State Annexation Reporting Laws Date of Last Update: April 21, 2019
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Letter Bill 0..3
HB0939 *LRB10103319AWJ48327b* 101ST GENERAL ASSEMBLY State of Illinois 2019 and 2020 HB0939 by Rep. Michael J. Madigan SYNOPSIS AS INTRODUCED: 65 ILCS 5/1-1-2 from Ch. 24, par. 1-1-2 Amends the Illinois Municipal Code. Makes a technical change in a Section concerning definitions. LRB101 03319 AWJ 48327 b A BILL FOR HB0939 LRB101 03319 AWJ 48327 b 1 AN ACT concerning local government. 2 Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, 3 represented in the General Assembly: 4 Section 5. The Illinois Municipal Code is amended by 5 changing Section 1-1-2 as follows: 6 (65 ILCS 5/1-1-2) (from Ch. 24, par. 1-1-2) 7 Sec. 1-1-2. Definitions. In this Code: 8 (1) "Municipal" or "municipality" means a city, village, or 9 incorporated town in the the State of Illinois, but, unless the 10 context otherwise provides, "municipal" or "municipality" does 11 not include a township, town when used as the equivalent of a 12 township, incorporated town that has superseded a civil 13 township, county, school district, park district, sanitary 14 district, or any other similar governmental district. If 15 "municipal" or "municipality" is given a different definition 16 in any particular Division or Section of this Act, that 17 definition shall control in that division or Section only. 18 (2) "Corporate authorities" means (a) the mayor and 19 aldermen or similar body when the reference is to cities, (b) 20 the president and trustees or similar body when the reference 21 is to villages or incorporated towns, and (c) the council when 22 the reference is to municipalities under the commission form of 23 municipal government. -
Statutory Rape: a Guide to State Laws and Reporting Requirements
Statutory Rape: A Guide to State Laws and Reporting Requirements Prepared for: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Department of Health and Human Services Prepared by: Asaph Glosser Karen Gardiner Mike Fishman The Lewin Group December 15, 2004 Acknowledgements Work on this project was funded by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under a contract to The Lewin Group. This report benefited greatly from the oversight and input of Jerry Silverman, the ASPE Project Officer. In addition, we would like to acknowledge the assistance of a number of reviewers. Sarah Brown, Eva Klain, and Brenda Rhodes Miller provided us with valuable guidance and insights into legal issues and the policy implications of the laws and reporting requirements. Their comments improved both the content and the organization of the paper. At The Lewin Group, Shauna Brodsky reviewed drafts and provided helpful comments. The Authors Table of Contents I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..........................................................................................................ES-1 A. Background...........................................................................................................................ES-1 1. Criminal Laws............................................................................................................... ES-1 2. Reporting Requirements............................................................................................. -
Historic Preservation in Sherborn
HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN SHERBORN I. Town Facts and Brief History A. Town Facts Sherborn is a small semi-rural community located about 18 miles southwest of Boston. The town is proud of its rural heritage which is still evident in many active farms and orchards, and preserved in Town Forest and other extensive public lands. Open space comprises more than 50% of the town's area. Because all properties have individual wells and septic systems, minimum house lot sizes are one, two or three acres, depending upon location. Sherborn is an active, outdoors-oriented town where residents enjoy miles of trails through woods and meadows for walking and horseback riding, swim and boat in Farm Pond, and participate in any number of team sports. A high degree of volunteerism due to strong citizen support for town projects, and commitment to excellence in public education, characterize the community's values today, as they have for more than 325 years. Some quick facts about Sherborn are: Total Area: 16.14 sq. miles (10328 acres) Land Area: 15.96 sq. miles (10214 acres) Population: 4,545 (12/31/02) Registered voters: 2,852 (12/31/02) Total Residences 1,497 (1/1/02) Single family homes: 1,337 (1/1/02) Avg. single family tax bill: $8,996 (FY03) B. Brief History Of Sherborn Settled in 1652 and incorporated in 1674, Sherborn was primarily a farming community until the early part of the 20th century. It now is a bedroom town for Boston and the surrounding hi-tech area. Sherborn's original land area encompassed the present territory of Holliston, Ashland, and parts of Mendon, Framingham and Natick. -
CPY Document
