RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — A North Carolina judge on Tuesday struck down the state’s new method for giving citizens of unincorporated areas the opportunity to block forced annexations by towns and cities. The ruling potentially strips away a key element of laws that property rights activists sought for years.
Judge Shannon Joseph issued a written order Tuesday throwing out the petition process authorized last year by the General Assembly. The measure halted a municipality’s effort to expand its borders if enough property owners in the targeted area said no. The case is likely to be settled in the appellate courts.
The Republican-led Legislature passed laws last June that overhauled the state’s involuntary annexation rules, which have guided municipal growth in the state for more than 50 years. While many property owners in unincorporated areas have long chafed at being absorbed by cities and having to pay higher taxes, city leaders have said the previous laws had served the state well by helping cities such as Charlotte grow at a manageable rate.
Several municipalities with pending annexations sued late last year, arguing that the new method was unenforceable because it only gave landowners, not all voters within the area that could be acquired, the right to decide. Joseph agreed, after two hours of arguments Monday in Wake County Superior Court. The judge ruled that two local laws and portions of a statewide involuntary annexation law enacted in 2011 were unconstitutional and void.
The laws said proposed involuntary annexations by cities would be terminated if 60 percent of the landowners in the targeted areas signed a petition within a roughly four-month period opposing it. The town or city would be barred from trying again for three years.
Property owners surrounding Lexington, Kinston, Fayetteville and others already have used the process to halt pending annexations. The petitions involving those involuntary annexations and a handful of other pending cases now have no effect, Joseph wrote, meaning the annexations could potentially resume if her ruling isn’t overturned.
Anthony Fox, a Charlotte lawyer representing three municipalities in the case, said his clients were pleased with the ruling. Supporters of North Carolina’s cities and towns have said the handful of communities whose pending involuntary annexations were seemingly overturned by the 2011 laws shouldn’t be penalized for following the previous rules.
“The annexations had gone through all the necessary challenges in the courts,” he said. “They would have been effective by now.”
Jim Eldridge, a Wilmington lawyer representing residents who lived near several municipalities that got the chance to overturn pending annexations, said he will advise his clients to appeal the ruling. An appellate court could issue a stay delaying Joseph’s order until after appeals are completed.
The state Attorney General’s Office, which also defended the laws in court with Eldridge, plans to review the ruling, a spokeswoman said. However, the office of Senate leader Phil Berger, R-Rockingham, said it understands the attorney general plans to appeal.
Eldridge said he was especially disappointed about the ruling for his clients, who had won the right to control their own destiny through the power of submitting petitions.
Home and business owners in unincorporated areas have become fixtures around the Legislative Building in recent years seeking help from lawmakers when their own court challenges to fight involuntary annexations failed. They said cities forced them to pay more taxes and fees to build water and sewer lines to their property lines without commensurate levels of service.
The property owners “had a voice and it was so exciting to see how those people responded to their ability. They organized, they mobilized, they got the petitions signed,” Eldridge said.
The Legislature also could revisit the issue when it returns for its budget-adjustment session in May. Berger wrote to municipal leaders in December warning them against “frivolous and abusive legal maneuvers” to challenge the annexation rules. He also suggested the General Assembly could pass more legislation to effectively cancel the pending involuntary annexations simply by repealing them altogether.
Berger spokeswoman Amy Auth said Tuesday that the Senate leader “will continue to protect property owners from tax-hungry municipalities.”
The North Carolina League of Municipalities, which was not involved in the lawsuit, believes its member towns and cities certainly have the right to pursue court action, but it also respects the General Assembly’s decision to develop reasonable annexation reform, according to group lobbyist Kelli Kukura.
She said the league would like to work with legislative leaders to find another compromise that would create a more “inclusive petition process” and change the prospect of a municipality having to provide more extensive water and sewer service at no charge to new residents.
“The citizens deserve strong, vibrant communities both now and into the future,” Kukura said, adding “We are ready to continue working with the General Assembly to try to reach that goal.”
By GARY D. ROBERTSON
(Associated Press)
Mar 27, 7:18 PM EDT
