City of St. Louis v. Pope

Decision Date04 April 1939
Docket Number35187
Citation126 S.W.2d 1201,344 Mo. 479
PartiesCity of St. Louis, Appellant, v. Nancy t. Pope et al., Defendants, Warwick Operating Company, a Corporation, et al
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Appeal from Circuit Court of City of St. Louis; Hon. Robert W Hall, Judge.

Affirmed.

E H. Wayman, Jno. T. Hicks and Francis J Sullivan for appellant.

Boudreau & Kramer, Case, Voyles & Stemmler, Clark M. Clifford, M. W. Feuerbacher, Arthur J. Freund, D. Calhoun Jones, Jones, Hocker, Gladney & Grand, Albert F. Muench, Charles A. Neumann, Rassieur, Kammerer & Rassieur, Luther Ely Smith, John C. Tobin and Charles P. Williams for International Building Company et al.

A. B. Frey and Karol A. Korngold for Johnson et al.

Marion C. Early, Louis B. Sher, Thomas J. Cole and Ford W. Thompson for Town Club Investment Company et al.

Jacob M. Lashly and Maurice P. Phillips for Ledlie, Blair and Lashly.

Taylor, Chasnoff & Willson for J. C. Penney Building and Realty Corporation et al.

Frank H. Haskins, for Warwick Operating Company et al.

Williams, Nelson & English, Allen May and John R. Griffiths for State Life Insurance Company et al.

Banister, Leonard & Sibley for Essex Investment Company.

Sylvan Agatstein for Davis et al.

Stephen Boggiano for Publicity Building Realty Corporation.

George B. Whissell and William E. Johnson for Southwestern Bell Telephone Company; Earl H. Painter and John B. Mohler of counsel.

W. J. Blesse and William Kohn for United States Building Corporation.

Thompson, Mitchell, Thompson & Young and C. P. Berry for Mercantile Trust Company et al.

Henry T. Ferriss for Hotel Jefferson Company.

Lewis, Rice, Tucker, Allen & Chubb for May Department Stores et al.

W. Scott Hancock for trustees under last will and testament of Horatio Nelson Spencer.

Stamm, Stewart & Pflager for National Lead Company et al.

OPINION

Lucas, J.

This is a condemnation proceeding by the City of St. Louis under its Charter to condemn property for the "Memorial Plaza." The question for decision on this appeal may be briefly stated as follows:

Is the City authorized and empowered by its Charter, in this particular proceeding, to establish a taxing district or benefit district for the purpose of collecting special benefits from the properties within the taxing district, pursuant to Section 4 of Article XXI of its Charter, or is it a proceeding that comes under the provisions of Section 12 of said Article XXI requiring the City to pay all the damages?

The facts as disclosed by the record are exceedingly voluminous, but for the purpose of this appeal we think the important facts may be stated as follows:

Some time prior to the year 1923, civic-minded citizens of St. Louis inaugurated a movement for municipal improvements and beautification of the City and advocated a city-wide bond issue as the means of financing these municipal improvements. It is conceded that St. Louis at that time needed numerous improvements due to the fact that it had become one of the exceedingly large cities of the country and the civic improvement and beautification of the City had been sadly neglected; for instance, the old Court House had become inadequate; the City was in need of a Municipal Auditorium as it had no place to entertain large gatherings; there were numerous other outstanding needs.

The people formed an organization known as the "General Council on Civic Needs" which council consisted of one hundred and eighty-four representative and outstanding organizations of the City of St. Louis, and these organizations represented practically the whole citizenry of the City. This organization meant to improve and beautify the City. The people became so interested that the City enacted Ordinance No. 32,019 which ordinance called for a special city election to be held February 9, 1923, at which election there was submitted to the qualified voters of the City, twenty-one propositions for the people to vote upon and thereby determine whether the City should issue bonds of the City in the various amounts, and for the specific purposes stated in said ordinance. The propositions were:

1. Establishing, opening and widening streets, $ 8,650,000.

2. A public plaza opposite the union station, $ 2,600,000.

3. Paving, re-paving and otherwise improving streets and highways, $ 5,800,000.

4. Purchase and installation of electric street lighting system, $ 8,000,000.

5. Acquisition of site and erection of court house, $ 4,000,000.

6. Construction and reconstruction of public sewers and acquisition of rights-of-way, $ 8,000,000.

7. Improvement of River des Peres, etc., $ 11,000,000.

8. Acquisition of land for additional public parks, squares, playgrounds, recreation fields, swimming pools and equipment therefor, $ 2,500,000.

9. Construction of buildings in, and improvements of, parks, squares, etc., $ 1,300,000.

10. Construction of aquarium in Forest Park, $ 400,000.

11. Plant to heat, light and furnish power to municipal buildings, etc., $ 1,000,000.

12. Acquisition of land and construction of, and equipment of, hospitals, etc., $ 4,500,000.

13. For the acquisition of a site and the erection of a civic building to be known as the "Municipal Auditorium and Community Center Building," to be used for the holding of public meetings, gatherings, and conventions, for the discussion of public questions, including matters submitted to the people under the referendum or the initiative, and to provide suitable meeting places for educational, moral, musical, industrial, labor and other purposes, $ 5,000,000.

