February 9, 2006 at 5:55 a.m.
Annexation law is being reviewed
House Committee testimony at Lent Town Hall sends loud and clear message: changes are needed in law
House Committee testimony at Lent Town Hall sends loud and clear message: changes are needed in law
The House committee traveled to Lent Township Hall for a two-and -a-half hour hearing gathering opinions, suggestions and general remarks in preparation for the 2006 legislative session. Those testifying hailed from Chisago County and as far away as Beaver Bay Township on Lake Superior and Monticello Township, to the west.
Committee Chair Rep. Mark Olson said, “The purpose of the tour is to see firsthand how annexation and eminent domain issues are affecting townships in greater Minnesota and hear from people involved on both sides of the issue.”
Aside from the stated purpose of getting facts from both sides-- the testimony last week without exception called for changing the existing laws governing annexation.
Lent Township Supervisor Gene Olson stated, “Townships have been in the back seat for 15 years, at least let us move to the front of the bus.”
From his experience on the Lent Township Planning Commission, David Milles told the committee the township is competently creating its own plan for land use and long range development.
He declared, “We are controlling our own destiny...we don’t need the city of Stacy to show us what to do.”
He felt “amalgamation” not assimilation should be the objective when working with Stacy. He guessed other township leaders feel the same about their situations with adjoining cities.
Several landowners said the committee must find a way to write annexation law that gives township property owners a say, a vote, or some method of democratic representation in annexations.
Fish Lake Supervisor Larkin told the committee that annexation isn’t the hot issue in north Chisago County as it is in the south end, but she’d like to see a law that lets townships “negotiate as equals” and promotes township representation at the table.
A Monticello Township supervisor referred to cities having an attitude of “manifest destiny” adding cities are annexing in land simply because they can. “It’s an unequal relationship,” the Monticello Town official told lawmakers.
He shared how township residents protested annexation attempts at the city municipal liquor store and cut into city profits there.
The city council and mayor were not re-elected and he said public opinion was turned-around. But “...we shouldn’t have had to do that.”
Columbus Township Board member Mel Mettler said Forest Lake is trying to prevent Columbus from incorporating as a city because it wants the township’s tax-generating parcels.
For “little city investment...they can just takeover.”
He feared that Columbus could indeed be derailed by Forest Lake in its incorporation attempts under current laws, because “history is not on our side.”
Renae Fry, a Columbus Township resident, suggested lawmakers re-think the presumption that all cities are in a better position to provide services to all townships.
In any new annexation law there needs to be a differentiation between townships that are capable of providing urban services-- like Columbus-- and the classic “rural” township.
She also hoped some historic preferences could be factored in for continuing the existence of townships.
The Beaver Bay Township official echoed this, pointing out Beaver Bay was chartered as a township two years before Minnesota gained statehood.
Silver Bay and the City of Beaver Bay are now annexing in Lake Superior lakeshore parcels because they are high-value and attractive to seasonal project developers. “Our non-residents now outnumber residents,” she stated.
Chisago Lake Township landowner David Whitney told the House committee members the annexation laws must include requiring that the city supply sewer and water in a certain timeframe. He said cities would have to look hard and long at realistic infrastructure extension. It would slow hostile or massive annexations because cities would “be more cautious.”
He also advocated for a new post-annexation tax structure to lessen the impact of going suddenly from township taxes to city taxes.
Comments:
Commenting has been disabled for this item.