Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 12-520 (2026)

Conditions which permit unilateral annexation; exceptions; ordinance; severability of ordinance where annexation invalid; limitations

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

12-520. Conditions which permit unilateral annexation; exceptions; ordinance; severability of ordinance where annexation invalid; limitations. (a) Except as hereinafter provided, the governing body of any city, by ordinance, may annex land to such city if any one or more of the following conditions exist:

(1) The land is platted, and some part of the land adjoins the city.

(2) The land adjoins the city and is owned by or held in trust for the city or any agency thereof.

(3) The land adjoins the city and is owned by or held in trust for any governmental unit other than another city except that no city may annex land owned by a county without the express permission of the board of county commissioners of the county other than as provided in subsection (f).

(4) The land lies within or mainly within the city and has a common perimeter with the city boundary line of more than 50%.

(5) The land if annexed will make the city boundary line straight or harmonious and some part thereof adjoins the city, except no land in excess of 21 acres shall be annexed for this purpose.

(6) The tract is so situated that ⅔ of any boundary line adjoins the city, except no tract in excess of 21 acres shall be annexed under this condition.

(7) The land adjoins the city and a written petition for or consent to annexation is filed with the city by the owner.

(b) No portion of any unplatted tract of land devoted to agricultural use of 21 acres or more shall be annexed by any city under the authority of this section without the written consent of the owner thereof.

(c) No city may annex, pursuant to this section, any improvement district incorporated and organized pursuant to K.S.A. 19-2753 et seq., and amendments thereto, or any land within such improvement district. The provisions of this subsection shall apply to such improvement districts for which the petition for incorporation and organization was presented on or before January 1, 1987.

(d) Subject to the provisions of this section and K.S.A. 12-520a(e), and amendments thereto, a city may annex, pursuant to this section, any fire district or any land within such fire district.

(e) No city may annex the right-of-way of any highway under the authority of this section unless at the time of the annexation the abutting property upon one or both sides thereof is already within the city or is annexed to the city in the same proceeding. The board of county commissioners may notify the city of the existence of the right-of-way of any highway which has not become part of the city by annexation and which has a common boundary with the city. The notification shall include a legal description and a map identifying the location of the highway. The governing body of the city shall certify by ordinance that the certification is correct and declare the highway, or portion of the highway extending to the center line where another city boundary line abuts the opposing side of the highway, annexed to the city as of the date of the publication of the ordinance.

(f) The governing body of any city by one ordinance may annex one or more separate tracts or lands each of which conforms to any one or more of the foregoing conditions. The invalidity of the annexation of any tract or land in one ordinance shall not affect the validity of the remaining tracts or lands which are annexed by the ordinance and which conform to any one or more of the foregoing conditions.

(g) No city may utilize any provision of this section to annex a narrow corridor of land to gain access to noncontiguous tracts of land. The corridor of land must have a tangible value and purpose other than for enhancing future annexations of land by the city.

History: L. 1967, ch. 98, § 2; L. 1974, ch. 56, § 4; L. 1980, ch. 62, § 1; L. 1986, ch. 70, § 2; L. 1987, ch. 66, § 2; L. 1993, ch. 147, § 1; L. 2005, ch. 166, § 11; L. 2005, ch. 186, § 6; L. 2007, ch. 142, § 1; L. 2010, ch. 130, § 1; L. 2015, ch. 91, § 1; July 1.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 23 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1958–2021 · leading case: Dillon Real Est. Co. v. City of Topeka, 163 P.3d 298 (Kan. 2007).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Dillon Real Est. Co. v. City of Topeka, 163 P.3d 298 (Kan. 2007). · cites it 49× “: This case arises out of the City of Topeka’s efforts to unilaterally annex property pursuant to K.S.A. 12-520. The property is located within both the Mission Township and the Sherwood Improvement District, a district created by Shawnee County pur *664 suant to K.”

City of Leawood v. City of Overland Park, 777 P.2d 830 (Kan. 1989). · cites it 32× “We transferred the case to this court pursuant to K.S.A. 20-3018(c).”

