Late last year, the Board of Josephine County Commissioners was embroiled in controversy after a lawsuit was brought by the Josephine Community Library District over the county granting a landowner’s request to rescind their property from the district, and thus being exempt from paying the associated tax.
In response, the county reversed the property’s removal from the district, and the lawsuit was dropped. Since then, the county has updated their policies to make it easier for landowners to both opt in and out of the library district.
On Wednesday, Sept. 4 the county hosted a presentation by legal counsel fully explaining the requirements for annexations and withdrawals during their weekly business session at Anne G. Basker Auditorium in Grants Pass.
“There are 28 different types of special districts that are listed in Chapter 198, which is the statutes that apply to special districts,” said Assistant Legal Counsel Stephanie Nuttall. “Some of those types include rural fire protection districts, water control districts, library districts and transportation districts. Of note is that the law enforcement service district is not included in that list. So they have their own separate set of rules. What we’re talking about here only applies to those on that list.”
Nuttall first discussed how special districts are formed, noting the following requirements: “You have to have a prospective petition, an economic feasibility statement, plus the same contents in your petition as you would have with an annexation or a withdrawal. Formation is through an election. So once all those criteria are met, an election is held and if more than 50% of the votes are cast in favor, the district is formed.”
Moving on to requirements for district annexations and withdrawals, Nuttall went on, “You have to have a cash deposit or security required regardless of the petition type, not to exceed $100 per precinct affected. Our current practice has been to require the cash in the amount of the filing fee. That’s all that we’re currently requiring as a deposit for annexation or withdrawal petitions. And that then covers any costs. If the annexation or withdrawal is successful or as the statute calls it, affected, then the district is responsible for those costs. And if the annexation or withdrawal is not affected, the petitioners are responsible for those costs.”
Nuttall acknowledged that signature requirements have been a major source of contention in the community recently. “The language regarding signatures for annexation requires the lesser of 15% or 100 electors or the greater of 15 owners or owners of 10% of acreage,” she said.
The most common situation with annexations, Nuttall noted, is single homeowners petitioning to join the library district, in which case the signature requirement is redundant because there are no other affected parcels that would need to sign off.
In the case that a petitioner attempts to get a large swath of land annexed into the district, and a majority of the affected property owners do not give their signatures, but the minimum required 15% do, an election involving the entire district would be prompted. This situation has not been encountered by the Josephine Community Library District since its inception.
“The territory annexed in becomes subject to any outstanding indebtedness, the permanent rate limit and local option taxes,” Nuttall added.
Withdrawals can not be authorized within two years of a district’s formation. This is not a problem for anyone seeking a withdrawal from the Josephine Community Library District since it was founded in 2017.
Another key requirement for a property seeking to withdraw from a special district, Nuttall said, is that it is not feasible for said property to receive services from the district.
This requirement was hotly contested when the matter was in the spotlight months ago because the district claimed that because inhabitants could walk to the library to check out a book or access books over the internet, service to the property was therefore feasible. On the other hand, the petitioning citizen, and some of the county commissioners, argued that while inhabitants of a property could be served by the library, the physical land itself could not. This, however, was also disputed, as studies have shown property values are impacted by the presence of a library district.
If the property owner files for withdrawal again, as he has said he intends to, this matter of feasibility would likely be contested once more.
Following Nuttall’s presentation, Commissioner Herman Baertschiger explained why the county had to introduce an updated policy regarding special district petitions:
“I want to make sure that people understand our process was flawed here last year. And the reason was there’s not one single statute that covers this. It’s a series of statutes that go all the way back to the 1960s… The legislature needs to fix this because it’s just been a mishmash of statutes that have just been and bits and pieces of statues that have been put together and that’s why it was so complicated.”
Baertschiger also noted that the county wants prospective district members to fully understand that their property would be responsible for the district’s debt, and Nuttall reiterated that an additional signature is required acknowledging they are aware of this when they fill out the petition.