Questions? Contact us: info@masondatacenterfacts.org
Donate
← Back to home

Annexation · Petition 26-AP-01

The annexation request.
Where it stands. How to take part.

Property owners are seeking to move approximately 405.8 acres from Vevay Township into the City of Mason for a proposed data center. The petition passed legal sufficiency review on October 7, 2026. Public comments are open while the local hearing is being arranged.

Annexation pendingPublic-hearing date awaiting official notice

Last checked . Meeting arrangements may change; use the official SBC notice before making plans.

Submit a public commentExplore the site maps

A paperwork threshold has been met

The State Boundary Commission (SBC) found Petition 26-AP-01, Vevay Township to City of Mason, legally sufficient on October 7. The SBC’s correspondence identifies a public hearing as the next step. The boundary change remains pending, and this determination does not authorize construction of a data center.

The application concerns seven parcels around College and Columbia roads. The petition describes approximately 405.8 acres. For the exact territory, read the submitted legal description and survey alongside the explanatory maps.

In June, Vevay Township declined to enter discussions about a voluntary PA 425 conditional transfer. The property owners subsequently pursued the separate state annexation process.

Sources: October 7 SBC correspondence, staff review and petition, and the SBC process guide.

Process and timeline

Confirmed events and proposed arrangements are labelled separately. No public-hearing date is presented here as confirmed.

  1. Legal sufficiency review completed

    The petition met the procedural requirements to move forward. The public written-comment period opened.

  2. Scheduling underway

    Local hearing arrangements

    The October 19 council packet lists possible dates in December 2026 and January 2027, with City Hall offered as a venue. These are staff proposals. A possible November scheduling meeting remains unconfirmed in the posted SBC material checked for this update.

  3. Date, time and place TBD

    Public hearing near the proposed annexation area

    Members of the public can speak and submit written comments. Written public comments are accepted until the hearing closes. The official notice will supply the confirmed arrangements.

  4. After the hearing

    SBC recommendation

    The commission considers the record and statutory criteria, then recommends approval, approval with a modified boundary, or denial to the LARA Director.

  5. Date TBD

    Final order and any available review

    The Director makes the final decision. The order identifies its terms and effective date. Any judicial review, eligibility and filing deadlines must be checked against the governing law and issued order.

What the 300-foot notice rule means

Under MCL 117.9(2), nearby owners within 300 feet receive the specified certified-mail hearing notice at least 30 days before the hearing. The local government supplies the owner-address list to the SBC at least 45 days beforehand. The mailing radius does not restrict who may participate in the public hearing.

The public comment deadline is separate from the clerks’ scheduling deadlines and any later response opportunity for municipalities or the petitioner. There is no universal “30-day appeal waiting period” inserted in this timeline.

Put your comments in the public record

You can write now. Identify the matter as Petition 26-AP-01 — Vevay Township to City of Mason, state your position, and explain the specific facts or questions you want considered. Ask that your correspondence be included in the petition record.

Email

LARA-BCC-Boards-Commissions@michigan.gov

Suggested subject: Public comment — Petition 26-AP-01. Keep a copy of your submission and request confirmation of receipt.

Postal mail

State Boundary Commission — Petition 26-AP-01
Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs
Bureau of Construction Codes, Operations Section
P.O. Box 30254
Lansing, MI 48909

For questions about submission arrangements, call 517-241-9303. These contact details appear in the SBC’s case correspondence. Follow any updated instructions in the eventual hearing notice.

At the public hearing

You may also speak in person. Bring a written copy of your remarks and supporting records for SBC staff. Check the official notice for the time, venue, accessibility arrangements and any presentation instructions.

Open an email to the SBCCheck official meeting notices ↗

Make the comment specific to this request

The SBC considers the criteria in MCL 123.1009. Connect your observations, questions and documents to those criteria. The map explorer can help identify terrain, the drain corridor and surrounding parcels.

