A Case for Changing SC's Annexation Laws

[Spartan]

This article is not about a current annexation issue, but rather the problems caused by the quasi-governmental entities known as Public Service Districts. PSD's are part of the historic anti-city attitude in South Carolina. In the case of Charleston and James Island, the results have been fairly chaotic and generally unproductive. 

http://www.postandcourier.com/news/charleston-has-just-months-to-begin-untangling-a-decades-old/article_da236362-35b9-11e7-8519-a36005d08b14.html

[Spartan]

This is not directly related to annexation laws, but it's a situation that is affected by them. The article is about three fire departments in Spartanburg County that want to merge to help deal with financial and personnel issues. In South Carolina, "special purpose districts" exist that allow for local government services to be provided to places that lack a local government. These SPD entities have taxing authority and "elected" boards to govern them under the guise of their host County's authority.

Quasi-governmental agencies to exist in rural areas because of their need in urban and urbanizing areas. I personally think that emergency services are and should be a function of government. In the sense of a rural area, a volunteer fire department is probably the most realistic solution to fire protection, but under no circumstance should they have taxing authority.

http://www.goupstate.com/news/20170522/3-spartanburg-county-fire-departments-look-at-merging

 

[Spartan]

This is another article about the issue above. A good way to solve this issue of ineffective fire service and lack of funding is to finance and staff all fire department activities through the County government. You benefit through having economies of scale, better purchasing power for new equipment, technology, etc., and fire fighters that receive salaries and benefits.

http://www.goupstate.com/news/20171119/county-council-backs-merging-3-rural-fire-departments

[vicupstate]

Doughnut holes present problems for SC cities

[cabelagent]

10 hours ago, vicupstate said:

Doughnut holes present problems for SC cities

Thx...please advise developments. There are donut situations in many SC municipalities...SC annexation laws are antiquated/out dated.

[ZUMAN2]

On ‎1‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 8:42 PM, cabelagent said:

Thx...please advise developments. There are donut situations in many SC municipalities...SC annexation laws are antiquated/out dated.

I doubt the SC annexation laws are ever changed regarding donut holes unless it's pro-donut holes.

[Spartan]

It won't change as along as anti-government Republicans maintain their stranglehold on South Carolina politics. It's been pretty terrible for the state in most respects. I realize that makes me sound like a liberal, which I am not, but I am for good government. Not funding the services that people need and want (like roads for the past 15 years) and not allowing local government the tools it needs to function at its highest capacity is a disservice to all Carolinians. 

 

[vicupstate]

SC Supreme Court rules against Awendaw annexation

The S.C. Supreme Court ruled this week that two Awendaw residents and the Coastal Conservation League may challenge a 2009 town annexation that cut through the Francis Marion Forest to reach a 360-acre privately owned tract.

The ruling could affect the town’s ability to enlarge its limits into the Francis Marion National Forest.

And that could ultimately affect how much development occurs there that might complicate the U.S. Forest Service’s efforts to manage its vast 260,000-acre forest that offers crucial habitat and recreation.

But the larger question — was the 2009 annexation legal? — might not be over. The town could continue to appeal an earlier judge’s ruling that the town had erred when it annexed the land.

Awendaw Mayor Miriam Green and Town Administrator Bill Wallace both declined to comment on the case Thursday.

The town incorporated in the 1990s and gradually has grown into a series of large — and largely rural — parcels along a 10-mile stretch of U.S. Highway 17, just north of Mount Pleasant. Awendaw’s formation enabled its residents, not County Council, to decide future land use there.

Its website states Town Council’s goal of maintaining its existing rural character “yet grow to a moderate-density residential community that has conveniences and some light industrial areas.”

To some extent, the annexation’s opponents were concerned that if the Nebo annexation stands, it could enable Awendaw to annex the much larger Fairlawn Plantation tract next door. But as the case wound its way through the courts, 5,600 of Fairlawn’s acres have been protected through conservation deals.

Still, the Coastal Conservation League estimates that the town still could annex about 10,500 acres in unincorporated Charleston County within a mile of its current town limits.

