Annexations of Military Resenrations bs Political Subdivisions

• Author: Captain Ralph B. Hammack
• Pages: 04

1. INTRODUCTION

   There are approximately 14001 military reservationse in the United Statea owed by the federal government and occupied, operated, or supervised by the Departments of the Army, Air Force, and Navy for military purposes. These properties fall into several categories based on use-Army posts, forts, camps, naval bases, sir bases, navy yards, arsenals, ordnance plants, depots, hospitals, ports, and many others. In view of the technological advances that have been made in weapons systems and equipment suitable for military uses since the end of World War 11, the activities at the military installations, particularly the industrial type, ha\,e expanded substantially in order to produce the modern materiel and weapons required for our armed forces.

   Also, after World War I1 ended, there existed a serious lack of suitable housing for military personnel at or near most of the military installations. This situation led to the enactment by Congress of the so-called "Wherry Housing Act''S in 1949, and the "Capehart Act"' in 1955. These acts provided for the construction of housing on or near military reservations by private can-tractors for occupancy by military and civilian employees of the Armed Forces. As a result of these housing programs and the expanded activities carried out upon these military reservations, there is now a large concentration of persons and valuable property on many of the reservations. Such reservations represent large military communities and include most facilities usuaily found in any modern urban community. As many of these military cammunities are located near a city or town, an increasing number of

   *This article was adapted from P thenis presented to The Judge Advocate General's School, U.S. Amy, Chariottesvilie, Virginia, while the author was P member of the Eighth Advanced Class. The opinions and conclusions presented herein are thsae of the avthor and do not necessarily rapresent the news of The Judze Advocate General's School nor any other governmental agency.

   ** JAGC, U.S. Army: LL.B, Ohia State University, 1849.1 Interdepartmental Committee for the Study of Jurisdiction Over Federal Areas Within the States, Juriadictmt Over Federal Avsa8 W

   863Stal.570 (1848).468 Stat. 885, 64&64 (1955), 8s amended, 12 U.S.C. 5 1748 (Supp. I, 195Q), 42 U.S.C. $1594 (SYPP. I, 1859).

   attempts have been made by these neighboring municipalities to extend their boundaries so as to include these military communities.

   The subject of the annexation of military reservations by political subdivisions of a state covers such a broad field that a detailed discussion of all facets of that subject has not been attempted. It is for that reason the bounds of this article have been limited generally to the significant effects of annexation as they relate to the jurisdiction of the federal government, the powers which may be exercised by the Iocd political subdivision, the duties and obligations of the annexing subdivision to provide normal municipal services, and the rights and privileges of the persons residing within an annexed military reservation with respect to voting in the state and local elections, and attendance of children residing upon the military reservations at the local schools without payment of tuition.

   The furnishing of governmental services, including fire and police protection, refuae and garbage collection, maintenance of streets, and other municipal services to the thousands of persons either residing or employed on many of our military reservations, represents an imposing burden on the governmental agency which must furnish them. Since these services are usually furnished by the municipal government for ail members of the municipality. it would be reasonable to assume that a municipality voluntarily annexing a military reservation would be obliged to furnish these servicea to ail persons in the annexed area. Similarly, it would be reasonable io assume that the inhabitants of the annexed military resenration would be afforded the civil and political privileges afforded a11 other members of the municipality to vote in the local elections and to send their children to the local schools. These assumptions may or may not be warranted, depending upon the measure of legislative jurisdiction possessed by the state and its political subdivisions over the particular military reservation concerned. For this reason, a brief historical development of the manner in which our military reservations have become subject to vaving degrees of state and federal legislative jurisdiction will pemit a better understanding of the significance that may be attached to their annexation by political subdivisions.

