01/11/1988 Meeting (3) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e area recently had come through ten bad years that had forced them to examine every dollar. He also said most residents of Willow Creek Road were retired and would receive no needed or non-existen~ benefits from annexation. Mr. O.Connell said services already had been put into the area for development that had not occurred yet, and until development did occur, no more land should be set aside. About 200 acres now was vacant, he said, and he reported no sewage or water problems. Mr. O'Connell said annexation now did not make sense and would result in added tax burdens. He said he would favor annexation if development were likely, but that was not the case. Mr. O.Connell said he opposed an increase in taxes without a chance to vote. He said residents could not afford annexation and preferred to use the money for development of Eugene area businesses. e Harold Chapman, 51 Chapman Drive, spoke in opposition to the annexation request. He distributed a packet of information containing copies of a remonstrance petition, an appellate judgment filed with the Oregon Supreme Court on September 9, 1987, and testimony and articles regarding a "double-majority" annexation procedure used in Gresham, Oregon. Mr. Chapman said he spoke on behalf of the River Road/Santa Clara Constitutional Rights Committee, which contended that the island annexation procedure authorized by Chapters 222 and 199 of the Oregon Revised Statutes violated the privileges and immunities clause of the Oregon Constitution (Article I, Section XX) and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution. Mr. Chapman said the committee included citizens who served on the boards of the River Road/Santa Clara Water, Park, and Fire districts. Mr. Chapman said the island annexation procedure did not allow for an election within the affected area, and he reviewed the information he had distributed. Mr. Chapman said the double-majority annexation procedure recently used in Gresham soon would be appealed to the Oregon Court of Appeals, where its constitutionality would be challenged. Mr. Chapman said that following final action of the State Supreme Court on triple-majority annexation cases, the Court of Appeals recently had activated 67 triple-majority and island annexation appeals. He said it appeared that no islands had been created legally that would be subject to the island annexation procedure, thus the 67 island annexations might or might not become vehicles to test the constitutionality of island annexation procedure. Mr. Chapman cited Oregon law (ORS chapter 222.750) and the Oregon Supreme Court case of Thurber v. McMinnville as evidence of a right to vote on island annexations. When island territory was within the jurisdiction of a boundary commission, he said ORS 199.490 paragraph Sa provided that when a city annexation was initiated as provided by ORS 222.750, the e MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 11, 1988 Page S