Stueckemann v. City of Basehor, 348 P.3d 526 (Kan. 2015). · cites it 13× “Its subsection (a)(2) provides the resolution of annexation shall contain a description of the land to be annexed: “(a) The governing body of any city desiring to annex land under the authority of K.S.A. 12-520, and amendments thereto, shall adopt a resolution stating that the…”

United States v. City of Leavenworth, Kan., 443 F. Supp. 274 (D. Kan. 1977). · cites it 17× “§ 12-520b provides that “[t]he governing body of any city proposing to annex land under the provisions of K.S.A. 12-520 shall make plans for the extension of services to the area proposed to be annexed and shall, prior to the adoption of the resolution provided for in K.”

Bd. of Riley Cnty. Comm'rs v. City of Junction City, 667 P.2d 868 (Kan. 1983). · cites it 14× “In disposing of this issue, the trial court held that the issue was not moot and that the plaintiffs had standing, reasoning as follows: “Pursuant to K.S.A. 12-520, any owner of annexed land may maintain an action challenging the validity of the annexation ordinance in the…”

City of Lenexa v. City of Olathe, 620 P.2d 1153 (Kan. 1980). · cites it 10× “Because all issues are thoroughly analyzed and discussed in Judge Walton’s memorandum decision, we quote those portions which set forth the considerations upon which his decision was based: “Issues “The primary issue to be determined is whether the City of Lenexa has standing to…”

Banzer v. City of Wichita, 703 P.2d 812 (Kan. 1985). · cites it 10× “: This is an appeal of a decision in the Sedgwick County District Court in which the court found that the City of Wichita had the statutory authority under K.S.A. 12-520 for annexation of ten tracts of land and that the procedure followed by the City in sequentially annexing the…”

In Re Petition of City of Overland Park for Annexation, 736 P.2d 923 (Kan. 1987). · cites it 7× “The property owners have appealed asserting three issues: (1) The City of Overland Park was required to exhaust its ability to annex pursuant to K.S.A. 1986 Supp. 12-520 before petitioning under K.”

In Re Petition of City of Shawnee for Annexation of Land, 687 P.2d 603 (Kan. 1984). · cites it 4× “On April 11, 1983, these landowners petitioned for and consented to annexation of their land by Bonner Springs pursuant to K.S.A. 12-520( g ). That same day Bonner Springs passed, published and filed the ordinances required to annex these lands.”

In Re the Appeal of the City of Lenexa, 657 P.2d 47 (Kan. 1983). · cites it 5× “The board in its order further found that the proposed territory sought to be annexed by Lenexa was under the planning jurisdictions of certain township zoning boards and Johnson County through the Johnson County Planning Commission; further that the proposed territory was…”

Cedar Creek Props., Inc. v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 815 P.2d 492 (Kan. 1991). · cites it 8× “12-521, which provided that if land could not be annexed pursuant to K.S.A. 1967 Supp. 12-520, the board of county commissioners could be petitioned by a city for permission to annex the land.”

McDowell v. City of Topeka, 718 P.2d 1308 (Kan. 1986). · cites it 15× “Following the adoption of the two annexation ordinances, appellees filed this action pursuant to K.S.A. 12-520, challenging the authority of the City to annex the properties and, after a hearing, the district court found both ordinances invalid.”

Show all 23 citing cases →

— K.S.A. § 12-520(a) — 7 cases

City of Leawood v. City of Overland Park, 777 P.2d 830 (Kan. 1989). “We transferred the case to this court pursuant to K.S.A. 20-3018(c).”

Dillon Real Est. Co. v. City of Topeka, 163 P.3d 298 (Kan. 2007). “: This case arises out of the City of Topeka’s efforts to unilaterally annex property pursuant to K.S.A. 12-520. The property is located within both the Mission Township and the Sherwood Improvement District, a district created by Shawnee County pur *664 suant to K.”

In Re Petition of City of Overland Park for Annexation, 736 P.2d 923 (Kan. 1987). “The property owners have appealed asserting three issues: (1) The City of Overland Park was required to exhaust its ability to annex pursuant to K.S.A. 1986 Supp. 12-520 before petitioning under K.”

