St. Louis County v. State Highway Commission, 51729
| Decision Date | 12 December 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 2,No. 51729,51729,2 |
| Citation | 409 S.W.2d 149 |
| Parties | ST. LOUIS COUNTY, Missouri, a Body Corporate and Politic, Appellant, v. STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION of Missouri, Respondent |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Donald J. Stohr, St. Louis County Counselor, Thomas W. Wehrle, Associate County Counselor, for appellant.
Robert L. Hyder, Bruce A. Ring, Jefferson City, for respondent.
This is an action for a declaratory judgment to determine if funds derived from certain general obligation bonds can be lawfully used by the plaintiff St. Louis County to reimburse the defendant State Highway Commission of Missouri for the cost of acquiring right of way for a highway in St. Louis County designated State Route AC in accordance with a contract between the County and the Highway Commission. The trial court held that the funds in question could not be so used and the County appealed. The facts are all agreed either by stipulation or admissions in the pleadings.
A proposal to issue general obligation bonds consisting of eight propositions aggregating $39,712,000 for public improvements was submitted to the voters of St. Louis County and approved on November 22, 1955. The item we are called on to construe is Proposition No. 1, which, as submitted to the voters and approved, reads as follows:
'Shall the following be adopted:
'Proposition to issue the bonds of St. Louis County, Missouri, in the amount of Eight Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($8,500,000) to provide funds for the purpose of paying any cost, judgment, and expense for property, or rights in property, acquired by purchase or eminent domain, for the construction of highways within said County; said highways to include those commonly known as the Mark Twain and Daniel Boone Expressways and Ozark Expressway with Route 61 connection, and an outer belt expressway running generally north and south and connecting with highways and expressways running generally east and west in said County.'
The proceeds from the issuance of the general obligation bonds under Proposition No. 1 were credited to a special fund designated as the 'Expressway Fund' and have been or will be expended in defraying the cost of St. Louis County highways as follows: Daniel Boone Expressway, $2,422,281.59; Mark Twain Expressway, $2,247,992.23; Ozark Expressway with Route 61 connection, $158,073.18; and the estimated cost in connection with Interstate Expressway 44, $1,100,000. This leaves in the special fund derived from Proposition No. 1 bonds a sum in excess of $2,500,000.
Since the approval of Proposition No. 1 by the voters of St. Louis County, the Highway Commission has constructed, or is in the process of constructing without cost to the County as part of the Interstate Highway System a limited access highway in St. Louis County, commonly called the Circumferential Expressway, and officially designated as Interstate Highway 270, Interstate Highway 244, and Interstate Highway 255. The route of the Circumferential Expressway is for all intent and purposes practically the same as the route contemplated by the 'outer belt expressway running generally north and south' specified in Proposition No. 1. It would not be feasible or practical to expend monies from the Expressway Fund for the construction of the outer belt expressway referred to in Proposition No. 1 because the Circumferential Expressway follows basically the same route and will serve the purpose for which the outer belt expressway was to be constructed.
On September 9, 1953, the St. Louis County Council entered an order authorizing the County to execute a 'Temporary Maintenance Agreement and Supplementary Agreement' which would permit the Highway Commission to assume certain maintenance and acquisition responsibilities over Halls Ferry Road, a public highway in the County, from the northern limits of the City of Junnings to Shackleford Road, a distance of 8.7 miles. This section of the highway designated State Route AC would become a part of the Supplementary State Highway System when constructed by the Highway Commission, and St. Louis County agreed to secure or cause to be secured the necessary right of way free of cost to the Highway Commission. On October 4, 1960, pursuant to an ordinance duly enacted by the St. Louis County Council, a contract was entered into by and between the County and the Highway Commission under which the Highway Commission proposed to construct and improve State Route AC, described above, and St. Louis County agreed to pay the costs of the acquisition of the necessary right to way for this reconstruction and improvement.
For the purpose of effectuating this prior ordinance and agreement, the St. Louis County Council on October 3, 1962, enacted an ordinance which appropriated the sum of $1,100,000 to pay the cost of acquiring the right of way for the reconstruction and widening of State Highway AC. The ordinance expressly provides that this appropriation was to be charged to the Expressway Fund created by the proceeds of the sale of bonds approved in Proposition No. 1 and was to be withdrawn from that Fund and used in connection with the improvement of State Route AC. The ordinance further provides that the Supervisor of St. Louis County is authorized to issue requisitions to reimburse the State Highway Commission when the Commission presents its statements of account.
Halls Ferry Road, now designated State Route AC, is one of the main traffic arteries running north and south in the northern part of St. Louis County and, except for a small portion of the highway at or near Interstate Highway 270, it is a narrow, two-lane heavily traveled, over-crowded road and is in dire need of widening and improving so as to relieve traffic congestion in the northern section of St. Louis County. The State Highway Commission has acquired substantial portions of the right of way for the reconstruction and improvement of State Route AC and in doing so has expended for such right of way the sum of $288,470.69, for which sum the State Highway Commission is claiming reimbursement from St. Louis County pursuant to the contract of the parties. It is estimated that additional sums of approximately $977,000...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. City of Chicago
...29, 88 N.W.2d 420; Sims v. Moore, 288 Ala. 630, 264 So.2d 484; Koenig v. Johnson, 71 Cal.App.2d 739, 163 P.2d 746; St. Louis County v. State Highway Com., (Mo.) 409 S.W.2d 149; North Carolina Turnpike Authority v. Pine Island, Inc., 265 N.C. 109, 143 S.E.2d 319.) In this case, the city coun......
-
Short v. S. Union Co.
...as a term of enlargement, noting that “in most instances the term ‘including’ is one of enlargement”); St. Louis County v. State Highway Comm'n, 409 S.W.2d 149, 152–53 (Mo.1966) (interpreting “to include” as used in a ballot proposition which states that “said highways” are “ to include ” c......
-
Johns-Manville Corporation v. VILLAGE OF DeKALB, MO.
...by the improvements made. 8 Two recent Missouri Supreme Court cases provide further support for this view. St. Louis County v. State Highway Commission, 409 S.W.2d 149 (Mo.1966) was a declaratory judgment action brought to determine if funds derived from general obligation bonds issued for ......
-
Hays v. Coe
...Co., 302 Md. 383, 397, 488 A.2d 486, 493 (1986) citing Black's Law Dictionary (5th ed. 1979). See also St. Louis County v. State Highway Comm'n, 409 S.W.2d 149, 153 (1966) ("including" in will usually interpreted as word of enlargement); Sims v. Moore, 288 Ala. 630, 264 So.2d 484, (1972); (......