Council approves annexation plan despite protests
The Searcy City Council agreed to recommended boundaries for the controversial annexation proposal Tuesday night, but not before confusing themselves and a room full of opponents by considering and then rejecting small changes to the proposal.
With the Council's action, city staff is directed to draw up detailed legal descriptions of the area the Council wants to bring under city jurisdiction. The Council will vote again in August to place the proposal on the November ballot.
Under consideration were new city limits that would extend northward to Collins Road and westward to Valley and Honey Hill Roads. The southern border would follow Booth Road eastward from Honey Hill Road to Hwy. 267.
At this point, however, the proposed city limits took a series of shifts and turns, producing a jagged protrusion in the otherwise blocked off shape of the city. The proposed line went southwestwardly on Hwy 267 for about a quarter of a mile before turning again eastward through farm land to a section line about a half mile west of Pioneer Road, then directly southward on the section line.
About a mile south, the line again jumped westward, southward, and eastward to the Searcy Airport in order to take in a 84-acre lot owned by the Searcy Industrial Development Corporation.
It is this jagged protrusion that generated the most controversy, and brought about 20 Pioneer Road residents to the Council meeting to speak against the proposal.
As proposed, the actual pavement of Booth, Honey Hill, Valley and Collins Roads would be brought into the city, with city jurisdiction extending to the far edge of the pavement.
But Council member Carl Nutter suggested that the borderline roadways be eliminated from the proposal, and suggested that city jurisdiction extend only to the near edge of the pavement.
"We'll have to spend $1 million just on Collins Road," he said. "I don't know how we can finance all the roads."
Under Nutter's proposal, residents along one side of the roads would be brought into city jurisdiction, but the roads in front of their house would not. The city would collect property tax on the residents' homes, but the county would be left with the cost for maintenance of the roads.
"I'd rather be in the city limits when I'm patrolling," said Thomas, arguing for inclusion of the roads.
"If you leave [the road] out, I don't have to worry about it at all," said Fire Chief Bill Baldridge. "But don't take it halfway across the road. Either bring in the whole road, or leave out the whole road."
Nutter's proposal failed, with only Nutter and Council members Dale English and Doug Faith voting for it.
It appeared the proposal would then be adopted as written, but Pioneer Road resident Buddy Phillips objected.
Phillips complained that Frontier Road, a narrow lane connecting Pioneer Road with Gum Springs Road, was going to be split between county and city jurisdiction.
In response, Mayor Belinda LaForce recalled a conversation she had earlier in the day with Dr. J.D. Patterson, who lives on a large parcel of land on the Hwy. 267 edge of the jagged protrusion.
"He told me he wouldn't mind all his property being in the city," said LaForce.
"His house will be in the city, but his barn will be in the county," said Phillips.
LaForce wondered aloud if the Council should extend the annexation boundary to include all of Patterson's property, and the meeting broke down as maps were shuffled and side conversations dominated the room.
Pioneer Road resident Lori Kline then said she didn't care if Patterson were annexed or not, but she and the other Pioneer Road residents should be left out of the city.
"That would leave you being an island inside the city," said Faith. "You'd be completely surrounded by the city."
"We'd be as popular as the Country Club," replied Kline, referring to a similar island-like situation at Searcy Country Club.
"The only reason the city wants Pioneer Road is to run a sewer line to the industrial property," said Phillips. "We'll be happy to give you an easement, just don't annex us."
But in the end, and as order was restored, the Council voted for annexation boundaries exactly as proposed.
€ Fees and taxes. LaForce's breakdown financial obligations on new residents included the city's eight mil property tax ($16 annually on a $100,000 house), a $12 monthly garbage fee and utility taxes ranging from three to four and one-half percent. These are, she said, "the most reasonable rates in the state of Arkansas."
But many begged to differ.
"We have our Southwest Water," said Blanca Lawson. "We have our Gum Springs Fire Department. We have garbage pick-up every week. We even have telephones. What we don't have is $12 a month on our water bill."
€ Inadequate city services. Many said they doubted the city could provide quality services.
"My mother-in-law lives in the city," said Regina Rhodes. "And you don't pick her trash up very adequately."
"You got holes in the road," said Wayne Stroup, who went on to name about a dozen city roads he said are full of potholes. "What the heck will we expect if there's a hole in the road?"
€ Distrust of city motives. Several speakers said the city had arbitrarily and unfairly drawn the annexation boundaries, and had otherwise treated the residents within the area shoddily.
"I hate to say this, Mr. Jordan," said Lawson. "But you're spinning pretty good up there."
"If you don't want to be in the city limits and you have enough money, you don't have to be," said Bill Barter. "That's what happened with the country club, and the Elk's Lodge was thrown in for good measure."
Barter was referring to a "hole" in the newly proposed city limits, leaving the Searcy Country Club completely surrounded by, yet outside, city jurisdiction. Jordan said later the country club was excluded to eliminate discussion of liquor licenses from the annexation debate.
Others, mistakenly believing that city officials are responsible for news content in The Daily Citizen, faulted LaForce and Jordan for contradicting themselves in news articles, and demanded that they "put this in the paper."
The Daily Citizen did incorrectly report that Tuesday's night meeting was to be held at the Carmichael Center, rather than the Lightle Center, but that fault was the paper's, not city officials'. The Daily Citizen wasn't informed of the mistake until it was too late to run a correction. The city redirected those who showed up at the wrong location, but several people blamed LaForce for the mistake.
€ An affront on Christian values. Reverend Todd Davis faulted city officials for having the "condescending arrogance of bureaucrats," and went on to say that the "city [believes it] is the savior, and the [annexation] committee believes it is John the Baptist." He called on city officials to "repent of their arrogance."
Mike Terrell said he was opposed to the annexation on principle, not particulars.
"These are the principles of the war for independence, and the second war for independence," he said. The first war for independence was against the British, he explained. In the second war of independence, he said, "the Union military invaded the South to gain territorial jurisdiction over ... those seeking to avoid the perils of tyranny."
Terrell went on to quote a biblical scholar named Timothy Terrell, as well as the Christian Reconstructionist R.J. Rushdoony.
Both, he said, supported the Christian right of private property over the powers of government.
In the end, the meeting went about as LaForce had predicted at its beginning.
"You may disagree," she told the audience. "But we know you'll understand, at least, why we want to do this."
The annexation issue will next go to the Searcy City Council for consideration at its July 13 meeting. At either that meeting or its August meeting, the council is expected to place the matter on the November ballot.