Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
cabelagent

Annex City View?

12 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

There's a story in Greenville News today about developing a master plan for affordable housing, repaved roads, upgraded street lights, more small businesses....and a community center to revive this community...just outside Greenville city limits. This looks like an opportunity for the city to offer annexation and give them what they need. That area appeared rough the last time I ventured through there....there's approx. 1200 residents (2000 census). Just think this is an opportunity to grow the city...a little bit.

Edited by cabelagent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


3 hours ago, cabelagent said:

There's a story in Greenville News today about developing a master plan for affordable housing, repaved roads, upgraded street lights, more small businesses....and a community center to revive this community...just outside Greenville city limits. This looks like an opportunity for the city to offer annexation and give them what they need. That area appeared rough the last time I ventured through there....there's approx. 1200 residents (2000 census). Just think this is an opportunity to grow the city...a little bit.

The problem is that residential homes are typically tax revenue negative to the city. That is the taxes from them are less than what it costs to serve them with even normal services. Typically, the lower income neighborhoods are worse than middle class or higher class homes.

Compounding this problem is that due to state law, the city can not receive all normal tax revenue for the current fire district in which the homes are within gets a larger sum. In other words, even though, the homes would be within the city, they would not be served by City of Greenville Fire. There is the possibly the city could "merge" with the fire districts, just as it could with other cities, but that is very hard. 

That is why you have mainly only seen the city annex commercial/industrial or open land.

This is not to say the City would never annex parts of it. The City has discussed annexing the Woodside Mill Community with the mill. However, the Mill would be tax revenue positive and would even out the community. Plus, the community must be lifted up to help the economic vitality of the mill redevelopment. 

Without large commercial land uses to annex with it, I doubt the city would go after City View.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ausrutherford said:

The problem is that residential homes are typically tax revenue negative to the city. That is the taxes from them are less than what it costs to serve them with even normal services. Typically, the lower income neighborhoods are worse than middle class or higher class homes.

Compounding this problem is that due to state law, the city can not receive all normal tax revenue for the current fire district in which the homes are within gets a larger sum. In other words, even though, the homes would be within the city, they would not be served by City of Greenville Fire. There is the possibly the city could "merge" with the fire districts, just as it could with other cities, but that is very hard. 

That is why you have mainly only seen the city annex commercial/industrial or open land.

This is not to say the City would never annex parts of it. The City has discussed annexing the Woodside Mill Community with the mill. However, the Mill would be tax revenue positive and would even out the community. Plus, the community must be lifted up to help the economic vitality of the mill redevelopment. 

Without large commercial land uses to annex with it, I doubt the city would go after City View.

Thanks....SC annexation laws are so archaic. The poor(er) communities located on perimeters of larger cities experience difficulties/pressures to fix/improve their infrastructures on their own. Annexation is not entirely the answer but they have a chance to become more attractive and perhaps grow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cabelagent said:

Thanks....SC annexation laws are so archaic. The poor(er) communities located on perimeters of larger cities experience difficulties/pressures to fix/improve their infrastructures on their own. Annexation is not entirely the answer but they have a chance to become more attractive and perhaps grow.

I would agree that being in the city would be best for the community...however, will the current jurisdictional format, it would not be best for the city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless the cost is really high, I think the city should pursue it.  Charleston years ago annexed poor neighborhoods in the Neck and now that area is about to redevelop from a poor residential and industrial zone into the affluent Magnolia project.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, ausrutherford said:

Compounding this problem is that due to state law, the city can not receive all normal tax revenue for the current fire district in which the homes are within gets a larger sum. In other words, even though, the homes would be within the city, they would not be served by City of Greenville Fire. There is the possibly the city could "merge" with the fire districts, just as it could with other cities, but that is very hard. 

Question: Can you share more information about this law? Is there a unique circumstance with this fire district? I am under the impression that all Special Purpose Districts automatically cede their rights to provide their service in the event that a municipality annexes into its territory. The only exception would be if there is some sort of interlocal agreement where that isn't the case. An example of an exception could be a water or sewer SPD, where the city grants a special purpose district the ability to manage its water/sewer system. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Spartan said:

Question: Can you share more information about this law? Is there a unique circumstance with this fire district? I am under the impression that all Special Purpose Districts automatically cede their rights to provide their service in the event that a municipality annexes into its territory. The only exception would be if there is some sort of interlocal agreement where that isn't the case. An example of an exception could be a water or sewer SPD, where the city grants a special purpose district the ability to manage its water/sewer system. 

