Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Annexation Dispute topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cherokee County adopts resolution asking state lawmakers to intervene in Holly Springs annexation dispute
Summary
The Cherokee County Board of Commissioners unanimously adopted a resolution asking the county—s legislative delegation to assist after the City of Holly Springs annexed a parcel the county says lies outside an agreed growth boundary.
The Cherokee County Board of Commissioners on Sept. 16 unanimously adopted a resolution asking the county—s legislative delegation to seek remedies after the City of Holly Springs annexed a parcel the county says lies outside a negotiated growth boundary.
The resolution, introduced and moved for adoption by Commissioner Wetherbee, singles out Parcel 15N26-158 (301 Lower Union Hill Road) and cites the county—s Growth Boundary Agreement with Holly Springs dated Nov. 1, 2022. Commissioner Carter seconded the motion; the board voted unanimously to adopt the resolution.
The resolution says the county formally objected to the annexation through the Department of Community Affairs and that the DCA declined to appoint an arbitration panel under the statutory process cited in the resolution as "OCGA Section 3,630 six-one 110" (language as stated in the meeting record). It says the county—s objections were made both informally and by written resolution and that the annexation has resulted in litigation and local costs tied to altered infrastructure demands, changes to the Hickory Flat community character and complaints that residents in the affected area lack representation in Holly Springs elections.
Commissioner Wetherbee presented the resolution and moved for its adoption, saying members of the county—s legislative delegation had offered to "explore options for legislative support" to better define or limit annexations. Commissioner Carter seconded; after brief discussion the board voted aye and the resolution was adopted.
The resolution asks the county—s delegation to intervene in the local dispute and to address what the board described as deficiencies in the DCA land-dispute resolution process. The resolution text included citations to the county—s Growth Boundary Agreement and to prior General Assembly resolutions (House Resolution 1199 and Senate Resolution 818, referenced in the reading) urging municipal/county boundary cooperation.
The board took no additional immediate action beyond adoption of the resolution and did not specify the precise legislative steps it will ask the delegation to take; the text asks for assistance "in addressing the county's concerns" and to help correct the DCA process cited in the resolution.
County staff confirmed the motion carried unanimously; no recorded no votes or abstentions were reported.
Why it matters: The resolution asks state lawmakers to become involved in a local annexation dispute and calls attention to how state-level dispute processes are applied (or not) in disputes between a county and a chartered city. The county framed the annexation as inconsistent with a negotiated growth-boundary agreement and as producing litigation and community impacts around Hickory Flat.
