Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About The Siuslaw news. (Florence, Lane County, Or.) 1960-current | View Entire Issue (Jan. 16, 2021)
SIUSLAW NEWS | SATURDAY, JANUARY 16, 2021 | 5A Opinion City’s annexation plan is disingenuous at best, deceitful at worst (Editor’s Note: View- point submissions on this and other topics are al- ways welcome as part of our goal to encourage community discussion and exchange of perspectives.) The Florence City Council will soon decide the fate of 70 homeowners in the original Idylewood subdivision, prompted by a Eugene developer’s request that the City an- nex Oceana Drive — a 24-foot-wide public road that runs between Rho- dodendron Drive and the developer’s property. This developer, Ben- edick Holdings LLC, has been trying to develop their acreage between the Idylewood and Heceta South neighborhoods for more than 10 years. After failing to obtain subdivi- sion approval from Lane County, they’re now try- ing with the City — and they’ve found a willing audience. That’s where Oceana Drive comes in. The Benedicks don’t own Oceana, of course; it’s a county road main- tained by Lane County. But that meager 24 feet of asphalt where Oceana touches Rhododendron gives Benedick — whose property is a half-mile away from Rhody — the contiguity with the City that they need to argue for annexation. And essentially, the City says, in applying its “triple majority” stan- dard, only the Benedicks count. Triple majority means the request comes from 1) a majority of owners, who 2) own a majority of the property area, and 3) own property whose value represents the ma- jority of the total. Pub- licly owned property like Oceana Drive doesn’t count toward triple ma- jority requirements, so the Benedicks get a pass. This is what’s called a “cherry stem” annexation; we’ll leave aside for the moment the fact that this kind of annexation is ille- gal in 16 U.S. states, and allowed only for govern- ment property in three or for others. The City of Florence says they’re OK, large- ly because they’ve done them before; notably, Driftwood Shores, where the “stem” was Rhodo- dendron Drive. However, Oceana (and a portion of Saltaire and Sandrift) have something that no previous annex- ation had: A poison pill. When the City an- nexed Rhododendron Drive, none of the prop- erty owners alongside the road were under any ob- ligation or requirement to connect to the sewer, the Benedicks put in place the Covenants, Condi- tions and Restrictions (CCRs) for Idylewood. All of these documents are recorded by Lane County, and now govern the 70 lots of the original Idylewood subdivision. They are self-renewing, forever. Taken together, the Im- provement Agreement and the CCRs say that Guest Viewpoint By Bruce Hadley Idylewood Owners, LLC nor to become part of the City. In fact, almost none have. But Idylewood and Oceana Drive are a very different case. You see, be- fore the Benedicks began to develop Idylewood, they entered into an “Im- provement Agreement” with the City of Flor- ence. It was signed Feb. 18, 1981, by then-mayor Roger McCorkle, and Ju- lius and Justine Benedick, doing business at that time as JMB Enterprises, Inc. Then, on June 7, 1982, “the cost of installation of sanitary sewer lines with- in the subdivision shall be borne entirely by the then lot owners.” This isn’t talking about individual hookups; the Agreement specifically says “the cost of major trunk lines” shall be shared pro-rata. Also, note the use of the word “shall,” meaning non-optional. In addition, the Im- provement Agreement and the CCRs say that those 70 owners are re- sponsible for all road improvements: “paving with curb and gutters, storm sewers, and side- walks,” whenever the City requests it — “at the sole discretion of the city council.” And, the CCRs add a helpful timeline: “It be- ing acknowledged that these improvements are generally required within one year following annex- ation.” By the way, both of these documents are rig- idly laid out as “non re- monstrance.” That means we, the 70 homeowners, may not object to any of these events, and we may not complain. So, no matter what the City says about “voluntary” sewer hookups, that just isn’t so. And, the true poison in this pill is that the 70 homeowners — mostly retired, fixed-income — have to pay for the sew- er line construction and all improvements on our street. (Spoiler alert: One of those improvements will very likely be an at- tempt to fix our existing stormwater problem, which the City’s Storm Water Management Plan described in detail in Oc- tober 2000.) The result of all this, should Benedick’s peti- tion be