Title: Gibbons v. Town of Vincent
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 1110400
State: Alabama
Issuer: Alabama Supreme Court
Date: December 21, 2012

R e l : 12/21/2012 
Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o f o r m a l 
r e v i s i o n b e f o r e 
p u b l i c a t i o n i n 
t h e 
advance 
s h e e t s o f 
Southern Reporter. 
R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o 
n o t i f y t h e 
Reporter of 
Decisions, 
Alabama 
A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r 
Avenue, Montgomery, Alabama 36104-3741 
((334) 
2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f 
any t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n 
o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may be made 
b e f o r e t h e 
o p i n i o n i s 
p r i n t e d i n 
Southern Reporter. 
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA 
OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013 
1110400 
Anne Bates Gibbons 
v. 
Town of 
Vincent e t a l . 
Appeal from Shelby C i r c u i t Court 
(CV-10-900169) 
PARKER, J u s t i c e . 
Anne Bates 
Gibbons a p p e a l s t h e S h e l b y 
C i r c u i t 
C o u r t ' s 
summary judgment i n 
f a v o r o f 
t h e 
Town o f 
V i n c e n t ("the 
Town"), 
the p l a n n i n g commission o f 
t h e 
Town o f 
V i n c e n t ("the p l a n n i n g 
1110400 
c o m m i s s i o n " ) ,
1 
and White Rock Q u a r r i e s , LLC ("White Rock") 
( h e r e i n a f t e r c o l l e c t i v e l y r e f e r r e d t o 
as "the 
a p p e l l e e s " ) . We 
a f f i r m . 
F a c t s and P r o c e d u r a l H i s t o r y 
White Rock owns 888 a c r e s o f u n d e v e l o p e d l a n d 
s i t u a t e d 
w i t h i n t h e c o r p o r a t e 
l i m i t s o f t h e Town ("the land") and 86 
a c r e s o f u n d e v e l o p e d 
l a n d 
a d j a c e n t 
t o t h e 888 a c r e s and 
o r i g i n a l l y 
s i t u a t e d 
i n an u n i n c o r p o r a t e d 
a r e a 
i n 
S h e l b y 
County, o u t s i d e t h e Town's c o r p o r a t e l i m i t s ; t h e 86 a c r e s has 
been annexed by t h e Town and i s now w i t h i n i t s c o r p o r a t e 
l i m i t s . 
Gibbons's c o m p l a i n t c h a l l e n g e d t h e 
Town's r e z o n i n g o f 
the l a n d based on a r e z o n i n g a p p l i c a t i o n s u b m i t t e d by White 
Rock and i t s a n n e x a t i o n o f t h e 86 a c r e s . 
White Rock sought 
the r e z o n i n g and a n n e x a t i o n so t h a t i t c o u l d c o n s t r u c t and 
o p e r a t e a r o c k q u a r r y on t h e p r o p e r t y . 
R e l e v a n t t o Gibbons's 
c l a i m s i s an amendment t o t h e Town's z o n i n g code adopted i n 
2009 p u r s u a n t 
t o w h i c h t h e l a n d was 
rezoned 
("the 2009 
amendment") and t h e p r o c e s s by which t h e 
Town adopted t h e 2009 
1 A t a l l 
times r e l e v a n t t o t h i s a p p e a l , t h e 
members o f 
t h e 
p l a n n i n g commission were Mary Lee R e y n o l d s , 
Don D r i g g e r s , 
E r n e s t 
K i d d , 
E v e l y n 
F i n n , J i m H a i r s t o n , and Marsh 
A c k e r ; 
R o b e r t Malone was a p p o i n t e d t o 
t h e 
p l a n n i n g commission i n June 
2010. 
2 
1110400 
amendment. 
S p e c i f i c a l l y , Gibbons a l l e g e s t h a t the Town d i d 
not s a t i s f y the n o t i c e r e q u i r e m e n t s 
of the s t a t u t e s t h a t g i v e 
m u n i c i p a l c o r p o r a t i o n s i n Alabama the power t o enact 
z o n i n g 
o r d i n a n c e s and t h a t s e t out the r e q u i r e m e n t s 
f o r e n a c t i n g such 
o r d i n a n c e s , 
§ 11-52-70 e t seq., A l a . Code 1975 
("the 
z o n i n g 
s t a t u t e s " ) , i n a d o p t i n g the 2009 amendment. 
Joy M a r l e r , the Town's c l e r k , t e s t i f i e d by a f f i d a v i t t h a t 
on May 
15, 2009, she p o s t e d n o t i c e of a p u b l i c h e a r i n g t o be 
h e l d by the p l a n n i n g commission on June 9, 2009;
2 the purpose 
of 
the 
June 
9, 
2009, 
p u b l i c h e a r i n g 
was 
t o hear 
p u b l i c 
comments on and c o n s i d e r u p d a t i n g the Town's z o n i n g code. 
