
http://www.omaha.com/news/metro/papilli ... 01fa6.html
Full Proposal:
http://www.gretnane.org/DocumentCenter/View/841

Based on a little number work, I would estimate that it would add about 3,500 or so resident to the city.nebugeater wrote:If you read the complete report one thing I found interesting is that the population numbers are based on old official census numbers. The actual population is probably closer to double that number. The report even stats something to the effect that a sizable number of new homes are in the areas since the census numbers that are used.
We are in the same ballpark. Based on a little sleuthing I was doing earlier this week with some school info and others I was guessing it may be 4KGarrett wrote:Based on a little number work, I would estimate that it would add about 3,500 or so resident to the city.nebugeater wrote:If you read the complete report one thing I found interesting is that the population numbers are based on old official census numbers. The actual population is probably closer to double that number. The report even stats something to the effect that a sizable number of new homes are in the areas since the census numbers that are used.
State law currently prevents annexation across county borders.Silverspoon wrote:Not that Im a fan of Gretna, Im a huge fan of making our city as large as possible. Why doesnt Omaha try and annex Gretna? I believe we share a border on the north side of Gretna.
Higher end homes with SID debt and septic systems maybe?Omababe wrote:Hmmmm ... Looking at that map, they seem to be excluding some closer-in higher-end housing along 370, plus a couple enclaves of uber-upscale housing along 168th. I would think they would want to snag those areas. It looks like one pocket of higher-end residential just east of 168 is covered, however.
I don't think so, but you are buying their debt as initial cost of annexation and as Omaha has shown with the substandard roads in SIDs, Gretna will eventually have to deal with the septic systems of the "acreages". That may affect the long term attractiveness of the areas.Coyote wrote:Is the city 'required' to provide sewage systems for SIDs full of septics?
Property tax on the dealership property. Sales tax if Gretna passed one. Keeping Lavista from getting it. Keeping Chalco from getting it. Keeping Springfield from getting it. All are reasons to annex it.Trips wrote:I always thought that 144th was the line for La Vista and Gretna. I searched for an agreement but could not find anything. Would the Woodhouse dealership provide much tax revenue since you pay based on where you register a vehicle?
Well, Chalco doesn't actually exist. It's just a CDP.bigredmed1 wrote:Property tax on the dealership property. Sales tax if Gretna passed one. Keeping Lavista from getting it. Keeping Chalco from getting it. Keeping Springfield from getting it. All are reasons to annex it.Trips wrote:I always thought that 144th was the line for La Vista and Gretna. I searched for an agreement but could not find anything. Would the Woodhouse dealership provide much tax revenue since you pay based on where you register a vehicle?
I can't pull the link from my phone's download history, but LaVista's 15 year annexation plan circa 2013 has the Harrison to Giles corridor West to 168th.Trips wrote:I always thought that 144th was the line for La Vista and Gretna. I searched for an agreement but could not find anything. Would the Woodhouse dealership provide much tax revenue since you pay based on where you register a vehicle?
Chalco never converted to a town? TILS.Garrett wrote:Well, Chalco doesn't actually exist. It's just a CDP.bigredmed1 wrote:Property tax on the dealership property. Sales tax if Gretna passed one. Keeping Lavista from getting it. Keeping Chalco from getting it. Keeping Springfield from getting it. All are reasons to annex it.Trips wrote:I always thought that 144th was the line for La Vista and Gretna. I searched for an agreement but could not find anything. Would the Woodhouse dealership provide much tax revenue since you pay based on where you register a vehicle?
But as i said before, I'd expect more aggressive annexations in the next decade as the Sarpy cities try to stake out claims for their futures. This one and Papillion's are just the start of a trend.
bigredmed1 wrote:Property tax on the dealership property. Sales tax if Gretna passed one. Keeping Lavista from getting it. Keeping Chalco from getting it. Keeping Springfield from getting it. All are reasons to annex it.Trips wrote:I always thought that 144th was the line for La Vista and Gretna. I searched for an agreement but could not find anything. Would the Woodhouse dealership provide much tax revenue since you pay based on where you register a vehicle?