353 OFFICIAL OPINION NO. 89 August 27, 1945. Hon. Clement T. Malan, State Superintendent of Public Instruction, State House, Indianapolis 4, Indiana. Dear Sir: Your letter of August 1, 1945, received requesting an offcial opinion on the following: "The City of Evansvile recently annexed a portion of Knight Township, Vanderburgh County. "A statute, Burns' Indiana Supplement, Section 28- 3305a, Acts of 1935, ch. 158, paragraph 1, page 578, provides for the liabilty of the city or town for the indebtedness of the annexed territory. "Does this statute make the civil City of Evansvile liable for the debts of the school trustee of the annexed territory, or does it make the School City of Evansvile, Indiana, liable?" Section 28-3305a, Burns' 1943 Supplement, saine being Section 1, Chapter 158, Acts 1935, provides as follows: "In all cases where any city or incorporated town of this state has annexed or shall hereafter annex any territory, or where any town has been or shall here- after be incorporated, and where the civil township, or school township, from which such territory was or is taken, is indebted or has outstanding unpaid bonds or other obligations at the time of the annexation or incorporation of such territory, then such city or town, as the case mày be, shall be liable for, and pay such proportion of such indebtedness of such civil township or school township as the assessed valuation of prop- erty in such annexed or incorporated territory is to the valuation of all property in such township, as the same is assessed for general taxation, prior to the annexation of any such territory or incorporation of any such town. -
Draft MRE1-2017 INCORPORATED TOWN of MONROE, NEW YORK
Draft MRE1-2017 INCORPORATED TOWN OF MONROE, NEW YORK TOWN BOARD ADOPTED LOCAL LAW NO. of 2017 IMPLEMENTING AN EXTENSION OF THE MORATORIUM ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OF THE UNINCORPORATED TOWN OF MONROE, NEW YORK Section 1. Legislative findings and intent. The Town Board (“Board”) of the Incorporated Town of Monroe, New York (‘Town”) previously found that there was a critical and compelling need, in the public interest as set forth in its prior Resolution, to impose a moratorium on the development of all residential property construction in the Town, and, the Town did adopt such a Moratorium. A. The Town previously undertook a Comprehensive Master Plan review in 2005 and enacted Local Laws with regard to the Comprehensive Master Plan (“CMP”) in 2008. The 2005 CMP indicated: In order to remain useful, municipal plans require periodic review and revision, typically at five to ten-year intervals. Economic conditions and business practices, housing and land use needs, transportation conditions and environmental standards are in a constant state of change; so municipal Plans need to be re- evaluated in order to provide for current needs. In 2015, the then Town Board confirmed that the Zoning Regulations were in need of amendment and that a rezoning process had been in effect for over half a decade. Moreover, a Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (“DGEIS”) was prepared to evaluate proposed 2015 Chapter 57 Zoning Amendments. Accordingly, there was a need for a current CMP that reflects all current land use, socio-economic, community character and other impacts. B. The Town Board previously found that the issues raised in The 2005 CMP adopted in 2008 warranted the Town consider a CMP at this time since economic and social impacts and trends have rendered assumptions and recommendations in the 2005 CMP in need of review and revision and that various ad hoc reviews and attempted amendments to the prior CMP did not provide for a Comprehensive Plan as New York State Town Law Section 272-a contemplates. -
Neighboring Town Early Vital Records
HAYES-GENOTER HISTORY AND GENEALOGY LIBRARY NEIGHBORING TOWN EARLY VITAL RECORDS The Town of Pelham was first settled in 1720-21. During that time frame the western one third of present day Pelham was included in the Town of Dunstable, Massachusetts, which had been incorporated in 1673 by the Great and General Court of Colonial Massachusetts. The eastern two thirds of Pelham during that time frame were part of Dracut, Massachusetts, which had been incorporated by Colonial Massachusetts in 1701. On January 4, 1731-2, all of Old Dunstable, Massachusetts located east of the Merrimack River, including the western one third of Pelham, was separated from Old Dunstable and became a part of the newly incorporated Town of Nottingham, Massachusetts. The eastern two thirds continued to be a part of Dracut, Massachusetts. In 1741, by Royal Decree of the King of England, all of present day Pelham was determined to be in the British Colony of New Hampshire, not Massachusetts. From the date of that decree until July 5, 1746, the western one third of present day Pelham was governed as part of Nottingham District, New Hampshire. The Nottingham District included all of Nottingham, Massachusetts declared to be in New Hampshire by the King’s decree. The District, although not technically a town, was governed by a Board of Selectmen and slate of other Town Officers until July 5, 1746. From the 1741 royal decree date until July 5, 1746, the eastern two thirds of present day Pelham were governed as part of the combined Dracut/Methuen District of Colonial New Hampshire. -
