91视频

Glenn Gross will never forget the blizzard of ’06.

There was a flurry of at least 70 annexation measures on Salem’s ballot that November. Gross, an assistant planner for the city of Salem, said people don’t truly realize what that means. Each annexation measure requires hours upon hours of work, he said.

Everything connected to the annexation must be backed by hearings and notices. City staffers must meet with applicants before preparing a report. Then they publish hearing notices, hold public hearings, file more staff reports, draw up maps, create ballot titles and so on.

鈥淢ost of the departments in the city are involved in one way or another,鈥� Gross said.

Salem residents began voting on every proposed annexation in 2000. Previously, annexations were mostly housekeeping matters for city councilors.

The status quo changed in 1976, when Corvallis residents opted to vote on annexations. Drawing inspiration from Corvallis, Oregon Communities for a Voice in Annexations formed 20 years later and started a minor revolution. City by city, the organization encouraged voters to take annexation votes away from their city councils.

The group’s members believe voters, not elected officials, should decide the fates of proposed annexations to regulate growth in their communities.

Gross said voting has mostly created more paperwork. In communities where people vote on annexations, they usually rubber stamp them as casually as city councilors did previously. In the 12 years Salem voters have decided annexation issues, Gross said they have rejected only one proposal.

Even leaders of Oregon Communities for a Voice in Annexations admit the trend to vote on annexations has done little to slow the growth of cities.

鈥淚n our experience, the vast majority are approved,鈥� said Jerry Ritter, secretary and legislative affairs representative for the organization.

The number of annexation proposals has decreased over the years, said Gross. One reason is that the sour economy has slowed construction. Another reason is that properties annexed into city limits and urban growth boundaries become 鈥渆nclaves鈥� surrounded by city property. As enclaves are cleaned out, fewer annexation proposals come from cities themselves, Gross explained.

Annexation proposals go before voters in only 32 of Oregon’s approximate 118 cities. That equates to 10 percent of the state’s population. Corvallis was the first city to vote on annexations, starting in 1977. The latest one, Wheeler (population 445), started in 2008. Salem, with its 152,000 residents, is by far the largest city to vote on annexations.

Voting on every annexation proposal larger than an acre costs a lot of money, Gross said.

鈥淚 don’t have a dollar figure, but it’s a lot of money because of all the staff time required,鈥� he said. 鈥淧lus, the advertising is expensive.鈥�

To try and streamline that process, the city of Sherwood has proposed a measure that would lump together annexation approval for approximately 24 properties it has pegged for future industrial development. If Measure 34-202 were to pass, properties in the 300-acre Tonquin Employment area could be annexed 鈥� pending approval by City Council.

In 2010, the city adopted a concept plan for employment-focused development in the area, which sits in the city’s northwest corner. Julia Hajduk, planning manager for the city of Sherwood, said city law requires a separate vote for each property owner’s request for annexation. City elections take place four times a year.

That can be a costly and lengthy process, Hajduk said. Getting voter approval out of the way also gives developers a greater degree of certainty.

鈥淎ny uncertainty is a concern and it can be a delay in terms of time, and time is money,鈥� Hajduk said. 鈥淪o, trying to remove that uncertainty is why the council chose to put that on the ballot to basically have the city vote up front.鈥�

Not everyone agrees, however, and Hajduk said she has seen campaign signs opposing the measure. She said that while annexations initiated by property owners generally are approved by voters, the most recent city-initiated annexation bid 鈥� for a 258-acre chunk of unincorporated land known as the Brookman area 鈥� was denied last year.

Ritter said it’s important that people have a voice in how their community grows. Some of the larger proposals are shot down occasionally, he added.

His organization began rolling like a juggernaut through the Willamette Valley a dozen years ago or so, spurred by the success of a vote-on-annexation campaign in Philomath. The group went through the region, convincing voters in Monmouth, McMinnville, Salem, Sherwood and others to follow suit.

November ballots in these communities now regularly come with annexation proposals. Canby, Jefferson, Molalla and Oregon City are among the cities that have measures on the ballot this year.

鈥淲e do not actively push for communities to adopt voter annexation ordinances, but we do help guide them through the process when they come to us for assistance,鈥� Ritter said.

One of the great things about voting on annexations, he said, is that it ruffles all of the right feathers.

鈥淧ublic and private interests have been trying to outlaw voter annexation laws in the courts and in the Legislature since Corvallis voters passed the first one,鈥� Ritter said. 鈥淐ity governments and developers see these local laws as an impediment to planning efforts. The citizens who front the initiatives see aggressive annexation policies as imperiling the fiscal health of their communities and denying them an effective voice in the process.鈥