Our VIEW The Panama City News Herald November 5th issue The American right of secession Panama City and the Eagles’ Hotel California appear to have something in common. You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave. That’s what James Morris learned Monday when he attempted to convince the city’s Planning Board that he should be allowed to de-annex his auto repair shop at 1301 E. 11th St. Morris is well known in Bay County for giving advice on auto repairs — he has a recurring column in this paper — and for his Libertarian views. “I think secession is an American right,” Morris said, according to The News Herald’s Ben Kleine. “It’s nothing personal; I’m just making a statement. I’ve given it 12 years. No one has ever thanked me for collecting taxes.” It seems to us that a property owner ought to have as much right to annex out of a city as he or she did to annex into it in the first place. Beyond being the right thing, it occurs to us it’s a way to make sure those seeking to annex properties — municipalities love to grow their tax base — follow through on whatever actions/policies they offered to make the idea attractive in the first place. So we think Morris has a right to leave Panama City if he wishes — especially if he is willing to bear the added cost of using the city’s water and sewer services without being officially part of the city. If he leaves, Morris no longer will be required to pay the 6.5 percent sales tax to Panama City and will enter Bay County, where there is no sales tax. Setting the sales tax issue aside, it’s important to note that Morris voluntarily annexed his property into the city 12 years ago — it’s not like he bought property already in Panama City and is trying to hijack it. Along with making a point about the rights of the individual and getting his business clear of a tax burden, Morris also wants to choose his own sanitation service — Panama City residents are required to use the city’s trash service — and was at one point frustrated by the behavior of the city’s code enforcement department and the requirement that he get a permit for a solar power panel. Planning Board officials countered that they did not want to set a precedent by allowing an individual to de-annex and that Morris would find government regulations and problems on the other side of the divide if he succeeded and began dealing with bureaucrats from Bay County. Those arguments seem shaky to us. When there are options available, individuals should have the right to decide for themselves which government they choose. And, if Panama City has an annexation policy, it also should have a de-annexation policy that is clear so individuals and businesses know what kind of commitment they are making. This would be different if Morris had bought property inside the city. In that circumstance, you could argue that he does not have the right to de-annex property that historically has been a part of the city. It also would be different if his property were surrounded by other properties that are part of the city. But that isn’t the case here. Ultimately, Bay County is oversaturated with cities that at times seem to exist to add extra burdens to taxpayers, provide government jobs even when the job is redundant, and fund other middlemen. The city’s annexation policy is flawed as it goes to this request, and the City Commission should carefully examine Morris’ request when they vote on it later this month. After all, Bay County is the unique place where in 2008 a city, Cedar Grove, was actually undone by its own citizens, the first in the state to unincorporate. While the planning board is worried about the precedent it might set by letting Morris out, the commission ought to be worried about the precedent that might be set if it denies Morris, who, generally speaking, isn’t one to go gentle into that good night if he believes a government process is flawed.
Posted on: Wed, 05 Nov 2014 16:45:23 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015