2021 Sanbornton Zoning Ordinance
Town of Sanbornton Zoning Ordinance Town of Sanbornton, New Hampshire ZONING ORDINANCE 2021 Edition Town of Sanbornton Zoning Ordinance ZONING ORDINANCE TOWN OF SANBORNTON, NEW HAMPSHIRE 2021 EDITION* * The “2021 Edition” of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Sanbornton NH supersedes all previous editions of the Zoning Ordinance document, no matter in what medium such previous editions were provided. * The “2021 Edition” of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Sanbornton NH remains in effect until such time as it is amended, at which time the “2021 Edition” will be replaced with an up-dated edition of the Zoning Ordinance document which will include all subsequent amendments and will be identified by the year in which such amendment took effect. This Zoning Ordinance is subject to typographical and formatting corrections. Town of Sanbornton Zoning Ordinance TABLE OF CONTENTS ARTICLE 1 PREAMBLE………………………………………………………………………………………. 1.1 ARTICLE 2 DISTRICTS……………………………………………………………………………………….. 2.1 ARTICLE 3 DEFINITIONS………………………………………………………………………………... 3.1-3.7 ARTICLE 4 GENERAL PROVISIONS………………………………………………………………...... 4.1-4.47 ARTICLE 5 GENERAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT……………………………………………………. 5.1 ARTICLE 6 GENERAL RESIDENCE DISTRICT…………………………………………………………... 6.1 ARTICLE 7FOREST CONSERVATION DISTRICT…………………………………………………….…. 7.1 ARTICLE 8 RECREATIONAL DISTRICT……………………………………………………………… 8.1-8.2 ARTICLE 9 HISTORICAL PRESERVATION DISTRICT………………………………………...………. 9.1 ARTICLE 10 COMMERCIAL DISTRICT………………………………………………...………….. 10.1-10.2 ARTICLE 11 HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT………………………….………………..….…… 11.1 ARTICLE 12 AQUIFER CONSERVATION DISTRICT……………….…………………………….. 12.1-12.2 ARTICLE 13 FLOODPLAIN CONSERVATION DISTRICT………………….……………………. 13.1-13.8 ARTICLE 14 SHOREFRONT DISTRICT……………………………………………………………. 14.1-14.2 ARTICLE 15 WETLANDS CONSERVATION DISTRICT…………………………………………. 15.1-15.5 ARTICLE 16 STEEP SLOPE CONSERVATION DISTRICT………………………………………. 16.1-16.2 ARTICLE 17 NON-CONFORMING USES, BUILDINGS AND LOTS……………………………..…… 17.1 ARTICLE 18 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT…………………………………………………………... -
Incorporation of a North Carolina Town
David M. Lawrence and Kara A. Millonzi Incorporation of a North Carolina Town Third Edition 2007 School of Government University of North Carolina The School of Government at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill works to improve the lives of North Carolinians by engaging in practical scholarship that helps public offi cials and citizens understand and strengthen state and local government. Established in 1931 as the Institute of Government, the School provides educational, advisory, and research services for state and local governments. The School of Government is also home to a nationally ranked graduate program in public administration and specialized centers focused on information technology, environmental fi nance, and civic education for youth. As the largest university-based local government training, advisory, and research organization in the United States, the School of Government offers up to 200 classes, seminars, schools, and specialized conferences for more than 12,000 public offi cials each year. In addition, faculty members annually publish approximately fi fty books, periodicals, and other reference works related to state and local government. Each day that the General Assembly is in session, the School produces the Daily Bulletin, which reports on the day’s activities for members of the legislature and others who need to follow the course of legislation. The Master of Public Administration Program is a full-time, two-year program that serves up to sixty students annually. It consistently ranks among the best public administration graduate programs in the country, particularly in city management. With courses ranging from public policy analysis to ethics and management, the program educates leaders for local, state, and federal governments and nonprofi t organizations. -
An Investigation of the Origin of Place Names of Towns in Penobscot County, Maine
The University of Maine DigitalCommons@UMaine Electronic Theses and Dissertations Fogler Library 8-1956 An Investigation of the Origin of Place Names of Towns in Penobscot County, Maine William F. Fox Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/etd Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Fox, William F., "An Investigation of the Origin of Place Names of Towns in Penobscot County, Maine" (1956). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 3328. https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/etd/3328 This Open-Access Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. AN INVESTIGATION OF THE ORIGIN OF PLACE 2 NAMES OF TOWNS IN PENOBSCOT COUNTY, MAINE By WILLIAM F. FOX A«B., Harvard College, 1950 A THESIS Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts (in History) Division of Graduate Study University of Maine Orono August, 1956 AN INVESTIGATION OF THE ORIGIN OF PLACE NAMES OF TOWNS IN PENOBSCOT COUNTY, MAINE By William F. Fox An Abstract of the Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts (in History). August, 195&* A study was made of the origin of place names of towns in Penobscot County, Maine. Each of the sixty-one town names is taken up in chronological order. A list of the previous designations of each town, beginning with the survey designation, is included and an attempt has been made to find the origin of these wherever possible as well as the name used today. -
