Administrative Control of Municipal Incorporation: the Search for Criteria
| Author | Thomas F. Hady,Clarence J. Hein |
| DOI | 10.1177/106591296601900408 |
| Date | 01 December 1966 |
| Published date | 01 December 1966 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
697
ADMINISTRATIVE
CONTROL
OF
MUNICIPAL
INCORPORATION:
THE
SEARCH
FOR
CRITERIA
CLARENCE
J.
HEIN
AND
THOMAS
F.
HADY
United
States
Department
of
Agriculture
N
AN
ATTEMPT
to
deal
with
one
aspect
of
local
government
problems
in
t
rapidly
urbanizing
areas,
a
number
of
states
have
turned
to
the
use
of
admin-
istrative
controls
over
the
incorporation
of
municipalities.
Experience
with
this
device
to
date
seems
to
indicate
a
pressing
need
to
provide
the
agencies
with
more
adequate
criteria
on
which
to
base
decisions
as
to
whether
a
specific
incor-
poration
should
or
should
not
be
permitted.
The
power
to
review
and
approve
proposed
incorporation
has
been
assigned
to
a
variety
of
administrative
agencies.
Minnesota
has
established
a
municipal
commission
whose
primary
function
is
to
review
incorporation
and
annexation
proposals.
Wisconsin
has
provided
for
a
split
in
the
review
process
-
nondiscre-
tionary
standards
are
to
be
applied
by
a
circuit
court,
and
court-approved
pro-
posals
are
then
turned
over
to
the
State
Director
of
Regional Planning
who
exercises
administrative
control.
California
has
provided
for
a
&dquo;local
agency
formation
commission&dquo;
in
each
county,
to
be
composed
of
local
officials,.’
A
pro-
posal
for
a
State
Boundary
Commission
comparable
to
the
Minnesota
Commission
was
passed
by
one
house
of
the
Michigan
legislature
in
1964,
and
was
resubmitted
in
1965.2
2
The
legislation
assigning
this
duty
to
an
agency
provides
for
specific
factors
that
must
be
taken
into
consideration
before
the
agency
can
issue
an
order
approv-
ing
or
disapproving
a
proposed
incorporation.
For
example,
the
Minnesota
Municipal
Commission
is
required
to
make
findings
as
to
the
following
factors:
(1)
the
population
of
the
area
within
the
boundaries
of
the
proposed
incorporation;
(2)
the
area
of
the
proposed
incorpora-
tion ;
(3)
the
area
of
platted
land
relative
to
unplatted
land;
(4)
the
character
of
the
buildings
on
the
platted
and
unplatted
lands;
(5)
past
expansion
in
terms
of
population
and
construction;
(6)
prospective
future
expansion;
(7)
the
assessed
value
of
platted
land
relative
to
the
assessed
value
of
the
unplatted
areas;
(8)
the
present
and
expected
necessity
and
feasibility
of
providing
governmental
services
such
as
sewage
disposal,
water
system,
zoning,
street
planning,
police
and
fire
pro-
tection ;
and
(9)
the
adequacy
of
the
township
form
of
government
to
cope
with
problems
of
urban
or
suburban
growth
in
the
area
proposed
for
incorporation.3
These
kinds
of
factors
are
useful
primarily
in
determining
whether
urbaniza-
tion
has
progressed
far
enough
in
the
area
so
that
some
action
-
such
as
incorpora-
1
Alaska
places
control
over
the
establishment
of
boroughs
in
the
State
Department
of
Local
Affairs
and
the
Local
Government
Boundary
Commission,
but
the
incorporation
of
cities
is
by
a
petition
to
and
hearing
by
the
State
Superior
Court.
2
Alvin
D.
Sokolow,
Annexation
and
Incorporation
in
Michigan:
An
Evaluation
of
the
Bound-
ary
Commission
Plan
(Institute
for
Community
Development,
Michigan
State
U.,
Technical
Bulletin
B-43,
January
1965).
3
Minnesota
Statutes
Annotated,
414.02.
To continue reading
Request your trial