Kingston council delays consideration of annexation request for 1900 Longville Road after hours of public comment

At a Kingston City Council work session, council members heard more than a dozen residents oppose an annexation request for 1900 Longville Road and opted not to add the petition to the next regular meeting agenda while they seek more information.

The request, submitted in the owners' names — Kevin and Melinda Mays — was the subject of sustained public comment. "Kingston should not be used to sidestep county oversight or tougher county development rules," said Casey Schnocky, a Rome County resident who told the council the parcel’s prior county rezoning application proposed 171 duplexes (342 units) and was withdrawn after community backlash. "It isn't growth, it's avoidance," Schnocky added.

Property owner Kevin Mays told the council the annexation petition is driven by a desire to obtain sewer service and to pursue what he described as appropriate uses for the land. "We all have property rights and it's important to know that," Mays said, asking the council to "rest easy" that no development was imminent.

County and local residents, however, urged caution. Mike Parkerson, who said he serves on the Rome County planning commission, flagged concerns about lot sizes, setbacks, construction quality and the narrow local roads that would bear additional traffic. "It's a slippery slope if we set precedent now," Parkerson said. Several speakers also raised school-capacity concerns: Michael Wedby said Kingston Elementary is already "at least 100 kids over capacity," and warned that additional housing without infrastructure planning would strain schools.

City staff described the legal and administrative steps involved in a municipal annexation. "There is a long step-by-step process prescribed by state law that we have to follow," said Mr. Bowling (city staff), explaining that council acceptance of a petition and a plan of service would only forward the matter to the planning commission for detailed review and public hearings, and that rezoning is a separate, concurrent process.

On utilities, Mr. Strampton (utilities staff) said sewer could be extended to the parcel if there is demand and the water/sewer board agreed, and that the city’s facilities can handle such an extension. "Sewer could be extended out there... we have the capabilities of handling that with our current facilities," he said, while also observing that property owners are not forced to connect when sewer becomes available.

After a round of council comments requesting additional information about the requested zoning, the plan of service and county coordination, council members expressed a preference to postpone formal action. Several members said they wanted more detail and recommended a workshop or special session before placing the request on an upcoming agenda. The mayor and staff confirmed the annexation petition will remain on file until council directs otherwise or the property owners withdraw the request.

The council did not vote to accept or reject the petition during the work session. The next procedural step—if the council votes to accept a petition and plan of service at a future meeting—would be referral to the planning commission and subsequent public hearings before any rezoning or final council action.