by Tammy Moore Teague
At the Mansfield City Council meeting on Thursday, March 1, local business owner, Dan Yandell, spoke to the city council and voiced his opinion on the city’s plan to annex his business into the city limits.
During the previous meeting the council had discussed with city attorney, Matt Ketcham, the feasibility and costs associated with the plan. Last week Yandell was present, and addressed these issues. There are three ways to annex, Yandell said. First is by petition, second is by election and third is ordinance. He made it clear that he will be opposing any action by the council to annex his property.
One of the perks, as outlined by the council, was gaining city fire and police protection. However, Yandall stated he has always had a good response and relationship with the Sebastian County Sheriff’s Department. Next, he rebutted the claim that the city would be able to offset the cost of providing utilities verses the revenue brought in by his business. “It’s a point of delivery, that’s where you pay tax,” he stated. “The city would not receive 90 percent of taxes on my customers.” He added that he had recently delivered a building in Mena, and that was where taxes were collected. Yandall concluded that he had surveyed his customers to see how they felt about the annexation proposal. Not one single person, according to Yandell, was for being annexed and for paying city taxes. “I will fight this,” Yandall reiterated, claiming to fight for his customers and for his business.
The city attorney did follow up with comments stating that it was the responsibility of the council to at least explore the option. Councilman Dave Johnson replied that he was against the annexation and that the city had more pressing issues to address at this time.
No action was taken on annexing Yandell’s property and it was slated for more discussion at next week’s meeting.