Is the GNR’s Editorial Board justifying an annexation fight because it’s the right thing to do, or because its an expensive mistake?

Annexation setback

Greensboro shouldn't accept its defeat in an annexation dispute without taking the case to a higher court.

The city courted trouble by waiting years to annex land in eastern Guilford County. By the time it acted, residents of three subdivisions on Millstream Road contended they should not be bound by an annexation agreement signed by the developer before they bought their property.

…Greensboro predicated its annexation on a pact with the subdivision developers a decade ago in which it would provide water and sewer and the developers would consent to annexation.

[Hartzman Question: Should municipalities create conditions in which developers can easily gloss over material information to new homebuyers?]

This agreement was recorded with the Guilford County Register of Deeds, negating protests by subsequent homeowners that they weren't aware of annexation plans.

[Hartzman Question: Aren’t real estate transactions subject to more disclosure than Register of Deeds filings?]

[Hartzman Question: Shouldn’t material information about financial implications of annexation be disclosed to new homebuyers, and if so, what documentation were Millstream Road homeowners and their attorneys provided to make informed decisions?]

…The city was slow to annex but, having gone so far into it now, should pursue it to the end.

Greensboro News and Record Editorial Board, February 14, 2010