approved: We’ll pay for the infrastructure, right up to his figurative doorstep. Once the property is annexed, the homeown- ers can be required to improve the street and install the sewer lines at any time. This is not just a financial burden; it is also a liability that will affect the marketability of our homes. It is disingenuous at best — and deceitful at worst — to claim that this annexation petition affects only the Benedick property. This decision has significant finan- cial ramifications for all properties along Oceana Drive, which will be on the hook for street im- provements and sewer lines, and are much more likely to be forced to an- nex to the City. The City keeps trying to sell this annexation as a public benefit. If that’s true, why doesn’t the city council put this up for a vote? Or, at a minimum, suspend its consideration until everyone can partic- ipate in a truly open and public hearing? LETTERS Annexation issues and flooding There was extreme flooding of San- drift Street in Idylewood back in 1996 when the rainy season dropped 121 inches. The area was saturated with wa- ter and Sandrift Street had 3 to 4 inches of water above the blacktop. Benedick had a 4-inch pump at the corner of Oceana and Sandrift Streets running day and night for weeks on end trying to keep up with the amount of water coming out of the area where Benedick Holdings LLC now wants to build 40-plus units. Since 1996, the rain amounts have been 7 to 8 feet, which filled the ditches up to the blacktop but not the 10 feet that was recorded previously. More re- cently, the water was not pumped out and 2 to 3 feet of stagnant water stayed in the ditches for months until it was fi- nally absorbed into the ground. The east end of Oceana Street, San- drift Street and Gullsettle Court are prone to flooding as this area is close to the seasonal lakes. This is Oregon and there are many more extreme rainy seasons to come. Tampering with this sensitive wetlands area, especially when the current flood- ing issues have not been addressed by the developer, will cause further prob- lems to the current homeowners for years to come. Annexation of a wetlands/wildlife area is not something the City of Flor- ence should never allow. —Ken Chipps Florence Annexation not the ‘cherry stem’ but it is ‘the shaft’ I’m writing to express my opposition to the annexation of Oceana Drive, and my deep concern that the Planning Commission and the City Council ap- pear to not care less about the people this annexation will adversely impact. All they seem to care about is the roughly 49 acres that can be developed at the end of Oceana Drive, the income it could produce for the Eugene mil- lionaire that owns it, additional tax rev- enue for the city, and possibly money for themselves and friends — knowing the line of work they are in. When I watched on TV (terrible au- dio and video) of the Planning Com- mission go through the motions of rec- ommending the annexation, they kept referring to it as a “cherry stem” annex- ation, the stem being Oceana Drive and the cherry being the 49 acres at the end of Oceana to be developed. The owner, Benedick Holdings, LLC, will become richer, while the home owners on Oceana will become poorer. Their taxes will be higher, they have to pay for the road upgrades that will be needed and they will be losing some of their front yards with the widening of the road. So, instead of calling Oceana Drive “the stem,” I think it should be called “the shaft” because that’s what the res- idents on Oceana Drive will be getting. And it’s not just Oceana Drive. I think our Mayor and City Council have their eyes on the whole Idylewood area for future annexation, which nobody wants. — Brent Johnson Florence ‘Robber Barons?’ In the Jan. 13 edition of Siuslaw News, Mr. Jeff Talbot wrote in the second paragraph of his Letter to the Editor (“Inclusiveness, Compassion and Posi- tivity”) he mentions that “our town” was “...built by loggers and fishermen. That is certainly true but this country was also built by robber barons who had little compassion or concern for those very loggers and fishermen — only for their own pockets and bottom line.” Mr. Talbot makes the jump from our own little town of Florence direct to “this country” as if we should now equate the entire country and it’s citi- zens to the issues we have here in Flor- ence. Robber barons in Florence? Maybe he was referring to folks like Davidson Industries in Mapleton who employed hundreds with good pay- ing jobs, who supported the Mapleton School District for decades, or our Flor- ence and Cushman mills that are no longer in business that also