Eric D. Williams

The Boundary Commission has jurisdiction over the effects of Act 425 agreements on petitions for annexation. The grant of jurisdiction includes the authority necessarily involved “in processing and approving, denying, or revising a petition or resolution for annexation.” The exercise of jurisdiction urged upon the Boundary Commission by Lenox and Casco Townships during the adjudicative process, reviewing and giving statutory effect to an Act 425 agreement, is now attacked vigorously on appeal because the outcome was contrary to the desires of the townships. According to the Appellants, the Boundary Commission can exercise its jurisdiction to consider an Act 425 agreement and deny a petition for annexation, but it cannot exercise its jurisdiction to consider an Act 425 agreement and grant a petition for
annexation. The Boundary Commission’s power to consider and analyze Act 425 agreements in order to determine their
impact on pending petitions for annexation is incidentally necessary to the process of fully adjudicating annexation cases. Any other holding would frustrate the legislature’s intent in
creating the Boundary Commission and charging it with the responsibility of hearing, approving, denying, or revising petitions for annexation.

Michigan Court of Appeals:
Petitioners appeal by leave granted a circuit court order affirming a decision of the State Boundary Commission (the commission). We affirm.