2023 Nebraska Revised Statutes › Chapter 17 - Cities of the Second Class and Villages › 17-407 - Annexation by city or village within county between 100,000 and 250,000 inhabitants; mayor and city council or chairperson and village board of trustees; powers; notice; contents; liability; limitation on action.

17-407.
Annexation by city or village within county between 100,000 and 250,000 inhabitants; mayor and city council or chairperson and village board of trustees; powers; notice; contents; liability; limitation on action.
(1) The provisions of this section shall govern annexation by a city of the second class or village located in whole or in part within the boundaries of a county having a population in excess of one hundred thousand inhabitants but less than two hundred fifty thousand inhabitants as determined by the most recent federal decennial census or the most recent revised certified count by the United States Bureau of the Census.
(2) The mayor and city council of any city of the second class or the chairperson and members of the village board of trustees of any village described in subsection (1) of this section may by ordinance, except as provided in sections 13-1111 to 13-1118, at any time include within the corporate limits of such city or village any contiguous or adjacent lands, lots, tracts, streets, or highways as are urban or suburban in character and in such direction as may be deemed proper. Such grant of power shall not be construed as conferring power to extend the limits of any such municipality over any agricultural lands which are rural in character.
(3) Not later than fourteen days prior to the public hearing before the planning commission on a proposed annexation by the city or village, the city clerk or village clerk shall send notice of the proposed annexation by certified mail, return receipt requested, to any of the following entities serving customers in such city or village or in the area proposed for annexation: Any natural gas public utility as defined in section 66-1802; any natural gas utility owned or operated by the city or village; any metropolitan utilities district; any public power district; any public power and irrigation district; any municipality; any electric cooperative; and any other governmental entity providing electric service. Such notice shall include a copy of the proposed annexation ordinance, the date, time, and place of the public hearing before the planning commission on the proposed annexation ordinance, and a map showing the boundaries of the area proposed for annexation.
(4) Prior to the final adoption of the annexation ordinance, the minutes of the meeting of the city council or village board of trustees at which such final adoption was considered shall reflect formal compliance with subsection (3) of this section.
(5) No additional or further notice beyond that required by subsection (3) of this section shall be necessary in the event (a) that the scheduled public hearing of the city council or village board of trustees on the proposed annexation is adjourned, continued, or postponed until a later date or (b) that subsequent to providing such notice the ordinance regarding such proposed annexation was amended, changed, or rejected by action of the city council or village board of trustees prior to formal passage of the annexation ordinance.
(6) Except for a willful or deliberate failure to cause notice to be given, no annexation decision made by a city of the second class or village either to accept or reject a proposed annexation, either in whole or in part, shall be void, invalidated, or affected in any way because of any irregularity, defect, error, or failure on the part of the city or village or its employees to cause notice to be given as required by this section if a reasonable attempt to comply with this section was made.
(7) Except for a willful or deliberate failure to cause notice to be given, the city or village and its employees shall not be liable for any damage to any person resulting from any failure to cause notice to be given as required by this section when a reasonable attempt was made to provide such notice. No action for damages resulting from the failure to cause notice to be provided as required by this section shall be filed more than one year following the date of the formal acceptance or rejection of the proposed annexation, either in whole or in part, by the city council or village board of trustees.
(8) No action to challenge the validity of the acceptance or rejection of a proposed annexation on the basis of this section shall be filed more than one year following the date of the formal acceptance or rejection of the annexation by the city council or village board of trustees.
Source
Laws 2009, LB495, § 7;
Laws 2017, LB74, § 2;
Laws 2017, LB133, § 115.
Annotations
An action to determine the validity of an annexation ordinance and enjoin its enforcement sounds in equity. County of Sarpy v. City of Gretna, 309 Neb. 320, 960 N.W.2d 272 (2021).
Subsection (2) of this section does not prohibit annexation of all agricultural lands, but only those agricultural lands which are rural in character. Lands may be currently utilized in an agricultural fashion and still not be rural in character. County of Sarpy v. City of Gretna, 309 Neb. 320, 960 N.W.2d 272 (2021).
The issue of whether annexed territory is agricultural land that is rural in character is a question of law. County of Sarpy v. City of Gretna, 309 Neb. 320, 960 N.W.2d 272 (2021).
The use of land for agricultural purposes does not necessarily mean it is rural in character. It is the nature of its location as well as its use which determine whether it is rural or urban in character. County of Sarpy v. City of Gretna, 309 Neb. 320, 960 N.W.2d 272 (2021).
The word "rural" is defined as "of or pertaining to the country as distinguished from a city or town," and the word "urban" is defined as "of or belonging to a city or town." County of Sarpy v. City of Gretna, 309 Neb. 320, 960 N.W.2d 272 (2021).
To determine whether lands are urban or suburban, or rural, the test is whether a city has arbitrarily and irrationally used the power granted therein to include lands entirely disconnected, agricultural in character, and bearing no rational relation to the legitimate purposes of annexation. County of Sarpy v. City of Gretna, 309 Neb. 320, 960 N.W.2d 272 (2021).