The state House has overwhelmingly passed legislation to reform involuntary annexation law.

Lawmakers approved Bill 524 on a third and final vote Thursday. Rep. Jamie Boles, a Republican representing most of Moore County, voted in favor of the legislation. Speaker Joe Hackney, a Democrat who represents one and a half precincts in Moore County, did not vote.

The bill now goes to the Senate, where it faces an uncertain fate. Last year, the House approved legislation to impose a temporary moratorium on involuntary annexations, but the bill died in the Senate.

Boles said Thursday that while he wasn't happy with the bill, he voted for it because he thinks some municipalities have abused annexation and citizens deserve recourse. He thinks the bill will make municipalities more accountable and will prompt more methodic and thoughtful annexation.

"I do think since 1959 that North Carolina has changed and so have its communities," he said. "We do need reform and some things need to be updated."

But he said he believes the requirement of obtaining signatures from 15 percent of registered voters in the area to be annexed and the surrounding municipality is too high and would like to see that percentage lowered. The bill allows for one year for the signatures to be gathered.

Doug Aitken, a Pinewild resident who heads the statewide Fair Annexation Coalition, has been a driving force behind annexation reform. He and other opponents of involuntary annexation aren't happy with the bill, especially the voting provision.

While Aitken and others have lobbied hard for a referendum, they consider that 15 percent requirement to be unreasonable and unachievable in most cases, and would prefer that the bill fails.

"We want it to die on the floor," he said this week "It's not a compromise bill. To say that is not really accurate."

Aitken had hoped that efforts to make the voting provision "more meaningful" would have succeeded in the House Appropriations Committee earlier this week, but all of those attempts failed. A motion to remove the amendment altogether was also unsuccessful.

Aitken has said in recent weeks that having a bad reform bill passed would be worse than its defeat. He said that historically, after reforms are passed, it's usually a long period of time before the issue is revisited -- maybe a decade.

Proponents of involuntary annexation, including the North Carolina League of Municipalities, are against a referendum because they believe it would hinder the growth of cities and towns and allow affected residents to have veto power.

A statement on the League's Web site posted after the bill passed the second of three readings Wednesday said it was "very disappointed" in Wednesday's vote.

"The House passage of the bill is especially disappointing in light of how municipal officials listened to concerns expressed by citizens, how many reforms the officials proposed and how many substantive changes that municipal officials accepted," the statement read. "Municipal officials have agreed to reform measures during every step of the legislative process, but the referendum requirement goes far beyond reasonable.

"We negotiated in good faith. What the House passed is not acceptable, and we will strongly oppose this version of the bill."

Because the bill is not retroactive, it would not apply to Pinehurst's contentious attempt to annex Pinewild Country Club, which has been tied up in state and federal courts for months.

Pinewild residents hoping to block the annexation suffered a setback earlier this week when a state appeals court ruled 3-0 in favor of the village. The residents are expected to petition the state Supreme Court for review.

If the Supreme Court declines to hear the case, village attorney Mike Newman said that the annexation could be completed in a matter of weeks.

Contact John Krahnert III at 693-2473 or by e-mail at jkrahnert@thepilot.com.