A proposal to reduce the extraterritorial jurisdiction for the City of Washington is back on the table, with city staff recommending that the ETJ be shrunk from 1.5 miles outside the city limits to one mile. City Manager Bobby Roberson and Planning Director John Rodman shared a proposal to make that happen with City Council members on Monday.

“There’s five basic areas that would be taken out of our ETJ,” Rodman said of the proposal. “What we tried to do is leave those corridors in, and we would still have jurisdiction over the corridor in and out of town, so we would still have some say over what those areas may look like.”

Rodman listed the Whichard’s Beach area, portions of River Road, Market Street Extension and properties adjacent to U.S. Highway 264 as being potentially impacted. While both staff members recommended the reduction, council members had various takes on the issue.

RESPONSIBILITY WITH NO BENEFIT

For Council members Roland Wyman and Virginia Finnerty, the benefits of administering the city’s ETJ do not outweigh the burdens. Both council members made points about having to provide services to ETJ residents who pay no taxes to the city.

“That seems pretty clear cut,” Wyman said. “It’s a cost-benefit issue here. We’re accepting responsibility for all the people in the ETJ, and we’re getting nothing in return. We have an administrative burden in those areas.”

Mayor Mac Hodges also expressed support for the reduction, saying he had received phone calls from residents outside of the city limits expecting the city to handle issues. A recent issue of a proposed sand mine in the ETJ was cited as one example of an issue that demanded considerable time and resources.

PLANNING CONTROL

For Councilmen Doug Mercer and William Pitt, the ETJ not only allows the city to help guide development — it also provides a valuable zoning protection for residents in a county that otherwise has none.

“They have had that protection for all these years, and I think we ought to continue protection for those people that are in those areas,” Mercer said.

Pitt concurred, saying he believed many residents in the ETJ would be thankful for the protections zoning ordinances provide. Roberson, in turn, said Beaufort County is one of the few counties in North Carolina that does not have some type of zoning regulations.

FLOOD INSURANCE

One impact of having the Whichard’s Beach area in the ETJ is that the flood-prone road has an impact on the city’s Community Rating System rating, which qualifies homeowners for significant discounts on flood insurance. Rodman said some developments in the vicinity of Whichard’s Beach are built below the minimum specifications, affecting the rating for the overall community.

“There are only three CRS programs in Beaufort County — Belhaven, Washington Park and the City of Washington,” Roberson said. “This CRS rating is dependent on us enforcing the flood regulations inside the ETJ. We spend a lot of time, and I don’t mind helping Beaufort County citizens, but we need to start looking at a lot of focus inside the corporate limits.”

MORE TO FOLLOW

Councilman Richard Brooks, for his part, said he would like to hear from ETJ residents who would potentially be impacted by the reduction.

“I would like to know if the people who live in that area would be in favor of us taking that away,” Brooks said. “I feel like it’s disrespectful to do things without letting people know what you have in mind.”

Ultimately, the council will hear more information on the proposed reduction in November, including how many people would be impacted in each area. In order for any reduction to be made, the city would have to follow a few steps:

• Impacted residents would have to be notified by mail.
• A map of areas under consideration would be made available for inspection.
• Meeting notices will be published in the newspaper, online and via social media.

While North Carolina state law requires a public hearing to extend a city’s ETJ, no hearing is legally required to reduce the area. The North Carolina School of Government states that, “it is prudent to mirror that hearing to adopt or amend a boundary ordinance relinquishing ETJ as well.”