A 
copy of the 2009 amendment was made a v a i l a b l e t o the p u b l i c a t 
the June 9, 2009, p u b l i c h e a r i n g . 
M a r l e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t on June 24, 2009, she p o s t e d n o t i c e 
of 
a n o t h e r 
p u b l i c 
h e a r i n g 
t o 
be 
h e l d 
by 
the 
p l a n n i n g 
commission on J u l y 14, 2009; the purpose of the J u l y 14, 2009, 
p u b l i c h e a r i n g was t o hear p u b l i c comments on and t o c o n s i d e r 
u p d a t i n g the Town's z o n i n g code. 
A copy of the 2009 amendment 
2 G i b b o n s has 
not 
c h a l l e n g e d the 
c o n t e n t 
of any 
of 
the 
n o t i c e s 
p o s t e d 
by 
the 
Town, 
o n l y 
the 
t i m e l i n e s s of 
the 
n o t i c e s . 
T h e r e f o r e , we are not i n c l u d i n g any f a c t s 
c o n c e r n i n g 
the c o n t e n t of the n o t i c e s or where the n o t i c e s were p o s t e d . 
3 
1110400 
was made a v a i l a b l e t o t h e p u b l i c a t the J u l y 14, 2009, p u b l i c 
h e a r i n g . 
M a r l e r 
t e s t i f i e d 
t h a t on August 11, 2009, she 
p o s t e d 
n o t i c e of a p u b l i c h e a r i n g t o be h e l d by t h e Town's c o u n c i l 
("the c o u n c i l " )
3 on September 1, 2009; t h e purpose of the 
September 1, 2009, p u b l i c h e a r i n g was t o hear p u b l i c comments 
on and t o c o n s i d e r the a d o p t i o n of t h e 2009 amendment. A copy 
of t h e 2009 amendment was made a v a i l a b l e t o t h e p u b l i c a t the 
September 1, 2009, p u b l i c 
h e a r i n g . 
M a r l e r 
t e s t i f i e d 
t h a t on September 9, 2009, she p o s t e d 
n o t i c e of t h e c o u n c i l ' s r e g u l a r m e e t i n g t o o c c u r on September 
22, 
2009; on t h e agenda f o r t h e c o u n c i l ' s r e g u l a r m e e t i n g , 
among 
o t h e r 
t h i n g s , 
was 
" u p d a t i n g 
t h e 
p r e s e n t 
z o n i n g 
o r d i n a n c e . " 
M a r l e r 
t e s t i f i e d t h a t a t i t s 
r e g u l a r m e e t i n g on 
September 22, 2009, t h e c o u n c i l adopted t h e 2009 amendment. 
M a r l e r a l s o t e s t i f i e d t h a t on September 23, 2009, she p o s t e d 
the Town's z o n i n g code, w h i c h i n c l u d e d t h e changes made by t h e 
c o u n c i l ' s passage of t h e 2009 amendment. 
3The c o u n c i l i s composed of f i v e members who a r e e l e c t e d 
by 
d i s t r i c t ; 
a t t h e 
time 
o f t h e 
a d o p t i o n 
o f the 
2009 
amendment, t h o s e members were Johnny Edwards, R a l p h B. K i m b l e , 
J r . , 
L a r r y 
K i n g , 
B r i d g e t t e 
J o r d a n 
Smith, 
and 
Mary 
Lee 
R e y n o l d s . 
The mayor o f t h e Town i s a l s o a member of t h e 
c o u n c i l , w h i c h i s t h e Town's m u n i c i p a l 
l e g i s l a t i v e 
a u t h o r i t y . 
4 
1110400 
On O c t o b e r 21, 2009, White Rock f i l e d an a p p l i c a t i o n w i t h 
the Town 
r e q u e s t i n g 
t h a t t h e Town 
rezone t h e l a n d 
from 
" a g r i c u l t u r a l 
d i s t r i c t " and " r u r a l 
r e s i d e n t i a l " t o " s p e c i a l 
d i s t r i c t " 
p u r s u a n t t o § 5.14 o f t h e Town's z o n i n g code and 
a l l o w White Rock t o c o n s t r u c t and o p e r a t e a r o c k q u a r r y on 
t h e 
l a n d ("the r e z o n i n g 
a p p l i c a t i o n " ) . 
S e c t i o n 5.14.5 o f t h e 
Town's z o n i n g 
code was added by t h e 2009 amendment. 
I n 
response t o a r e q u e s t by t h e Town, White Rock amended i t s 
r e z o n i n g a p p l i c a t i o n on November 3, 2009, w i t h a s u r v e y o f 
t h e 
l a n d , as w e l l as t h e 86 a c r e s i n t h e u n i n c o r p o r a t e d 
a r e a o f 
S h e l b y County. 
The Town does n o t employ l a n d p l a n n e r s t o a s s i s t 
w i t h 
z o n i n g a p p l i c a t i o n s . 