  • Topography and drainage: how the requested boundary relates to the drain corridor, drainage basins, low ground and adjacent properties. Ask for the underlying engineering evidence; the terrain maps alone do not predict future flooding.
  • Public services: documented water and wastewater capacity, roads, emergency services, proposed improvements, who would pay, and effects on the remaining township.
  • Land use and community plans: how the proposed boundary change relates to existing land uses and adopted city, township, county or regional plans.
  • Fiscal and community effects: compare projected benefits with service obligations, infrastructure costs and effects on both communities. Identify the source and assumptions behind any figures.

Use these outlines as a starting point. Replace the bracketed prompts with your own information and keep factual claims tied to a source.

General public-comment letter 
Subject: Public comment — Petition 26-AP-01

Dear State Boundary Commission:

Please include this letter in the record for Petition 26-AP-01, the proposed annexation from Vevay Township to the City of Mason.

I am [name and connection to the area]. My position on this proposed annexation is [your position].

My concern or question is [specific issue]. The relevant evidence is [document, map, observation or study, with its date]. This relates to [drainage, services, land use, community plans or another statutory criterion] because [explanation].

I ask the commission to [specific request for a finding, supporting evidence or decision]. Please acknowledge receipt of this comment.

Sincerely,
[Your name]
[Your community and preferred contact information]
Download the outline (.txt)
Example focused on terrain and drainage 
Subject: Public comment — Petition 26-AP-01 — drainage

Dear State Boundary Commission:

Please include my comments in the record for Petition 26-AP-01. I am [name and connection to the area], and my position is [your position].

I ask the commission to consider the relationship of the proposed annexation to the Aurelius and Vevay Drain, surrounding topography and drainage basin under MCL 123.1009.

[Describe your specific observation or concern and identify its location. Cite the source and date of any map, photograph, engineering report or other evidence.]

Please identify the evidence addressing drainage conditions, affected neighboring properties and any service or infrastructure implications of the boundary change. I understand that the explanatory terrain maps do not themselves establish flood levels or predict development impacts.

[State the finding or decision you request, and explain why the evidence supports it.]

Sincerely,
[Your name and community]
Example focused on services and costs 
Subject: Public comment — Petition 26-AP-01 — services and costs

Dear State Boundary Commission:

Please include my comments in the record for Petition 26-AP-01. I am [name and connection to the area], and my position is [your position].

I ask the commission to examine the practicality and cost of supplying public services, and the effects on both Mason and the remaining township, under MCL 123.1009.

[Identify a specific service, capacity question, proposed improvement or cost assumption. Cite the record that supports your comment.]

Please distinguish existing capacity from proposed future improvements, and projected revenue from binding financial commitments. I request a clear record of who would fund and maintain any necessary infrastructure and how the boundary change relates to the adopted community plans.

[State the specific finding, evidence or decision you request.]

Sincerely,
[Your name and community]

Keep the decisions separate

Annexation changes a municipal boundary

This proceeding determines whether the described land becomes part of Mason. Zoning, site design, utility agreements and any environmental permissions belong to their respective processes and records. The requested boundary is not an approved data center building footprint.

Annexation and ordinance referendums have different rules

Under MCL 117.9(4), an approved annexation order is not subject to that statutory referendum when 100 or fewer people resided in the approved territory at the time the petition was filed. A different provision addresses territory with more than 100 residents. The relevant population is the population in the territory at filing.

The petition reports eight residents, based on owner-supplied information. That is an attributed statement in the application, rather than an independent population finding by this website. A city ordinance referendum is a separate mechanism; eligibility and deadlines must be assessed for the particular action.

Our community’s work to protect Noise and Vibration Ordinance 272 continues alongside participation in the state boundary proceeding. We will identify each future decision by its actual record and applicable process.

Read the official records

The council packet is posted as a draft agenda packet. Its attached state correspondence and submitted petition are source records; proposed hearing dates in the staff report are not a hearing notice. Page links may require opening the PDF in a separate reader.

Explore the mapsSend us a source or correction