Poole v. City of Pearl
| Docket Number: | 2002-AN-02139-SCT | |
| Oral Argument: | 06-07-2005 | |
* This video is best viewed in the most current version of Google Chrome, Internet Explorer with Windows Media Player plug-in, or Safari (Mac Users). |
||
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 08-11-2005 Opinion Author: DICKINSON, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Annexation - Reasonableness Judge(s) Concurring: Waller and Cobb, P.JJ., Easley, Carlson and Graves, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Smith, C.J., Diaz and Randolph, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES AND ANNEXATION |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-27-2002 Appealed from: RANKIN COUNTY CHANCERY COURT Judge: James L. Roberts Disposition: Finding the requirements of law had been met, Special Chancellor Roberts approved the annexation. Case Number: 48,339 |
|
| Note: | CIVIL - MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES & ANNEXATION | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | IN THE MATTER OF THE EXTENSION OF THE
BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF PEARL,
MISSISSIPPI: CAROL POOLE, ROBERT PITTS, ET
AL. |
JAMES H. HERRING |
||
| Appellee: | CITY OF PEARL, MISSISSIPPI | JERRY L. MILLS, JAMES A. BOBO |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Annexation - Reasonableness |
| Summary of the Facts: | The City of Pearl filed a petition seeking to annex approximately 2.2 square miles. Because the PAA included property within the jurisdiction of the Jackson Municipal Airport Authority, an objection was filed by both the Airport Authority and the City of Jackson. They filed a joint motion for summary judgment, seeking exclusion from the annexation approximately 40 acres. The chancellor granted the motion and the Airport Authority and the City of Jackson ceased their efforts as Objectors. Objections to the annexation were also filed by two groups of private citizens. At the conclusion of the trial, the chancellor found that, under the totality of the circumstances, the annexation was reasonable. The objectors appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | In determining whether the proposed annexation is reasonable, the chancellor must weigh the totality of the circumstances, using twelve indicia of reasonableness as a guide. The City provided evidence of growth and development in the PAA. The City’s population increased by over twelve % from 1990 to 2000. While the City has substantial land available for residential development, the density of population in the City of Pearl is more than double every other municipality in Rankin County, except Brandon. The fact that the PAA may lie in the path of growth of other municipalities does not negate that it also lies in a path of growth of Pearl. Pearl has improved the road conditions of the city streets near the PAA. Pearl’s only viable option for expansion is to the north. An environmental health program specialist testified concerning numerous potential health hazards specifically identified in the PAA, created by individually owned septic tanks, sewerage discharge, and the lack of a central sewerage disposal system. The testimony and exhibits provide evidentiary support for the chancellor’s finding that Pearl has the financial ability to make improvements and furnish services to the PAA as promised. Some of the photographic exhibits reveal incompatible land uses in the PAA showing a need for zoning and overall planning. Pearl’s fire department – which serves as the PAA’s secondary provider of fire protection – is closer in proximity to the PAA and is equipped with more advanced equipment and more highly trained personnel. As the provider of water for the area, Pearl installed fire hydrants and maintains and improves the system as needed to sustain the growth that the PAA has experienced. Other than a central sewerage collection system, the PAA already has most all of the services it needs. Since the only natural barriers involved are ridge lines which might impact a central sewer system, this is not an obstacle to annexation. While Pearl has not perfectly fulfilled its promises and obligations from past annexations, the record supports the chancellor’s finding that it has substantially done so. Annexation will have no adverse impact on the voting strength of African Americans, or any other minorities. While the residents of the PAA enjoy benefits because of their proximity to various municipalities, it would be difficult from the record to determine which of those benefits are due to the proximity with Pearl. Based upon the City’s burden of proving the reasonableness of a proposed annexation, the chancellor’s judgment approving the petition for annexation is affirmed. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
