This is a continuation of this previous post.? These are two other key problems with the annexation law.
Problem 2
Municipalities try and duplicate existing services.? Often, the municipality will simply contract to provide an extra police officer with a county and call that providing police protection to an area (even though the area already has excellent police protection from that same county).
The PCS: Not only doesn’t prohibit duplication of existing services, it expressly allows, for the first time, the duplication of services.? This is a change that significantly helps municipalities.
HB 645: Protects against duplication of services.
What does it mean to oppose this reform?: Legislators would have to believe that it is a meaningful benefit to duplicate services an area already has.
Problem 3
Municipalities force annexation victims to pay for the infrastructure necessary for the municipalities to provide the water and sewer service they are required to provide under the law.? In other words, annexation victims that don’t want the water and sewer in the first place, are then forced to pay for the lines to receive these unnecessary and unwanted services.? These costs may be the single biggest problem for annexation victims (even worse than higher taxes): The costs can be $15,000 or more.
Not many people have that kind of money lying around.
The PCS and HB 645: Neither addresses this issue–this problem needs to be addressed.
What does it mean to oppose this reform?:? Legislators would have to believe that even though a municipality initiates an annexation and forces property owners into the city, these property owners should subsidize the municipality in order to help it forcibly annex them (kind of like digging one’s own grave).
