79.140. Bills must be signed — mayor's veto. — Every bill duly passed by the board of aldermen and presented to the mayor and by him approved shall become an ordinance, and every bill presented as aforesaid, but returned with the mayor's objections thereto, shall stand reconsidered. The board of aldermen shall cause the objections of the mayor to be entered at large upon the journal, and proceed at its convenience to consider the question pending, which shall be in this form: Shall the bill pass, the objections of the mayor thereto notwithstanding? The vote on this question shall be taken by ayes and nays and the names entered upon the journal, and if two-thirds of all the members-elect shall vote in the affirmative, the city clerk shall certify the fact on the roll, and the bill thus certified shall be deposited with the proper officer, and shall become an ordinance in the same manner and with like effect as if it had received the approval of the mayor. The mayor shall have power to sign or veto any ordinance passed by the board of aldermen; provided, that should he neglect or refuse to sign any ordinance and return the same with his objections, in writing, at the next regular meeting of the board of aldermen, the same shall become a law without his signature.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
7
cases, 1980–2007 · leading case:
In Re Malone, 592 F. Supp. 1135 (E.D. Mo. 1984).
In Re Malone, 592 F. Supp. 1135 (E.D. Mo. 1984).
· cites it 7× “Plaintiffs contend that Mo.Rev.Stat. § 79.140 required Mayor Morgan to veto Ordinance No.”
Robinson v. City of Raytown, 606 S.W.2d 460 (Mo. Ct. App. 1980).
· cites it 6× “1654-78 in compliance with the requirements of Section 79.140, RSMo 1969, they professedly deemed it duly enacted; that the enactment of Ordinance No.”
City of Gainesville v. Gilliland, 718 S.W.2d 553 (Mo. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 2× “The conduct of Mayor Sullivan in notifying Gilliland of the settlement and his neglect to send the bill back to council cured any deficiency pursuant to § 79.140, RSMo 1978, when Mayor Sullivan failed to sign the minutes.”
Adams v. City of Manchester, 242 S.W.3d 418 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 2× “Section 79.140 states in pertinent part: The mayor shall have power to sign or veto any ordinance passed by the board of aldermen; provided, that should he [or she] neglect or refuse to sign any ordinance and return the same with his objections, in writing, at the next regular…”
Hawkins v. City of Fayette, 604 S.W.2d 716 (Mo. Ct. App. 1980).
“120 provides that the mayor shall have a seat in and preside over the board of aldermen, but shall have no vote except in the case of a tie, and he shall exercise a general supervision over all the officers and affairs of the city; § 79.140, he shall approve or veto bills; § 79.”
Malone v. City of Fenton, 592 F. Supp. 1135 (E.D. Mo. 1984).
· cites it 7× “Plaintiffs contend that Mo.Rev.Stat. § 79.140 required Mayor Morgan to veto Ordinance No.”
Mantle v. Buchheit, 62 S.W.3d 630 (Mo. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 2× “The mere signing of the minutes would not comply with this statutory requirement. Mantle’s initial hiring was accomplished more informally, by motion.”
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.