News and Opinion from Sisters, Oregon
News and Opinion from Sisters, Oregon
Eady asked the city council February 13 to provide a public forum for the debate.
In a memorandum to the council, Eady wrote, "I would like to present my case and answer questions from the city council, hear testimony in opposition and then have the opportunity to respond."
Eady also wants the council to vote on whether or not to endorse the move.
The Barclay Ranch annexation is on the ballot for the March 11 election. The election will be the first test of a voter-approved measure requiring that city residents approve any new annexation. The council agreed to place the matter on the next council meeting agenda.
In a separate memorandum, Eady offered the city 6.74 acres as a gift for use as a park and a city hall or community center. He proposed that park development funds come from private donations and existing park funds. He also recommended a $400 systems development charge on any construction activity and agreed to an 8.5 percent room tax on his proposed 25-unit lodge.
Eady has long advocated that Sisters annex undeveloped properties adjacent to the city limits as a way of expanding the tax base.
In the past, the city has had a policy of annexing only developed land in order to tax the property at its full value.
Provisions of the Measure 47 tax "cut and cap" initiative now allow cities to add the value of property improvements even when property has already been annexed without the improvements.
Eady believes the changes make immediate annexation of the Barclay Ranch parcel advantageous to the city.
Eady also argued that the council should "come out strongly in favor of the initiative by the SAVE committee" that would require voter approval to extend city services such as water to properties outside the city limits.
Eady believes that under current laws, the city could extend services to a property they hope to annex, but a vote against annexation by those living on the property could leave the city holding the bag.
In a related issue, the Alliance for Responsible Land Use in Deschutes County has accused the city of violating its comprehensive plan by agreeing to provide water services to developments outside the city.
Howard Paine of ARLU DeCo argued that the comprehensive plan clearly states that annexation is required before city services are extended.
The law firm that represents Sisters believes that the language of the plan is intended to be advisory. Also, the city attorney believes the language is inconsistent because the plan also states that a property has to be developed to be annexed, which in turn means that it has to have utility services, streets and other services.
Paine argued that, without any implementing ordinances in place, the comprehensive plan has the force of law, and he said that ARLU DeCo is prepared to file an enforcement order to force the city to obey the plan.
"It's my feeling," Paine said, "that these agreements you've made where people have not previously been receiving services should be rescinded."
Jim Cornelius is editor in chief of The Nugget and author of “Warriors of the Wildlands: True Tales of the Frontier Partisans.” A history buff, he explores frontier history across three centuries and several continents on his podcast, The Frontier Partisans. For more information visit www.frontierpartisans.com.
Reader Comments(0)