The Pensacola City Council recently approved, by unanimous vote, thirty requests for voluntary annexation submitted by Mayor Ashton Hayward.
The requests are the first submitted under Mayor Hayward’s new voluntary annexation program announced in his State of the City address earlier this month. “To physically grow our City and increase our tax base, we must add population through annexation,” Hayward said, noting that this was also an opportunity to clean up the City’s confusing boundaries, which sometimes cut through kitchens, backyards, and storefronts.
“I’m excited to welcome these property owners to the City, and to begin taking action on this issue,” said Hayward. “With this program, we have an opportunity to simplify our boundaries and provide new residents with great City services. I look forward to bringing another group to the City Council in the near future.”
Each of the thirty properties submitted for annexation is split between the City and unincorporated Escambia County, receiving two separate parcel numbers and tax bills each year. In addition, these split parcels create uncertainty as to which jurisdiction is responsible for providing services or responding to an emergency. To simplify the situation, the Mayor’s Office partnered with the Escambia County Property Appraiser’s Office to identify these split parcels and contacted owners to propose voluntary annexation.
“This program is a great example of how two government agencies can work together for the benefit of taxpayers,” said Escambia County Property Appraiser Chris Jones. “This annexation program will help both agencies by simplifying record-keeping and curbing duplication of services.”
Approximately ten acres of land will be added to the City through annexation of the thirty parcels, which will increase revenues from ad valorem property taxes and stormwater fees. Because annexations must be enacted by ordinance, a second reading in July is necessary before the properties are officially annexed into the City.
In the coming months, the City will continue this effort by going block-by-block and door-to-door to inform residents of the costs and benefits of annexation. In many cases, the cost to annex is minimal, and residents and businesses who annex are often able to offset the cost with insurance savings. Among the benefits provided to those who annex are improved police and fire response, street lighting, street cleaning, and sidewalks. Those adjacent to the City limits and interested in voluntary annexation should contact Helen Gibson at (850) 436-5650.
Editor’s note: This is great news. Pensacola’s city limits (and therefore its population and tax base) are not even close to resembling the actual urban area, but almost every large-scale annexation by referendum effort of the last century has failed. These thirty split parcels may be the “low hanging fruit,” but it’s a good start to an important initiative.
5 comments
CJ Lewis says:
Jun 25, 2012
By what amount does this action increase the city’s property tax and stormwater fee base and how many new people will be joining the city population? Someone must know. It would be useful information in this story.
The City of Pensacola suffered a traumatic net population loss of 4,332 in the last decade. No one on the City Council seems to care to find out why it happened or where the people went. That loss was more than any other city, town or village in the State of Florida that grew by 17.6% in a timeframe that the city population decreased by 7.7%. The city’s African-American population also decreased from 33% to 28%.
Page 493 of next year’s FY2013 Annual Budget document, a high-numbered page only the most determined City Council members who read the budget document will read, reports the city lost another 84 people in 2011. Page 507 says the median age of the population increased from 37 to 38. As school enrollment within city limits continues to decline the median age increases. The numbers continue to go in the wrong direction.
There is a downside to annexation. City property owners and residents are liable for their share of the city’s total unfunded pension mess which is more like $260 million than the $116 million figure used for public consumption. The difference exists between the real versus imaginary rates of returns. Also, we are on the hook for the Community Maritime Park bond debt. The City Council made everyone and not just the CRA liable for the debt. We get to pay additional taxes and fees to include municipal utility taxes and a higher franchise fee to use natural gas.
Few living over near the Pensacola County Club or at Marcus Pointe or up north of Olive Road headed towards UWF seem eager to be annexed into our little city. Many have told me they are content to enjoy city life at county prices. The price of earning the right to have a black city garbage can is just too high for too many. Many of the people who enjoy our neighborhood’s 5-acre park for free live outside city limits. Like many city employees, Helen Gibson does not live in the city. I’m no longer shocked when city employees tell me that they would never consider living inside of city limits.
You must be joking says:
Jun 26, 2012
I suppose that is great news for the 220 million budget which must be funded by the 53,000.00 + city residents remaining!
The question is which city employees DO live in the city knowing what they know? Not many.
Dale Parker says:
Jun 26, 2012
There is no 53,000 residents …. more like 50,000. I can assure you that if I could un-annext my property I would be OUT of the City of Fools.
What a Joke says:
Jun 28, 2012
I personally believe that living in the City is well worth the cost. A paid, professional fire department shows up within minutes when a call comes in — think those volunteers in the county do that? Ditto the Pensacola police department. Those guys are great & beat the heck out of Sheriff Morgan’s crew. Want to compare code enforcement in the city & county or parks & recreation services?
Granted, this piddly group who agreed to be annexed doesn’t mean much, but there are many reasons to choose to live in the city & skip the lower level of services in the county.
E. D. Sackman says:
Jul 1, 2012
I live in a small subdivision close by the airport, in the county surrounded by city. We have good response by deputies when needed and mutual aid response between city fire and Escambia Fire Rescue in case of fire or other such emergencies. Why should I want to live in the city and have to deal with the city council? The county commission is bad enough.