A. At the public hearing held for the purpose of determining if the territory proposed to be annexed to the municipality shall be annexed to the municipality, the municipal boundary commission shall determine if the territory proposed to be annexed:

(1) is contiguous to the municipality; and

(2) may be provided with municipal services by the municipality to which the territory is proposed to be annexed.

B. If the municipal boundary commission determines that the conditions set forth in this section are met, the commission shall order annexed to the municipality the territory petitioned to be annexed to the municipality.

C. If the municipal boundary commission determines that only a portion of the territory petitioned to be annexed meets the conditions set forth in this section, the commission may order annexed to the municipality that portion of [the] territory which meets the conditions set forth in this section.

D. If the municipal boundary commission determines that the conditions set forth in this section are not met, the commission shall not order the annexation to the municipality of the territory petitioned to be annexed.

E. Any order of the municipal boundary commission shall be final unless any owner of land within the territory proposed to be annexed, within thirty days after the filing of the final order in the office of the county clerk and the office of the municipal clerk, obtains review of the order by the district court.

History: 1953 Comp., § 14-7-15, enacted by Laws 1965, ch. 300.

Bracketed material. — The bracketed material was inserted by the compiler and it is not part of the law.

Doctrine of prior jurisdiction. — The doctrine of prior jurisdiction, which provides that the court first obtaining jurisdiction retains it as against a court of concurrent jurisdiction in which a similar action is subsequently instituted, is applicable in administrative proceedings, including annexation disputes. Therefore, the commission's decision-making process was entitled to priority as against annexation ordinances adopted by municipalities after an annexation petition had already been filed with the commission. AMREP Southwest, Inc. v. Town of Bernalillo, 1991-NMCA-110, 113 N.M. 19, 821 P.2d 357, cert. denied sub. nom., Town of Bernalillo v. AMREP Sw., 113 N.M. 16, 820 P.2d 1330.

Commission's stay of annexation of a disputed area pending a judicial determination of the commission's jurisdiction over that matter did not deprive the commission of its priority. AMREP Southwest, Inc. v. Town of Bernalillo, 1991-NMCA-110, 113 N.M. 19, 821 P.2d 357, cert. denied sub. nom., Town of Bernalillo v. AMREP Sw., 113 N.M. 16, 820 P.2d 1330.

Authority of commission. — The boundary commission has the authority to annex property over the objections of the municipality involved. City of Albuquerque v. State Mun. Boundary Comm'n, 2002-NMCA-024, 131 N.M. 665, 41 P.3d 933, cert. denied, 131 N.M. 737, 42 P.3d 842.

Commission to act reasonably. — Although Subsection A does not specifically direct the commission to act reasonably, it is an implicit requirement, because the element of reason in its decision, or its absence, is a basis for court review. Mutz v. Municipal Boundary Comm'n, 1984-NMSC-070, 101 N.M. 694, 688 P.2d 12.

Reasonableness of objections. — The municipal boundary commission should only exercise its authority to annex property over a municipality's objections based on a finding that those objections were unreasonable under the circumstances. City of Albuquerque v. State Mun. Boundary Comm'n, 2002-NMCA-024, 131 N.M. 665, 41 P.3d 933, cert. denied, 131 N.M. 737, 42 P.3d 842.

Contiguity required. — Each unit, block or lot of land to be annexed need not have a common boundary with the municipality to satisfy requirement of contiguity in Subsection A(1). Mutz v. Municipal Boundary Comm'n, 1984-NMSC-070, 101 N.M. 694, 688 P.2d 12.

The term "contiguous" in the annexation context requires a touching or close physical proximity of the property. Cox v. Municipal Boundary Comm'n, 1995-NMCA-120, 120 N.M. 703, 905 P.2d 741, cert. denied, 120 NM. 636, 904 P.2d 1061.

Satisfaction of requirements of Subsection A(2) within reasonable time. — The requirement of Subsection A(2) that the annexed territory "may be provided with municipal services" is satisfied if the municipality demonstrates the ability to provide services to the territory to be annexed within a reasonable period of time. Mutz v. Mun. Boundary Comm'n, 1984-NMSC-070, 101 N.M. 694, 688 P.2d 12.

"To file" a paper is to place it in the official custody of the clerk. Town of Hurley v. New Mexico Municipal Boundary Comm'n, 1980-NMSC-083, 94 N.M. 606, 614 P.2d 18.

It is not necessary that officer endorse document upon its receipt in order to effect the filing. Town of Hurley v. New Mexico Mun. Boundary Comm'n, 1980-NMSC-083, 94 N.M. 606, 614 P.2d 18.

Three purposes of the filing requirements contained in Subsection E of this section and 3-7-16A NMSA 1978 are: (1) to provide public and accessible repositories in the offices of county and municipal clerks of accurate copies of the official orders of the commission; (2) to give constructive notice to the world of such orders; and (3) to fix the commencement of the time within which an appeal to the district court from such orders may be taken, namely 30 days, by the instrumentality of constructive notice to a party desiring to appeal. Town of Hurley v. New Mexico Mun. Boundary Comm'n, 1980-NMSC-083, 94 N.M. 606, 614 P.2d 18.

District court review of commission's decision is limited to questions of law - whether the administrative agency acted fraudulently, arbitrarily or capriciously; whether the commission's order was supported by substantial evidence; and whether the agency acted within the scope of its authority. Mutz v. Municipal Boundary Comm'n, 1984-NMSC-070, 101 N.M. 694, 688 P.2d 12.

When the commission followed its statutory mandate and determined that the area proposed for annexation was contiguous and could be provided with municipal services by the city, the district court was then limited to determine whether, based on the record, this decision was fraudulent, arbitrary or capricious, supported by substantial evidence, and within the scope of the commission's authority. Cox v. Municipal Boundary Comm'n, 1995-NMCA-120, 120 N.M. 703, 905 P.2d 741, cert. denied, 120 N.M. 636, 904 P.2d 1061.

Law reviews. — For note, "Annexation of Unincorporated Territory in New Mexico," see 6 Nat. Resources J. 83 (1966).