Annexation Talk Sparks Opposition Move Driven Partly By Growth In Sales And Property Tax Dollars

Annexation? No thanks.

County residents and officials were united Tuesday in their antipathy toward the city of Spokane’s latest proposal for annexing four large areas of county land.

The renewed interest in expansion, which was broached Monday at a city Public Works Committee meeting, was criticized as unnecessary, arrogant and greedy.

It’s also nothing new, said County Commissioner John Roskelley.

“This kind of thing has been going on for some time, where the city throws out these monkey wrenches, and we have to repair the damage,” Roskelley said.

The city is discussing the annexation of parts of Moran Prairie, Yardley, Linwood and the West Plains.

The specifics of what will be targeted won’t be known until the city can count how much land is covered by annexation covenants. The city requires county landowners to sign a waiver agreeing not to fight annexation in exchange for hooking up to city water and sewer lines.

To annex an area, the owners of 75 percent of its assessed value need to agree to it.

In the case of Yardley and sections of Moran Prairie and the West Plains, the city might have the 75 percent covered by the covenants.

Even though the city may have a right to annex those areas, it should still leave it up to the residents, said county Commissioner Kate McCaslin.

“Just because the city can legally snatch these areas doesn’t mean it should,” McCaslin said. “The ethical and right thing to do would be to hold a vote. If they can get the people to vote themselves into the city, so be it.”

That’s unlikely to happen, particularly in Linwood. Very few Linwood residents have signed annexation waivers, so the city would have to try another tactic that would put it to a vote of residents. A similar effort failed in 1987.

John Gowdey, a Linwood resident, said he has no interest in joining the city.

“We’re better off where we are,” he said. “With all the trouble and turmoil you have in the city, why would anyone want to go in there?”

But Linwood and the other lands the city plans to annex are within areas designated for urban growth over the next 20 years.

Sooner or later, those areas should become part of the city, said City Planning Director John Mercer.

“There’s a realization the city needs to grow, and the urban growth areas are the areas where the city needs to do that growing,” Mercer said. “Any city needs to be able to grow, or it stagnates.”

Part of the motivation for that growth is sales and property tax dollars.

In Yardley, the city’s revenues could eclipse its costs because of the numerous industrial users and big-box stores there, said Dave Mandyke, the city’s director of general services.

“When you look at Yardley, that’s a positive cash flow situation,” Mandyke said. “In a residential area, at best you hope to be revenue neutral.”

But in its quest for cash, the city may be ignoring the needs of the citizens, said Valley Fire Chief Pat Humphries.

“The city needs to come to the table thinking about service to the citizens, not just a land grab,” Humphries said.

To annex any of the four areas in the next few years, the city would have to get the approval of the county fire districts that serve the areas and depend on them for revenue. In 1998, the city struck deals agreeing not to annex areas served by the districts for five years and to give two years’ warning before any planned annexation.

If Yardley were annexed, Valley Fire would stand to lose up to $500,000 annually, Humphries said.

Additionally, the city does not have a fire station close enough to adequately serve the area, said Assistant Fire Chief Dave Lobdell.

Mandyke said the city would likely try to renegotiate the 1998 agreements allowing for earlier annexation.

The city would also explore funding the fire districts that are in place rather than replace them, he said.

“We’re not trying to make it any more expensive than possible, nor are we trying to put any fire districts out of business,” Mandyke said. “We’re not trying to put any undue hardships on the fire districts.”

Other county services could be affected by annexation as well.

The Spokane Library District could lose 10 to 15 percent of its $6.2 million budget, said director Michael Wirt. Losing Yardley and the West Plains would be particularly painful because they are mainly commercial and industrial areas that generate revenue but don’t require library branches.

“You’re picking off the industrial tax base,” Wirt said. “We’d then have funding issues in the rest of the district.”

But while taxing districts would be affected by annexation, taxpayers may not be.

Overall tax rates in the county range from $11 to $18 per $1,000 of assessed value, depending on where the property is located and what kinds of services are provided, said John Sweetman, chief deputy assessor for Spokane County.

The overall city tax rate is about $14.80 per $1,000, he said.

“It just all depends on where you live in the county and what fire district and school district you’re in,” Sweetman said.

And for industrial users, annexation could represent a cost savings, Mandyke said. It costs as much as 50 percent more to hook up to city water and sewer if they are outside city limits, he said.

That is in part because the city wants to create incentives for businesses to agree to annexation, Mandyke said.

“If you’re here, it’s cheaper,” he said.