Ten reasons to vote no on annexation issue

We have a very important election coming up on Feb. 7. As you know it is the Missouri primary election, and we will also vote on whether we feel the city of Jackson should annex the Heartland Materials LLC quarry. Listed below are 10 reasons why many of us feel you should vote no on this annexation.

1. As the mayor states in her article, and we agree, Jackson is the "city of beautiful homes, churches, schools and parks." However, we do not think adding a quarry into our city limits will add beauty to our city. Let's stick with more environmental friendly industries, like Nordenia.

2. We understand that the city is looking for growth, and we're pleased that Nordenia will soon be moving into the Jackson Industrial Park. We understand they will employ 30 to 50 people, plus there will be no adverse effects to their neighbors. If the goal is to add growth by annexing a quarry, we question what business, knowing the adverse affects a quarry can cause (such as dust, traffic, noise, structural damages), is going to want to build a new business near a quarry.

3. What about Hubble Creek, which runs right through our park? Pictures have already been taken by homeowners who live between Jackson and Fruitland of how dirty and murky the creek now gets after just a little rain shower. How will this look running through our park? What will this be like in five to 10 years?

4. In a story that appeared in the Southeast Missourian on Oct. 11, it said that once the quarry is up and running, there could be 80 to 120 trucks driving on County Road 601 each day. This sounds like a lot of road repair cost.

5. In that same story it said that eight to 10 full-time jobs would be kept when the quarry is up and running. Considering all the adverse affects to the surrounding area, would only eight to 10 full-time jobs really be worth it? What happens if the partners decide to sell out in a year or so, thus removing any possible local self-regulation? From what we understand this is a fairly common practice with quarries.

6. Since the city has only annexed the highway right of way to the quarry, we will be jumping over about three miles of land (except for a couple properties), which is not annexed to the city. Providing services to the Heartland Quarry will be very costly to the city. Remember, this is a business which in the end will only provide eight to 10 full-time jobs.

7. If this annexation goes through, why would the city zone an area "heavy industrial," which is next to schools and in the backyard of homes, if they do not allow this within our current city limits? If we believe "everyone counts," shouldn't we care enough about our neighbors to afford them the same basic protection we now have in our city? We understand the city plans for the quarry to be self-regulated. Just who does that protect, except the quarry?

8. Since the Heartland annexation is now classified as an involuntary annexation the city is required to provide all services to the area within three years (Missouri Revised Statutes 71.015). This means the city will be required to have a plan in place to provide costly services out several miles.

9. If we annex this property, in future years could we receive numerous complaints from property owners about the dust and structural damage? Could this result in lawsuits to the city?

10. According to Jackson's 2009 Comprehensive Plan, undesirable uses added to the community included that "they would not want to see a new landfill or rock quarry located within the community." Why has that changed?

We say vote no on Feb. 7.

Let's keep our motto as is: "Jackson, the city of beautiful homes, schools, churches and parks."

Ken and Ginny Leimbach are residents of Jackson. This guest column was submitted on behalf of many residents who agreed with the contents of this letter.