Opinion
No. 37680
Decided June 26, 1963.
Municipal corporations — Annexation of territory — Procedure — Notice of time and place of hearing — Substantial compliance with statute — Section 707.05, Revised Code.
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Lucas County.
On May 17, 1960, a petition for the annexation of territory to the city of Toledo was filed with the Board of County Commissioners of Lucas County. On the same day, the board fixed July 19, 1960, as the date for a hearing thereon. On June 3, 1960, a copy of the petition was filed with the county auditor. On June 9, 1960, a notice of the time and place of the hearing was posted in the area to be annexed.
A hearing on the petition was had on July 19, 1960. The board approved the petition and ordered its findings and approval of annexation certified to the auditor or clerk of the city of Toledo.
On August 26, 1960, a certified popy of the board's resolution, together with the annexation petition, map and all papers connected therewith, was filed in the office of the city clerk.
On October 24, 1960, the appellants herein brought the instant action in the Court of Common Pleas of Lucas County, praying that the appellees be enjoined from presenting to the city council the map, petition, papers and trancript in connection with the annexation proceeding and that the proceeding "be found to be not right, just or equitable."
The Court of Common Pleas held that the notice of the proceedings on the annexation was properly advertised and that the provision of Section 707.05, Revised Code, requiring the posting of notice is not applicable to annexation proceedings, and denied the injunction.
The Court of Appeals, on appeal on questions of law, found that the requirements of the law applicable to annexation proceedings had been substantially complied with, and affirmed the judgment of the trial court.
The allowance of a motion to certify the record brings the cause to this court for review.
Mr. Edward G. Harris, for appellants.
Mr. Louis R. Young, director of law, and Mr. Reno R. Riley, Jr., for appellees.
Appellants contend that the requirements of Section 707.05, Revised Code, were not complied with because (1) the notice of the July 19 hearing before the board was posted for only 40 days before that hearing instead of for a full six weeks ( i.e., 42 days), and (2) the hearing before the board was held on July 19 which was only 46, instead of the required 60, days after the petition had been filed in the county auditor's office.
Section 707.05, Revised Code, provides (1) that the hearing before the board "shall not be less than 60 days" after the petition is filed in the office of the county auditor, and (2) that the agent of the petitioners shall cause a notice of the time and place of hearing to "be published in a newspaper * * * for a period of six consecutive weeks, and shall also cause a copy of the notice to be posted in a conspicuous place * * * not less than six weeks prior to the time fixed for the hearing."
Notice of the hearing was published as required by the foregoing statute.
The only apparent purposes for the foregoing statutory requirements would be to provide notice of the hearing to all interested parties so that they would have ample time to prepare for the hearing. There is nothing in the record to indicate that those purposes have not been fully satisfied. There is nothing in the record to indicate that any interested party did not have notice of the July 19 hearing in time to fully prepare for it. See Dabkowski v. Baumann, 175 Ohio St. 89. At that hearing much testimony was presented by both proponents and opponents of the proposed annexation but no objection was made by anyone about the notice or about the time of the hearing.
Therefore, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
TAFT, C.J., ZIMMERMAN, MATTHIAS, O'NEILL, GRIFFITH, HERBERT and GIBSON, JJ., concur.