Local representatives traveled to Nashville on Aug. 22 to sit in on a summer study committee meeting that saw the return of discussion on a controversial de-annexation bill tabled earlier this year.
The bill, if passed, would have given residents living in areas annexed since 1998 a chance to petition for a referendum to decide whether to separate their area from the city or town that annexed it. Ten percent of residents in each annexed area would need to petition for a referendum on the matter, and if 51 percent of the voters in that area indicated a desire separate from the city, then the area would be de-annexed.
The committee was designed to give members of the state and local government more information about what de-annexation would look like, and attendees heard from seven speakers on both sides of the issue.
While Sen. Bo Watson, R-Hixson, who sponsored the de-annexation legislation last session, said there was no new ground plowed on the matter, he believes the information presented will be helpful as he prepares to draft a new bill for January.
Many legislators withdrew support for the bill last session because of its lack of statewide application, but Watson said the meeting made it clear that both advocates and critics wanted a more specific, surgical approach that did not penalize cities that had annexed the right way.
“I felt actually pretty good about our bill because much of what was addressed as concerns, particularly by city representatives, were things that we attempted to address in our legislation,” he said.
Moving forward, Watson said his goal is to give a voice to citizens whose cities annexed overzealously or for tax purposes, while working with the Tennessee Municipal League and city mayors to make sure the bill is not injurious to the state. Echoing Watson’s sentiments in regards to cities, Rep. Mike Carter, R-Ooltewah, who sponsored the bill in the House, said the failed legislation strove to protect the state by ensuring “people cannot leave without paying the city back their fair share of city expenses.”
“If the city’s made an investment, that has to be paid for and those citizens have to be responsible for it,” Watson said, reiterating, “We just want good de-annexation policy that doesn’t punish those who have done it correctly.”
News of the bill’s dismissal for a summer study back in March came as a disappointment to some Hamilton County residents annexed by the city of Chattanooga, said County Commissioner Sabrena Smedley, who also attended the Nashville meeting.
Peggy Jo Britton of Ray Jo Estates was one of the many to reach out to the commissioner when a garbage can arrived at her home on Jan. 2, 2013, with a note reading, “Welcome to the city.”
Britton said being part of the city has had little benefit for her and the 22 neighbors in her subdivision who signed her de-annexation petition. The rezoning has placed her home closer to a fire station, which has lowered her homeowner’s insurance some, but not enough to make up for the city’s high property tax rate, which she said has become a burden for her community’s retirees.
“We don’t want to be in the city,” said Britton.
Smedley said she has heard several other complaints from annexed locals along Morris Hill Road and in subdivisions like Ellington Way and Laurel Cove, with frustrations ranging from lowered police patrol and months-long delays in non-emergency response times to still-uninstalled sewers and less frequent trash pickups than their commercial, paid disposal services.
“A number of people felt that all they got in exchange from their tax dollars was a different color garbage can,” Smedley said. “These people were happy. They didn’t feel there was anything the city could provide that they didn’t have.”
If passed during the next legislative session, the de-annexation bill would give those voicing complaints one chance to separate themselves from the city, said Rep. Carter.
“This is a one-time opportunity to heal the wound of forced annexation,” he said. “Once it’s over, it’s over.”
Smedley said she would continue to attend meetings to keep her constituents updated so that if the measure becomes policy, she will be able to organize and instruct those hoping to de-annex.
“Then, it will be up to them,” she said.