Banzer v. City of Wichita, 703 P.2d 812 (Kan. 1985). “: This is an appeal of a decision in the Sedgwick County District Court in which the court found that the City of Wichita had the statutory authority under K.S.A. 12-520 for annexation of ten tracts of land and that the procedure followed by the City in sequentially annexing the…”

Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. City of Mulvane, 227 P.3d 997 (Kan. Ct. App. 2010).

— K.S.A. § 12-520(a)(1) — 6 cases

City of Leawood v. City of Overland Park, 777 P.2d 830 (Kan. 1989). “We transferred the case to this court pursuant to K.S.A. 20-3018(c).”

Stueckemann v. City of Basehor, 348 P.3d 526 (Kan. 2015). “Its subsection (a)(2) provides the resolution of annexation shall contain a description of the land to be annexed: “(a) The governing body of any city desiring to annex land under the authority of K.S.A. 12-520, and amendments thereto, shall adopt a resolution stating that the…”

Bunge Milling, Inc. v. City of Atchison, 310 P.3d 1065 (Kan. Ct. App. 2013).

Stueckemann v. City of Basehor (Kan. 2015).

— K.S.A. § 12-520(a)(7) — 4 cases

City of Leawood v. City of Overland Park, 777 P.2d 830 (Kan. 1989). “We transferred the case to this court pursuant to K.S.A. 20-3018(c).”

Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. City of Mulvane, 227 P.3d 997 (Kan. Ct. App. 2010).

Bd. v. City of Mulvane, 227 P.3d 997 (Kan. Ct. App. 2010).

— K.S.A. § 12-520(a)(l) — 4 cases

Bunge Milling, Inc. v. City of Atchison, 310 P.3d 1065 (Kan. Ct. App. 2013).

City of Leawood v. City of Overland Park, 777 P.2d 830 (Kan. 1989). “We transferred the case to this court pursuant to K.S.A. 20-3018(c).”

Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. City of Mulvane, 227 P.3d 997 (Kan. Ct. App. 2010).

— K.S.A. § 12-520(c) — 3 cases

United States v. City of Leavenworth, Kan., 443 F. Supp. 274 (D. Kan. 1977). “§ 12-520b provides that “[t]he governing body of any city proposing to annex land under the provisions of K.S.A. 12-520 shall make plans for the extension of services to the area proposed to be annexed and shall, prior to the adoption of the resolution provided for in K.”

City of Lenexa v. City of Olathe, 625 P.2d 423 (Kan. 1980).

— K.S.A. § 12-520(d) — 1 case

McDowell v. City of Topeka, 718 P.2d 1308 (Kan. 1986). “Following the adoption of the two annexation ordinances, appellees filed this action pursuant to K.S.A. 12-520, challenging the authority of the City to annex the properties and, after a hearing, the district court found both ordinances invalid.”

— K.S.A. § 12-520(e) — 1 case

— K.S.A. § 12-520(g) — 8 cases

In Re Petition of City of Shawnee for Annexation of Land, 687 P.2d 603 (Kan. 1984). “On April 11, 1983, these landowners petitioned for and consented to annexation of their land by Bonner Springs pursuant to K.S.A. 12-520( g ). That same day Bonner Springs passed, published and filed the ordinances required to annex these lands.”

City of Lenexa v. City of Olathe, 660 P.2d 1368 (Kan. 1983).

City of Leawood v. City of Overland Park, 777 P.2d 830 (Kan. 1989). “We transferred the case to this court pursuant to K.S.A. 20-3018(c).”

City of Lenexa v. City of Olathe, 620 P.2d 1153 (Kan. 1980). “Because all issues are thoroughly analyzed and discussed in Judge Walton’s memorandum decision, we quote those portions which set forth the considerations upon which his decision was based: “Issues “The primary issue to be determined is whether the City of Lenexa has standing to…”

Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. City of Mulvane, 227 P.3d 997 (Kan. Ct. App. 2010).

— K.S.A. § 12-520(h) — 2 cases

Stueckemann v. City of Basehor (Kan. 2015).

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.