Opinion No. 45-81 (1981)
This text of Opinion No. 45-81 (1981) (Opinion No. 45-81 (1981)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Attorney General Reports primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Dear Senator Dirck:
This opinion is in response to your question asking as follows:
Does Section
71.015 , RSMo, as amended by House Bill 1110 apply to cities located in St. Louis County?
You also state:
The General Assembly enacted House Bill 1110 which, among other things, amended Section
71.015 in its entirety. Section71.015 as amended by House Bill 1110 states specifically as follows: `Should any city, town, or village, not located in any first class county which has adopted a constitutional charter for its own local government . . .'However, Section
71.860 states as follows: `The provisions of Section71.015 shall apply as well to all cities, towns, villages and municipalities of whatsoever kind, located in any first class county which has adopted a constitutional charter for its own local government, except as provided in Section71.920 .'There appears to be ambiguity as to whether or not Section
71.015 applies to cities in St. Louis County.
The changes to which you refer in §
Should any city, town, or village, not located in any first class county which has adopted a constitutional charter for its own local government, seek to annex an area to which objection is made, the following shall be satisfied:
. . . .
Section
The provisions of section
71.015 shall apply as well to all cities, towns, villages and municipalities of whatsoever kind, located in any first class county which has adopted a constitutional charter for its own local government, except as provided in section71.920 .
The problem is obviously that §
However, there is clear authority for the view that, under the circumstances presented, the §
Therefore, it is our view that the legislature did not intend to void the provisions of §
CONCLUSION
It is the opinion of this office that §
The foregoing opinion, which I hereby approve, was prepared by my Assistant, John C. Klaffenbach.
Very truly yours,
JOHN ASHCROFT Attorney General
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Opinion No. 45-81 (1981), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/opinion-no-45-81-1981-moag-1981.