|
|
|
|
Salem residents voice displeasure |
|
|
Tuesday, 08 July 2008 |
Many opposing annexation into Benton, they say
A large number of residents of the Salem community continued to voice displeasure Monday night over the possibility of being annexed into the city of Benton.
George “Bucky” Ellis, a Benton attorney and chairman of the city’s Planning and Zoning Commission, declared at the start of Monday night’s public hearing at Benton Municipal Complex that the event would “not be a political rally.”
He disallowed “clapping, stomping and hooting” and promised to “clear the room” if it happened. “I’ve done it before,” he said.
“This is a conversation,” Ellis said in outlining ground rules for the exchange. He noted that everyone present would have an opportunity to vote on the annexation proposal.
A special election is scheduled Tuesday, Aug. 12, on whether land south of Northlake Road bordering the Salem community will be annexed into Benton. The city of Bryant also wants the area and has scheduled an annexation election the following month.
Planning commissions of both cities agreed in 2005 that the area was to be part of Benton’s jurisdictional planning area, but Bryant officials now claim that Benton changed its planning map the next year. Benton officials say this didn’t happen and contend Bryant officials are violating the agreement regarding this area and that they have also done so in another incident which has resulted in litigation.
“Does Benton get to vote on this?” Salem resident David Holloway asked.
Ellis explained that Benton residents as well as people in the area proposed for annexation may vote. The state Legislature has determined that this is a fair way for determining such issues, he said, explaining that before the 1960s, a city could annex an area without a vote of the residents of the affected area. This was changed through legislation introduced by former state Rep. John Purtle, he said.
Several Salem residents said they do not think it’s fair that Benton residents should be allowed to vote on the issue because they outnumber the Salem residents.
Ellis replied that it would “not be fair for a small area to control [the destiny of] an entire area. The law now is that everybody in the entire area gets a vote on the issue. That’s the way the Arkansas Legislature has decided we’re going to do it.”
Tom Zuber asked why the city didn’t choose to “proceed west” in its annexation planning. “My opinion is this [annexation] is just an argument between Benton and Bryant,” he said.
“I know this is the law ... but I don’t think this is right,” Zuber said, indicating that he believes annexations should be permitted only when the people of the affected area request the move.
Bob Huie, who helped organize an anti-annexation rally Saturday at Salem, asked Benton officials to reconsider the annexation issue. “I’m asking these people to call this thing off and go somewhere else,” he said.
Ellis explained that such decisions are made by the City Council.
A Salem resident expressed concern about Benton’s code enforcement regulations, particularly in regard to horses and cows, and how they would apply to the Salem area where there are no similar rules.
“Day-to-day life for the most part will not change,” Ellis said. Many things, such as owning cattle, will be “grandfathered in,” he said.
Much of the land eventually would receive an agricultural zoning designation, Ellis said, though initially it would be brought in as single-family residential. “We rework the land use for particular property and it gets rezoned appropriately,” he said.
Indicating they believe the annexation will be approved, two people asked whether they would be allowed to vote for Benton officials in the November election. When told this would be their option, they said they would “vote against everybody who had anything to do with this annexation.”
Some residents questioned whether they would receive electrical services through Benton Utilities if they were annexed in this election.
Benton Alderman Doug Stracener explained that this area is part of First Electric Cooperative Corp. service area and the city cannot absorb these customers at this time. The customers would have to be purchased from First Electric and this will not be happening, he said.
Some residents asked how long it would take for city services to be available to the newly annexed area. Some services would be provided immediately, Mayor Rick Holland said, while others, such as sewer, would require infrastructure improvements.
Marsha Guffey, the city’s director of community development, said the city would have to provide such services within three years according to state law, except for utilities that are part of another provider’s designated service area.
Benton Assistant Fire Chief Mark Mills and Fire Marshal Bruce Armstrong answered several questions regarding the city’s plans to build new fire stations near the areas designated for annexation.
Possible areas cited for the proposed stations are Gregory and Scott-Salem Road and Rolla and Scott-Salem Road.
Guffey has noted that fire flow in the Hurricane Lake Estates area is inadequate. Building a new fire station in Salem would benefit residents of both areas, she said.
“We will be able to more effectively serve the existing residents in the Hurricane Lake area, as well as residents in the annexation area,” she said.
Mills said Benton firefighters respond to many calls in that area already through a mutual aid agreement. This was acknowledged by two residents who said they would like to “see documentation” of this.
Police protection was another issue addressed. It was noted that Benton’s department is not fully staffed now and residents want to know how they could expect to receive coverage.
Interim Police Chief Roger Gaither said the city is in the process of hiring seven new officers and additional ones would be needed if the area is annexed. A police substation in Salem would be included in future plans, it was noted.
If the Northlake annexation occurs, it would ensure that enough new Benton subdivisions can tie onto the water system to make a planned new water tower cost-effective, Guffey said.
In response to a question, Ellis said there are no current plans to develop subdivisions in the area proposed for annexation.
He explained that he would know about any because of his position as Planning Commission chairman.
When a resident asked about jail coverage, he was told that this issue is not affected by any annexations. The Saline County Detention Center houses prisoners from all areas of Saline County.
In discussing proposed infrastructure improvements, city officials were asked how they plan to finance them.
Holland explained that the city receives additional state turnback revenue from annexed areas. The increased population from the annexation area will help fund services in general, he said.
Leroy Allen, a member of the city’s Public Utilities Commission and a former alderman, also responded to infrastructure inquiries, but could not remain at the entire session because he had to leave for a PUC meeting.
Ellis explained that it’s not possible to budget many of the improvements that could take place in the future because these are is still in the planning stages.
A man said he couldn’t understand this because when he decides to add a room to his house, he knows in advance what he plans to do and how he can finance the project. |
|
|
|
Razorbacks
