied. He said Pinewild already has water, sewer, garbage collection and fire protection. It is patrolled by Moore County sheriff’s deputies and covered by Pinehurst’s building inspectors.

“There really is nothing new that Pinewild gets that I can see, except higher taxes,” Boesch said. “I believe their primary motivation is tax base.”

It has been estimated that the annexation would boost Pinehurst’s yearly revenue by $1 million, Boesch said.

He said Pinehurst officials are working with Pinewild residents to make the annexation as palatable as possible, and they are acting within the law. But if laws are changed, he wants to be sure that Pinewild benefits from those changes.

“This thing is starting to look like a coalition that’s going to have some clout,” he said. “That’s why it looks like there are going to be more bills introduced.”

Some lawmakers said they would support revisions in the laws.

“I would like to see annexation laws changed,” said Rep. Marvin Lucas, a Cumberland County Democrat who introduced an unsuccessful bill to allow a vote on Fayetteville’s annexation. “I think when you are annexing such a large number of people against their will, they need to have more of a voice.”

Rep. Nelson Dollar, a Wake County Republican, who introduced annexation laws in the last session, said bills could be introduced in the upcoming session that would form a commission to study current laws, which were passed in 1959. He said a statewide suspension on annexations also could be proposed.

Bills failed last time because they lacked support from leadership, Dollar said, but that could be changing.

“I think there’s building pressure on the General Assembly to deal with the annexation issue,” he said. “It continues to crop up around the state. You see annexation being used simply as a tool to jump out there and grab tax base. That’s not what it was intended to be used for.”

Dollar said Fayetteville’s annexation, which was watched across the state, may have played a role in the city’s mayoral race, where incumbent Marshall Pitts Jr. lost to Tony Chavonne.

“I think Fayetteville is an excellent example where voters are indicating their displeasure with involuntary annexations,” he said. “Once the action was taken, they were still not pleased with it, and that was their first chance to deal with it.”

Chavonne said he agrees that the annexation could have been an Election Day issue, but he said he supports current law.

“I said all along that cities need to be able to grow. I’m not in favor of any changes in the law,” Chavonne said. “The issue, for me, was more about how it was done. It was a very large annexation, and it’s going to take years to extend services. It could have been done at a more orderly pace.”