Higdon v. City of Senoia

O.C.G.A. § 36-36-11 and O.C.G.A. § 36-70-24 4 C, which create a process for attempting to resolve disputes concerning annexation, do not unconstitutionally infringe on a city's power to zone land within its boundaries.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

In these companion cases we are called upon to resolve whether OCGA § 36-70-24 4 C and 36-36-11 violate the delegation of zoning power under Art. IX, Sec. II, Par. IV of the Georgia Constitution. For the reasons which follow, we declare the statutes constitutional, and reverse the judgment of the trial court.

In its 1997 session, the General Assembly enacted the Service Delivery Act, OCGA § 36-70-20 et seq., to “minimize inefficiencies resulting from duplication of services and competition between local governments and to provide a mechanism to resolve disputes over local government service delivery, funding equity, and land use.” Id. Toward that end, OCGA § 36-70-24 4 C provides for a dispute resolution process when a bona fide land use dispute arises between the city and county over the use of land which is the subject of annexation. It requires that “a process shall be established by July 1, 1998, to resolve land use classification disputes when a county objects to the proposed land use of an area to be annexed into a municipality within the county.” Id. OCGA § 36-36-11 a defines a “bona fide land use classification objection” as an objection to a proposed change in land use which “results in a substantial change in the intensity of the allowable use of the property or a change to a significantly different allowable use.” OCGA § 36-36-11 b provides that an annexation is not effective until any bona fide land use classification objections raised by the county relative to the area to be annexed are resolved pursuant to the dispute resolution process required by OCGA § 36-70-24 4 C.

Higdon v. City of Senoia

O.C.G.A. § 36-36-11 and O.C.G.A. § 36-70-24 4 C, which create a process for attempting to resolve disputes concerning annexation, do not unconstitutionally infringe on a city's power to zone land within its boundaries.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report