THE DEATH of HB 2367, ANNEXATION MORATORIUM

 

The basic NC League of Municipalities’ legislative strategy regarding reform of  North Carolina’s annexation laws, as carried out in the NC Senate, is: Deny, Delay, Discourage, and Defeat.

 

Deny (as in denying there is a problem, and denying access to change), Delay (by pigeon holing bills and forming study commissions), Discourage (as to wear down the citizens and legislators seeking reform), and Defeat (by extensive use of the Deny, Delay, and Discourage tactics.)

 

1. To understand this strategy, a  brief review of previous attempts at annexation reform is useful.

 

            ~The current law was passed in 1959. There have been several attempts at reform since.

 

            ~ In 1983, a Legislative Research Commission recommended 20 changes and 10 were enacted. Those enacted were minor in character, such as increasing the amount of time between the passing of the Resolution of Intent and the Public Hearing. Proposals not enacted which would have brought more balance to the law: the requirement for certified mail notices, a method for de-annexation if services were not delivered as required, a ban on future “local” acts concerning annexation, and a deadline for the changes to take effect (essentially a “moratorium”).

 

            ~ Following two years of failed attempts to amend the law, in 1998 another Legislative Research Commission was established. The membership of this Commission clearly shows the lack of influence exhibited by the citizens of North Carolina. In addition to the Representatives and Senators, the Commission included the Mayor of Washington, NC, a Councilwoman from Greensboro, NC, and the City Attorney for Charlotte, NC. There were neither citizens nor citizen groups represented on the Study Commission.

                        * Changes proposed during the Commission’s hearings: 35

                        * Changes proposed in the Commission’s report to the General Assembly: 23

                        * Changes proposed which actually became part of the law: 14

                        * Percent of changes endorsed by NCLM which became law: 80% (8 of 10)

                        * Percent of changes proposed by two citizens groups to the Commission which became law: ZERO (0 for 12).

 

2. This brings us to the most current application of the Deny, Delay, Discourage, Defeat strategy. We need to return to the summer of 2007, at the adjournment of that year’s legislative session. The House sent to  the Senate a resolution concerning adjournment, including a number of proposed joint select committees, one of which was a study of municipal annexation. The Senate returned this resolution, but omitted the proposed Joint Select Committee on Municipal Annexation. This deletion did not go unnoticed, and the House unanimously voted to put that Joint Annexation Select Committee back in the resolution and returned it to the Senate.

 

            ~Unfortunately, the Senate had already adjourned for the year and “had left the building.”

 

            ~This missed opportunity will be important later in the 2008 “Short Session.”

 

            ~Late in 2007, Speaker Joe Hackney, a man of his word,  did as he had promised and established the House Select Committee on Municipal Annexation, which, for the first time, included citizen representation.

 

            ~This Select Committee, having a mix of Republicans and Democrats, met numerous times in 2008 before the start of the “Short Session.” The Committee recognized that (1) Reform of this 50 year old law was needed, (2) An in-depth study would be required for substantial reform, and (3) Municipalities had been and are, abusing the law with impunity, as there is no oversight. The Committee produced HB 2367, Annexation Moratorium, which was to put a halt to new annexations and a hold on existing ones for nine months while the Committee could develop specific recommendations for change.

 

            ~This bill passed the House by a 98-18 vote on July 2, 2008 and was sent to the Senate. 

 

3. The death of HB 2367:

 

            ~Senator Rand immediately placed HB 2367 in the Rules and Operations Committee of the Senate (he chairs this Committee), where all bills the leadership do not like go to die. It is important to know Senator Rand’s stated reasons for doing so.

 

            ~“The Senate rules do not allow the Senate to consider this bill.”

 

            ~To begin with, Senator Rand has acknowledged, to two different groups who met with him, that “He sets the Rules” for the Senate. He could have easily allowed the bill to go forward since he has that authority (another, different, story.)

 

            ~Furthermore, the Senate Rules did allow consideration of HB 2367. Senate Joint Resolution 1573 (2007) specifically states that bills implementing the resolutions of study commissions and select committees may be heard.  It does not differentiate between a “House Only” or “Senate Only” or “Joint” select committee. Further, Senator Rand allowed HB 2188, a product of a House Select Committee to go forward. It was passed by the Senate and signed into law by the Governor.

 

            ~It is interesting to note that 25 of the 50 Senators signed a form requesting Senator Rand move HB 2367 to the Senate floor for debate and vote. Another 8 Senators verbally requested such a move, making a total of 33 to support the request. Senator Rand’s refused to move the bill out of Rules.

