No. 9-79
A third class city does not have authority to provide free space to a chamber of commerce or a state license fee agent. A third class city does not have authority to rent an office to a state license fee agent at less than a reasonable rent, and such a city does not have authority to donate money to private not-for-profit corporations.
Cite as Mo. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 9-79
CITIES, TOWNS AND VILLAGES:
A third class city does not hav~
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW:
authority to provide free space to
a chamber of commerce or a state
license fee agent.
A third class city does not have authority
to rent an office to a state license fee agent at less than a
reasonable rent, and such a city does not have authority to
donate money to private not- for-profit corporations.
September 27, 1979
OPINION NO . 9
The Honorable James F. Antonio
State Auditor
State Capitol Building
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
Dear Mr. Antonio:
Fl LED
C!
This opinion is in response to a request of your prede-
cessor, Mr. Thomas M. Keyes, asking:
l.
Is it permissible under Missouri law
for the City of Aurora to provide office
space free of rent to the Chamber of
Cornrr.erce?
2.
Is it permissible under Missouri law
for the City of Aurora to rent office
space to a state license fee agent for
$25 per month which is less than a
reasonable rent for such space?
3.
Is it permissible under Missouri law
for the City of Aurora to donate with-
out restriction $2,500 to a day care
center, $2,500 to a senior citizen
group, and $500 to the Barry-Lawrence
County Mental Health Association?
The facts involved in this request include that the City
of Aurora provides office space at no charge to the Chamber of
Commerce and provides office space to a state license fee agent
for a rental fee of $25 per month.
Furthermore, the city has
donated money to a day care center, a senior citizen group, and
a mental health association, all of which are not-for-profit
The Honorable James F. Antonio
corporations .
each donation.
Federal revenue sharing money was used to make
We note that Aurora is a city of the third class.
Appropriate to your request is Art. VI, § 25, Mo. Consti-
tution (as amended 1976), which provides:
No county, city or other political
corporation or subdivision of the
state shall be authorized to lend
its credit or grant public money or
property to any private individual,
association or corporation except as
provided in Article VI, Section 23
(a) and except that the general assem-
bly may authorize any county, city or
other political corporation or sub-
division to provide for the retirement
or pensioning of its officers and
employees and the widows and children
of deceased officers and employees
and may also authorize payments from
any public funds into a fund or funds
for paying benefits upon retirement,
disability or death to persons employed
and paid out of any public fund for
educational services and to their bene-
ficiaries or estates; and except, also,
that any county of the first class is
authorized to provide for the creation
and establishment of death benefits,
pension and retirement plans for all
its salaried employees, and the widows
and minor children of such deceased
employees.
Also appropriate is Art. VI, § 23, Mo. Constitution (as
amended 1976), which provides:
No county, city or other political
corporation or subdivision of the
state shall own or subscribe for stock
in any corporation or association, or
lend its credit or grant public money
or thing of value to or in aid of any
corporation, association or individual,
except as provided in this Constitution.
-2-
The Honorable James F. Antonio
In responding to your first two questions, we will first
discuss some general principles of law and then relate those
principles to the factual situations you raise.
Clearly a municipality is a creature of the legislature
possessing only those powers expressly granted or those neces-
sarily or fairly implied in or incident to express grants or
those essential to the declared objects of the municipality.
Anderson v. Cita of Olivette, 518 S.W.2d 34 (Mo. 1975); Kennedy
~City or-Neva a, 281 S.W. 56 (K.C. 1926).
Section 77.010, RSMo 1978, in pertinent part provides
that:
[A]ny city of the third class . . .
may receive and hold property, both
real and personal, within such city,
and may purchase, receive and hold
real estate within or without such
city for the burial of the dead; and
may purchase, hold, lease, sell or
otherwise dispose of any property,
real or personal, it now owns or may
may hereafter acquire; ...
.
Section 77 .140, RSMo 1978, provides in pertinent part:
The council may also provide for the
erection, purchase or renting of a
city hall, ... and all other neces-
sary buildings for the city; and
may sell, lease, abolish or otherwise
dispose of the same, and may enclose,
improve, regulate, purchase or sell
all public parks or other public grounds
belonging to the city, and may purchase
and hold grounds for public parks within
the city, or within three miles thereof.
With some exceptions, not relevant here, a city cannot
construct a building solely for the purpose of renting it to
third parties.
However, it seems clear that generally a build-
ing constructed for city purposes may be used for other pur-
poses when not needed for city purposes if such use will not
interfere with the city use.
