Citizens Ass'n for Responsible Dev., Inc. v. Conrad Yelvington Distrib., Inc., et al.


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2002-CC-00623-SCT

Supreme Court: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 11-06-2003
Opinion Author: Graves, J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Conveyance of county-owned property - Land use provisions - Sufficient explanation - Property value - Noise impact - Silica dust - Valid title
Judge(s) Concurring: Pittman, C.J., Smith, P.J., Waller, Cobb, Easley and Carlson, JJ.
Non Participating Judge(s): McRae, P.J., and Diaz, J.
Procedural History: Admin or Agency Judgment
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - OTHER

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 03-19-2002
Appealed from: Harrison County Circuit Court
Judge: Jerry O. Terry, Sr.
Disposition: Affirmed the actions of the Harrison County Board of Supervisors and its governmental subdivision, Harrison County Development Commission, authorizing the sale of county property to Conrad Yelvington Distributors, Inc.for use as an aggregate distribution plant.
Case Number: 99-00507

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Citizens Association for Responsible Development, Inc.




REILLY MORSE



 

Appellee: Conrad Yelvington Distributors, Inc., Harrison County Development Commission and Harrison County HARRY R. ALLEN JOSEPH R. MEADOWS KAREN J. YOUNG BRITT R. SINGLETARY GARY DALE THRASH DAVID W. CRANE GLEN K. TILL  

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: Conveyance of county-owned property - Land use provisions - Sufficient explanation - Property value - Noise impact - Silica dust - Valid title

Summary of the Facts: By a Bill of Exceptions, the Citizens Association for Responsible Development, Inc. appealed the conveyance of county-owned property in the Long Beach Industrial Park to Conrad Yelvington Distributors, Inc. for use as an aggregate distribution plant. The circuit court affirmed the decision of the Harrison County Board of Supervisors to convey the property to Yelvington. The objectors appeal.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Land use provisions The objectors argue that the decision by Harrison County and Harrison County Development Commission to allow Yelvington’s outdoor aggregate distribution terminal into a light industrial park violated the land use provisions of the ordinance creating the Long Beach Industrial Park. In so arguing, they reference language which was contained in a feasibility study. The acceptance of the study in a recital of a resolution regarding the feasibility of the acquisition and creation of the Long Beach Industrial Park is not a policy statement, ordinance, or regulation that is officially adopted and promulgated by the County’s lawmaking officials. Issue 2: Sufficient explanation The objectors argue that the County and Commission have not provided a sufficient explanation for their decisions in the resolutions approving the Yelvington transaction, and therefore, the decisions are not subject to judicial review. The record shows that the Board of Supervisors and the Commission adequately considered the complaints and concerns of the objectors as well as other members of the community. After a full year of meetings, investigations by experts and a personal visit to the Yelvington plant, the Commission and the Board decided that the sale of the property to Yelvington would be in the best interest of the County. Therefore, the findings of the Commission and the Board were not arbitrary or capricious and were supported by substantial evidence. Issue 3: Property values Although the objectors argue that, due to the nature of the Yelvington facility, vibrations are affecting surrounding properties, they have failed to present any expert testimony regarding the vibrations and/or decreasing property values. In fact, Yelvington and the Commission retained experts to investigate the claims who found that no such devaluation had occurred. Therefore, the findings of the Commission and the Board were reasonable based on the evidence. Issue 4: Noise impacts The objectors argue that the record lacks findings that noise created by the Yelvington facility is minimal and that noise reduction devices have not mitigated the level of noise. The record shows that the noise impacts from the Yelvington facility are minimal and have been adequately mitigated. Not only did the Manager of Safety, Excellence and Environment with the Mississippi State Diagnostic Instrumentation and Analysis Laboratory find that sound level measurements were within the normal range, but the Commission and Board required Yelvington to install sound abatement devices in order to further reduce the noise level. Issue 5: Silica dust The objectors argue that the report submitted by the expert who was hired to investigate concerns regarding silica dust was inadequate since he did not perform any measurements of actual emissions at the site. However, the expert did visit the site and found that activities conducted at Yelvington would be highly unlikely to represent a significant health risk to the surrounding community. The objectors have presented no evidence to refute these findings. Issue 6: Valid title The objectors argue that Yelvington did not have valid title or permission from the Commission to construct and operate its facility for the nine months prior to the vote and that Yelvington’s occupation of the land without permission and without compensation to the County resulted in the County making a donation to a private industry. Yelvington entered the land pursuant to a right of entry granted by the Commission. The fact that Yelvington occupied the property prior to the consummation of the sale does not render the sale invalid.


Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court