Shady Grove part of Laurel?

By Eloria Newell James, community@leadercall.com

October 08, 2008 09:42 am

— The wait is now on.
The Mississippi Supreme Court has heard arguments in the City of Laurel’s annexation quest for portions of the community of Shady Grove.
Jackson attorney Jerry Mills, representing the City of Laurel, and attorney Tim Hancock of Jackson, representing the opponents of the annexation, presented their oral arguments before the Supreme Court Monday afternoon.
Now, residents, business owners and city officials await the courts ruling.
However, many of those in the 2.5 square miles of Mississippi Highway 15 north that has been proposed for annexation are against becoming part of the City of Laurel.
During the oral hearings, where each side was given 20 minutes to present their case, the attorneys presented their cases.
Mills said the City of Laurel is already providing water and sewer services to much of the Shady Grove area.
Hancock, however, says no one in the proposed area wants to be annexed by Laurel.
Some of the residents contacted by the Leader-Call Tuesday agree.
“It’s all about the dollars and cents,” one business owner said. “I Love Laurel, but I don’t want my taxes to go up.”
Martha Windham, owner of Bee Happy Natural Foods in the Tall Oak Plaza, agreed, adding that she’s not in favor of the annexation.
“I’m personally against it. I know there are some benefits -- some pros, but there are also some cons,” Windham said. “I would prefer to pay less taxes.”
Leona McDonald, the former owner of Bee Happy, said it was the city taxes that made her decide to locate in the Tall Oak Plaza on Highway 15.
“The whole purpose for moving out here in 2000 was to avoid all the taxes,” McDonald said. “My shop was originally in the shopping center across from Kroger’s and I moved out here because it was out of the city, near the highway and I didn’t have to pay city taxes. ... If they annex, the rent and city taxes will all go up.”
Rex Jones, a Shady Grove resident, said he’s not in favor of the annexation.
Jones said he and his wife have lived in the Shady Grove community for about 45 years.
“We were originally on the University Utility Water and then the city bought them out,” he said. “We are elderly people, so we don’t pay a lot of taxes.
“I’m not against the city. I love Laurel, but this is a forest,” Jones said. “We don’t have the city’s sewer services here and I don’t think they can afford to come in and put us on their system. ... We don’t mind the taxes, because about 70 percent of the people here are elderly and don’t pay taxes.”
Sue Walker, a resident of Laurel, said she’s lived in the city for about 45 years and loves it.
“I like the conveniences of living in the city,” she said. “I like being close to things and all of the lights.”
The Supreme Court appeal process is the city’s last challenge against a judge’s 2007 ruling in the annexation case.
City leaders filed the case, which began under former mayor Susan Vincent’s administration, with hopes to make part of the Shady Grove and Sharon communities part of the city of Laurel. However, Judge Charles Thomas refused that request, citing a decrease in development and population.
“The City of Laurel has seen a continual decline in population for the last 40 years,” the official court document reads. “In spite of past annexations, the population of the city has dropped from 27,889 in 1960 ... to 18,893 in the year 2000. Such a continual decrease in population certainly calls into question the city’s need to expand and indicates that there is no current need for the city to expand its municipal boundaries. The lack of growth diminishes the need for expansion.”
However, the judge awarded the city the Pendorff area and the Sportsplex area during a phase of the annexation battle. These areas are home to about 1,000 people.
Laurel City Administrator Gary Suddith said each side in the annexation battle had to submit requests for reconsiderations in Thomas’ final judgment order.
Suddith said the city in March did file questions on four different points, the main two being two sections where the city already provides utilities.
“We are asking for the 2.5-mile area between the city limits of Laurel and Shady Grove, where the city of Laurel already provides the area with utilities,” he explained. “We originally asked for the area up to Trace Road. Now, we are asking for the area from the city limits to University Road, up to Houston Road to Highway 15. We are not requesting any of the Shady Grove utility district.”
In his ruling, Thomas did mention that having revitalization efforts downtown will help the city in the future.
“Despite the declining population and the declining economy as noted above, the city of Laurel has been fairly successful in redeveloping the existing downtown and redevelopment improved the situation,” Thomas wrote. “Redevelopment has an impact on attracting adjacent development as shown by the small businesses, restaurants and specialty stores surrounding the shopping mall located within the city.”
City leaders, Thomas wrote, should continue efforts to rebuild vacant lots and revitalize run-down buildings already within the city boundaries.
“The city of Laurel has experienced decline and continues to experience some decline, and the evidence indicates an alternative strategy for redevelopment is available to the city by taking what is no longer being used and put it to its highest potential use,” he wrote.
During recent months, the city has worked to revitalize its downtown. With the help of the Laurel Express group, several businesses have opened up downtown and many buildings have been renovated.
Thomas also cited the main reason Laurel should be granted the Pendorff and Sportsplex areas is zoning and planning.
“It is important to recall that the Pendorff parcel was almost entirely built-out but is still in need of planning and zoning,” Thomas wrote. He continued by acknowledging the city’s huge investment in the Sportsplex.
“The western parcel is made up of the multimillion dollar Laurel Sportsplex, owned by the city of Laurel, 37 single-family residences, one church, 13 mobile homes, and four businesses. ... There is an undeniable need to control growth around the city’s multi-million dollar sports facility.”
But the zoning issue also worked against the city for the Shady Grove and Sharon parcels.
“Much of the north portion of this (Shady Grove) parcel is rural, approximately 6.1 square miles of which is in agriculture usage,” Thomas says. “This Special Chancellor finds that the Sharon parcel is very largely rural with little need for the myriad of city ordinances and restrictions that are truly incompatible with a rural lifestyle.”
Following Monday’s hearing, the state court made no decision. The court took the matter under advisement. No specific date for a decision was given.
Suddith said, “once the court issues its ruling, the city will have a 10-day window to accept the rulings or back out of the case.”

Copyright © 1999-2008 cnhi, inc.