Article Options

Attorney: Murphysboro should redo annexation

BY KRISTEN CATES, THE SOUTHERN

Wednesday, July 12, 2006 6:50 AM CDT

MOUNT VERNON - Despite what some saw to be an obvious reason for the appeal of Murphysboro's eastward annexation, not one word was mentioned about Wal-Mart during the appellate court hearing held Tuesday morning in Mount Vernon.

Instead, attorneys for both sides focused on whether excluding the legal description of one parcel of Dennis Niemann's property from the original petition to annex property should force the city of Murphysboro to go back to the drawing board.

Patricia McMeen, attorney for Lelan Stallings, who made the appeal, said she is not trying to stop Wal-Mart from coming to Illinois 13 and Country Club Road.

McMeen wants judges Melissa Chapman, James Donovan and Stephen McGlynn to "reverse the trial court" which permitted the annexation without one parcel's legal description.

"(The city of Murphysboro) didn't comply with the statutory regulations and should go back and redo it," McMeen said.

Previous court decisions indicate that ambiguity cannot be in place when trying to annex property. McMeen argued that when several property owners in the affected area signed off on annexation, they weren't given the proper legal description or a map.

However, city attorney Ed Heller - who admitted the mistake of leaving out the legal description was his - said a general property description was included in the petition and it would depend on how one interprets previous court cases to determine whether there really was any ambiguity in the description.

"The standard is: Does the petition describe the property with sufficient detail?" Heller said.

Heller said that most people were aware of what was being annexed and the owner of the parcel that was left out of the description - Niemann - signed the petition to annex his property into the city of Murphysboro.

"If the objector was Mr. Niemann I think it would make the case a more difficult case," Heller said.

It will be a matter of weeks before either side will hear how the appellate court rules.

"I think it's a harmless error," said Alderman Mark Costa, who attended the hearing. "The complainant is not the person who had the error in their parcel and they have nothing new to offer. They just don't like Wal-Mart."

kristen.cates@thesouthern.com

(618) 529-5454 ext. 5804