THE EDITORIAL BOARD

What’s wrong with this picture?

A developer wants 802 apartments, vacation rentals and senior housing, as well as 14,400 square feet of retail space and 50,400 square feet of office space, on 68 acres on South Bear Creek Road. The land is bounded by Asheville on three sides and is near an Asheville park.

The request is going before the Buncombe County Board of Adjustment next month. The issue was to have been heard last week but, “There’s a lot of information to process,” said Bob Oast, an attorney for the Charlotte-based developer.

Why the county? Why isn’t this land in the city, where it belongs? The people who will live there will be using the city’s infrastructure and services. Why shouldn’t they be paying their fair share in support of the city?

Because the state has punished Asheville for electing members of the wrong party to city office. The state has put many restrictions on the water system and at one point tried to seize it without compensation. The city sued and prevailed in the N.C. Supreme Court.

Most cities can require that land be annexed as a condition of providing water service. Asheville cannot. "This is unique to Asheville," said Mayor Esther Manheimer.

She was reacting to a report that Asheville’s growth is slowing.

"Asheville city’s population growth rate dropped to 0.7 percent annually in 2017 and 2018, after averaging 1.5 percent annually over the previous six years,” said Tom Tveidt, an Asheville-based economist.

Also, most cities can charge higher rates for providing water outside their limits, which creates a financial incentive for annexation. Black Mountain, which buys its water in bulk from Asheville, has such differential rates.

Asheville's in its own category

Again, however, Asheville is singled out for special treatment. State law forbids it from charging more for service outside the city. Another, more recent restriction forbids the city from refusing service to areas outside the city so long as it has the capacity.

More:Asheville to change charter to thwart GOP-imposed election districts

There’s a lot of history in this, going back to how the city arguably mistreated residents of special districts established a century ago, but the effect nevertheless is to remove a tool for annexation in the here and now.

So, if Asheville cannot annex voluntarily, how about involuntary annexation? The city is under a special moratorium imposed by the state. Also, the city’s role in planning for areas near its borders, a power that would have given it a role in the South Bear Creek Road project, has been abolished by the state.

The ban on refusal of service, and reiteration of the ban on differential rates, were so patently unfair that they drew criticism from the judge who approved them. Wake County Superior Court Judge Howard Manning said the action "seems so unfair to the City of Asheville" and would be overturned if it applied to parties in a private dispute.

But, "in the legislative theater of conflict, the legislature has the power and authority to act in the manner in which it did."

In the long run, North Carolina needs a home-rule constitutional amendment under which cities and counties would run their own affairs within broad guidelines such as free elections, due process and a balanced budget. In the short run, the state needs to stop treating Asheville differently than other cities.

A good place to start would be to stop trying to force the city to adopt district elections for City Council. The at-large system is working. In a 2017 referendum, three of every four voters supported the status quo.

That should be enough for Raleigh to start setting this picture aright.

Your turn:How to submit an op-ed or letter to the editor