Mo. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 247
Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 247.170 (2026)

Detachment of part of district included in city

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  247.170.  Detachment of part of district included in city — conditions — procedure — election. — 1.  Whenever any city owning a waterworks or water supply system extends its corporate limits to include any part of the area in a public water supply district, and the city and the board of directors of the district are unable to agree upon a service, lease or sale agreement, or are unable to proceed under section 247.160, then upon the expiration of ninety days after the effective date of the extension of the city limits, that part of the area of the district included within the corporate limits of the city may be detached and excluded from the district in the following manner:

  (1)  A petition to detach and exclude that part of the public water supply district lying within the corporate limits of the city as such limits have been extended, signed by not less than five percent of the registered voters who are patrons of the water supply district, or twenty registered voters that are patrons of each subdistrict, whichever is less, shall be filed in the circuit court of the county in which the district was originally organized.

  (2)  The court, being satisfied as to the sufficiency of the petition, shall call a special election of the voters of the district at which election the proposal to detach and exclude the part of the district lying within the corporate limits of the city shall be submitted to the voters in the entire district for a vote thereon.  The election shall be conducted within the district by the election authority.

  (3)  The ballot shall briefly state the question to be voted on.

  (4)  In order to approve the detachment and exclusion of any part of the area in a public water supply district, the proposal shall require the approval of not less than a majority of the voters voting thereon.

  (5)  The election authorities shall thereafter promptly certify the result to the circuit court.  The court, acting as a court of equity, shall thereupon without delay enter a decree detaching and excluding the area in question located within the corporate limits of the city from the public water supply district; except that before the decree detaching and excluding the area becomes final or effective, the city shall show to the court that it has assumed and agreed to pay in lump sum or in installments not less than that proportion of the sum of all existing liquidated general obligations and of all unpaid revenue bonds and interest thereon to date of the water supply district as the assessed valuation of the real and tangible personal property within the area sought to be detached and excluded bears to the assessed valuation of all of the real and tangible personal property within the entire area of the district, according to the official county assessment of property as of December thirty-first of the calendar year next preceding the date of the election, and in addition thereto that the city has assumed and agreed to assume or pay in a lump sum all contractual obligations of the water district that are greater than twenty-five thousand dollars for debt that pertains to infrastructure, fixed assets or obligations for the purchase of water, and to pay the court costs.

  (6)  The decree shall thereupon vest in the city the absolute title, free and clear of all liens or encumbrances of every kind and character, to all tangible real and personal property of the public water supply district located within the part of the district situated within the corporate limits of the city with full power in the city to use and dispose of the tangible real and personal property as it deems best in the public interest.

  (7)  If the proposal fails to receive the approval of the voters the question may be again presented by another petition and again voted on, but not sooner than six months.

  (8)  Any and all sums paid out by the city under this section, other than the costs of the election, shall be administered by the circuit court for the benefit of the holders of the then existing and outstanding bonds of the district, and the remainder of such sums, if any, shall be delivered to the district to be expended in the operation, maintenance and improvement of its water distribution system.

  2.  Upon the effective date of any final order detaching and excluding any part of the area of any public water supply district, or leasing, selling or conveying any of the water mains, plant or equipment therein, the circuit court may, in the public interest, change the boundaries of the public water supply district and again divide or redivide the district into subdistricts for the election of directors in conformity with the provisions of section 247.040, without further petition being filed with the court so to do.

­­--------

(L. 1949 p. 255 § 12637.1, A.L. 1957 p. 581, A.L. 1978 H.B. 971, A.L. 1995 H.B. 484, et al., A.L. 2000 S.B. 741, A.L. 2003 H.B. 511)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases, 1960–2015 · leading case: Allen v. Pub. Water Supply Dist. No. 5 of Jefferson Cnty., 7 S.W.3d 537 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Allen v. Pub. Water Supply Dist. No. 5 of Jefferson Cnty., 7 S.W.3d 537 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 24× “031, rather than the mandatory detachment provisions of section 247.170. Appellate courts will sustain the judgment of the trial court unless there is no substantial evidence to support it, it is against the weight of the evidence, it erroneously declares the law, or it…”
City of Harrisonville v. Pub. Water Supply Dist. No. 9, 49 S.W.3d 225 (Mo. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 11× “In Mathison , residents of the city sought, pursuant to § 247.170, to detach and exclude from the district all of the district’s territory lying within the corporate limits of the city.”
Pub. Water Supply Dist. No. 1 of Butler Cnty. v. City of Poplar Bluff, 12 S.W.3d 741 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 17× “City concedes it failed to initiate detachment proceedings pursuant to § 247.170 prior to any of the annexations.”
Mathison v. Pub. Water Supply Dist. No. 2, 401 S.W.2d 424 (Mo. 1966). · cites it 16× “This is a proceeding under § 247.170, RSMo 1959, 1 by residents of the City of Raytown 2 as owners 3 of real estate located within the territory of defendant, Public Water Supply District Number Two of Jackson County, to detach and exclude from the District all that part of its…”
Pub. Water Supply Dist. No. 16 v. City of Buckner, 951 S.W.2d 743 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 10× “When Buckner annexed and rezoned a tract in 1994 which Public Water Supply District M 16 had planned to serve, the district sued, asking the circuit court to enjoin Buckner from extending the city’s water service into the area without first complying with the requirements of §…”
State ex rel. Stern Bros. & Co. v. Stilley, 337 S.W.2d 934 (Mo. 1960). · cites it 10× “If the parties are unable to agree upon a service, lease or sale agreement, § 247.170 provides a procedure for detachment under the supervision of the circuit court.”
Landwersiek v. Dunivan, 147 S.W.3d 141 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 4× ““In the event that the city and the water district cannot reach an agreement, § 247.170 allows detachment of the annexed area from the water district pursuant to the circuit court’s instruction- and supervision.”
Robertson Props., Inc. v. Detachment of Territory From Pub. Water Supply Dist. No. 8 of Clay Cnty., 153 S.W.3d 320 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 4× “This evidence, coupled with the documented involvement by Kearney both pri- or to and during the Robertson suit, presents a perplexing question as to whether this suit should have been brought by Kearney under Section 247.170. The trial court rejected this solution, and this…”
Pub. Water Supply Dist. No. 5 of Jefferson Cnty. v. City of DeSoto, 8 S.W.3d 206 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 16× “5 of Jefferson County, MO, (‘Water District”) appeals the trial court’s dismissal of its petition that sought to permanently enjoin Defendant City of DeSoto from extending water service to recently annexed parcels of land without complying with the requirements of section…”
Pub. Water Supply Dist. No. 16 v. City of Buckner, 44 S.W.3d 860 (Mo. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “On June 7, 1995, PWSD filed an action against the City asking the circuit court to enjoin Buckner from extending its water service into the area annexed in 1994 (Disputed Tract) without first complying with section 247.170. Public Water Supply v. City of Buckner, 951 S.”
Pub. Water Supply Dist. No. 14 of Jackson Cnty. v. Scoville, 221 S.W.3d 493 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 10× “2001) ("City was required to proceed under Section 247.170, if it wished to provide water service to all customers in the annexed territory”); Pub.”
Pub. Water Supply Dist. No. 10 of Cass Cnty. v. City of Peculiar, 971 S.W.2d 849 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 8× “Nonetheless, since one of the issues raised within point II will recur on remand, for the sake of judicial economy, we will address whether Peculiar must comply with § 247.170 before it can service inhabitants within the annexed areas of PWSD’s district.”
Show all 17 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.