Court Opinion

ID: 9944067
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-26 16:12:03.421808+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:55:37.743362
License: Public Domain

I agree with the majority because the special chancellor carefully followed the law as established by this Court.
The dissent bears more than passing interest as to similar cases in the future.
I am concerned that the city granted special tax status to an extremely large utility and a large commercial entity in the proposed annexed territory, but that individual objectors do not rise to the same level of importance.
The Legislature may wish to address whether or not objectors residing in territory proposed to be annexed by a municipality have the right to exercise their wishes at the ballot box. Whether the results of such a procedure were mandatory or merely advisory, those individual objectors and all citizens would have a greater forum for the expression of their wishes.
BANKS, J., joins this opinion.