10/21/2009 9:58:00 PM If Williamson Valley incorporates, who gets its road?
Courtesy/Yavapai County
This map depicts the section of Williamson Valley Road that county officials say would remain in the county's possession if Williamson Valley incorporates. The Town of Williamson Valley Incorporation Committee disputes that claim and says the road automatically reverts to town ownership.
PRESCOTT - If the community of Williamson Valley becomes the Town of Williamson Valley in 2010, residents automatically would get possession of their embattled Williamson Valley Road - or not.
Town of Williamson Valley Incorporation Committee members believe the road, which currently belongs to Yavapai County, automatically reverts to town ownership.
However, Yavapai County officials and attorneys say that is not true, or maybe it could be true, but no one can find a specific statute that explains it one way or the other.
"It is not absolutely clear (that the town automatically gets the road), but we don't think that it does," Yavapai County Deputy Attorney Jack Fields said. "Nothing that we could find clearly says that will or will not happen."
He added that the county's legal position is that the county does not have to give Williamson Valley Road to the town automatically, and county officials have no intention of doing so.
Yavapai County Public Works Director Phil Bourdon said that the county would keep the road, but that the newly formed town council could petition the Board of Supervisors to relinquish the road to them.
"I have never heard of a city or town having to petition a county for a road," said Tom Belshe, deputy director of the League of Arizona Cities and Towns. "In every incorporation I have been involved with since 1993, the city or town automatically takes over the county roads within its boundaries."
Belshe said that Arizona Revised Statute 9-104 clearly explains the law. The statute reads that a county is responsible for maintaining such things as roads until July 1 the year after a town or city incorporates.
According to Belshe's interpretation, the Town of Williamson Valley would take possession of the road, but the county would be responsible for its maintenance until the following July 1, when the town would elect its council members. The Board of Supervisors appoints the first town council.
Roads built in subdivisions do not qualify as county highways, and neither side involved in the road discussion disputes ownership of those roads - a city or town automatically annexes them.
Bourdon said that even though a community incorporates, the county still could keep a road within the town's boundaries.
He cites several county-owned roads that are within a town or city's boundaries: Pioneer Parkway in Prescott; Fain Road in Prescott Valley; and Mingus Avenue in Cottonwood.
"When a city takes over and signs an agreement with the county, we keep and maintain the road," he said. "But, for a town to take over a road, it has to be by board action."
If a town does take over a previously owned county road, it would become responsible to pay for its repair and maintenance. A newly formed town council, such as Williamson Valley could have next year, could levy a sales tax on its residents to pay for town services, according to Belshe and Title 9 of Arizona Revised Statutes.
Dewey-Humboldt residents pay a one percent sales tax, while Fredonia residents pay four percent.
However, a town council could not levy property taxes. A majority of residents would have to vote for those.
Although taxes do not seem disputed by Williamson Valley incorporation members, possession of the road that winds through the heart of the proposed incorporation boundaries appears to be headed toward a legal battle.
"I called the town managers of the most recent three incorporations - Star Valley, Maricopa and Dewey-Humboldt - and everyone of them said that they did not have to petition to get a county road that was in their boundaries," Belshe said. "That is our opinion and we're sticking to it."
"I had a team of three attorneys researching this, and we were just unable to find something definitively one way or the other," Fields said. "So it may end up being something for a court to decide."
Georgene Lockwood, president of the incorporation committee, thinks that would be a sad day for the county.
"When a community comes together and incorporates, it's an amazing thing," she said. "For the county to try to subvert that effort and keep a community from shaping its future would be a terrible thing.
"I can't predict who will be on the first town council, but it is up to them to represent the will of the people."
Posted: Monday, October 26, 2009
Article comment by:
It's Carol with the Control Issues
Interesting that Carol Springer's controlling highjinks get hardly a mention i.e. the bizarre claim: "We own the road!" But Georgene Lockwood is always painted as though she "has road issues." Yes, she moved to the country, along with all her neighbors who did as well. Thank you, Georgene for representing the majority of WV. I admire your tenacity.
Posted: Friday, October 23, 2009
Article comment by:
Antonio
Even if they do not get the road, by incorporating the nascent Town of WV would be able to control all the zoning on both sides of the road, and could adopt noise abatement standards that make the road less intrusive or more aesthetic.
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
Help me understand.......
Are we serious? What benefit would incorporating do? Seriously, someone explain this to me. Pay some sort of additional sales tax and/or additional property taxes for what? Fire coverage by Central Yavapai Fire and law enforcement by YCSO? We have that now!
So for a road? Ms. Georgene Lockwood obviously has some sort of leadership skills, and is exhibiting them by continuing her "road issues". I respect you for your efforts and energy in pursuing your cause. But mam, please volunteer somewhere that will benefit us all, not just a very limited few.
We do not need this continuing separation of neighbors. All this seems to be helping is: some peoples egos, the attorneys and the media (for it helps them sell papers).
Please help me understand all this.
Thanks!
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
How did we know! The incorporation idea is truly only about the road! Sales Tax - which won't exist without bringing in commercial development - isn't the only thing a town needs to cover their expenses. If there are enough fools out there to vote for incorpration, we can also look forward to high density residential so the permit and impact fees can generate more revenue? How else are we going to pay the salaries of future town employees, i.e., the incorporation committee who obviously want to control the area! To that Committee and it's supporters - if you want all the benefits of a Town - MOVE TO ONE!
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
Tongue-in-cheek
One, just one good Wal-Mart right at the corner of Williamson Valley Road and Outer Loop would provide all the new city's revenue required in sales tax. Then the rest of the area can stay rural.
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
Where Angels Fear to Tread...
Connie, what makes you think that the traveling public and citizens have some obligation to keep WV rural and to insure you exclusionary speculations that no one else can live in the region. None! We all own that road. However, we the traveling public have interest in safety. The measurement of that safety is the job of the traffic engineers and not the opinions of amateurs with a special interest. Second, without the sales tax base, you have no way to meet the obligations that come with incorporation. I do not desire to see it as a strip commercial corridor. Neither do I expect the general public to forgo the needed improvements in the name of exclusivity, speculation and unreasonable expectations to the gain of the few.
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
Easy answers
Sandy, all you have to do is talk to people in Dewey-Humboldt. They already know everything you people have been asking about! I think your biggest problem will be the division that exists between the people who want to develop and those who don't. If you don't resolve that now, it'll be worse if you incorporate. Learn from DH's history.
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
DanG
The story tells precisely why there is an Incorporation Movement.... The Supes, Led by Springer telling Williamson Valley that they will keep the road.
If so, are they going to take Williamson Valley Road away from the City of Prescott for the 1.2 miles that are in the city?
This seems like an Obama move--to nationalize a road for the benefit of Special Interests....
OH--and the negative voices here... I wonder how many actually live in Williamson Valley?
How many are toadies to the Yavapai County Cartel of Construction, Developers, Real Estate Brokers, and Ranchers-turned-developers?
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
Connie
Lots of nasty little troll voices on this blog all arguing on behalf of shutting down the residential-wilderness-agricultural corridor in Williamson Valley and turning it into another Chino Valley commerical strip---how do you sleep at night? Such opinions reflect a willful oblivion of water issues and the damage that unrestricted growth would bring to a hi-desert ecology. Try this logic: If the county has listened to the citizen proposals for a 3-lane highway improvement project instead of jamming the 5-lane highway design down the throat of residents (who quickly become 'victims' of what they perceive to be a 'done-deal') then there would not have been any lawsuits (how sad that citizens feel compelled to sue their government!) nor would there have been any need to investigate the pro's and con's of incorporation. Farewell to an impending wasteland--Last one in Williamson Valley turn out the lights! Bye!
Those folks in Williamson Valley would do well to drive down the road and chat with some of the folks in Dewey-Humboldt! Ask them "How's that working out for you?". Incorporation just adds another level of gummint control with no benefits. Kind of like adding an HOA! If you think that gummint works well, just check out the skunks and barking dogs in PV. Officials ignore both:(
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
Sandy
Obviously we need more infomation . . . not just conjecture or misinformation . . . So where would correct information on such an important issue come from?
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
Where Angels Fear to Tread...
City revenues come from sales tax. As there is no retail or commercial business, there is only the start-up money the State provides. That money would only cover the administrative overhead for the start-up and not much else. So how do you maintain anything, pay for the services or even the town administrator's contract? Anonymous, asked for a reason why not. It is really for the proponents to give the reasons for annexation, and address how they could manage it. Would the plan include business zoning, then wait until retail is built and the sales tax becomes available? This is a daunting task for the experienced.