[ZUMAN2]

HB 3661 is currently under review that would allow one municipality to “leap-frog” over another municipality in order to annex unincorporated properties.   This is all to allow the Town of James Island to reconnect the town from one it's former boundary iterations.  Being the State of SC, I'd be shocked the bill doesn't get passed but the unintended consequences will be interesting.    I don't believe the bill can specifically be directed to the benefit of the Town of JI.

http://www.live5news.com/2019/03/20/james-island-incorporation-bill-has-support-critics/

 

[vicupstate]

SC has spent a century making the annexation laws as difficult as possible for cities to annex, yet when it comes to this ONE quasi-town, they have changed one law after another to allow them to annex in a fashion that they would NEVER let any other town or city do.  This makes no sense whatsoever.  Hopefully, it does get anywhere but I imagine it will pass in time.   

This part was REALLY shocking. I assume this would ahev to apply to any town or city in order to be constitutional : 

 Neighborhoods would also be able to join the town if 25 percent of registered voters petition. Bill 3661 must pass through state legislation before this goes forward.

 

 

[ZUMAN2]

54 minutes ago, vicupstate said:

SC has spent a century making the annexation laws as difficult as possible for cities to annex, yet when it comes to this ONE quasi-town, they have changed one law after another to allow them to annex in a fashion that they would NEVER let any other town or city do.  This makes no sense whatsoever.  Hopefully, it does get anywhere but I imagine it will pass in time.   

This part was REALLY shocking. I assume this would ahev to apply to any town or city in order to be constitutional : 

 Neighborhoods would also be able to join the town if 25 percent of registered voters petition. Bill 3661 must pass through state legislation before this goes forward.

 

 

Yes,  and nothing done yet to address the  "donut hole" issue, at least not to my knowledge.

[Spartan]

South Carolina is a Home Rule state, so they can't craft legislation targeting one specific place. I don't see anything about the petition in the official text; and although it could potentially be bad for Charleston in the James Island area, it seems like it would open up a lot of opportunities for cities across the state to aggressively annex.

Here's the link to the text: https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess123_2019-2020/bills/3661.htm

More importantly, though, I don't know why anyone who lives on James Island would want to annex into that sham of a town. They offer no substantive services and are poorly managed, despite having to raise taxes a few years ago.

[ZUMAN2]

Does anyone know about any active legislation to liberalize SC annexation laws?  I heard a Charleston city council member say today that there is so trying to confirm/ get specifics.

 

[vicupstate]

^^ I have not heard anything, but i can't imagine it passing even if it were introduced. The Legislature is more conservative than ever.  

[ZUMAN2]

I did another search this morning and found this:

2023-2024 Bill 3236: Local Government - Annexations - South Carolina Legislature Online (scstatehouse.gov)

This bill - Bill 3236 - would allow municipalities to annex an area that is completed surrounded by a municipality.

I don't know if this is the same language that the bill has been filed in the past before the SC State legislature or not but it seems like common sense.  Maybe that why is won't pass.

 

 

[vicupstate]

On 1/28/2023 at 9:34 AM, ZUMAN2 said:

I did another search this morning and found this:

2023-2024 Bill 3236: Local Government - Annexations - South Carolina Legislature Online (scstatehouse.gov)

This bill - Bill 3236 - would allow municipalities to annex an area that is completed surrounded by a municipality.

I don't know if this is the same language that the bill has been filed in the past before the SC State legislature or not but it seems like common sense.  Maybe that why is won't pass.

 

 

Well it is sponsored by two Republicans, so maybe it will get a fair hearing at least. One of them is from Mt. Pleasant and since Charleston, North Charleston and Mt. Pleasant would be be beneficiaries of this bill, that is where you might expect opposition to be highest. 

[ZUMAN2]

This article was in the Post & Courier yesterday (Mar 4) concerning House Bill 3236.

https://www.postandcourier.com/mount-pleasant/proposed-sc-bill-spreads-fear-of-being-annexed-in-historic-black-communities/article_db335134-b788-11ed-95ff-e3b9dc596777.html

In summary the article, which was not in-depth, gave an overview to 3236 and interviewed a couple of opponents who voice 
concern that the bill would allow the forced annexations of historic African-American communities in the Mount Pleasant area.

The article did not discuss the bill's impact in SC outside of the Charleston area.

I'm not sure who provides trash and fire protection to these A-A areas today.  There is no public service district in the East Cooper area.

 

[Spartan]

It seems like they would want to refine it to prevent cities from using this to strategically annex around challenging parcels and then involuntarily annex those parcels. 

[vicupstate]

Apparently Charleston and North Charleston aren't the only cities will disputes over annexation

Landrum is suing Campobello over land dispute