|
|
|
Last Updated: November 16, 2007 A favorable straw vote was taken in March 1956 to consolidate all of the towns from Roads End to Cutler City. (7) A meeting was held in February 1964 to start plans to consolidate the area from Roads End to Cutler City. In March 1964 the decision was made to call the combined cities "Lincoln City". A vote for consolidation was to be held on May 15th, 1964. Taft rejected the consolidation in June 1964 but consolidation won approval by a narrow margin on December 8th, 1964, after the next election. (7) In late February 1973 Jerry Parks, with fifteen signatures combined from Roads End and East Devils Lake, petitioned the State health Board to annex Roads End and East Devils Lake because of sanitation problems. (Capitol Journal - 2/28/1973 & NG - 3/1/1973) On receipt of the petition, the Oregon State Board of Health on March 1, 1973, requested that Lincoln City initiate procedures for annexing the Roads End and East Devils Lake area. The Lincoln City Council acknowledged the request but took no action. The State Health Board explained that on September 16, 19 and 20 of 1973 the Health Division initiated a preliminary survey to determine whether or not evidence existed to support the allegations of the petitioners. The evidence was verified and the State Health Division subsequently ordered Lincoln City to furnish the state with sanitary sewer plans for both areas by December 15, 1973. The city's answer was "we can't afford it". (NG - 10/11/1973) In December 1973 the Lincoln City Council adopted an ordinance establishing a policy of providing municipal utilities services outside the city limits by contract. Under the new ordinance no water, sewer or other services will be provided by the city outside the corporate limits except by written contract executed by the property owner and approved by the council. The property owner must also agree to waive any future remonstrance to annexation and the contract will specify the terms or conditions under which the council may execute annexation proceedings. (NG - 12/27/73) In October, 1974 the Oregon Shores Conservation Coalition voted against a proposal to permit cities to annex adjoining areas without the vote of residents to be annexed. A coalition spokesman said Roads End in Lincoln County is threatened by over development and annexation ambitions of Lincoln City. (Oregonian - 10/7/1974) The Lincoln City Council approved negotiations with the Sal-la-Sea District Improvement Company to purchase the Roads End and Sal-la-Sea water systems on April 13, 1977. The roads End Water District budget committee commented that they could see no advantage for the city to purchase the water system unless there is some purpose like annexation. Questions which then cropped up are possible annexation of the Roads End area to the city and a desire by Sal-la-Sea II to use a six-inch city water line which runs to Pixieland. (NG - 4/14/1977) A study group was appointed by the REIA in December 1977 to look into the question of annexation by Lincoln City. REIA did not want to see Roads End lose its identity, but realizes it may be financially impossible to do anything else given the costs facing Roads End residents for an upgraded sanitary sewer and water system. (NG - 12/15/1977) The Roads End Improvement Association voted 19-16 on January 15, 1978, to send a fact sheet listing the pros and cons of annexation along with the next REIA bulletin to all property owners. They will be asked to submit an opinion by return mail. (NG - 1/19/1978) Moves to annex Roads End received a setback on February 12, 1978, when the Roads End Improvement Association heard of the many problems associated with annexation. Grant money recently received from the FHA for drought relief in the Roads End area was going to be applied to the whole north of highway 101 water project. Also at one recent meeting the Lincoln City Council passed a rate resolution affecting Roads End without discussing it, then asked REIA for comment. The REIA was additionally concerned that the area may lose their R-1A zoning. (NG - 2/16/1978) The Roads End Improvement Association decided on March 12, 1978, to ask Lincoln City to prepare a fact sheet explaining what annexation would mean for the Roads End Residents. Lincoln City suggested that maybe the city should start the consent procedure instead of the association. (NG - 3/16/1978) By a one-vote margin on April 9, 1978, the Roads End Improvement Association decided to proceed with distributing annexation information to area residents. The reason given was that annexation had been talked about for several years and it was time to have the issue resolved. (NG - 4/13/1978) The results of the opinion poll for annexation of Roads End drew an overwhelming number of "no" votes. The final tally was 192 "no" votes and 32 "yes". (NG - 6/15/78) In 1979 the Lincoln City Planning Director said " It's not in the best interest of Roads End to continue to exclude themselves from the city" pointing to the area's inclusion in city's urban growth boundary as "de facto annexation". "If they are in the urban growth boundary and do not want to be annexed then they are in a dilemma. A dilemma complicated by the fact that they are currently getting a high level of city services, but no police protection. We want to make sure that any development in the area has some character and is not a runaway development". REIA replied that "the biggest reasons for opposing annexation are that the people of the area don't feel the cost of becoming part of the city justifies the benefits. They are afraid the Lincoln City Planning Commission will approve commercial developments for Roads End the same way it has approved developments along the beach in Lincoln City. If we join Lincoln City we will be faced with a planning commission which likes to grant variances to motels and high rises. Lincoln City has a runaway planning commission which is only concerned about money and the retired people who live in Roads End don't care about that". The present zoning for Roads End is strict. It allows single family dwellings only and prohibits mobile homes and commercial establishments. (NG - 10/11/79) The engineering consultant who designed the Roads End sewer system said "any effort to annex Roads End into the city, something that can only be done by a vote of the people in Roads End, will continue to fail. There's no feeling of oneness with the city for common goals or unity. The community wishes to preserve the high standards that have been prevalent in the past and there is a seething apathy against annexation. Residents of Roads End are sophisticated and they think of growth in different terms than other areas of the County". (NG - 10/11/79) A Roads End Improvement Association newsletter dated July/August 1982 reviews a letter and information sheet