Severance Procedure Initiation
The formal removal of territory from a municipality's boundaries.
Severance Procedure Initiation is the formal process by which territory is removed from a municipality's boundaries, functioning as the reverse of annexation. This process is not limited to formerly annexed land; even portions of a municipality's original territory may be deannexed. The concept also applies to other local government entities, such as school districts. Alternative terms include disannexation, secession, detachment, disconnection, severance, and exclusion. When the purpose is to create a new municipality, it is sometimes called division.
Lore & Background
Deannexation procedures and requirements vary greatly among states. Most states provide for some sort of deannexation procedure, and a majority allow residents to petition for it. Many states specifically require judicial or administrative agency review of petitions. Deannexations are much less common than annexations; when they occur, they are typically small-scale and involve individual properties. Deannexations of entire neighborhoods are unusual. Large-scale deannexations in which the deannexed land becomes unincorporated are extremely rare. Only one deannexation has ever been struck down on constitutional grounds: the Alabama legislature's deannexation of majority-Black areas from Tuskegee in 1957, which the Supreme Court invalidated in Gomillion v. Lightfoot.
Reader's Guide
The procedure for deannexation most typically involves four steps: first, a request is made for deannexation, either by the city legislature or signed by a required percentage of property owners or residents in the affected area; second, the request is presented to a designated authority, such as a court; third, the authority reviews the request to see if it meets statutory requirements; fourth, the authority grants the requested deannexation unless the request is improper. Laws governing resident-initiated deannexation are diverse. A 2016 study of 28 states found that the required level of support ranged from 100% of affected landowners in many states to 5% of all landowners citywide in West Virginia, while in Missouri a petition can be filed by any resident of the affected area. Eleven of the 28 states allowed petitions only when the deannexation would not create a 'donut hole' inside an existing municipality. Seven allowed petitions only when the affected area had not received any public improvements. Some states limit the right to petition to areas that have not been platted, or that are used for only agricultural purposes. Ohio uniquely provides for a referendum in which only those qualified voters who live in the affected area may vote, limited to proposed deannexations of areas of 1500 acres or greater.
Motivations and Political Dynamics
Deannexation may result in the formation of a new municipal corporation, ceding the affected land to another municipality, or returning it to its unincorporated condition. Land is often deannexed in order to switch it from one municipality to another, or in order to form a new municipality on it. Cities sometimes deannex land to rationalize strange borders created by past annexation wars. Portions of cities may attempt to deannex due to political disagreements with city leadership, as with 1990s deannexation campaigns in Staten Island and the San Fernando Valley. Majority-white cities have sometimes attempted to deannex regions with large minority populations to preserve white voters' power. Some grassroots deannexation campaigns have been initiated by majority-white areas, motivated by what Richard G. Hatcher described as 'white reaction to black ascendency'. African American communities impacted by racially motivated annexation may seek relief through deannexation, as occurred when the Brandy Creek neighborhood of Weldon, North Carolina was annexed into Roanoke Rapids for an economic development project. Only one deannexation has ever been struck down on constitutional grounds: the Alabama legislature's deannexation of majority-Black areas from Tuskegee in 1957, which the Supreme Court invalidated in Gomillion v. Lightfoot.
Legal Procedures and Authority
Deannexations typically involve consultations between the property owners in the area to be deannexed and the municipality. Deannexation also often involves local legislation passed by the state legislature. From the standpoint of separation of powers, deannexation is a legislative function because it relates to municipal boundaries, which are traditionally reserved to the legislature. However, a few cases have held that courts have an equitable power to deannex land to which no municipal services are provided. Legislatures often delegate their powers by involving courts in the process, either by providing for deannexation petitions to be brought before a court or by providing for judicial review of deannexation rulings by a municipality. Judicial discretion is typically quite limited. Legislatures may also delegate the review of deannexation petitions to an administrative agency. They may also delegate the power of deannexation to municipalities directly. In all cases, the power to deannex must be exercised in the exact manner prescribed by the legislature or the deannexation is null and void. As of 2017, 36 states provided for some sort of delegated deannexation procedure. The procedure most typically involves four steps: a request, presentation to a designated authority, review of statutory requirements, and granting unless improper. Laws governing resident-initiated deannexation are diverse. A 2016 study of 28 states found required support ranging from 100% of affected landowners to 5% of all landowners citywide. Eleven states allowed petitions only when no 'donut hole' would be created. Seven allowed petitions only when the affected area had not received public improvements. Some states limit petitions to unplatted areas or agricultural areas. Petitions may be addressed to a court, the municipality, or the people through a referendum. Ohio uniquely provides for a referendum limited to qualified voters in the affected area for areas of 1500 acres or greater.
Frequency and Practical Impact
Deannexations are uncommon. Large-scale deannexations are even less common, as most deannexations involve only one or a few properties. Census data through 1980 indicated that the average size of a deannexation was 285 acres. Compared to annexation, the impact of deannexation on municipal boundaries is quite small. A study covering 1950 to 1976 found that deannexations accounted for 1.4% of boundary changes. A study of Texas municipal boundary changes from 2000 to 2010 found that deannexation accounted for only 2.6% of the overall changes in municipal area. In general, when land is deannexed from a local government, the debts of the local government do not stay with the land, unless a statute provides otherwise. Bondholders are assumed to have constructive notice that local boundaries can change. Deannexation can bring both costs and benefits to the deannexed area. For homeowners otherwise inclined to leave a city, deannexation provides the benefits of avoiding the expense of relocation and increased commuting times. White residents of school districts with increasing African American enrollment sometimes pursue deannexation from the school district as an alternative to white flight.
More in Story & Timeline
Elsewhere in Severance
Spotted an error? Know more?
Reader corrections go straight into our review queue. Suggest an edit · How this site is sourced