The City Council voted 4-2 on June 20, 2023 to spend up to $11,000 for Bridge &Watkins consultants to conduct a feasibility study to see if the City should annex. That price tag does not include an engineering study, defense of annexation if the case presented is contested, and other unexpected or miscellaneous costs. Typically, when cities annex, they look to increase monies going into the city and look for high value areas, such as the Bent Tree or Ridge/Jolly Road areas near Columbus, that are not in the city limits. But the Councilman from Ward 2 has other ideas (as he was the one who brought up annexation.)
Prior to qualifying for annexation, a municipality must meet 12 points of consideration. The Councilman from Ward 2 attended the June 22, 2023, noon meeting of the City Utilities Commission. Reportedly, an estimate for each citizen in the potential annex area (East Columbus) would incur $66,000 each for sewer, recovery was 155 years or 96 based on how many people wanted it. (Recovery is based on if everyone that is in the area wanted service it would generate $22,308 annually.) Total cost to provide sewage service was $3.4 million. It was estimated it wouldtake about 896 years to recover the lift costs. Interestingly, the Ward 2 Councilman did NOT share his new knowledge during the Special City Council Meeting the same day at 2pm—only that he attended.
The indicia:
1. The municipality’s need to expand – Columbus land areas are already under-utilized. Columbus would be better suited to eliminate blight and create opportunities for redevelopment within existing boundaries. – NO
2. Whether the area sought to be annexed is reasonably within a path of growth of the city – The area specified by the Ward 2 Councilman would be in the direction of the New Hope community and adjoins the City already. However, the area may already be build out with little opportunity for more growth. – MAYBE
3. Potential health hazards from sewage and waste disposal in the annexed areas – A study at some additional cost would be needed to determine this technical aspect concerning ground water contamination and other factors. – MAYBE
4. The municipality’s financial ability to make the improvements and furnish municipal services promised – The City cannot be certain of its current financial condition due to the dereliction of the accounting department with incompetent personnel for too long. The latest audit report dates all the way back to the fiscal year ended 2020. The initial estimate from the Utilities Commission of providing sewer service should be justification enough to forego any more discussion of annexation in the proposed area. – HECK NO
5. The need for zoning and overall planning in the area – This could best be determined by a study the current inhabitants of the area. – MAYBE
6. The need for municipal services in the area sought to be annexed – The area is already serviced with electricity and water. – NO
7. Whether natural barriers exist between the city and the proposed annexation area – No natural barriers – YES
8. Past performance and time involved in the city’s provision of services to its present residents – The City struggles already to provide adequate Police protection to present residents. Expanding the geographical area of the City would further stretch the Police Department resources. The proposed areas may include public housing facilities that could present elevated fire/rescue and police demands. – NO
9. Economic or other impact of the annexation upon those who live in or own property in the proposed annexation area – Imposing additional property taxes on the property owner of the potential annexation area would likely be detrimental to property values of the area. – NO
10. Impact of the annexation upon the voting strength of protected minority groups – The City is majority Black and the annexation of the proposed area would increase that majority. – MOOT
11. Whether the property owners and other inhabitants of the areas sought to be annexed have in the past, and will in the foreseeable future unless annexed (because of their reasonable proximity to the corporate limits of the municipality), enjoy economic and social benefits of the municipality without paying their fair share of taxes – The Councilman proposing annexation has not mentioned an interest of the inhabitants of the proposed annexation to be annexed. In fact, the Councilman has presented no reasonable purpose for the annexation. Some perceive the Councilman’s proposed annexation as political brinksmanship poorly conceived. – NO
12. Any other factors that may suggest reasonableness – Congruity of the City’s boundaries and the delivery of unified emergency services could be a couple of factors in favor of annexation. – YES
The Daily Journal reported on the 12 points of consideration related to annexation process in Tupelo https://www.djournal.com/news/analysis-tupelo-makes-its-annexation-case-on-12-key-points/article_cdfcdf71-02d4-5d2f-95ab-1c071e19aa56.html In that article, The Daily Journal gave sound reasoning for annexation. The above points considered for Columbus makes it appear the City Council just wasted more money on consultants without applying a bit of common sense first.