sent out by two property owners soliciting annexation to Lincoln City. The newsletter suggested that the information be sent to all property owners in Roads End, not just the few that had received it. The newsletter further states that there were several errors in the request to annex and then gave a list of pros and cons of annexation and recommended against it. (REIA newsletter - July/August 1982) This section is under construction. At a general meeting of the Roads End Improvement Association on October 14, 2000, the Lincoln City Manager presented his comments on annexation during discussion of the topic of continuing water service from the city: "Let me assure you right now that the city has no firm policy regarding annexation of this area. The city is open to discussions; particularly part and parcel are the discussions on a renewed water contract. I personally believe that you're part of this community, that the city could better serve your needs and that we should be entertaining discussions concerning long-term annexation. There are many opportunities that exist for service that you do not now have. You're part of this community and the impacts from this area to substantial populations and a substantial number of housing units here. There is an interdependence and we can't ignore that. So, the city is prepared to be open in discussions concerning annexation if you would like to pursue those. My personal opinion is the city will not force annexation unilaterally without cooperation of the homeowners and the property owners of this area." "I do think that annexation will be a topic of discussion on a renewed water contract. So, while I do not personally believe and will not recommend to the City Council a unilateral forced annexation (and that leads to all kinds of legal battles and animosity) I do believe that annexation is something that I look for a win/win mutual-benefit situation. Now I believe that that can be done." "Annexation, if it occurs, should occur at the initiation of Roads End rather than the city. The city ought to react to that. In other words there ought to be a request for annexation. I personally feel that, again, the city would not force unilateral annexation. I'll be honest with you; we don't even know who would vote on it. There can be a vote (and I'll take these one at a time)...there can be a vote on annexation, but we don't know who votes on it. We don't know if the city votes on it or you vote on it. That's not clear. The courts have not decided that issue. That tells me that the best possible scenario, if there were to be an annexation, it would be a mutual thing; it would be a win/win situation. And if the city simply sits back and says 'We'll wait for you to come to us for annexation' I don't think the discussions ever get to win/win. So, I think the only way it would occur on a favorable basis for the city and the district would be on a negotiated basis. Keep in mind that the city can offer some things that the county can't offer, and I've mentioned a few. One of those is land use. We're now going through a land use plan for Taft that is tailor-making a new and very special zoning district just for the core of Taft. I'm prepared to tell you I believe the same thing could be done for Roads End where you could initiate the kind of zoning that you want for your future and provided it makes some kind of sense I think the city would be very receptive to it. That is not, probably, a possibility that you have in the county." "Then we come to what is the legal basis of annexation? Who decides the annexation? I can just tell you that our City Attorney, who I believe is one of the best land use attorneys in the state, does not have a definitive answer on that question. The city's policy, I believe, will be, and certainly my recommendation to the City Council has been, we don't annex large areas without the consensus of the people. I think anything else is not productive. I don't know if the City Council will actually adopt that as a strategy or not but that's been my recommendation and will continue to be so. I believe that in discussions of the renewed water contract there needs to be a discussion of annexation. Let's talk about it." (REIA general meeting notes - 10/14/2000 For the full text of this meeting, please see one of the REIA Board members.)In a meeting with the Lincoln City Manager on February 1, 2001, it was stated to the water negotiating committee that a permanent water agreement could be reached quickly if we include annexation in "x" number of years as part of the contract. He was adamant that the annexation issue should be addressed somewhere in the negotiations for a new water contract. He said that the city needs a sense of what Roads End wants as part of annexation. The city would then hold a general election of registered voters, although he says he still doesn't know who should vote; Lincoln City only, Roads End only or both? Although he said one of the benefits of annexation for Roads End would be enforcement of property rights, Measure 7 is a big stumbling block. Until the city is sure of what they will be dealing with, all bets are off as far as enforcing property issues are concerned. The constitutionality question will be resolved this year and then it will take two or three years to figure out what it means. Other ways the city could annex Roads End is if we had such a crime problem that we (Roads End) demanded Police protection, or if the current water supply runs out Roads End could be cut off as secondary (outside city limit) users. (REIA Water Committee notes - 2/1/2001 For the full text of this meeting, please see one of the REIA Water Committee members.) At a Lincoln City Chamber of Commerce meeting February 23, 2001 a city council member discussed where expenses might be cut or revenues increased to overcome the current budget shortfall. During that discussion he said he supported annexation of Roads End. He estimated that annexation of Roads End would dump enough revenue into the city's general fund to more than cover the shortfall. He stated that to make annexation possible Roads End residents would have to support it, something that's been uncertain in the past. The City manager said it wouldn't be an immediate solution to the city's current problems and that he didn't get any indication that Roads End residents wanted to annex from a recent meeting with a group from Roads End. A Roads End resident brought out the fact that annexation of Roads End would be "complicated". One of the main factors in that complication is the R-1A zoning for the area that the residents hold "sacred". Lincoln City's Director of Finance said that Roads End residents could expect to see a total property tax increase of around 50% if they were annexed, part of which would be made up in reduced utility bills. (NG - 2/28/2001)
|