Alaska Stat. § 29.06.040

Municipal boundary changes

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AK-LEGakleg.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 29.06.040. Municipal boundary changes.
 (a) The Local Boundary Commission may consider any proposed municipal boundary change. The commission may amend the proposed change and may impose conditions on the proposed change. If the commission determines that the proposed change, as amended or conditioned if appropriate, meets applicable standards under the state constitution and commission regulations and is in the best interests of the state, it may accept the proposed change. Otherwise, it shall reject the proposed change. A Local Boundary Commission decision under this subsection may be appealed under AS 44.62 (Administrative Procedure Act).

 (b) The Local Boundary Commission may present a proposed municipal boundary change to the legislature during the first 10 days of a regular session. The change becomes effective 45 days after presentation or at the end of the session, whichever is earlier, unless disapproved by a resolution concurred in by a majority of the members of each house.

 (c) In addition to the regulations governing annexation by local action adopted under AS 44.33.812, the Local Boundary Commission shall establish procedures for annexation and detachment of territory by municipalities by local action. The procedures established under this subsection must include a provision that
     (1) a proposed annexation must be approved by a majority of votes on the question cast by voters residing in the annexing municipality;

     (2) a proposed annexation or detachment must be approved by a majority of votes on the question cast by voters residing in the area proposed to be annexed or detached;

     (3) municipally owned property adjoining the municipality may be annexed by ordinance without voter approval; and

     (4) an area adjoining the municipality may be annexed by ordinance without an election if all property owners and voters in the area petition the governing body.

 (d) A boundary change effected under (a) and (b) of this section prevails over a boundary change initiated by local action, without regard to priority in time.




Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2002–2024 · leading case: Municipality of Anchorage v. Suzuki
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Municipality of Anchorage v. Suzuki (2002) alaska “400 ("boundary" is not included among definitions); AS 29.06.040, 450; AS 44.33.812, .822, .826, .”
City of Soldotna v. State of Alaska, Local Boundary Commission (2024) alaska · cites it 9× “19 Finally, we consider whether the regulation conflicts with any other state statutes or constitutional provisions; this is another legal question to which we apply our independent judgment.20 Because we presume the validity of an administrative regulation, the challenger bears…”
— Alaska Stat. § 29.06.040(c) — 1 case
City of Soldotna v. State of Alaska, Local Boundary Commission (2024) alaska “19 Finally, we consider whether the regulation conflicts with any other state statutes or constitutional provisions; this is another legal question to which we apply our independent judgment.20 Because we presume the validity of an administrative regulation, the challenger bears…”
— Alaska Stat. § 29.06.040(d) — 1 case
City of Soldotna v. State of Alaska, Local Boundary Commission (2024) alaska “19 Finally, we consider whether the regulation conflicts with any other state statutes or constitutional provisions; this is another legal question to which we apply our independent judgment.20 Because we presume the validity of an administrative regulation, the challenger bears…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.