February 16, 2004
A bill [HB 2654] is being considered by the Kansas legislature that would change the annexation laws for the better. The bill would require cities to get approval from 60% of the voters in an area to be annexed before the land could be annexed. Many thanks to Doris Riley of Oxford Estates neighborhood in Overland Park for giving a heads up on this legislation.
If you oppose the way Overland Park handles annexation, you might want to send an email to members of the House Committee on Local Government, which is considering the bill, urging them to support it. Their email addresses are listed below. Or send an email to annexbill@nbrhd.net which will go to all of them with a copy to NeighborhoodNet).
It seems self evident to me that the people who are about to be annexed should have a voice in whether or not they will be annexed. Right now they have none.
The Cities of Overland Park and Topeka are fighting the bill.
Having been through Overland Park's recently bollixed up annexation, I would argue that those living near the annexed area, not just those in the annexed area, also should have a vote. An annexation certainly has as much impact as a re-zoning, and nearby property owners do have rights in a rezoning. But this bill does not go that far.
Annexation History Lessons
We have just seen what happens when Overland Park annexes an area: massive commercialization; recommended destruction of a neighborhood that gets in the way (to be fair, the OP City Council did agree to hold off on destroying Steck Plantation neighborhood until they could consider it some more); recommendation to build an otherwise unneeded highway interchange for $25 million to satisfy commercial interests over residents' objections; conversion to a commercial corridor of a non-commercial, residential road linking two highschools that share facilites.
Then there is the previous annexation, when Overland Park made the mistake of actually writing down promises to the annexed citizens of the Morse/Stanley area - Resolution 1896. They dragged off to jail one guy who tried to make them live up to one of their promises. Only when he took them all the way to the State Supreme Court [Docket #82,706 -- City of Overland Park v. Dahl] - where they lost and he won - did Overland Park, led then as now by Mayor Eilert, finally understand that their promise had the force of statute and they were breaking the law by ignoring it.
So, naturally, Overland Park made no enforceable promises at all in this last land grab.
They did, however, let the developers who contribute so much of OP City Council campaign funding dominate the Planning Task Force for the annexed area and excluded all the citizens living across the street from the annexed area. Terry Goodman, Ward 4 City Council member, as Chair of the Task Force, can take responsibility for those decisions.
And, of course, Overland Park never gave the citizens in the annexed area an opportunity to vote about being annexed.
The Bill Itself
This law would change at least that - citizens in the area would have a vote.
If you would like to read what the bill says, you can download it from:
http://www.kslegislature.org/bills/2004/2654.pdf
It is house bill 2654. Here is the first paragraph:
"New Section 1. No land shall be annexed pursuant to K.S.A. 12-520,
and amendments thereto, unless the question of such annexation has been
submitted to and approved by at least 60% of the qualified electors of
the area proposed to be annexed voting at an election called and held
thereon. Such election shall be called and held in the manner provided
for question submitted elections."
House Committee on Local Government
Write your opinions to:
[return to top] |