LAS VEGAS, NV – The city of Las Vegas cannot annex a proposed portion of Clark County if the majority of property owners oppose the proposal, the city staff confirmed at a special city council meeting Monday. The meeting was held to hear feedback from property owners in the area about the proposal to annex
Prior annexations have left "islands" of unincorporated Clark County that are surrounded by the city of Las Vegas. The city says that the plan to annex the land is in accordance with NRS 268.572, which states:
1. Sound urban development is essential to the continued economic development of this State.
2. Municipalities are created to provide the governmental services essential for sound urban development and for the protection of health, safety and welfare in areas being used for residential, commercial, industrial, institutional and governmental purposes, or in areas undergoing such development.
3. Municipal boundaries should be extended, in accordance with legislative standards, to include such areas and to provide the high quality of governmental services needed therein for the protection of the public health, safety and welfare.
4. Areas annexed to municipalities in accordance with such uniform legislative standards should receive the services provided by the annexing municipality as soon as possible following the annexation.
5. Areas annexed to municipalities should include all of the urbanized unincorporated areas adjacent to municipalities, and piecemeal annexation of unincorporated areas should be avoided, securing to residents within the area proposed to be annexed the right of protest.
The city approved the resolution to annex ten different areas, accounting for 872 acres of property, into the city at a Jan. 3 city council meeting. Five city council members (including since resigned Ricki Barlow), as well as Mayor Carolyn Goodman, all voted in favor of the resolution. Councilman Steven Seroka was the only vote against the resolution.
The city maintains that those in the proposed area of annexation – which the city identifies as 1.7 percent of property owners – are benefiting from subsidized city services, paid for by the remaining 98 percent. The city estimates that annexation will cost residents living in the proposed area an extra $341 in taxes per year, which will atone for an annual cumulative subsidy of "$450,000 – $500,000."
Monday’s public hearing allowed for property owners in the proposed annexation area to voice their concerns. The resolution has already been opposed by the Clark County Commission, saying that the city should not annex land strictly for tax purposes. A Facebook page, as well as a website, www.stopcityannexation.com, have been created for those in opposition to the city’s resolution.
The properties proposed for annexation fall within Wards 1, 3, and 5. The city has identified the ten proposed annexation areas as:
South of Alexander Rd, north of Cheyenne Ave, east of Rainbow Blvd, and west of Jones BlvdNorth of Gowan Rd, east of Jones Blvd and southwest of Rancho DrNorth of Smoke Ranch Rd, south of Cheyenne Ave, east of Jones Blvd and west of Decatur BlvdSouth of Cheyenne Ave, west of Jones Blvd, and north of Cartier AveSouth of Smoke Ranch Rd, north of Vegas Dr, west of Decatur Blvd, and east of Smith StSouthwest of Vegas Dr and Michael WayNorth of Vegas Dr, south of Coran Ln, and west of Allen LnSouth of Coran Ln and west of Simmons St, and parcels generally located northwest of Vegas Dr and Tonopah DrSouthwest of Fremont St running north of Glen AveNorth of Sahara Ave, south of Charleston Blvd, east of Jones Blvd and west of Edmond St.
Residents in the proposed annexation area have until Feb. 27 at 5:30 p.m. to submit a written protest to the city. Letters must be mailed in or hand delivered to the City Clerk’s office.
Image of Las Vegas Mayor Carolyn Goodman via Julie Jacobson/Associated Press