The press conference was fine.? Now let’s look at a press release the GOP is sending out on property rights (Note HB 524 is the sham annexation reform bill):

“While the bill [HB 524] was not completely satisfactory to most members, it makes significant progress in providing fairness to property owners in areas proposed to be annexed.? Key provisions in the bill that provide more equitable treatment under our annexation laws include:

  • Requires extension of water and sewer lines within 3 years to annexed area ? annexed residents are no longer subject to municipal property taxes if this deadline is missed
  • Prohibits use of ?shoestring? annexations?
  • Requires cities to meet a threshold of meaningful services before involuntary annexation
  • Extends to 20 years the time for property owners to pay any assessments
  • Requires more information and structured public hearings provided to residents in proposed annexation areas.”

It is amazing that this comes from the same legislators that spoke at the press conference.

The bill hurts annexation reform–in its current form, it would be better if the entire bill was gutted, at least it wouldn’t hurt property owners.? If they took out everything they mentioned above, the bill would be OK–not that it would help, but at least it wouldn’t hurt.? I address the bullet points in order:

1) The three year water and sewer line requirement is bad for property owners because it mandates that they pay for the water and sewer even if they don’t want it or need it.

2) Courts already have made shoestring annexations illegal (thanks for nothing).

3) This is the biggest flaw of the bill!? Reformers would want this language removed, not kept in the bill–in fact, the GOP would probably get points for taking it out.? It would allow a city to provide one extra cop to an annexed area that has excellent police service and that would be considered meaningful!? As I mentioned before, these legislators still don’t get or refuse to get what is meant by meaningful services.

4) Yes, this is a minor tweak that is beneficial.? Annexed property owners still are forced to pay for the costs of water and sewer infrastructure in order to get water and sewer service they never wanted or needed in the first place.? Now though, they get 20 years to pay for something they shouldn’t be paying for in the first place.

5) Great, now annexation victims will have better information on how they will be forcibly annexed against their will.

As John Hood argued today:

Is this a case of the perfect being the enemy of the good? No. In its current form, the 2009 annexation bill is a missed opportunity, little more than a way to provide political cover to nervous incumbents. There?s still time to save the situation, via amendment. But not much.

Well said.? Unfortunately, there’s not much chance of it being saved by amendments if the ones likely to try to amend it already are happy with the bill.

Since I don’t want this to be completely negative, the GOP press release does say the eminent domain amendment has been changed to read:
?
?Private property shall not be taken by eminent domain except for a public use. Public use does not include the taking of property in order to convey an interest in the property for economic development. The preceding two sentences do not apply to takings for access to property. Just compensation shall be paid and, if demanded, shall be determined by a jury.”

This would be a horrible amendment offering little protection, but at least it took out the blighted language that would have weakened property rights.

Yes, we are now at the point when legislators should be commended for not hurting property rights in the name of protecting property rights.? If I commend them for this weak eminent domain amendment, I think it is pretty obvious, with my low standards, that the annexation bill must really be bad.