|
Sylva town leaders' refusal to annex is short-sighted
Sylva leaders, in a surprise non-move last Thursday, refused to proceed with annexing 31 acres off Webster Road that includes Nanny's Lane and Griffin Road.
The decision is especialy perplexing in light of Sylva officials' haste to put the property acquisition in motion eight months ago. Calling an emergency meeting on April 15 two hours before Webster's town board was scheduled to meet, Sylva leaders passed a resolution of intent to annex the area before Wester's board could do so.
Several town board members later cited the fact that residents in the area proposed to be annexed would prefer not to join the town as a reason for their vote. If public opposition is to be the determining factor in annexation decisions, then Sylva's leaders should go ahead and put any idea of future growth on the shelf.
We don't need a crystal ball to tell them that most county residents, faced with the prospect of paying about twice as much in property taxes – Sylva taxes in addition to county taxes – would say "no" to being annexed. There was lots of opposition to Sylva's 1996 move that brought in residents along N.C. 107 and in the Moody Bottom areas, but no one halted that one.
At least a couple of board members said Sylva should pursue creating an extra-territorial jurisdiction instead. Here's a news flash: The Nanny's Lane/Griffin Road area is not likely to be available for ETJ regulation.
Webster wanted that area before and announced its intent to annex, which was reported in the March 31, 2004, edition of The Sylva Herald, prompting Sylva's preemptive strike. Webster could move quickly to bring that area into their town limits.
Cost was another factor cited in the decision, with at least one board member saying the area wouldn't generate enough revenue to make it profitable for the town. That could be true initially, but as development occurs, tax revenues will only increase, and the day-to-day costs of police protection and trash pickup would not be that much.
But the main reason the annexation should have proceeded, it seems to us, is that Sylva has become a central body with one long, spindly limb. Where once there was a town that extended equally outward in all directions, now there is the fat remnant of the old octagonal town flailing one skinny arm out 107. That arm needs some support, and Sylva leaders need to fill in the gaps between the town's outstretched fingers and its torso.
"Protecting the town's borders," was listed as a reason for the annexation last April. "A step in the right direction," was what the mayor called it then.
In light of last week's 3-2 vote against annexation, it looks to us like Sylva leaders took a giant step backwards.
|
