Section 1.4 Exercise of Police Power by Charter Cities

• Library: Local Government Deskbook (2017 Ed.)

2. (§1.4) Exercise of Police Power by Charter Cities

Originally, constitutional charter cities were authorized to frame charters in harmony with and “subject to the Constitution and laws of the State.” Mo. Const. of 1875 art. 9, § 16. The Supreme Court of Missouri interpreted this to mean that charters were grants of power and that municipalities could exercise only those powers authorized in the charter. See, e.g., Tietjens v. City of St. Louis, 222 S.W.2d 70 (Mo. banc 1949) (charter authority to exercise police power within a particular field must come from an express or fairly implied grant of powers in the charter, and the fixing of rents was not incident to any power granted by the city charter). Moreover, the charter itself “must not be out of harmony with the general laws of the state nor invade the province of general legislation or attempt to change the policy of the state as declared for the people at large . . . .” State ex rel. Spink v. Kemp, 283 S.W.2d 502, 514 (Mo. banc 1955).

While a charter was required to be exercised in harmony with the Constitution and laws, this did not necessarily mean that any conflict between city ordinance and state statute would be resolved in favor of the statute. Instead, ordinances were generally required to yield to statutes if related to matters deemed:

· “governmental,” Coleman v. Kansas City, 182 S.W.2d 74, 77 (Mo. banc 1944); Kansas City v. J.I. Case Threshing Mach. Co., 87 S.W.2d 195, 202–03 (Mo. banc 1935);

· “of statewide concern,” Sch. Dist. of Kansas City v. Kansas City, 382 S.W.2d 688, 692–93 (Mo. banc 1964); or

· “of general state concern,” State ex rel. Zoological Bd. of Control v. City of St. Louis, 1 S.W.2d 1021, 1026 (Mo. banc 1928); State ex rel. Carpenter v. City of St. Louis, 2 S.W.2d 713, 720 (Mo. banc 1928).

Conversely, an ordinance might prevail if the matter concerned was found to be:

· “corporate,” Coleman v. Kansas City, 182 S.W.2d at 77; Grant v. Kansas City, 431 S.W.2d 89, 92 (Mo. banc 1968) (dictum);

· “purely municipal,” Stanton v. Thompson, 136 S.W. 698, 699 (Mo. 1911);

· “local,” State ex rel. Spink v. Kemp, 283 S.W.2d at 522; or

· “essentially appertaining to the city government,” State ex rel. Garner v. Mo. & K. Tel. Co., 88 S.W. 41, 43 (Mo. banc 1905).

In 1971, article VI, § 19(a), of the Missouri Constitution was amended to provide that a charter city “shall have all powers which the general assembly of the state of Missouri has authority to confer upon...