Summary of State Speed Laws
DOT HS 810 826 August 2007 Summary of State Speed Laws Tenth Edition Current as of January 1, 2007 This document is available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161 This publication is distributed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in the interest of information exchange. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the Department of Transportation or the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. If trade or manufacturers' names or products are mentioned, it is because they are considered essential to the object of the publication and should not be construed as an endorsement. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ...................................................iii Missouri ......................................................138 Alabama..........................................................1 Montana ......................................................143 Alaska.............................................................5 Nebraska .....................................................150 Arizona ...........................................................9 Nevada ........................................................157 Arkansas .......................................................15 New -
Illinois Revised Cities and Villages Act: a Study
Chicago-Kent Law Review Volume 21 Issue 2 Article 1 March 1943 Illinois Revised Cities and Villages Act: A Study J. Stanley Stroud Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation J. S. Stroud, Illinois Revised Cities and Villages Act: A Study, 21 Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 129 (1943). Available at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview/vol21/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Chicago-Kent Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. CHICAGO-KENT LAW REVIEW VOLUME 21 MARcH, 1943 NUMBER 2 THE ILLINOIS REVISED CITIES AND VILLAGES ACT: A STUDY J. STANLEY STROUD* PRIOR LEGISLATION B EFORE 1870 most, if not all, cities, villages, and incor- porated towns in Illinois were organized under special charters granted to each of them separately by special act of the General Assembly. Much of the time of the early legislators was devoted to the enactment of such legisla- tion.' While the general provisions of the various special charters, were, for the most part, reasonably similar, there was nothing like universal uniformity, some municipalities receiving a much more liberal grant of powers than others. After the prohibition, by the Illinois Constitution of 1870, of this type of special legislation, the General Assembly, in 1872, enacted the Cities and Villages Act.2 This Act, con- stituting as it did the general charter of all municipali- ties incorporated thereunder, authorized new cities and vil- lages to be incorporated under its provisions, and author- ized already existing cities, villages, and incorporated towns to abandon their prior organization and become incorporated as a city or village under the provisions of the Act. -
Summary of Vehicle Occupant Protection Laws Ninth Edition Current As of June 1, 2010 DISCLAIMER
DOT HS 811 458 April 2011 Summary of Vehicle Occupant Protection Laws Ninth Edition Current as of June 1, 2010 DISCLAIMER This publication is distributed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in the interest of information exchange. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Department of Transportation or the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. If trade names, manufacturers’names, or specific products are mentioned, it is because they are considered essential to the object of the publication and should not be construed as an endorsement. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………. iii OVERVIEW NARRATIVE OF KEY PROVISIONS………………………………………….. v SUMMARY CHART OF KEY PROVISIONS…………………………………………………. vi ALABAMA……………………………………………………………………………………… 1 ALASKA………………………………………………………………………………………… 5 ARIZONA……………………………………………………………………………………….. 8 ARKANSAS…………………………………………………………………………………….. 11 CALIFORNIA…………………………………………………………………………………… 14 COLORADO…………………………………………………………………………………….. 19 CONNECTICUT………………………………………………………………………………… 22 DELAWARE…………………………………………………………………………………….. 26 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA…………………………………………………………………….. 29 FLORIDA………………………………………………………………………………………… 33 GEORGIA……………………………………………………………………………………….. 37 HAWAI’I…………………………………………………………………………………………