Laserfiche WebLink
• Whether the area is proposed for long-term development. <br />See Exhibit B, pp. 15-16 for the full text of the policy.2 Each of these criteria also contains a <br />requirement relating to the provision of city services. <br />In this instance, the Council may consider the property for disannexation because (a) the area <br />proposed to be disannexed comprises more that an individual parcel (although the fact that it is <br />only four parcels makes this point arguable given the language of the policy); (2) the area is not <br />populated with residential development (criteria #6); and (3) disannexation of the area will not <br />create any keyholes or islands. <br />The primary issue with disannexation of the proposed area as far as the city is concerned is that of <br />lost potential property tax revenue. Dr. Kraft's parcel is now (and will be when he builds his new <br />clinic) developed. The real question is the possibility of future development on the Cobb and <br />Morrison properties. At present, the Cobb properties are subject to an Ag exemption that make <br />their taxable value very low. Staff is concerned that with expansion of HWY 271 and other <br />development in the area, these properties may become attractive for either residential or <br />commercial development which would greatly increase their taxable values. <br />In any event, it must be remembered that once disannexed, given current annexation law, it would <br />be nearly impossible to reannex the property, and the city would be giving up all future property <br />taxes forever. <br />Should Council wish to undertake disannexation proceedings with respect to this property, the <br />following procedure will need to be followed: <br />February 10, 2025—City Council Meeting—The City Council will discuss the petition and <br />determine whether or not to proceed. If Council wishes to proceed, it should consider and act upon <br />the accompanying resolution authorizing the disannexation process. Should Council wish not to <br />proceed, it should consider and act upon the accompanying resolution declining to proceed. This <br />is in the discretion of the Council. If Council determines to proceed, from here, the entire process <br />must be complete within 90 days. If Council determines not to proceed, there will be no further <br />action on the petition. <br />If Council chooses to proceed: <br />February 11--21, 2025—The city attorney will send out notices to other taxing entities, service <br />providers, and railroads as necessary, which must be done by 30 days before the first of two public <br />hearings. <br />March 13, 2025—Publish notice of first and second public hearing in the Paris News (publication <br />of notices of hearing must be between the 20`i' and the 10th day out from each public hearing; <br />because of the way the calendar falls, we can do a single publication for both which saves on <br />publication fees).. <br />March 24, 2025—Regular City Council Meeting -1St Public Hearing <br />Z The policy for disannexation is simply the inverse of the policy for annexation. Other than the prohibitions against <br />keyholes and islands, the policy on disannexation is sparse. Likewise, state law regarding disannexation is simply that <br />the procedures used in disannexing property must not conflict with the procedures for annexing property. <br />