All I know is that if the city annexes from the fire districts, the fire districts still keeps a major portion of the taxes on that property. I made a mistake saying the fire district still answers the address, it doesn't. The city still serves it, but looses out on the taxes. This is why the city has not really annexed many already residential areas as of late, only commercial. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, vicupstate said:

Unless the cost is really high, I think the city should pursue it.  Charleston years ago annexed poor neighborhoods in the Neck and now that area is about to redevelop from a poor residential and industrial zone into the affluent Magnolia project.   

Charleston has residential density going for it. Parts of it are over 10,000 people per square mile. With that type of density, residential housing can actually become tax positive.

Charleston was able to invest in the annexation due to tax income elsewhere. 

 

Greenville's residential tax loss is likely narrowing with the development downtown and Verdae (which is denser that most other areas), but still has a long way to go. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


7 hours ago, Spartan said:

Question: Can you share more information about this law? Is there a unique circumstance with this fire district? I am under the impression that all Special Purpose Districts automatically cede their rights to provide their service in the event that a municipality annexes into its territory. The only exception would be if there is some sort of interlocal agreement where that isn't the case. An example of an exception could be a water or sewer SPD, where the city grants a special purpose district the ability to manage its water/sewer system. 

There is an intergovernmental agreement between Greenville and the adjoining PSDs, but I don't know a lot of details.  

I believe there was either legislation or a lawsuit between Charleston and the St. Andrews and/or James Island PSD(s) over this issue.  The result was that once annexed, property taxes continue to be paid to the PSD for 5 years, then the taxes go to Charleston.  Charleston has not let that deter them from continuing to annex in those PSDs. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, vicupstate said:

There is an intergovernmental agreement between Greenville and the adjoining PSDs, but I don't know a lot of details.  

I believe there was either legislation or a lawsuit between Charleston and the St. Andrews and/or James Island PSD(s) over this issue.  The result was that once annexed, property taxes continue to be paid to the PSD for 5 years, then the taxes go to Charleston.  Charleston has not let that deter them from continuing to annex in those PSDs. 

 

I believe there is also a 5 year rule with at least one of the PSDs up here as well. There was a year limit when that stops however, but I don't remember when. Still a few years out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some state and Federal funding is based on population. I wonder if they they take that into account when considering annexation or just the property taxes/business license fees from the area in question?

Another reason to consider City view is that the minority population in the city has dropped such that it is getting very difficult to maintain two minority seats on council.   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

12 hours ago, vicupstate said:

There is an intergovernmental agreement between Greenville and the adjoining PSDs, but I don't know a lot of details.  

I believe there was either legislation or a lawsuit between Charleston and the St. Andrews and/or James Island PSD(s) over this issue.  The result was that once annexed, property taxes continue to be paid to the PSD for 5 years, then the taxes go to Charleston.  Charleston has not let that deter them from continuing to annex in those PSDs. 

 

That makes sense. It would give the PSD's a chance to prepare for a budget reduction. The key thing in the law is that PSD's are ultimately lower on the food chain than municipalities.

Charleston gets a "crapload" of sales tax revenue due to their LOST and tourist economy. They use that funding to provide a "tax credit" to its residents, so it's actually cheaper to live in the City than the County. That would also give them more flexibility to annex the Neck than other cities may have. I know that the St Andrews PSD is almost non-existent due to annexations in West Ashley.

That being said, Greenville could, and probably should, strategically annex residential areas. I don't know if the City View area makes sense for Greenville, but in all likelihood the City may be able to offer things that the County and PSDs cannot. I personally hope they do annex because I am 100% in support of anything that reduces or removes the need for PSDs. I think they are a governmental anathema in South Carolina that should not exist.

 

6 hours ago, vicupstate said:

Some state and Federal funding is based on population. I wonder if they they take that into account when considering annexation or just the property taxes/business license fees from the area in question?

Another reason to consider City view is that the minority population in the city has dropped such that it is getting very difficult to maintain two minority seats on council.   

 

They probably do take the population numbers into account, but ultimately that's not a primary deciding factor. In my experience, population isn't a huge determining factor on state or federal funds. South Carolina does have an allotment to cities that is distributed based on population, but the General Assembly never funds it at the level required by the constitution, so the amount gained on a per person basis probably isn't enough to offset the cost to provide services (this is just an educated guess, BTW - I've never done the math).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.