Being annexed into city doesn't ensure services
Regarding the letter concerning annexation without representation:
The residents in the recent Greensboro annexation shouldn't be concerned about the costs in the immediate future. Our property was annexed in July 1996, 11 years ago. We still do not have city water or sewer. I assure the residents it will be some time, if ever, before they receive city water and sewage.
City taxes start immediately but some services may never come. We have paid city taxes for 11 years. The street where we live joins property developed after our annexation. These properties received all city services as they were developed.
We still have no street light, no city water or sewer. Why should we pay the same city taxes but receive less service? Is this not inequitable?
Sylvia and Gerald Smith
Greensboro
Comments (5)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
"We still have no street light, no city water or sewer. Why should we pay the same city taxes but receive less service? Is this not inequitable?"
I'm no lawyer and I don't play one on TV but I see a potential class action law suit in the making. 11 years of taxation without services for you and your neighbors should be enough to make lawyers drool in anticipation.
Posted on December 2, 2007 10:34 AM
Let's not forget those thousands of City residents that live on PRIVATE streets like those found in townhomes. They do not receive trash service and often times pay for their own sewer infrastructure...those residents still pay full taxes...
Yes this sysyem is broken.
Posted on December 3, 2007 8:56 AM
Billy,
The lawyer's know you can't take on city hall. I had a similar case a few years ago. I had a few laywers willing to take a 5-digit retainer for their services. Most told me "you can't beat city hall".
Posted on December 3, 2007 9:51 AM
nitpicker,
I forwarded this post so several lawyers I know and some are interested. They all tell me there's not enough info in this one letter upon which to build a case but they would like to learn more.
One major difference: I'm talking about a "class action" case which is very different and easier to manage than an individual case. There are state laws that stop most individual law suits against cities but the state has no say over any class action suit. If Sylvia and Gerald Smith are the only annexed residents facing these same problems then they haven't much of a chance but if they can unite with just one more GSO property owner then the City is screwed.
And I really doubt Sylvia and Gerald Smith are the only ones-- they're just the only ones we know of.
Posted on December 5, 2007 9:30 AM
About the private streets...
When someone moves onto a private street, they made the decision to move there and it would be silly to complain about it if they failed to consider that when buying the property. Often, they have to pay the homeowners association fees, too. The city does not make streets private, homeowners associations do. The homeowners association often chooses to hire a third party to bill the residents for trash collection, water and sewer, and then charge HOA fees on top of that. The city does not make them make these choices.
Posted on December 5, 2007 10:41 AM