City of Cameron v. Stafford

Decision Date05 April 1971
Docket NumberNo. 25536,25536
CitationCity of Cameron v. Stafford, 466 S.W.2d 115 (Mo. App. 1971)
PartiesThe CITY OF CAMERON, Missouri, a Municipal Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Kenneth D. STAFFORD, et al., Defendants-Respondents. The CITY OF CAMERON, Missouri, a Municipal corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Wilma E. JONES, et al., Defendants-Respondents.
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

Melvin E. Griffin, Bob F. Griffin, Griffin & Griffin, Cameron, for plaintiff-appellant.

Harold L. Miller, Robison & Miller, Maysville, for defendants-respondents.

SHANGLER, Presiding Judge.

The City of Cameron, of the third class and operating under the City Manager form of government, brought two separate suits for declaratory judgment under Sec. 71.015, V.A.M.S., seeking judicial confirmation of proposals to annex two distinct tracts containing 317 acres of land lying adjacent. In each case two defendants were sued as representatives of a class, and in neither case is there any contention that the defendants did not fairly represent the class. The actions were consolidated for trial, tried to the court, and appealed as consolidated. The trial court denied the City's petitions and we affirm those judgments. We are essentially in accord with the findings of fact, and completely in accord with the conclusions of law, given by the trial court to support his judgments.

The present boundaries of the plaintiff City contain about 1452 acres, the bulk of which is in Clinton County, and the rest spills over into DeKalb County to the north. It was brought to this size by the addition of an undisclosed acreage by annexation in 1963 and by the subsequent annexation of approximately 252 acres on December 22, 1969. Of this most recently annexed area, 216 acres were added to the east corporate limits so that the City is presently bounded to the east, generally, by Interstate 35. Other small acreages were annexed in 1969 including Redbud Addition, a platted area near the southern edge of the City, and a portion of North Cameron Heights, another platted area in DeKalb County to the north. As now constituted, Cameron lies astride U.S. 69 which runs through it north and south, and each part of the City has easy access to the network of highways within and surrounding it. State Access Route BB, sometimes referred to as I--35 business loop, forms the southern boundary of the City at its most southeasterly extension and connects U.S. 69 to the west with I--35 to the east.

The lands sought to be annexed by these proceedings have been referred to throughout as the Stafford Tract and the Jones Tract.

THE STAFFORD TRACT

The Stafford Tract, containing about 163 acres of gently rolling land, lies immediately south of State Access Route BB, the existing southern boundary of the City's southeastern extremity. This tract is in the form of an 'L', and from its jointure near the intersection of Route BB and U.S. 69, one arm extends east from U.S. 69 to 300 feet beyond I--35 at a uniform depth of 810 feet, and the other extends north and south along U.S. 69 and encompasses somewhat more than two quarter sections. The dwellings and business houses of the sixteen residents of the Stafford Tract (as well as the five acre city cemetery) are all strung along the perimeter formed by Route BB and U.S. 69. Except for the land these buildings and their uses require, the rest, 145 of the 163 acres sought in annexation, remains unimproved pasture. Each of the residents, except for the Tindalls, who occupy the easternmost 300 foot strip, is served by at least one City utility. But only the Four County Implement Company is connected to the City sewer system, presumably at its own expense. This tract is served by the volunteer Cameron Fire Department and benefits also from occasional Cameron police patrols. City electricity is available as is water by connecting with the City water main, also presumable at the user's expense. The closest City sewer is located 700 feet east of U.S. 69 on the north side of Route BB from whence a sewer line runs north and east to the City sewage disposal dump.

The Four County Implement Company, an Allis Chalmers outlet, is located at the juncture of Route BB and U.S. 69 and the other businesses on the tract extend south from there along U.S. 69. They include a liquor store, a Pontiac sales and service business and the Stafford Red X Motors, a combination Buick sales and service agency and filling station which occupies an 800 foot front on U.S. 69. From that point southThe land becomes pastoral once again and is unimproved except for a few farm buildings.

The Stafford Tract was said by witnesses for the City to be very desirable for both residential and commercial development. Leo Farnon, a Cameron realtor, expressed his opinion that it had a value of $1000 per acre, much more than such land would be worth for exclusively agricultural purposes. There was no evidence, however, of any sales of such land at any price.

THE JONES TRACT

The Jones Tract also lies to the south of the present corporate limits, is bounded on the east by U.S. 69 which separates it from the Stafford Tract to the east. Its own south boundary is on a line with the south boundary of the Stafford Tract. The Jones Tract contains 154 acres, including Crestview Subdivision, a 40 acre area platted by Mr. and Mrs. Jones in 1966. (Mr. and Mrs. Jones, who live in the subdivision, also own a tiny motel also located there, as well as all the platted lots which have remained unsold and most of all the other land in the tract.) The subdivision abuts Park Avenue (the southern corporate boundary at that point) on the north and U.S. 69 on the east. Of the lots platted--and almost 100 lots appear on Plaintiff's Exhibit 2--only one commercial and five residential lots have been sold, the last of them in 1967. Mr. Jones explained that his immediate design was to have gas available for only the front tier of lots facing Park Avenue, but before a gas main could be installed and gas service be made available at all, it was required that he record a plat of the entire forty acres. Although the recorded plat delineates lots and streets, in fact the only street servicing the subdivision is Park Avenue on which it fronts. So apart from the six lots which have been sold, the Jones dwelling and the modest two-unit motel they own and operate, the rest of the forty acres of the subdivision remains unimproved pasture land.

