Posted by: Patricia Salkin | November 5, 2009

Citizens Claiming an Adverse Impact May Challenge Annexation Where Their Land is Not Part of the Annexed Property

Lifestyle initiated a voluntary annexation by requesting the City of Reno annex 7,000 acres of land in Cold Springs Valley. Residents of Cold Springs, an area that borders the land in question, opposed the annexation. The City Council ignored the opposition and annexed the land. The citizens sought reversal of this decision. The District Court found the claims speculative and held that therefore they lacked standing to challenge the annexation.

The court held that the residents do have standing to challenge the annexation even though their land is not being annexed. The right to seek judicial review extends to anyone claiming to be adversely affected by an annexation. The Court noted that it has consistently held that citizens have the right to challenge land use decisions. In annexation cases, the party must also prove that they would be adversely affected by the annexation. To prove that a party is adversely affected by the annexation, a party must show both current and reasonably ascertainable future adverse effects if the land were to be annexed. To allow otherwise would be unreasonable because the citizens would have to wait until after annexation to bring a claim.

Citizens for Cold Springs v City of Reno, 2009 WL 3319705 (Nevada 10/15/2009).

The opinion can be accessed at:           

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: