City of Kansas City v. Stegmiller

• Decision Date: 30 June 1899
• Citation: City of Kansas City v. Stegmiller, 151 Mo. 189, 52 S.W. 723 (Mo. 1899)
• Parties: CITY OF KANSAS CITY v. STEGMILLER et al.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

52 S.W. 723

151 Mo. 189

CITY OF KANSAS CITY v. STEGMILLER et al.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

June 30, 1899.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS — ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY — CHARTER PROVISIONS — ORDINANCES — TIME OF TAKING EFFECT — ELECTIONS — REGISTRATION — SUBMISSION OF THE MUNICIPAL QUESTION.

1. A city of over 100,000 inhabitants, organized under the freeholders' charter by authority of Const. art. 9, § 16, providing for such organization, has power to extend its limits by amending its charter under said section, which provides that "such charters so adopted may be amended by a proposal therefor made by the lawmaking authorities of such city, published for thirty days, and accepted by three-fifths of the qualified voters."

2. A city of over 100,000 inhabitants, organized under a freeholders' charter, by authority of Const. art. 9, § 16, providing for such organization, can extend its limits, by amending its charter, so as to include another municipality, under Rev. St. 1889, § 1880, as amended by Laws 1895, p. 55, providing a general law whereby such cities may extend their limits.

3. Rev. St. 1889, § 1880, as amended by Laws 1895, p. 55, providing a general law whereby cities of over 100,000 inhabitants, organized under freeholders' charter by authority of Const. art. 9, § 16, may extend their limits, does not create a new class of cities, in violation of Const. art. 9, § 7, providing that the general assembly shall provide by general laws for the organization and classification of cities into classes not exceeding four, the powers of each to be defined so that all cities of the same class shall possess the same powers.

4. Rev. St. 1889, § 1880, as amended by Laws 1895, p. 55, providing a general law whereby cities of over 100,000 population, organized under a freeholders' charter by authority of Const. art. 9, § 16, may extend their limits, is not a special or local law, within the meaning of Const. art. 4, § 53, providing that the assembly shall not pass any local or special laws.

5. Provisions of a city charter declared unconstitutional have no legal existence, and are not binding upon the municipality.

6. An amendment of a city charter takes effect from the date of its approval, unless otherwise provided by law.

7. Under Laws 1897, p. 111, amending the law requiring registration in cities of over 100,000 population by providing that "at any special election occurring in any portion of such city only, or which * * * is to submit propositions or amendments to a vote of the people, there shall not be a previous revision of the registry," a revision of the registry is not required in such city for a special election to vote on the acceptance of an amendment of its charter providing for the annexation of territory.

8. An amendment of the charter of a city, providing for the extension of its limits so as to include another city, is valid, although the proposition submitted to the latter city was only that said city was to be included, whereas the extension also included other territory.

9. The extension of the limits of a city is not unreasonable when the territory annexed thereby is nearly all improved, and necessary for drainage and police purposes.

In banc. Appeal from circuit court, Jackson county; Edward P. Gates, Judge.

Action by the city of Kansas City against Joseph Stegmiller and others. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

Teasdale, Ingraham & Cowherd, for appellants. R. B. Middlebrook and Clarence S. Palmer, for respondent.

GANTT, C. J.

Kansas City sued Joseph Stegmiller, formerly collector of the city of Westport, for moneys in his hands which he had collected and failed to turn over to the city of Westport, and procured judgment in the circuit court of Jackson county against him and his bondsmen. One of the material allegations in the petition was that Kansas City had extended its corporate limits, and absorbed the city of Westport, and had thereby become entitled under the law to collect from Stegmiller any money in his hands due the city of Westport. The defendants, in their answer, admitted that Stegmiller was collector of Westport, and that he had collected money due Westport, and that he still owed the sum sued for to Westport. He, however, denied that he owed Kansas City anything, and set up as a reason for not owing Kansas City that said city did not extend its corporate limits so as to include Westport in accordance with the laws of the state of Missouri governing such matters, and assigned nine different reasons why the attempted extension was null and void. Among other reasons, he alleged that section 1880 of the Revised Statutes of Missouri of 1889 was void, said section being part of the law on which the extension was founded, as being in conflict with section 16 of article 9 of the constitution of Missouri, and as being special legislation, and otherwise unconstitutional. Defendants further averred that Kansas City was without power under the constitution or laws of the state to extend its limits at all. In its reply the city traversed all the nine points raised in the answer. The cause was tried in the circuit court of Jackson county before Hon. E. P. Gates, one of the judges of the circuit court, and judgment was rendered for Kansas City. After motions for new trial and in arrest had been heard and overruled, the defendants appealed to this court.

The proceedings in this case began March 6, 1897, when a resolution was passed by the common council of Kansas City directing that the mayor of that city notify the mayor of Westport of Kansas City's intention to extend its limits so as to include, among other territory, Westport. Although this resolution of Kansas City was transmitted to the mayor of Westport by the mayor of Kansas City on March 10, 1897, the mayor of Westport did nothing until August 23, 1897, when he issued his proclamation to the voters of Westport, ordering a special election. Said special election was held in the city of Westport on September 28, 1897, and a certificate embodying the result thereof was attested by the mayor of Westport and the city clerk thereof on October 4, 1897. On the very same day that it was so attested and certified, the common council of Kansas City received it, and filed it as part of the records of the city, and the mayor of Kansas City called the attention of the common council to the fact, and officially recognized said communication from Westport's mayor. As soon as Westport had thus signified in proper manner its intention of becoming a portion of Kansas City as extended, the lawmaking authorities of Kansas City proceeded to do their part, and on October 26, 1897, the common council passed a proposal to the qualified voters of the city that the Kansas City charter be amended by extending the city limits, and defining the limits accurately according to the map forming a part of the record in this case. This proposal will be found in the record. Its language is couched in the exact terminology used in section 16, art. 9, of the constitution, and in strict conformity to section 43, art. 17, of the city charter. This proposal was not only recommended by the mayor, but was approved by him, as part of the lawmaking authorities of the city, the same as other ordinances of the city are approved. Not only was this proposal passed, but at the same meeting, on October 26, 1897, another ordinance was passed by the common council providing a form for submitting to the qualified voters of Kansas City the proposed amendment to the charter, describing the limits and defining the method of conducting the election, the form of the ballot, etc. This ordinance will be found in the record. This ordinance was also approved by the mayor on October 27th, 1897. These two ordinances (the proposal and the ordinance prescribing the details of the election) were published, together with the proclamation of the mayor of Kansas City calling a special election, for 30 days preceding December 2, 1897, in four newspapers of the largest circulation in Kansas City — the Star, the Journal, and the World, — all being English newspapers, and the German newspaper, the Kansas City Presse. The election was conducted without charge of unfairness or fraud, and in accordance with the law as supervised by the election commissioners of Kansas City. The result of the election in Kansas City was 5,731 for the extension of the limits and 323 against it. Result in Westport, 1,034 votes for and 164 against. The election in Kansas City occurred on December 2, 1897. The next general city election was held April 5, 1898. The next day after the Kansas City election (December 3, 1897) the officials of Westport turned over all the official documents and moneys and property belonging to Westport to the Kansas City comptroller, and voluntarily went out of office, and no municipal functions have been exercised by Westport from that time to this. The people of both cities acquiesced in the result. The municipal government of Kansas City has adjusted itself to the new situation, and has held one municipal election and one general election since the date of the annexation, to wit, December 2, 1897. Four new aldermen from the four new wards have taken their seats in the council. Four new aldermen at large have also taken their seats in the upper house. All have deliberated in its proceedings, and have made laws for the city. The city assessment of taxes for 1898 was made and collected without protest. City taxes for 1899 have been levied, and are payable May 1st, and will be collected commencing on that date. All licenses and other taxes have been voluntarily paid without protest by the people of the annexed territory, and the territory that has been annexed is admittedly city property, and has been such for many years, as will be seen by a perusal of the record. The reasonableness of the extension is not seriously contested. The people of Westport and of the adjacent...