14. For the acquisition of land adjacent to and in the neighborhood of the City Hall, in some or all of the following City Blocks, namely -- (land as designated) for a public plaza to be known as "Memorial Plaza," and for the erection therein of a memorial building or monument in appreciation of the services rendered by the Citizen Soldiers of Missouri in the late World War, and for the purpose of preserving the records and perpetuating the memory of their heroic achievements and sacrifices, $ 6,000,000.

15. Acquisition of sites and construction of fire engine houses, etc., $ 772,500.

16. City's share of the cost of elimination of railroad grade crossings, $ 1,600,000.

17. Land and construction of west end approach of Municipal Bridge, $ 1,500,000.

18. Land and erection of east end approach of Municipal Bridge, $ 1,500,000.

19. Armory, $ 1,000,000.

20. Public Markets, $ 1,250,000.

21. Improvement and construction of new waterworks plant, $ 12,000,000.

The total amount of bonds submitted at this election was approximately $ 88,000,000. All propositions carried except No. 19, which was a million dollars for an Armory. The propositions were submitted separately so that the voters could vote for or against any one or more of the propositions. Section 5 of the ordinance provided that the proceeds of the sale, or sales, of any of the bonds aforesaid which may be issued upon the authority of an affirmative vote, as above stated, for any one of the specific purposes designated in this section . . . shall be used for such purposes only, namely:

"Proposition Thirteen: For the acquisition of a site and the erection thereon of a civic building to be known as the 'Municipal Auditorium and Community Center Building,' to be used for the holding of public meetings, gatherings and conventions, for the discussion of public questions, including matters submitted to the people under the referendum or the initiative, and to provide suitable meeting places for educational, moral, musical, industrial, labor and other purposes, $ 5,000,000."

"Proposition Fourteen: For the acquisition of land adjacent to and in the neighborhood of the City Hall, in some or all of the following City Blocks, namely City Blocks numbered 489, 490, 491, 492, 499, 500, 501, 505, 209 East and 209 West, for a public plaza to be known as 'Memorial Plaza' and for the erection therein of a memorial building or monument in appreciation of the services rendered by the Citizen Soldiers of Missouri in the late World War, and for the purpose of preserving the records and perpetuating the memory of their heroic achievements and sacrifices, $ 6,000,000."

The City, by Ordinance No. 32,343, properly declared that twenty of the twenty-one propositions had received the necessary two-thirds vote and that $ 87,372,500 of municipal bonds had been authorized.

Prior to the election the "General Council of Civic Needs," which organization cooperated with the then city officials in advocating the benefits and need of the general bond issue, circulated generally and widely among the voters a pamphlet directed to the voters and which pamphlet contained several pages of information about the proposed improvements and how the money was to be supervised and expended. This pamphlet stated that the funds from the bond issue would be expended under the supervision of a "Citizens' Bond Supervisory Committee;" that the improvements are absolutely necessary for St. Louis to maintain its prominence among the great cities; that the public improvement program was not for the special benefit of any man, business or interest, but that everybody would receive benefits from these public improvements; that Mayor Kiel had already appointed a committee of representative men of business, civic and labor organizations to supervise the handling of the money; that by issuing bonds the cost of the improvements is spread over a period of years so that not only the taxpayers of the present but the taxpayers of the future will enjoy and derive a benefit from the improvements and will pay a proportionate share of the costs.

The City, by Ordinance No. 32,496, authorized and directed the issuing of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • City of Lebanon v. Schneider
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • June 27, 1942
    ...... counties: State ex rel. Moseley v. Lee, 319 Mo. 976,. 5 S.W.2d 83; State v. Logan, 268 Mo. 169, 186 S.W. 979. If the exception of St. Louis County contained in the. act be stricken from the act, the entire act is thereby. rendered invalid. To eliminate the exception and to permit. the ... Cummins v. K. C. Public. Serv. Co., 334 Mo. 672, 66 S.W.2d 920; St. Louis v. Senter Comm. Co., 337 Mo. 238, 85 S.W.2d 21; St. Louis v. Pope, 344 Mo. 479, 126 S.W.2d 1201;. Artophone Corp. v. Coale, 345 Mo. 344, 133 S.W.2d. 343. The decisions elsewhere are to the effect that if an. ......
  • State ex rel. Springfield Warehouse & Transfer Co. v. Public Service Com'n
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Kansas
    • November 7, 1949
    ...Corpn. v. Coale, 133 S.W. 2 343, l. c. 347 [2-4], 345 Mo. 344; City of St. Louis v. Pope, 126 S.W. 2 1201, l. c. 1210-1211 [8, 9], 344 Mo. 479. The intention of legislature with respect to the provision providing for transfer of a part of a certificate of convenience and necessity in Sectio......
  • State ex rel. Melbourne Hotel Co. v. Hostetter
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • April 4, 1939
    ...... Jefferson D. Hostetter et al., Judges of the St. Louis Court of Appeals No. 36201Supreme Court of MissouriApril 4, 1939 .          . Opinion of ... Caldwell from a judgment of the Circuit Court of the City of. St. Louis affirming the final award of the Missouri. Workmen's Compensation Commission, ......
  • White v. Bd. of Elections and Ethics
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Columbia District
    • March 4, 1988
    ...judicial notice of the fact that those who run in an election are interested to learn the results. City of St. Louis v. Pope, 344 Mo. 479, 493, 126 S.W.2d 1201, 1210 (1938) (en banc). In view of the short timeframe within which the Board must perform a number of duties so as to afford a rig......
  • 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