Citizens of Rising Sun v. Rising Sun City Development Committee

528 N.W.2d 597, 1995 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 52, 1995 WL 134872
CourtSupreme Court of Iowa
DecidedMarch 29, 1995
Docket93-1820
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 528 N.W.2d 597 (Citizens of Rising Sun v. Rising Sun City Development Committee) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Citizens of Rising Sun v. Rising Sun City Development Committee, 528 N.W.2d 597, 1995 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 52, 1995 WL 134872 (iowa 1995).

Opinion

McGIVERIN, Chief Justice.

Iowa Code chapter 368 (1993) establishes procedures and conditions for incorporation of a territory into a city. One condition for incorporation is that citizens seeking to incorporate must show an ability “to provide customary municipal services within a reasonable time.” The respondent city development committee found and determined that petitioner Citizens of Rising Sun failed to meet this burden. On judicial review, the district court concluded substantial evidence supported the committee’s decision disapproving the Citizens of Rising Sun’s petition to incorporate their territory into a city. We agree and thus affirm the district court’s judgment.

I. Background facts and proceedings. In 1992, Citizens of Rising Sun (Rising Sun) submitted a petition to the City Development Board, see Iowa Code section 368.9, to incorporate the territory known as Rising Sun into a city. See id. § 368.11. The proposed new city of Rising Sun is located adjacent to the eastern boundary of the city of Pleasant Hill in eastern Polk County and consists of approximately five square miles. The estimated population of the area is 1,022 persons who live in single family residences on small acreages and farms.

In order to consider Rising Sun’s proposal, the Rising Sun City Development Committee (Committee) was formed pursuant to Iowa Code section 368.14. The Committee consisted of five permanent members of the City Development Board who had been appointed by the governor, see id. section 368.9, and one local representative from the territory involved who was appointed by the county board of supervisors, see id. section 368.14(1).

Once formed, the Committee held a public hearing on Rising Sun’s petition for incorporation. See id §.368.15. Aware of Iowa Code section 368.17(l)’s requirement that it must show an ability to provide customary municipal services, Rising Sun submitted evidence of the types of services it would provide and the methods by which it would provide them.

Rising Sun produced evidence that it would be able to provide most customary municipal services, including law enforcement, fire protection and rescue, road maintenance and construction, library, and some administration, through contracts with other governmental entities pursuant to Iowa Code chapter 28E. 1

Rising Sun also presented evidence of other services, such as natural gas, electricity, water, garbage, and sewer services, that would be provided through franchise agreements, individual contracts, or by the residents themselves.

Finally, Rising Sun stated that it would provide certain services itself. These included city clerk services, legal services, and cemetery services.

As Rising Sun admitted, the provision of the majority of these services would remain essentially the same after the proposed incorporation as they had been before the pro *599 posed incorporation. Also, Rising Sun emphasized that it sought to maintain the mostly residential and agricultural character of the area, and that it did not have any plans for a centralized commercial district or for industrial development.

Two other governmental entities from Polk County appeared at the public hearing: Polk County and the city of Pleasant Hill. Polk County did not take any position for or against the incorporation.

Pleasant Hill, however, opposed the incorporation. Pleasant Hill had twice attempted to involuntarily annex, pursuant to chapter 368, all or portions of the Rising Sun territory into its city during the past few years, but had been unsuccessful.

After the public hearing, the Committee held its decisional meeting and subsequently filed its findings, conclusions, and determination. See Iowa Code § 368.19. The Committee found and concluded that the proposed city could not provide customary municipal services within a reasonable time. In particular, the Committee reasoned that indefinitely contracting for all services does not constitute the provision of municipal services. Also, the Committee found and concluded that the proposed incorporation was not in the public interest. See id. § 368.16. The Committee, therefore, disapproved Rising Sun’s petition. See id. § 368.17(1).

Rising Sun filed a petition for judicial review with the district court. See id. § 368.22. The district court ruled that both Committee conclusions and its final decision were supported by substantial evidence. See id.

Rising Sun appealed, see id. section 17A.20, contending that the Committee erred in determining that contracting, either privately or through chapter 28E agreements, for municipal services cannot satisfy section 368.17(l)’s requirement that it show the proposed city would “provide customary municipal services within a reasonable time.” Rising Sun also contends that the Committee erred in concluding that the incorporation of Rising Sun was not in the public interest as required by section 368.16.

II. Scope of review. Our review of a city development committee’s decision to deny or approve a petition for incorporation is limited generally under Iowa Code section 17A.19 and specifically under section 368.22. Section 368.22 provides in pertinent part that:

The judicial review provisions of this section and chapter 17A shall be the exclusive means by which a person or party who is aggrieved or adversely affected by agency action may seek judicial review of that agency action. The court’s review on appeal of a decision is limited to questions relating to jurisdiction, regularity of proceedings, and whether the decision appealed from is arbitrary, unreasonable, or without substantial supporting evidence. The court may reverse and remand a decision of a ... committee, with appropriate directions.

(Emphasis added.)

Section 368.22 then states that certain portions of section 17A.19’s general judicial review provisions are not applicable to chapter 368 actions. These include subsection 17A.19(8) which sets forth several reasons a reviewing court may grant relief from other agencies’ actions.

Accordingly, section 368.22 and the contentions as submitted by the parties limit our review in this incorporation case to the sole question of whether there is substantial supporting evidence for the Committee’s decision. See Iowa Code § 368.22; see also Des Moines v. City Dev. Bd., 473 N.W.2d 197,199 (Iowa 1991). To make this determination, we ask whether a reasonable person would find the evidence adequate to reach the decision made by the committee; if a reasonable person would find the evidence adequate to reach the same decision as the committee, it is “substantial” for purposes of our review. See Dickinson County v. City Dev.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Pruss v. Cedar Rapids/Hiawatha Annexation Special Local Committee
687 N.W.2d 275 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 2004)
State Ex Rel. Johnson v. Allen
569 N.W.2d 143 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
528 N.W.2d 597, 1995 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 52, 1995 WL 134872, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/citizens-of-rising-sun-v-rising-sun-city-development-committee-iowa-1995.