In 1990, the city of Charlotte had a population of just under 400,000. By 2000, its population had grown to about 540,000, a 35 percent increase over the decade. While rapid, the city’s growth did not come from 145,000 additional people moving into its existing borders. Actually, about 61,000 people moved into the city per se; most of the city’s growth came from annexing 68 square miles of land and 84,000 people in the 1990s.

Under North Carolina law, Charlotte did so with ease and without the consent of those annexed.

In addition to the state’s largest city, many other North Carolina municipalities regularly make use of annexation. Raleigh, Jacksonville, and Fayetteville each added at least 35,000 to their populations during the 1990s by overtaking nearby areas.

Overall, the state’s 189 largest cities and towns added 360,000 people within their borders between 1990 and 2000. They added 580,000 in population through mainly involuntary annexation during the same period.
Nor is the power and appeal of annexation limited to the state’s largest cities. The town of Carolina Shores, for example, is planning to forcibly annex the Village at Calabash neighborhood. The move would increase the town’s population by nearly 50 percent from its current 1,482.

The annexation process

Under North Carolina law, it is relatively simple for a municipality to annex. State law sets out a specific process that must be followed. The municipality must pass a resolution of intent, adopt an annexation report, and hold an informational and public meeting by certain deadlines.

The annexation report must contain accurate maps of both the municipality and the area to be annexed. It also must include information about how the town or city will provide services to the area it is adding. Ten to 90 days after the public hearing, the municipality must enact an annexation ordinance. The annexation must take effect no sooner than one year after the annexation ordinance is adopted.

While municipalities may not annex purely agricultural land, the definitions of “urbanized land” are generous. One allows annexation if 60 percent of the lots in an area are used for residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, or governmental purposes and 60 percent of the total acreage, not counting those used for commercial, industrial, governmental, or institutional purposes, consists of lots of three acres or less in size.

In addition, at least one-eighth of the external boundaries of the area to be annexed must be common with existing municipalities borders.

If the municipality follows the correct procedure, it will prevail. As Carolina Shores Mayor Jack Elliott recently put it to those opposed to his town’s proposed annexation, “In the final analysis, you’re going to lose it, unfortunately.”

North Carolina’s annexation laws are among the most liberal in the nation. In South Carolina, by contrast, at least 75 percent of property owners representing at least 75 percent of the property value of a proposed annexation must consent for annexation to occur.

Arguments for and against

The argument for forced annexation is best summarized by Fayetteville’s position on the topic, as presented on the city’s web page:

People often reap the benefits of living near or adjacent to a city or town without contributing to the tax base. They may work or shop in the city, use city-maintained streets to reach their destination, come under municipal police while in the city, take advantage of traffic improvements, street lights, sports facilities, cultural facilities, parks and festivals, all without bearing financial responsibility for those services. These people also add to the problems of traffic congestion and litter. Annexing those areas ensures that the areas both receive the benefits of city services and bear the costs of those services. Economists call these people free riders who vehemently object when their free ride is endangered by annexation. Municipal dwellers, therefore, subsidize the quality of life of the urbanites living just outside the municipal boundaries.

Opponents of forced annexation note that the ultimate issue is people’s right to participate in and consent to government actions that effect them, not governmental efficiency and free ridership.

“Citizens of an area facing annexation should have the right to vote,” said Jonathan Hill, director of Citizens for a Sound Economy North Carolina.

“Involuntary annexation turns the idea of democracy on its head and should be stopped.”

Lowrey is an associate editor at Carolina Journal.