I’m not going to mention the need for a vote (we know this is the primary reform).? Every reform that I’m going to mention is unrelated to a vote, yet it still is being adamantly opposed by the League.? They don’t have a single argument against these reforms, because they can’t be defended against.? All the League can do is put up smokescreens and try to confuse the issues.

The fact that there would be any opposition to these modest and common sense reforms is a real indicator of the true interest in making any compromises.?

“Reformers” couldn’t care less about shoestring annexations (which already are illegal), density requirements, better notice, or any other issue that is ancillary to reform.? For example, the League tries to make it sound like it is some major reform to extend the time to appeal a case from 60 days to 90 days.? Who cares?

None of this addresses what the fundamental problems with the law are–and as of now, it looks like legislators simply have no interest in addressing these issues.? In the past, the smokescreens to confuse people would have worked, but they aren’t anymore (which is causing headaches for the legislators–the grassroots actually know that they are being sold a lemon).

Problem 1

Areas that don’t need one single service are being forcibly annexed.? This is despite the fact that the primary purpose of forced annexation is to promote sound urban growth through the provision of services that offer a meaningful and significant benefit to the annexation victims.

A service doesn’t provide a meaningful or significant benefit if it isn’t even necessary!

The PCS: Doesn’t address this problem.

HB 645😕 It addresses this problem through the bill’s definition of “area in need of meaningful services.”? Under HB 645, a municipality is required to show that a majority of property owners need one meaningful service (not two, three, four, etc–just one).? If they can meet this minimal requirement, they can move forward with an annexation.

What does it mean to oppose this reform?: Legislators would be required to believe that municipalities should be able to forcibly annex without providing one necessary service.

Problems 2-4 coming soon!