   11. ACQUISITION OF MILITARY RESERVATIONS AND OF LEGISLATIVE JURISDICTION OVER THEM BY FEDERAL GOVERNNENT A. Methods of Acquiring Military Reservations and Legislative Jurisdiotion

   The Constitution of the United States makes reference to but 100 *(io l l l B

   ANNEXATIONS OF MILITARY RESERVATIONS

   one method by which the federal government may acquire land within a state to be used for military purposes.' That method is by purchase of the land for use as B fort, magazine, arsenal, dock-yard or other needful building, with the consent of the state wherein the land is situated. The courts have, however, recognized the power of the federal government to acquire land for military purposes by such other means as purchase based upon voluntary agreement, condemnation for public use, foreclosure of liens, devise or succession where state law does not prohibit such devises, by acceptance a8 a gift from states and individuals, and by setting it aside from the public domain.B As a consequence of our military reservations having been acquired by these different methods,r the federal government has not always received a uniform measure of legislati\,e jurisdiction over them.

   It is probable that the majority of military reservations have been acquired by the method referred to in the Constitution, because of the requirement of a federal statute enacted in 1841, prohibiting the expenditure of public money for the erection of public works until there had been received from the appropriate state the consent to the acquisition by the United States of the site upon which the structure was to be placed.$ The giving of such consent by the state resulted in the transfer of exclusive legislative jurisdiction over such site to the federal government by operation of article I, section 8, clause 17, of the Constitution. This statute was amended in February, 1940, so as to make acquisition of legislative jurisdiction by the United States over land purchased with the consent of state optional rather than mandaaU.S. Connt. art. I, 5 8, el. 11: "Cangre~s shall have power . . , To exer-cise exelusive Legislation In all Cases vhatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, became the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exer~ise like Authority over all Plaeea purchased by the Consent of the LegislatuTe of the State in which the Same ehall be. for the Erection of Forts, Iagazinei, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful buildings.. . ."

   GUnited States Y. Pekins. 163 U.S. 625 f16961 ffardasure af lien): Van Brocklin Y. Tennessee, 117 U.S. 151 (1886) (purchase without consent of state) i Kohl Y. United States, 91 U.S. 867 f1675) (eminent domain) i Fay V.

   United States, 204 Fed. 559 (1st Cir. 1913); Crook, Homer & Co. 7, Old Point Comfort Hotel. 54 Fed. 504 (E.D. \'a. 1893) (donations): Dieksan V. United Statea. 125 Mass. 611 (1877) (devise or aueeeision): State V. Oliver, 162 Ten". 100, 35 S.W.2d 396 (1930) (donation).

   1 Far discussion of various methods by which the United States has ac. quired land and military reservations, lee Darie, The Aopxiiition, Aooeptoma, and Loss ai Jvriadiotion 0 % ~

   .Militmy Remrvatiane: Rdotiie Rzghta oi tha

   State and Federal Ooz.ernment Reomding Seivioe oj Pmcrsa, Xighruwa, and Applieatian aj ths Federal Asgimiintive Crimes Act, Ch. 111, 8. thesis pre-rented to The Judge Advocate General's School, 1965.

   I RW stat. 5 a66 (ISIS).*oo 21118 101

   tory.g As to the military reservations acquired by the United States prior to February 1, 1940, over which the states had tendered exclusive jurisdiction to the federal government by means of a consent or cession statute, acceptance of such jurisdiction by the United States waa presumed in the absence of an intent by the federal government not to accept such jurisdiction.10 There is a conclusive presumption against the acceptance of any legislative jurisdiction over lands acquired after February 1, 1940, by the federal government, unless a formal acceptance of jurisdic. tion is filed by the United States." The current policy of the fed-eral government ia not to seek jurisdiction over federal lands within the states except in unusual circumstances. This policy, as applicable to the Department of the Army. is aet out in AR 405-20,24April1957.

   The federal government has acquired legislative jurisdiction over some military reservations not purchased with the consent of B state, by means of a cession of jurisdiction by the state pursuant to a "cession" statute. It has also reserved all or a portion of its jurisdiction, in some instances, over military reservations withdrawn or set aside from the public domain, when admitting into the Union the state within whose borders the reservations are located. When these latter methods were utilized to obtain or retain legislative jurisdiction, the federal government was not required to Becure exclusive jurisdiction over the reservations concerned, and frequently did not do so.11

   The federal government has not acquired any measure of the states' legislative jurisdiction over many reservations, These reservations are held in a proprietorial capacity only and are subject to the jurisdiction of the state. Like other federal...