 

            ~As citizens inundated his office with  protesting e-mails and calls, Senator Rand said that he thought the Senate should have been a part of the House study, and since it was not, then he advocated forming a Joint House and Senate committee to study possible changes to annexation reform.

 

            ~Please refer to the “missed opportunity” noted in paragraph 2, above. Before the Senate headed home for the summer in 2007, they had had a perfect opportunity to join the House in studying the issue of annexation reform, but the Senate leadership specifically removed the annexation study from the proposal. The Senate did not participate in 2008 because they specifically chose not to participate in 2007.

 

4. So, at the end  of the 2008 “short session,” as Senator Rand wanted,  a Joint Legislative Study Commission on Municipal Annexation was formed.

 

“The Commission shall be composed of 28 members as follows:

(1)        Twelve members appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate.

(2)        Twelve members appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

(3)        One member representing the North Carolina League of Municipalities, appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate.

(4)        One member representing the North Carolina League of Municipalities, appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

(5)        One member representing the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners, appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate.

(6)        One member representing the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners, appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

 

            ~Supposedly, these members were to have been appointed in August and begin meeting in September. The reported goal was to have specific recommendations for annexation reform by the time the new Legislature was seated in January of 2009, as that is the “drop dead” date of these appointments.

 

            ~There is an election in November, a Thanksgiving, a Christmas, and a New  Year’s Holiday between now and then.

 

            ~And what is this Commission supposed to study?

 

"As a part of its study, the Commission may examine issues related to:

 

(1)  State law governing involuntary annexation, voluntary annexation by petition, and voluntary satellite annexation.

(2) Municipal compliance with current annexation procedural standards.

(3) Provision of services to persons in areas subject to annexation.

(4) The effect of creation of an independent review procedure for municipal annexation decisions.

(5) Current standards for judicial review and appeal of municipal annexation decisions.

(6) The impact of current annexation law on municipalities and the state of a whole.

(7) Whether the state's current annexation law should be amended.

(8) Any other issue related to annexation deemed relevant by the Commission."

 

            ~Note the use of “may” in the lead sentence.

 

            ~The Commission appointees were not announced until September 15, 2008.

 

            ~Senator Tony Rand was appointed to this Commission as a member by Senator Basnight. (Initially surprising, this appointment now makes perfect sense.)

 

            ~On September 30, 2008, as a citizen appointed to the Commission by Speaker Hackney, I e-mailed all four co-chairs of this Committee asking for a schedule of meetings and also for an agenda for each meeting so I could prepare properly.

 

            ~As this is written (Oct 14), 2008) I have had no reply to my request for information to the four co-chairs.

 

            ~On October 7, 2008, I asked the Speaker’s office if they knew of any schedule.

 

            ~On October 10, 2008, the co-chairs announced a meeting for October 22, 2008, during which David Lawrence would make a presentation on annexation law in North Carolina.

 

            ~On October 11, 2008, the October 22, 2008 meeting was canceled.

 

            ~Remember, the Commission’s appointment terminates no later than the opening of the 2009 Legislative Session in January 2009.

 

            ~Obviously this Commission will never be able to cover these subjects in the time it has been given.

 

            ~It is patently obvious what is going on: Deny, Delay, Discourage, Defeat.

 

            ~So, what are the citizens of this state to do?

 

I URGE YOU TO TAKE THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS:

 

1. Communicate with all candidates for the General Assembly you will be voting for and let them know how critical their stand on annexation reform will be their obtaining your vote. Results in the upcoming election may affect the leadership's thinking on this issue.

 

2. Write the current Senate leadership and share your thoughts on their actions to date. Remind them they represent the entire state in their leadership roles, not just special interests.

 

3. Write  your local newspapers and insure they are aware of the what is going on (or, more properly, NOT going on) with this Commission. Alert them to the Deny, Delay, Discourage, Defeat strategy being used by the NCLM and the Senate.

 

We have come this far by actively keeping focused on the goal of annexation reform. That is what we must continue to do, and we will work with anyone committed to that goal, be they Democrat, Republican, Independent, or Libertarian. We must continue to communicate to our elected officials that we are going to be here until these annexation laws are fixed, and we will be back next year, and the year after that and the year after that. If we get minimal reform in 2009, that will NOT be the end of our efforts.

 

We are not going away.

 

Period.

 

Doug Aitken

President, Fair Annexation Coalition