The Philomath City Council took a step Monday toward annexing 10 properties into the city, setting up a future vote by residents on the expansion after resolving questions about how to define island properties.
Following a public hearing and detailed discussion that lasted nearly an hour at the Aug. 11 meeting at Philomath City Hall, councilors unanimously adopted findings of fact in the city’s application for the annexations. The Planning Commission gave its approval at a July 21 meeting.
City staff will now draft an ordinance confirming the quasi-judicial decision and present it to the council for a vote at its Oct. 13 meeting. If the ordinance receives approval, the issue would then move forward for a public vote on the May 2026 ballot.
“These island annexations are individual lots that are completely surrounded by properties that are within city limits,” City Manager Chris Workman said. “They receive the same services that their neighbors get, primarily public safety.”
Other benefits mentioned by the city for those residents include the use of public streets, access to bus service, nuisance enforcement, public parks, trash collection and more.
“But they don’t pay for any of those services through property taxes like the neighbors all the way around them do,” Workman said.
Currently, none of the property owners have development plans.
If voters approve of the annexations, properties with residential zoning or use would be brought into the city limits three years later, or when the property is sold, whichever comes first.
The 10 properties have a combined total size of 15.5 acres with a mix of zoning that includes low-density residential, medium-density residential, industrial and public right-of-way. The city has not annexed any island properties since 2018.
During the public hearing, the owner of a property proposed for annexation on South 19th Street challenged the city on its definition of an island property.
“We are not completely surrounded by the city limits, so we shouldn’t fall into this annexation and island,” said Charlotte Williams, a lifelong resident, referring to definitions that she had seen in a prepared staff report.
Williams made references to two neighboring properties, which are also in her family and in the county. As a result, she concluded that her property is not completely surrounded by the city limits.
Workman admitted that he did not make reference in the staff report to “territories” — a term used in municipal code and state code. Territories represent a grouping of properties surrounded by city properties and such designations have been used in the past (several Cooper Lane properties in the 2018 annexations, for example). The three tax lots mentioned by Williams were categorized as a territory.
The council later approved a language revision to clarify the inclusion of territories among properties to be annexed.
Two other property owners submitted written testimony — one on South 19th in opposition and another on Pioneer Street in favor of the move.
“I’m comfortable with this, especially since it’s going to the voters. I’m always happy to let the community make a decision,” Mayor Christopher McMorran said. “From what I can see here, it meets the requirements, the conditions in our development code and we are just making the quasi-judicial decision tonight and voters get to make the policy decision about if that’s something they want in their community or not.”
The council’s decision could be appealed to Oregon’s Land Use Board of Appeals.
