City of Horn Lake, Matter of, s. 91-CA-765

Decision Date16 September 1993
Docket Number91-CA-766,Nos. 91-CA-765,s. 91-CA-765
Citation630 So.2d 10
PartiesIn the Matter of the Confirmation of Alteration of the Boundaries of the CITY OF HORN LAKE, MS and the City of Southaven, MS. CITY OF SOUTHAVEN, Mississippi and Horn Lake Water Association, Inc. v. CITY OF HORN LAKE, Mississippi and Concerned Citizens Against Annexation: Mack Bowles, Bobby Logan, Dorothy Logan, S.I. Raley, W.D. Sisk, Perry D. Joyner, J.H. Little, Alice Jones and Jack Perry.
CourtMississippi Supreme Court

Jerry L. Mills and William A. Pyle, Pyle, Dreher, Mills & Dye, Jackson, Ronald L. Taylor, Southaven, James H. Herring, Herring, Long & Ward, Canton, for appellants.

B. Brennan Horan, Horan & Horan, Horn Lake, B.G. Perry, Southaven, James E. Holland, Cleveland, for appellees.

En Banc.

SULLIVAN, Justice, for the Court:

The DeSoto County Chancery Court denied the City of Southaven the opportunity to extend its municipal boundaries to include a one mile tract west of Interstate 55. The chancellor did grant Southaven's annexation requests for territories east of Interstate 55; however, Southaven alleges that it was manifest error to deny its annexation requests for the territory west of Interstate 55. Also, Southaven alleges that the chancellor's decision to allow the City of Horn Lake to amend its annexation ordinance and supplement an incorrect description of its entire municipal boundary violated the requirements of Mississippi Code Annotated, Sec. 21-1-27 (1972). Southaven contends that this Court should also adopt new guidelines for determining reasonableness in annexation cases.

PRIOR HISTORY

The City of Horn Lake adopted an ordinance which sought to annex certain territories on December 7, 1989. The ordinance did not correctly define the entire boundary of the city and, when this matter was raised on Southaven's Pre-trial Motion to Dismiss, Horn Lake was granted leave to amend to correctly describe the currently existing boundaries. On October 18, 1990, Horn Lake passed an ordinance which corrected the faulty legal description and related back to the date of the original ordinance.

Trial was held on the December 7, 1989, ordinance. Southaven again renewed its objections, but the chancellor decided that this mistake in the Horn Lake boundary description was not critical.

On January 2, 1990, Southaven adopted an ordinance which sought to annex certain territory contiguous to its border. Shortly thereafter, Southaven filed its petition with the DeSoto County Chancery Court to annex an area of approximately 1 1/2 miles east of I-55 and an area of approximately 1 mile west of I-55 along the Church Road corridor.

Objections to Southaven's annexation were filed by Horn Lake, the DeSoto County Board of Supervisors, the Horn Lake Water Association, and the Concerned Citizens of DeSoto Woods. On May 4, 1990, the City of Horn Lake filed a petition to annex the same one-mile tract west of I-55. Horn Lake also petitioned to annex other areas which, in addition to the area also sought by Southaven, totals two square miles wholly between Highway 51 and I-55, adjoining the south

edge of a 1979 annexation and extending almost two miles south. On motion by Horn Lake, the annexation cases were consolidated for trial, which began on January 7, 1991.

THE FACTS

Southaven is the larger of the two cities, with a population of about twenty-two thousand (22,000) at the time of trial in 1991. It lies on both sides on I-55 and adjoins the State of Tennessee. On the west side of I-55, it extends southerly about two (2) miles from the Tennessee line, while, on the east side of I-55, it extends about three and one-fourth (3 1/4) miles southerly from the Tennessee line.

Horn Lake had a 1990 population of about nine thousand (9000) people. Its boundaries lie exclusively to the west of I-55. Both cities have a common boundary which begins at I-55 and runs about one and one-half (1 1/2) miles westerly; however, the western portions thereafter diverge. The depth of Horn Lake, to the north and south, is only about three-fourths ( 3/4) of a mile along the west side of I-55 and westerly about one (1) mile to U.S. Highway 51. Thereafter, it extends for another one and one-half (1 1/2) miles south on the western side of Highway 51.

Stateline Road is parallel to and about one-fourth ( 1/4) of a mile south of the Tennessee line. It is the first I-55 interchange south of the Tennessee line. This road has significant commercial development and the sales tax from this area generates a substantial proportion of Southaven's municipal income. Approximately two (2) miles south is another interchange at Goodman Road, which is also known as State Highway 302. This roadway services DeSoto County and has appreciable commercial development. Two (2) miles south of this interchange is an east-west county road known as Church Road. This roadway passes under I-55. The chancellor noted that the State Highway Department has agreed to study the possibility of an I-55 interchange at Church Road, but this Court is unaware of further developments.

No objection was voiced to Southaven's annexation of the land east of I-55. This area is roughly square, extends almost one and one-half (1 1/2) miles along I-55 and about one and one-fourth (1 1/4) miles to the east. Church Road runs through the southerly portion of this tract and a substantial residential development lies in the center of this area. The City of Southaven already provides water and sewer service to this tract.

The tract lying west of I-55 has irregular boundary lines and extends westerly from I-55 to Highway 51. Church Road runs east-west through the center of this tract. Development is not substantial, but there are a few houses and one business along this one mile stretch of Church Road. There are no public streets, except Church Road, and there is no central sewer system.