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
Bill
Let's face it -- this is just another attempt by a small group of people to try to stop the much-needed expansion of Williamson Valley Road. Quit wasting everyone's time and money, and get on with widening the road. If they did get enough votes to incorporate, how would they raise money? Sales Tax? I don't think so -- this is the same group that wants to ban business in the WV corridor. No businesses = no sales tax.
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
Why?
It's almost a sure thing that incorporation will result in additional taxation of the residents of WV. They will need to pay the new council members, buy liability insurance (probably required by law), the usual stuff. The bad news is they won't have any sales tax revenue (except that one little convenience market). Residents will not approve any retail, so property taxes will have to be levied. Fixing that long road won't be cheap either, assuming they take control of it. Does anyone but me get the feeling that a few advocate types (Georgine Lockwood?) are pushing for this and the rest of the (mostly) affluent residents are sort of "what, me worry?". I wonder if this is all about widening that road. If so it would be a mess down the road lol.
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
LAWSUIT LOCKWOOD RIDES AGAIN
This is just Georgene Lockwood causing more trouble. She was instrumental in the lawsuit against the county costing us God knows how much, Georgene fought the store out here for years until they finally got it through, she ran for supervisor and lost because she is so radical, and now she wants to incorporate. How much will this cost us now? In my opinion if we just banished Georgene Lockwood from Williamson Valley we would all save a lot of money.
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
Beware the County
How interesting that there should be a fight over this! Seems pretty obvious that this is about the county keeping control of the road so that they can have it wide and uncluttered. That way they can easily move traffic to and from the 30,000 new homes that they plan to the north.
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
On a road to nowhere
I suspect someone in the PRO incorporation camp need to recalculate the finances and include a sizable budget item for Gil Shaw's "LEGAL FEES" as he fights the county. Remember sales tax won't help because there is NO business to generate sales tax from.
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
"I have yet to hear anyone opposed to this incorporation set forth a clear, reasoned justification for opposing this action." -
Despite claims of incorporation advocates, there will be nothing gained by incorporation. More government = more costs = more taxes and more intrusion. By the way, where will these mysterious 'sales taxes' that the articles keep mentioning come from? From all of the shopping malls in Williamson Valley?
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
R
Laboring under an apparent misconception I always thought Williamson Valley Road was owned by Carol Springer and Steve Pierce.
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
Annie May
It's about taxation. The committee thinks we can survive on the money we would get from the state, money residents currently pay to the county would go to the town ... But in the real world we're in a recession with no guarantee of what we'll get (all municipalities are feeling cuts from the state) AND incorporation opens Pandora's Box to taxation. NO to incorporation. We're just fine right now.
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
So we are going to incorporate so we can pay higher taxes. Doesnt make sense to me.
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
George
All the property owners would need to receive a ballot. There would have to be 50 percent plus one be yes votes from the total ballots distributed. A ballot not returned would count as a 'no' vote. These are the state voting statutes.
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
Anonymous
I have yet to hear anyone opposed to this incorporation set forth a clear, reasoned justification for opposing this action. I also find it interesting that the county relinquishes "ownership" of county roads in other areas that have been incorporated, but wants to retain "ownership" of WV Rd. Why, in a period when all levels of government are seeking ways to cut costs, our esteemed county and its legal staff want to retain "ownership" of WV Rd. The county's only demonstrated interest in WV Rd. is to convert it to an obscenely big raceway to serve the interests of ranchers between Prescott and Seligman.
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
A Little Confused
I belive that any town, that is in AZ,that is next to an pre annexation area, can Do like Phoenix did to Black Canyon City.File To Stop all incorperation and keep it as is.I believe the limit is within a 5 mile limit to the incorperated Town border.
Not a Lawer so not sure.
Do know Phoenix stopped Black Canyon City.
Posted: Thursday, October 22, 2009
Article comment by:
5 lanes now
As I have been saying it is a county road and will continue to be a county road. In the near future Fair Oaks -Tonto to Iron Spings will be a paved, next will be a road to the Wineglass to connect through Paulden. Eventually W.V. will be paved to Seligman and Campwood Rd. to Bagdad. Funny we have state highway going thru the middle of Prescott yet the whinnie (residents) think the county is gonna give them something as important as a major 5 lane road. Oh that's right they also thought APS should bury a major power grid so it didn't block their view. Subvert, hardly. More like wise planning.
