Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 123.1001 (2026)

Definitions.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION

Act 191 of 1968

123.1001 Definitions.

Sec. 1.

As used in this act:

(a) "Adjusted boundaries" means the total area that would be encompassed by a municipality if a municipal boundary adjustment is approved as proposed in a petition or resolution.

(b) "Commission" means the state boundary commission.

(d) "Municipality" means an incorporated city or village.

(e) "Municipal boundary adjustment" means incorporation of a new city or village, consolidation of 2 or more cities, villages or townships as a new city, and the annexation of territory to a city where the commission has jurisdiction over annexation proceedings.

History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968 ;-- Am. 1972, Act 362, Imd. Eff. Jan. 9, 1973

Compiler's Notes:

For transfer of powers and duties of the state boundary commission from the department of commerce to the director of the department of consumer and industry services, see E.R.O. No. 1996-2, compiled at MCL 445.2001 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 15 cases, 1971–2016 · leading case: Midland Twp. v. State Boundary Comm'n, 259 N.W.2d 326 (Mich. 1977).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Midland Twp. v. State Boundary Comm'n, 259 N.W.2d 326 (Mich. 1977). · cites it 4× “Our disposition makes it unnecessary to consider the townships' contentions that these amendments do not cure the constitutional infirmity of the 1970 amendment as it relates to the 1968 act and the home rule cities act, and that such amendments can only operate prospectively…”

Coalition Protecting Auto No-Fault v. Michigan Catastrophic Claims Ass'n, 894 N.W.2d 758 (Mich. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “Certain plaintiffs challenged the legislation, arguing inter alia, that the 1970 HRCA annexation amendment violated art 4, § 25, because the Legislature did not reenact and republish certain portions of the BCA act of 1968.”

Shelby Charter Twp. v. State Boundary Comm'n, 387 N.W.2d 792 (Mich. 1986). · cites it 2× “The background of 1970 PA 219 was, in 1977, described as follows: I have been in the House for 13 years and I remember the emotional battles in the Legislature on annexation bills almost every year up to 1970.”

Rudolph Steiner Sch. v. Ann Arbor Charter Twp., 605 N.W.2d 18 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000). “MCL 123.1001 et seq.; MSA 5.2242(1) et seq.”

Casco Twp. v. State Boundary Comm'n, 622 N.W.2d 332 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). “In July 1996, the Winkles and other landowners in Casco Township and Columbus Township filed a petition with the State Boundary Commission seeking to annex approxi *396 mately 157 acres of land into the city of Richmond, pursuant to the state boundary commission act, MCL…”

Midland Twp. v. State Boundary Comm'n, 236 N.W.2d 551 (Mich. Ct. App. 1975). · cites it 2× “MCLA 123.1001 et seq.; MSA 5.2242(1) et seq.”

Berry v. Sch. Dist. of City of Benton Harbor, 467 F. Supp. 630 (W.D. Mich. 1978). “§ 123.1001 et seq' The Act creating the SBC amended and replaced certain provisions of the Home Rule Cities Act, M.”

Vill. of Wolverine Lake v. State Boundary Comm'n, 261 N.W.2d 206 (Mich. Ct. App. 1977). “This bias against small communities rises as much from the statute as it does from the Boundary Commission "policy”, but this legislative *60 choice is a political one and not subject to judicial review. Having its basis in the "permissive statutory power”, the actions of the…”

Twp. of Novi v. State Boundary Comm'n, 242 N.W.2d 449 (Mich. Ct. App. 1976). “1 MCLA 123.1001; MSA 5.2242(1). 2 MCLA 117.”

Twp. of Farmington v. State Boundary Comm'n, 189 N.W.2d 757 (Mich. Ct. App. 1971). · cites it 2× “The case is remanded to the trial court for entry of an appropriate order retransmitting the petition aforesaid to the commission for further proceedings in the manner provided by law.”

Williams Twp. v. City of Midland, 289 N.W.2d 892 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 4× “MCL 123.1001 et seq.; MSA 5.2242(1) et seq.”

Indep. Twp. v. State Boundary Comm'n, 484 N.W.2d 774 (Mich. Ct. App. 1992). “MCL 123.1001 et seq.; MSA 5.2242(1) et seq.”

Show all 15 citing cases →

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 123.1001(a) — 1 case

Williams Twp. v. City of Midland, 289 N.W.2d 892 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). “MCL 123.1001 et seq.; MSA 5.2242(1) et seq.”

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 123.1001(e) — 1 case

Williams Twp. v. City of Midland, 289 N.W.2d 892 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). “MCL 123.1001 et seq.; MSA 5.2242(1) et seq.”

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.