The quarter-section immediately to the south of the subdivision contains four dwellings, those of Reno, Collins, Koechner and Pollard, each facing U.S. 69 to the east. The balance of the quarter-section as well as of the entire Jones Tract to the west remains open country, so that of the 154 acres sought to be annexed, 135 are unimproved pasture land. It is as pasture for his hogs and cattle that Jones uses that land. The land west of the four dwellings was terraced because of its roughness. It becomes even rougher to the west where it is cut by a 'big ditch' which empties into the Burlington Reservoir, a source of the City's water supply, lying southwest of the tract. The City's witnesses acknowledged a variance in elevation in the tract not exceeding 40 or 50 feet and that it would not be as desirable for development as the Stafford Tract, but desirable nonetheless. Jones testified that the westerly portions could not be used without a considerable expenditure for grading.

All of the twenty-eight residents of the Jones Tract, as well as the few businesses conducted there, have the benefit of some City service. Only those lots in the subdivision fronting on Park Avenue, however, have access to the City sewer system. They are connected to a sewer line having the capacity to serve twenty-four dwellings, installed by Jones at a cost of almost $9000. The construction of a lift station was also necessary since the natural flow of the tract is to the southwest and the City's sewage disposal dump is to the northeast. The water main was installed at a cost of about $2250. It was such costs, particularly for the sewer line, which prompted Jones to give up any serious effort to sell additional lots other than the remaining frontage lots for which he had already made provision for water and sewage disposal.

The Jones Tract, including the only businesses it contained--the motel and Reno's accounting office, both fronting on U.S. 69--had the benefit of the same fire and police protection as was available to the Stafford area. The City's recreational facilities were also used by some of the residents.

Admittedly, those platted lots fronting on Park Avenue and the unplatted sites along U.S. 69 brought higher prices than if they had been sold for purely agricultural uses. As to the balance of the tract, its fair market value was $400 to $500 per acre according to Mrs. Jones, and $1000 per acre according to Mr. Farnon, the City's witness.

THE CITY OF CAMERON

The evidence depicts plaintiff as a forward-looking, fiscally sound, enterprising city. Its police department, consisting of a chief and four officers, is equipped with two radio cars, at least one of which is on patrol the day around. From its base station, messages are received and transmitted on two frequencies by a dispatcher on duty throughout the day and night. Cameron police have patrolled along Route BB, U.S. 69 and Park Avenue which are the common boundaries of the City and the areas sought to be annexed. For the past three years, the police department has also answered calls from the Stafford and Jones Tracts because they are considered by the City to be within its 'trade area'. For the same reason, the Cameron volunteer fire department has been servicing the Stafford and Jones Tracts for the past two years. The personnel and equipment of both departments seem reasonably adequate to accord these two tracts, if annexed, the same municipal services now rendered to Cameron.

Cameron's water supply, purification and distribution systems are more than...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
7 cases
  • City of Town and Country v. St. Louis County
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • September 20, 1983
    ...entitled to the test of reasonableness. City of Olivette v. Graeler, 338 S.W.2d 827, 837 (Mo.1960) (Graeler I ); City of Cameron v. Stafford, 466 S.W.2d 115, 120 (Mo.App.1971). And the annexing city bears the burden of demonstration that its proposed action is reasonable. Young v. Mayor, Co......
  • City of Des Peres v. Stapleton
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • May 27, 1975
    ...(Mo. banc 1967). Even the lack of migration from the city to the area will not by itself show unreasonableness. City of Cameron v. Stafford, 466 S.W.2d 115 (Mo.App.1971). Applying these and other factors to the present annexation, we cannot say that the trial court erred in finding the anne......
  • City of Centralia v. Norden
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • July 5, 1994
    ...was held unreasonable where city had 788 acres of undeveloped, vacant land (50 percent of total city acreage)); City of Cameron v. Stafford, 466 S.W.2d 115 (Mo.App.1971) (annexation found unreasonable where city had 216 acres of vacant land suitable for residential development (15 percent o......
  • City of Butler v. Bock
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • March 5, 1973
    ...for consideration in annexation cases. Williams v. City of Illmo, Mo.App., 279 S.W.2d 196, 202(1, 2); and compare City of Cameron v. Stafford, Mo.App., 466 S.W.2d 115, 121(7). The area here proposed to be annexed lies to the north of Butler along old U.S. Highway 71 and new U.S. Highway 71 ......
  • Get Started for Free
1 books & journal articles
  • Section 15.24 Other Annexation Failures
    • United States
    • The Missouri Bar Practice Books Local Government Deskbook Chapter 15 Annexation and Municipal Boundary Adjustments
    • Invalid date
    ...637 S.W.2d 786 (Mo. App. E.D. 1982) · City of Lake Ozark v. Prewitt, 631 S.W.2d 103 (Mo. App. W.D. 1982) · City of Cameron v. Stafford, 466 S.W.2d 115 (Mo. App. W.D. 1971) · City of O’Fallon v. Bethman, 569 S.W.2d 295 (Mo. App. E.D. 1978) ...