29 N.Y.2d 274 (1971)

r
r

A municipality may annex territory in an adjoining local government even if a state highway bisects the territory, provided the territory adjoins the municipality and the annexation is in the overall public interest.

r
r

Summary

r

The City of Gloversville sought to annex territory in the Town of Johnstown. The Town opposed the annexation, arguing that a state highway bisecting the territory prevented it from “adjoining” the City as required by the General Municipal Law. The Appellate Division agreed with the Town and dismissed the City’s petition. The New York Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the presence of a state highway within the territory does not preclude annexation if the territory otherwise adjoins the municipality and the annexation serves the overall public interest. The court remanded the case to the Appellate Division to determine whether the annexation met the public interest standard.

r
r

Facts

r

The City of Gloversville sought to annex a portion of land located within the Town of Johnstown.

r

Route 30-A, a state highway, bisected the territory proposed for annexation.

r

The territory to be annexed adjoined the City for a distance of 650 feet.

r
r

Procedural History

r

The City of Gloversville petitioned the Appellate Division, Third Department, for a determination of whether the proposed annexation was in the overall public interest.

r

The Town of Johnstown moved to dismiss the petition, arguing the state highway prevented the territory from legally adjoining the City.

r

The Appellate Division agreed with the Town and dismissed the City’s petition.

r

The City appealed to the New York Court of Appeals.

r
r

Issue(s)

r

Whether a municipality may annex territory in an adjoining local government when a state highway bisects the territory to be annexed.

r
r

Holding

r

Yes, because the presence of a state highway within the territory does not prevent annexation if the territory otherwise adjoins the municipality and the annexation is in the overall public interest.

r
r

Court’s Reasoning

r

The Court of Appeals reasoned that the General Municipal Law only requires the territory to be annexed to adjoin the annexing local government. Since the territory in question adjoined the City for 650 feet, this requirement was met. The court emphasized that the state highway, although state property, remained within the Town’s territory.

r

The court cited Howard v. Commissioners, stating, “When the United States, with the consent of Kentucky, acquired the property upon which the Ordnance Plant is located, the property did not cease to be a part of Kentucky…A state may conform its municipal structures to its own plan, so long as the state does not interfere with the exercise of jurisdiction within the federal area by the United States.” The court extended this reasoning to state-owned property, holding that annexation does not interfere with the state’s ownership or use of the highway.

r

The court noted the absence of any statutory prohibition against annexing state-owned lands in Section 716 of the General Municipal Law. The court reasoned that the key considerations are whether the annexing government and the territory adjoin and whether the annexation is in the overall public interest. The court noted that