news-record.com

NEWS

Greensboro won’t refund taxes in voided annexation

Article
Comments (14)

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

(Updated 11:30 pm)

By Amanda Lehmert
Staff Writer

GREENSBORO — McLeansville residents who were temporarily part of the city won’t get a refund on any property taxes they paid to Greensboro, the city manager said this week.

A judge’s ruling this month overturned Greensboro’s 2009 annexation of 286 properties in the area of Mount Hope Church Road in McLeansville.

So far, property owners have paid $314,902 in taxes . All but 14 of the properties have paid Greensboro taxes in full, according to Guilford County, which collects taxes for the city.

Residents also paid an estimated $15,000 in motor vehicle taxes.

Although the judge’s decision means the three subdivisions were never officially part of Greensboro, City Manager Rashad Young said the city does not plan to refund the taxes.

The ruling says Greensboro must pay the plaintiffs’ legal fees, but Young said the judge did not make any ruling about taxes. And unless told otherwise, the city will not refund the taxes paid by McLeansville residents.

Greensboro has spent about $450,00 providing trash, road and public safety services for the subdivisions since last year, according to city staff.

News of the decision not to refund taxes upset Ron Powell, one of the plaintiffs who sued over the annexation.

“I’m not a lawyer. All I can say is: What does null and void mean? It never happened,” he said of the city’s annexation.

Powell said Greensboro should never have extended services to the area while the litigation was ongoing.

The city plans to appeal the judge’s ruling.

Contact Amanda Lehmert at 373-7075 or amanda.lehmert@news-record.com

Comments

View Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

Beachwalk

February 24, 2010 - 3:03 pm EST

"property owners paid $314,902 in taxes to the city." + "Residents also paid an estimated $15,000 in motor vehicle taxes."
This I believe.

"Greensboro spent about $450,00 providing trash, road and public safety services for the subdivisions since last year, according to city staff."
This I don't believe. Greensboro should have to pay every penny of taxes back to these people. They didn't want the services and didn't ask for them.

DeeDee

February 24, 2010 - 8:00 pm EST

The City of Greensboro went to all the expense of running water and sewage out to the areas under discussion. Some of the home owners have said that they would be happy to dig a well and possibly septic system as well. They way want to have their property checked to see if it perks first and then factor in the cost of installing a septic system and well. Maybe what the city should have done was annex the area in between so that the city would be a continuous piece. They do not seem to have an issue with annexing large chunks of land toward the west but have ignored the eastern part of Guilford for years.

DaveW

February 24, 2010 - 3:17 pm EST

There are more cows in McLeansville but more BS in Greensboro.This is par for the course.

Rick

February 24, 2010 - 3:31 pm EST

How greedy and desperate can the city of Greedsboro get?

speakup2

February 24, 2010 - 3:42 pm EST

Mobsters....

buzzman

February 24, 2010 - 4:01 pm EST

Motor vehicle taxes are paid to Guilford County. I am not aware that the City of Greensboro gets any of that money. Anyone know?
There is no way that the city spent $450,000 for that area. McLeansville residents need to sue for their taxes back.
This is just more Greensboro as usual!!!

Jeramy

February 24, 2010 - 4:38 pm EST

Really! If annexing that area is really gonna cost the city a net loss of several hundred thousand dollars a year would the city, facing a budget shortfall, spend even more to fight to keep it. There is no way the city spent close to that amount, outside of trash service and replacing relatively new street signs with brand new city signs I doubt the city spent much more than that.

obiwon

February 24, 2010 - 5:17 pm EST

I think Greensboro should shut off the water and sewer service they provided based on the owner of the property at the time asking for it to be delivered. Since the citizens sued and so far have won their court battle to remain out of Greensboro, everything appears to be null and void. Turn off the water and sewer, let them go back to septic and well water and then -- when the well water runs dry during the next drought or becomes contaminated due to the growth in the area, well, TOUGH!!!

nypd6735

February 24, 2010 - 7:01 pm EST

you are just jealous because we are

Indy1776

February 24, 2010 - 7:02 pm EST

@obiwon- Why punish the residents by shutting off their water/sewer? These are paid services (in the form of fees) and are not tied to taxes. Why would suggest endangering health over taxes?

nypd6735

February 24, 2010 - 7:02 pm EST

i feel the city gave us services we should not get our tax money back. as long as we are not paying those taxes in the future you should all be happy. i was also thinking the city can and probably will give us all 90 days to get a well then stop water and sewer to this area. by law they can do that i was reading up on it.

nypd6735

February 24, 2010 - 7:04 pm EST

i would like my vehicle tax money back i did call the tax dept and was told call back tomorrow they are looking into it....

laserguidedloogie

February 25, 2010 - 10:18 am EST

The City of Greensboro should not only pay the taxes back, but penalties and interest as well. That seems only fair and it is certainly what the government would demand if the opinion had gone the other way and taxes were owed.

Crap like this is why people have such a low opinion of government. Too many slimy politicians and their underlings looking for anyway to scam people out of a buck.

Ken
http://www.LaserGuidedLoogie.com

glenwoodresident

February 25, 2010 - 5:25 pm EST

They have temporary escaped the city tax man, congratulations to them. Now how about a city water and service fee for non-residences. $500.00 bucks a year should cover it and of course they will pay the non-residence water price for water and sewer. Who knows maybe the city can come out ahead of the deal. The city will not have to supply police protection, fire protection, garbage service, road work, sidewalks, libraries, snow removal, or bus service. It looks like a win win situation.