About 10 years ago La Vista and Gretna drew their line at 168th Street.jessep28 wrote:Papillion and LaVista have a boundary agreement.
About 20 years ago, there was some discussion about Chalco incorporating but nothing came of it. (My parents bought a house in Echo Hills in 1976 and they've always had an Omaha address, lol.)bigredmed1 wrote:
Chalco never converted to a town? TILS.
That grain mill was a lot of things back in the day. I would sure want ground water testing before getting saddled with that as a city.damonhynes wrote:About 20 years ago, there was some discussion about Chalco incorporating but nothing came of it. (My parents bought a house in Echo Hills in 1976 and they've always had an Omaha address, lol.)bigredmed1 wrote:
Chalco never converted to a town? TILS.
I think the Chalco powers-that-be saw the writing on the wall--there was no way they could get to 10k population that would make them annex-proof. Funny that no one has wanted to annex them, after all! I wonder why that is, to be honest. 40+ y/o houses, can't be a lot of debt after all these years.
Only Omaha has to abide by the 10k population rule and they can't annex into Sarpy anyway. Maybe there was pressure from Papillion and/or La Vista?damonhynes wrote:I think the Chalco powers-that-be saw the writing on the wall--there was no way they could get to 10k population that would make them annex-proof. Funny that no one has wanted to annex them, after all! I wonder why that is, to be honest. 40+ y/o houses, can't be a lot of debt after all these years.
I did not know that, but anyhows I seem to remember the initiative / watercooler talk was circa 1990-95 or so.Coyote wrote:As a CDP Chalco had a population of 10,994 in the 2010 census.
So other cities can take ones that are larger than 10k? Is there a limit?TitosBuritoBarn wrote:Only Omaha has to abide by the 10k population rule and they can't annex into Sarpy anyway. Maybe there was pressure from Papillion and/or La Vista?
Isn't it a law affecting class 1 cities in Nebraska? Of which Omaha is the only one.HR Paperstacks wrote:So other cities can take ones that are larger than 10k? Is there a limit?TitosBuritoBarn wrote:Only Omaha has to abide by the 10k population rule and they can't annex into Sarpy anyway. Maybe there was pressure from Papillion and/or La Vista?
It's even less of a factor because Chalco isn't incorporated. I believe La Vista's annexation goals involve annexing Chalco.TitosBuritoBarn wrote:Sorry. I reread my statement and its clearly a little confusing. I only meant that the 10K rule isn't a factor here because Omaha isn't eligible to annex Chalco.
Monday’s three-hour meeting drew a crowd of more than 100 to Gretna Middle School. About 35 property owners, a couple in tears and many with raised voices, listed off concerns they had with the plan. Only a few spoke in support of it.
“This community has been working toward this annexation and this growth area all along for the last eight years,” said Keith Marvin, the city’s planning consultant. “It’s something that’s been on the radar for a long time.”
IIRC, there was a bill before the State Legislature a few years back about annexing across county lines, and failed, I can't remember how bad it failed or if it even came up for a vote.OmahaFan wrote:Omaha can’t annex sadly across county lines like the others have said but if Gretna really wanted to stick it to Papillion and Sarpy county they should start something in the legislature or make a ballot issue to be Annexed into the city of Omaha. That would surely freak out Papillion I’d think. Just thinking out loud.
Once Omaha got that, it would just scrape across Sarpy north of the midline and then make a mad rush west before Lincoln could grab anything.Coyote wrote:IIRC, there was a bill before the State Legislature a few years back about annexing across county lines, and failed, I can't remember how bad it failed or if it even came up for a vote.OmahaFan wrote:Omaha can’t annex sadly across county lines like the others have said but if Gretna really wanted to stick it to Papillion and Sarpy county they should start something in the legislature or make a ballot issue to be Annexed into the city of Omaha. That would surely freak out Papillion I’d think. Just thinking out loud.