The committee may not approve:
1. An incorporation unless it finds that the city to be incorporated will be able to provide customary municipal services within a reasonable time. \n Tue Dec 09 22:13:46 2025 Iowa Code 2026, Chapter 368 (31, 1) 11 CITY DEVELOPMENT, §368.19\n\n 2. A discontinuance or severance if the city to be discontinued or the territory to be severed will be surrounded by one or more cities unless a petition for annexation of the same area is also filed and approved.
3. A discontinuance or severance unless it finds that the county or another city will be able to provide necessary municipal services to the residents.
4. An annexation unless the territory is adjoining the city to which it will be annexed, and the committee finds that the city will be able to provide to the territory substantial municipal services and benefits not previously enjoyed by such territory, and that the motive for annexation is not solely to increase revenues to the city.
5. A consolidation unless the cities are contiguous.
6. An incorporation of territory, any part of which is within two miles of an existing city, unless a petition for annexation of substantially the same territory to such city has been dismissed, disapproved, or voted upon unfavorably within the last five years.
7. A city development action which creates an island. [R60, §1043; C73, §430, 431; C97, §610, 611, 615; S13, §615; C24, 27, 31, 35, 39, §5612 – 5614; C46, 50, §362.26, 362.28, 362.29; C54, §362.26; C58, 62, 66, 71, 73, §362.1, 362.26; C75, 77, 79, 81, §368.17] 91 Acts, ch 187, §4; 92 Acts, ch 1174, §5 Referred to in §368.3, 368.16, 368.20 \n
Notes of Decisions
Dickinson Cnty. v. City Dev. Comm., 521 N.W.2d 466 (Iowa 1994).
· cites it 10× “” Iowa Code § 368.17 (4). The decisive issue in this involuntary annexation proceeding is whether there was substantial evidence to support a finding that such condition was met.”
City of Des Moines v. City Dev. Bd., 473 N.W.2d 197 (Iowa 1991).
· cites it 4× “16 provides in pertinent part as follows: Subject to section 368.17, the committee shall approve any proposal which it finds to be in the public interest.”
City of Des Moines v. City Dev. Bd., 335 N.W.2d 449 (Iowa Ct. App. 1983).
· cites it 4× “” The court held that such considerations were appropriate under section 368.16 and that the board’s action was appropriate under that section.”
State Ex Rel. Johnson v. Allen, 569 N.W.2d 143 (Iowa 1997).
· cites it 6× “§ 368.17(1) (emphasis added). Similarly, the committee may not approve an annexation of land to an existing city unless “the committee finds that the city will be able to provide to the territory substantial municipal services and benefits not previously enjoyed by such…”
City of Mason City v. Zerble, 93 N.W.2d 94 (Iowa 1958).
· cites it 4× “8; and following it, in the same Code chapter, is section 368.17. Section 368.5 gives cities and towns the power to “regulate” slaughterhouses and parades.”
Deer Creek Homeowners Ass'n v. City Dev. Bd., 556 N.W.2d 155 (Iowa Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 8× “Iowa Code § 368.17 (4) (1993). The supreme court has held a territory proposed for annexation cannot frustrate annexation by merely showing it already enjoys some of the same services the annexing city proposes to extend.”
Dunn v. City Dev. Bd. of Iowa, 623 N.W.2d 820 (Iowa 2001).
· cites it 2× “16 provides that “[sjubject to section 368.17 [specific grounds that will bar approval], the committee shall approve any proposal which it finds to be in the public interest.”
City of Altoona v. Sandquist, 230 N.W.2d 507 (Iowa 1975).
“§ 368.17(4), The Code, 1975. In their agreed statement of the record the parties recite that, “The City is capable of extending to the defendants’ property all municipal services and has provided sewer, water and street maintenance.”
City of Dubuque v. City Dev. Bd. (Iowa Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 8× “7(2), which directs the Board to deny applications barred by Iowa Code section 368.17. Under section 368.17(4), the Board may not approve annexation unless the annexing city “will be able to provide to the territory substantial municipal services and benefits not previously…”
— Iowa Code § 368.17(1) — 2 cases
State Ex Rel. Johnson v. Allen, 569 N.W.2d 143 (Iowa 1997).
“§ 368.17(1) (emphasis added). Similarly, the committee may not approve an annexation of land to an existing city unless “the committee finds that the city will be able to provide to the territory substantial municipal services and benefits not previously enjoyed by such…”
— Iowa Code § 368.17(4) — 6 cases
Dickinson Cnty. v. City Dev. Comm., 521 N.W.2d 466 (Iowa 1994).
“” Iowa Code § 368.17 (4). The decisive issue in this involuntary annexation proceeding is whether there was substantial evidence to support a finding that such condition was met.”
State Ex Rel. Johnson v. Allen, 569 N.W.2d 143 (Iowa 1997).
“§ 368.17(1) (emphasis added). Similarly, the committee may not approve an annexation of land to an existing city unless “the committee finds that the city will be able to provide to the territory substantial municipal services and benefits not previously enjoyed by such…”
Deer Creek Homeowners Ass'n v. City Dev. Bd., 556 N.W.2d 155 (Iowa Ct. App. 1996).
“Iowa Code § 368.17 (4) (1993). The supreme court has held a territory proposed for annexation cannot frustrate annexation by merely showing it already enjoys some of the same services the annexing city proposes to extend.”
City of Altoona v. Sandquist, 230 N.W.2d 507 (Iowa 1975).
“§ 368.17(4), The Code, 1975. In their agreed statement of the record the parties recite that, “The City is capable of extending to the defendants’ property all municipal services and has provided sewer, water and street maintenance.”
— Iowa Code § 368.17(l) — 1 case
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.