-3-
The Honorable James F. Antonio
For instance, a city can purchase property for municipal
purposes and hold it after it is no longer necessary for such
purpose.
Kennedy ~ City of Nevada, supra.
If a city owns property which cannot be used for a city
purpose for a time, it may rent it for a private use during
that period.
Harris~ Cit~ of~ Louis, 111 S.W.2d 995 (St.
L. 1938); Heger~ City Q_ t:-l.ou1s, 20 S.W.2d 665 (Mo. 1929).
It is important that the city be in a situation where the
property to be rented was originally developed for a city use
or is being held for a later city use.
If the city develops
property solely for rental purposes but shrouds that purpose
in the rhetoric of city use, the court will disallow such
attempt.
State ex rel. City of Jefferson v. Smith, 154 S.W.2d
101 (Mo. bane l9ZiT) -.-
-
-
However, as is stated in the recognized treatise on municipal
corporations, McQuillin:
If it [city] has more room is such
a building than is needed for munici-
pal purposes, it may rent out a
portion of it, though a municipal
corporation cannot erect buildings
as an investment.
And where a town
erects a new municipal building, thus
leaving useless an old one, it may
repair the old one for the purpose of
renting it.
While this would be
illegal if the primary purpose were
to invest money in a building to rent,
the town, having no longer any use
for the building, need not sacrifice
it but may do what one might prudently
do with such a building. .
10 McQuillin 34, Municipal Corporations ,
§ 28.13.
By analogy the case of State ex rel. Mitchell v. City of
Sikeston, 555 S.W.2d 281 (Mo. banc-r9~ is 1nstructive.
Tnere
the Missouri Supreme Court allowed the City of Sikeston to build
a power plant much in excess of the city's present needs with
the understanding that surplus power would be sold until the
excess capacity was needed by the city.
-4-
The Honorable James F. Antonio
From the foregoing and in the absence of relevant deed
restrictions, we believe the following rule c~n be stated:
When a municipality in Missouri is in possess~on of excess
property which was acquired for city use in good faith, it
may rent that property during the time that it is not needed
for city purposes so long as there is no interference with
public use of city property thereby.
We believe the Missouri
courts would impose a requirement that the rental be reason-
able and not gratuitous.
We assume that the space in question in the Aurora City
Hall is not needed for city purposes, that the use noted does
not interfere with city uses and that there are no deed restric-
tions which must be considered.
In any event, those are specific
factual questions which we should not attempt to resolve.
Your first question asks whether it is proper for the City
of Aurora to provide space free to the Chamber of Commerce.
Based on the foregoing, we hold that it is not.
Assuming as
we have, that the space is properly available, it may be rented
at a reasonable rate to the Chamber of Commerce, but it may not
be provided gratuitously.
Similarly, we believe space may be provided to a license
fee agent if reasonable rental is paid.
In connection with your third question relating to a
donation of federal revenue sharing money to a day care center,
a senior citizen group, and a mental health association, it
is first recognized that these groups are not-for-profit corpo-
rations and are private in nature although a number of their
services may involve some public needs.
Further, Op. Atty.
Gen. No. 69, Marshall, Feb. 11, 1974 (Mo.), copy enclosed, con-
cluded that the City of Ashland could not appropriate money to
the Ashland day care center.
We note that a recent opinion of this office, Op . Atty .
Gen. No. 98, Mueller, May 25, 1977 (Mo.), held that a city
of the fourth class has authority to provide for the relief
of its poor inhabitants.
Under the facts presented to this
office in connection with your request, we have no reason to
believe that this particular opinion would be applicable inas-
much as we do not find facts to show that we are talking about
the relief of poor inhabitants.
Thus, we believe that Op .
Atty . Gen. No. 69, 1974, answers your third question, and that
it is not permissible for the City of Aurora to donate money
to the day care center, senior citizen group, or mental health
association.
-5-
The Honorable James F . Antonio
CONCLUSION
It is the op~n~on of this office that a third class
city does not have authority to provide free space to a
chamber of commerce or a state license fee agent.
A third
class city does not have authority to rent an office to a
state license fee agent at less than a reasonable rent.
Further, such a city does not have authority to donate money
to private not-for-profit corporations.
The foregoing opinion, which I hereby approve, was
prepared by my Assistant, Preston Dean.
Enclosure
Op. Atty. Gen. No. 69 ,
Marshall , Feb.ll
1974 (Mo.)
Very truly yours,
JOHN ASHCROFT
Attorney General
-6-