LONG BEACH—Residents in a west Harrison County neighborhood say they were caught off guard after learning their homes could be annexed into the City of Long Beach as part of a plan tied to a nearby industrial park—a move they fear could raise costs and reduce control over their property without clear benefits.
The proposal would bring the Long Beach Industrial Park into the city’s tax base, but because of how the area is laid out, more than 40 nearby homes would also be annexed. City leaders say the move supports economic development, while residents say they fear higher costs and loss of local decision-making.
State law requires annexed land to be contiguous—meaning it must border existing city limits—according to Mississippi Code 21-1-27.
City Sees Growth Potential in Underused Industrial Land
The city plans to annex about 1.3 square miles surrounding the Long Beach Industrial Park, which—despite its name—is not currently within city limits.
Mayor Tim Pierce said the goal is to support business growth and draw new attention to land that has remained largely undeveloped for decades.
“Over the years—since back in the ’90s—there’s a lot of empty land in there, and I think it’s going to take some attention and some planning to help it grow,” Pierce said.
He said he plans to work with the Mississippi Development Authority to help move the project forward.
“MDA is big about growth, industrial growth, and so I think those are going to be good conversations going forward on how I can help that industrial park,” he said.
This isn’t the first time Long Beach officials have discussed expanding city boundaries.
In 2021, leaders floated a broader annexation plan that would have extended the city west and north toward Interstate 10. That effort fell through after officials said they needed more time to study the costs of a larger expansion.
The current proposal is a scaled-down version focused on the industrial park and surrounding area.
“Knowing the finances of our city, I can incorporate the industrial park and the existing residential area within what (our budget) can handle,” Pierce said.
Homeowners Worry: Taxes, Utilities and Losing Say
If the annexation moves forward, more than 40 homes would be brought into city limits, shifting residents from county jurisdiction and potentially changing their taxes, utility options and public services.
Pierce said the city already provides fire protection to the area, which improves fire ratings and can lower homeowners’ insurance premiums. He added that access to other city services would expand gradually.
“It’s not a day one you’ve got to be ready to start paying bills,” he said. “You don’t have to take our water when you’re annexed … they will not be charged for those services unless we provide it.”
Several residents in the proposed annexation area currently rely on private wells and septic systems and worry they’ll eventually have to connect to city utilities at their own expense.
Joanie Barker said losing her well is one of her biggest concerns.
“I have a well. I’d have to do away with the well, and then I’d have Long Beach water,” Barker said.
She’s also worried about rising costs.
“The biggest problem is taxes,” she said. “I’m retired. I can’t afford these expenses.”
Resident Misty Hopkins said many are frustrated about the lack of representation in city decisions.
“Being out in the county, you know, we don’t get to vote for (the) mayor,” she said.
State Law Followed, But Residents Say They Weren’t Informed
Mississippi law requires cities seeking to annex county land to follow a public process that includes a vote by city leaders, a petition in chancery court and advance notice of a public hearing published in a newspaper of general circulation.
Public records show the Board of Aldermen voted to pursue annexation on Sept. 15, 2025. The city filed its petition the next day. On Dec. 10, a legal notice ran in the Gazebo Gazette ahead of a Jan. 29 hearing.
While Long Beach followed the required procedures, Hopkins questioned whether the notice reached the people affected.
“They could have mailed every single one of us because there’s only 48 (homes),” she said. “It wouldn’t cost that much to slap a couple … letters in the mail and mail us and formally inform us—you know, give us a heads up.”
Barker said the notice wasn’t effective.
“(City leaders) said that they advertised it in the paper for three months,” she said. “But it was in the Gazette, a Pass Christian newspaper that none of us (are subscribed to).”
A trial in chancery court is scheduled for June 15-17. A judge will decide whether the annexation is reasonable and whether the city can provide adequate services, as required by state law.
Pierce said he plans to keep meeting with residents and businesses before the court date.
“Between now and June, I’ve got a lot of homework to do,” he said. “I want to work with them and come to some type of agreement.”
This article first appeared on RHCJC and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.