HOT SPRINGS -- State legislators in attendance at Monday night's special meeting of the Garland County Quorum Court told a gallery of about 100 people that the city isn't using the amended enclave provision in the state code's annexation chapter as the Legislature intended.
The 10 justices of the peace who convened Monday night unanimously adopted a resolution objecting to the city's proposal to annex more than 3,000 acres bordering lakes Hamilton and Catherine.
Rep. Bruce Cozart, R-Hot Springs, lamented supporting legislation last year that resulted in Act 109, which broadened the definition of an enclave to include areas bounded by corporate limits on three sides and a lake or a river on a fourth.
Enclaves are areas surrounded by corporate limits that a municipality's governing body can annex by majority vote. Cozart was one of 89 House members to vote for Senate Bill 138. He was joined by Reps. John Vines, D-Hot Springs, and Laurie Rushing, R-Hot Springs.
"What we thought the intent of the bill was was nothing like it's being used for," Cozart told those assembled in a courtroom on the third floor of the Garland County Courthouse. "I voted for that bill. I thought it was what we needed. We didn't know what it was capable of.
"I'm as guilty as anybody in the House and Senate that voted for that bill. I apologize for making that mistake."
Cozart called the city's proposal to annex three areas under the authority of Act 109 a "land grab" defying the legislation's stated purpose to facilitate delivery of public services in areas more efficiently served by municipalities.
"I never thought the intent would be 3,000 acres," he said. "I was thinking more like a little subdivision that had 10 houses and maybe 15 acres."
Rep. Mickey Gates, R-Hot Springs, said the volume of legislation generated during a General Assembly doesn't allow legislators to analyze every bill. He was one of eight House members who abstained from the SB138 floor vote.
"A lot of times there's 100 bills that come through a committee on a single day," he told the crowd. "Being able to read everything is just not possible, so you're depending on people saying, 'Yeah, we were in the meeting. We heard the presentation. This is what it's going to do.'
"The ones who did vote for it never imagined this would happen, unless you're dealing with people who really don't care what the citizens have to say or think."
Cozart said he'll file a bill this week for the 91st General Assembly to consider when it convenes Jan. 9 that will allow residents in areas affected by the amended enclave provision to have a say in whether they want to be annexed. Land also can be annexed through a special election of city residents and property owners in the affected area or by residents who own more than half of the affected area's acreage petitioning the county judge for a voluntary annexation.
"To not be able to vote on a measure that affects their land, moving it from one entity to another, that's not right," Cozart said.
Mayor Ruth Carney, the lone member of the Hot Springs Board of Directors in attendance Monday night, said her fellow board members pre-empted the joint work session she proposed last week for city and county officials to discuss the annexation proposals.
"I was told the board was against it and that they told the city manager he couldn't be in that room," Carney told the audience.
Carney was told at the Nov. 15 board meeting that her objection to holding public hearings for all three enclave study areas during the Dec. 6 board meeting couldn't be accommodated, as it would upset the timetable for notification prescribed by state law.
Municipalities are required to publish a legal notice containing the legal description of the territory proposed for annexation and notify affected property owners by certified mail at least 15 days prior to the public hearing. Notification letters were delivered to the post office Nov. 16, and the legal notice ran in the following day's newspaper, according to the city clerk's office. Monday was the notification deadline.
The city can vote on ordinances annexing the three affected areas at its Dec. 20 meeting.
State Desk on 11/25/2016