From Church Road north, the western edge of this parcel adjoins the City of Horn Lake along Highway 51. The northern boundary line of this parcel is the irregular southern boundary of an unincorporated subdivision area generally referred to as "DeSoto Woods."

Horn Lake alleges that it was not reasonable for Southaven to annex the area west of I-55 and filed a petition in a separate cause to annex this area plus other unincorporated areas to the north. Both DeSoto County and Horn Lake Water Association originally objected to Southaven's annexation west of I-55, but each withdrew its objections prior to trial.

The chancellor considered and weighed the twelve indicia of reasonableness, from this Court's decision in Bassett v. Town of Taylorsville, 542 So.2d 918, 921 (Miss.1989), and held as follows:

1) Southaven has no substantial need for this area for any anticipated growth;

2) This area does not lie in Southaven's path of growth;

3) Annexation is not now required for planning, zoning, other city services, or protection from health hazards;

4) I-55 forms a natural barrier and a convenient boundary;

5) This area should more properly and suitably be annexed by Horn Lake.

Horn Lake sought annexation of approximately two (2) square miles, wholly between Highway 51 and I-55. This area includes The Chancellor again weighed these indicia of reasonableness for annexations and concluded:

the southerly "Church Road" area of approximately one (1) square mile, with Church Road running east-west through the center of the tract. This is essentially the same area sought for annexation by Southaven.

1) As to the Church Road and DeSoto Woods area annexations, Horn Lake's proposal is unreasonable;

2) Neither area has a pressing need for services from the city and the city has no proposal for substantial improvements;

3) Horn Lake has not shown a need for these areas to accommodate their present expected growth;

4) Horn Lake's financial ability to adequately serve and improve its current population plus these new areas is questionable;

5) Horn Lake has failed to perform substantial obligations arising from a previous 1987 annexation;

6) The area residents are strongly opposed to annexation by Horn Lake.

The chancellor held that Southaven's annexation east of I-55 was reasonable, yet he concluded that Southaven's annexation of the proposed territory west of I-55 was not reasonable. Southaven's requested annexation west of I-55 was denied.

The chancellor concluded that only the northern portion of Horn Lake's annexation request was reasonable, and this area adjoins the city on two sides and contains three-fourths ( 3/4) of a mile of Highway 51. The remainder of the proposed annexation, which included part of the DeSoto Woods Subdivision and the Church Road area, sought by Southaven, was denied.

Southaven perfected its appeal to this Court, requesting determination of the following issues:

I. Whether the requirements of Mississippi Code Ann. Sec. 21-1-27 (1972) are mandatory and jurisdictional and must these requirements be present at the time of filing a petition for annexation;

II. Whether the chancellor's decision, in refusing to allow the City of Southaven to annex the territory it sought west of I-55, was clearly erroneous; and

III. Whether this Court should adopt new guidelines for the determination of reasonableness in annexation cases.

THE LAW
I. WHETHER THE REQUIREMENTS OF MISSISSIPPI CODE ANN. Sec. 21-1-27 (1972) ARE MANDATORY AND JURISDICTIONAL AND MUST THESE REQUIREMENTS BE PRESENT AT THE TIME OF FILING A PETITION FOR ANNEXATION?

The chancellor's determination that Miss.Code Ann. Sec. 21-1-27 (1972), does not require the "entire boundary as changed" to be defined with certainty is a question of law. The principle of "manifest error" only applies to factual situations, and this rule does not apply to questions of law. Holliman v. Charles L. Cherry & Associates, 569 So.2d 1139, 1145 (Miss.1990). For questions of law, and not fact, "the manifest error/substantial error rule does not prevent this...

To continue reading

Request your trial
23 cases
  • In re Extension of Boundaries of City of Winona
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • 24 Junio 2004
    ...which had usable vacant land of 43%, 59%, and 48%, respectively" were approved by this Court. Id. See also Matter of City of Horn Lake, 630 So.2d 10, 18 (Miss.1993); Enlargement and Extension of Mun. Boundaries of City of Madison v. City of Madison, 650 So.2d 490, 496 (Miss.1995); Extension......
  • Enlarging, Extending & Defining Corporate Limits & Boundaries of Canton v. City of Canton
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • 6 Mayo 2021
    ...developable land." In re City of Tupelo, 94 So. 3d at 272.¶111. Additionally, unlike in the City of Madison, City of Ridgeland, and City of Horn Lake cases, in which the annexations were affirmed despite high levels of usable vacant land, Canton has failed to show high growth activity. City......
  • In re Enlargement of Mun. Bound. of Clinton
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • 3 Mayo 2007
    ...at 554-56; Enlargement and Extension of Mun. Boundaries of City of Madison, 650 So.2d at 496; City of Southaven v. City of Lake Horn (In re City of Horn Lake), 630 So.2d 10, 18 (Miss.1993). The above case law indicates that this Court refuses to set a limit on the vacant land available and ......
  • In re Enlarging, Extending & Defining the Corporate Limits & Boundaries of Canton Madison Cnty.
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • 6 Mayo 2021
    ...developable land." In re City of Tupelo , 94 So. 3d at 272.¶111. Additionally, unlike in the City of Madison , City of Ridgeland , and City of Horn Lake cases, in which the annexations were affirmed despite high levels of usable vacant land, Canton has failed to show high growth activity. C......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT