O.C.G.A.
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
(a) If, after the public hearing, the governing body determines that the annexation to the municipal corporation of the area proposed in the application would be in the best interest of the residents and property owners of the area proposed for annexation and of the citizens of the municipal corporation, the area may be annexed to the municipal corporation by the adoption of an annexing ordinance.
(b) The annexing ordinance authorized by subsection (a) of this Code section shall be adopted within 60 days following validation of the signature of the applicants.
History
Ga. L. 1966, p. 409, § 4; Code 1981, § 36-36-27; Code 1981, § 36-36-37, as redesignated by Ga. L. 1992, p. 2592, § 3.
Annotations
Law reviews. - For annual survey of local government law, see 56 Mercer L. Rev. 351 (2004).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Annexations properly invalidated. - Judgment invalidating the City of Atlanta’s attempted annexation of five areas was affirmed because the trial court correctly held that the annexations were invalid since at the time the annexations would have become effective, the areas in question were already part of the newly
incorporated City of South Fulton and, thus, ineligible for annexation by Atlanta. City of Atlanta v. Mays, 301 Ga. 367, 801 S.E.2d 1 (2017). Cited in City of Riverdale v. Clayton County, 263 Ga. App. 672, 588 S.E.2d 845 (2003).
Notes of Decisions
City of Atlanta v. Mays, 801 S.E.2d 1 (Ga. 2017).
· cites it 4× “OCGA § 36-36-37 says: If, after the public hearing, the governing body determines that the annexation to the municipal corporation of the area proposed in the application would be in the best interest of the residents and property owners of the area proposed for annexation and…”
City of Riverdale v. Clayton Cnty., 588 S.E.2d 845 (Ga. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 10× “Riverdale claims that the trial court erred in holding that OCGA § 36-36-37 requires the governing body of a municipal corporation to make a specific finding of best interest on the record before adopting an annexation ordinance.”
City of Atlanta v. Mays (Ga. 2017).
· cites it 4× “3 OCGA § 36-36-37 says: If, after the public hearing, the governing body determines that the annexation to the municipal corporation of the area proposed in the application would be in the best interest of the residents and property owners of the area proposed for annexation and…”
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.