employed hundreds — not to mention the as- sorted small businesses that lived and thrived along with those mills. Was he referring to the fishing indus- try of small family owned businesses that fought the Siuslaw River in order to get out to the ocean on a daily ba- sis in all weather to support and feed their families and pay taxes to support schools and infrastructure? Or the many food stores that thrived here and paid taxes and supported the local economy? Shame on you, sir, to describe these long-time residents and businesses that have supported our local economy and risked their own time and money to be successful and strive for a better life — and then equate them with robber bar- ons? Further, Mr. Talbot stated, “Hundreds of residents that have no say or vote in the matter and are being completely ig- nored.” Florence just had an election, and hundreds did vote. If one chooses to live outside the boundaries of the election process, then so be it. Then, Mr. Talbot went on to say that “…not one resident of the Oceana and adjoining streets and subdivisions wants.” My congratulations for taking the time to walk and knock on every door and speak to every single resident. Per- haps it is more accurate to say you are referring only to the folks who appar- ently signed the “No To Annexation” letter rather than a blanket statement of all who live in your stated area. —Dana Rodet, 37-year Florence resident Moved to Idylewood to enjoy tranquil beauty • Annexation: noun — The act or an instance of annexing, or adding to something larger, especially the incor- poration of new territory into the do- main of a city, country or state. Annexation is sought by the builder (Benedict Holdings) so it can continue Cloudcroft Lane through our tranquil, Idylewood community. With this will come radically in- creased traffic through our community and will make walking in our private streets dangerous. Included in this annexation plan will be: The taking of your property to make room for sewers, sidewalks and light poles. Property easements will com- pletely change our wonderfully private, green community, into an all-night lighted environment to invite outside foot traffic. Crime will likely follow. Think those sidewalks and lights are free? Think again, we will be billed for them. Some of us will lose all of our green privacy to give way to the ease- ments. The installation of sewer lines; we have septic tanks and allowing the city to charge us for sewer lines will cost over $200 per foot to each homeowner. And thousands more dollars to have it connected to your home. You get: Annexed by saying nothing. Watch the greenery fade to stained concrete and the wildlife with it. Count on your property values declining in- stead of rapidly increasing as ours is the type of neighborhood people pay a ton for to get away from city zones. The City gets: To take away a chunk of the property you paid for (or are paying for already) along your street. They also get to bring in heavy equip- ment for months, blocking driveways, creating noise and ruining the beautiful trees and landscape. They will also get to take away your green natural privacy walls and open our community to end- less cross traffic as folks will start cut- ting through our neighborhood to get to and from Highway 101. The City will also get to build side- walks and install light poles in our wire- less/no pole community. And finally — the best part — the City will get to bill you thousands of dollars for doing it all. That money will not be well spent on home improvements, but it will help lower your property values. If you are fortunate enough to have lived here your whole life, this may not sound serious enough. However, like so many others, I moved here from a large city in California. I moved to Idyle- wood to enjoy the green privacy, peace and tranquil beauty. Neighbors love to walk in the street together, to walk dogs and visit with neighbors, without fear of speeding cars racing for Rhododendron Drive. This is the community I invested in like many others. I love the fact that there are no sidewalks here and the community is dark at night, discourag- ing unwanted behavior outside. We did not buy property here to watch it turn into another city atmosphere. We have a beautifully unique com- munity here that we share with the wildlife. People who do not live here want to change that forever. I hope this gets your attention. Speak up for your property rights. The City Planning Commission and mayor are rushing this by in hopes no one will notice until it is too late. Once annexed into the city, you cannot de-annex. —Ken Vida Florence
