Staff outlines two annexation petitions; council asks for legal review and prefers separate resolutions

City staff gave an introductory presentation on two annexation petitions at the April 27, 2026 Incla City Council meeting and council members directed staff to return with legal guidance and recommended next steps.

Community Development Director Chris Massenet told the council the city received two petitions in March and that the two submissions together initially covered about five vacant residential parcels totaling roughly 18 acres. Staff recommended the council modify each petition area to include additional adjacent parcels to regularize the city boundary and to better comply with the comprehensive plan; with the added parcels the two areas would total roughly 38 acres with an assessed valuation near $8.5 million.

Massenet explained the common 60 percent petition method for annexation and the Boundary Review Board review steps. He advised that water and sewer stub-outs exist near the proposed annexation areas, which can reduce utility-connection costs. "If the council were to combine both of these together as one annexation and approve it with the modified additional parcels, that would authorize the appellants to go out and then try to secure signatures," Massenet said; he noted the statutory 60-day timeline for council to set a meeting date to accept, reject or modify a petition.

During discussion, council members questioned whether the Tarragon parcels alone would meet the 60 percent signature threshold and raised staff-workload concerns if the city must process two annexations simultaneously. One council member asked staff to consult the city attorney about allowing a condition that applicants cover consultant costs to limit staff burden; another council member said the committee recommended running the petitions separately. Public works and planning staff flagged that processing as two separate petitions could be more equitable for individual parcel owners and avoid one annexation being weighted by a high-assessed-value parcel.

Council direction and next steps

Council members signaled they are open to reviewing material and asked staff to prepare two separate resolutions to accept, reject or modify the annexation areas and to consult the city attorney about possible conditions such as payment for consultant services. Staff noted that if the council chooses to combine parcels, the appellants would still need to secure signatures representing 60 percent of valuation before the Boundary Review Board verifies the petition. Staff will return with attorney guidance and any recommended resolutions; council discussed returning to the next meeting to take formal action within the 60-day statutory window.