More News

Mount Airy Mayor Pat Rockinberg plans to sit down with leaders from a group of residents who had petitioned the town for annexation last year, hoping to end a four-month disagreement.

A $22,444 charge to 197 residents living in an area south of Interstate 70 has been the center of discussion and controversy since it was billed by the town in December for costs related to a failed annexation request.

During Monday night's town council meeting, Rockinberg said he recently received a call from Skip Colvin, one of the leaders of the petitioner group, asking to sit down and negotiate.

"I believe it does make sense for me to sit down and meet with petitioners and discuss options," Rockinberg said. "They want to reach out to me and I want to reach out to them...we need to close this issue out."

Colvin did not immediately return a call and email asking for comment.

The bill remains unpaid as town staff and petitioners disagree about who is on the hook for the advertising, legal fees and studies involved.

Petitioners say they were not told about the accruing costs related to the annexation, some citing verbal agreements and understandings, while some town residents and officials cite clear language on the costs for the petitioners when they entered the process.

"Ignorance of the law does not alleviate you from following the law," Councilman David Blais said at the meeting, citing a part of town code 44-3, which includes "the petitioner or petitioners shall pay to the town the sum of $2,000 as a deposit toward costs to be incurred."

A $2,000 filing fee already was paid by petitioners in October 2009.

Additionally, town code 44-8 says "Before taking final action upon any such petition or in the event that any such petition is withdrawn, the Council shall advise the petitioners' representative of the total charges incurred for review of the same by the Town Planner, services of the Town Attorneys and any consultants and costs of publication of required notices of hearing, to which 15% will be added toward the Town's administrative costs and overhead ."

Litigation has been mentioned.

"I do not agree with making the bill go away, but I do agree with negotiating," Rockinberg said.

Rick Blatchford who spoke during residents' comment portion of the meeting and lives in the current town limits, said that the officials were obligated to control the finances of the town.

"Having the executive fighting with the legislative branch...is making a mess of things," he said. "Turn it over to the mayor."

The petitioners asked the town to annex their property in September 2009, in part, to prevent Carroll County from rezoning the land for commercial development.

Joel Jessee, a petitioner living south of I-70, said recent comments in Carroll County's Planning and Zoning Commission made him wary.

"This is not going to go away," he said. "... it's already in motion again."

He said as a petitioner he was willing to work with the town, but also has the right to challenge bill.

"Right now we're right in the middle of a bill and everybody's polarized on that, but in the long run we're going to have to be a community," he said.

Mount Airy Councilman Wendi Peters said she had heard from petitioners who believe they owed the money and were willing to pay, and motioned that they be released from any obligation if they did.

The motion that residents be released from any obligation did not pass, with Peters and Blais for the motion and council members Peter Helt, Scott Strong and Dave Pyatt opposed.

acochrun@gazette.net