City Council Agenda and Packet 1982 02 02

Home Browse Search

• • • 1/19/82 Page -2- item was for the consideration of Ordinance- Biella Annexation. :IARCIA HUGHES - ATTORNEY Marcia Hughes with the firm of Rothgerber, REPRESENTING `,Bt. RICHARD BIELLA Appel and Powers requested a discussion with council before a motion was entertained. In her opening remarks she stated that the formula was not appropriate and the petitions were not valid. - an annexation decision was an administrative one rather than a legisla- tive action. She referred to the State Statutes requiring 1/6th of the property to be annexed must be contiguous to the City, 50% of the adults living on the property must use City facilities, i.e. churches, schools, or recreational purposes, and that the property owners give a commitment that over 50% of the property will be kept in agricultural use for 5 years. Also, that the City would not be able to provide water and sewer utilities to the property. In her opinion these were factual decision, therefore the referendum process did not apply. CITY ATTORNEY RAUTENSTRAUS In reply to Ms. Hughes, Attorney Rautenstraus stated it was his opinion there ware 2 basic arguments - administrative versus legisla- tive. Citing the McKee versus the City of Louisville case Rautenstraus stated the administrative argument lost in the Supreme Court and the Court said annexation is a legislative action. The factual argument of the 1/6th contiguity, that the property will be urbanized, etc. were some of the criteria of the Statutes . But just because the criteria exists, it is not mandatory on the City to then do the annexation. ACCEPTANCE OF THE PETITION Councilman Leary moved, Councilwoman Morris seconded that council accept the petition for referendum on Ordinance #746. Roll call vote: YES Leary, Fauson, Cussen, Morris NO Ferrera, Cummings Motion carried 4-2.