I n s t e a d , 
l a n d p l a n n e r s a t t h e S h e l b y 
County Department o f Development S e r v i c e s a d v i s e and a s s i s t 
the Town w i t h l a n d - p l a n n i n g i s s u e s p u r s u a n t t o a c o n t r a c t u a l 
agreement. 
K r i s t i n e Goddard, a l a n d p l a n n e r w i t h t h e S h e l b y 
County 
Department 
o f Development 
S e r v i c e s , 
a s s i s t e d t h e 
p l a n n i n g 
commission and t h e c o u n c i l w i t h 
p r o c e s s i n g and 
r e v i e w i n g t h e r e z o n i n g 
a p p l i c a t i o n .
4 
4The Town and t h e p l a n n i n g commission a l l e g e i n t h e i r 
b r i e f on a p p e a l t h a t t h e Town has a v a l i d l y c r e a t e d 
"Zoning 
B o a r d o f A d j u s t m e n t t h a t can hear a p p e a l s , g r a n t v a r i a n c e s t o 
the z o n i n g code, and a l l o w s p e c i a l e x c e p t i o n s t o t h e z o n i n g 
5 
1110400 
M a r l e r 
t e s t i f i e d 
t h a t on J a n u a r y 12, 2010, she p o s t e d 
n o t i c e o f a h e a r i n g t o be h e l d by t h e p l a n n i n g commission on 
J a n u a r y 26, 2010; 
t h e purpose o f t h e 
J a n u a r y 26, 2010, p u b l i c 
h e a r i n g 
was t o 
r e c e i v e 
p u b l i c comment 
on t h e 
r e z o n i n g 
a p p l i c a t i o n . 
The p l a n n i n g commission h e l d t h e J a n u a r y 26, 
2010, p u b l i c h e a r i n g , and f o l l o w i n g t h a t p u b l i c h e a r i n g , t h e 
p l a n n i n g commission h e l d two "work s e s s i o n s " on F e b r u a r y 1, 
2010, and March 4, 2010. The purpose o f t h e 
work s e s s i o n s was 
t o " d i s c u s s 
( i ) 
t h e [ r e z o n i n g a p p l i c a t i o n ] , 
( i i ) 
t h e d r a f t 
recommendations and r e p o r t from Ms. K r i s t i n e Goddard on b e h a l f 
of t h e S h e l b y County Department o f Development 
S e r v i c e s and 
the P l a n n i n g Commission, and 
( i i i ) comments r e c e i v e d a t t h e 
J a n u a r y 26, 2010, p u b l i c h e a r i n g . " 
On F e b r u a r y 16, 2010, t h e c o u n c i l h e l d a 
r e g u l a r l y 
s c h e d u l e d m e e t i n g , w h i c h members o f t h e p l a n n i n g commission 
and t h e Z o n i n g Board o f A d j u s t m e n t f o r 
t h e Town ("the ZBA") 
code." The Town and t h e p l a n n i n g commission's b r i e f , a t 
p. 6. 
The Town and t h e p l a n n i n g commission c i t e t h e p a r t i e s ' 
j o i n t 
s t i p u l a t i o n o f f a c t s i n s u p p o r t o f t h i s a s s e r t i o n . A l t h o u g h 
the v a l i d c r e a t i o n o f t h e Town's Z o n i n g B o a r d o f A d j u s t m e n t 
("the ZBA") was d i s p u t e d by Gibbons i n t h e p a r t i e s ' 
j o i n t 
s t i p u l a t i o n o f f a c t s , i n 
h e r b r i e f on a p p e a l Gibbons does n o t 
d i s p u t e t h e v a l i d i t y o f t h e ZBA, b u t appears t o concede t h a t 
i t was v a l i d l y c r e a t e d . 
See G i b b o n s ' s b r i e f , a t pp. 10, 30¬
32. 
6 
1110400 
a t t e n d e d . 
D i s c u s s e d a t the m e e t i n g was the p o t e n t i a l impact 
of the r e z o n i n g a p p l i c a t i o n on p r o p e r t y a d j a c e n t t o the l a n d , 
w h i c h i s owned by EBSCO I n d u s t r i e s . 
On F e b r u a r y 26, 2010, Gibbons, as a p r o p e r t y owner and 
r e s i d e n t o f the Town, f i l e d a c o m p l a i n t a g a i n s t the Town and 
the p l a n n i n g c o m m i s s i o n . 
Gibbons sought a w r i t of mandamus 
d i r e c t i n g 
the Town and the p l a n n i n g 
commission 
" t o cease 
c o n s i d e r i n g the [ r e z o n i n g ] [ a ] p p l i c a t i o n under the p r o v i s i o n s 
of S e c t i o n 5.14.5 of the [Town's z o n i n g c o d e ] , [
5 ] and i n s t e a d 
5 S e c t i o n 5.14.5 o f the Town's z o n i n g code p r o v i d e s : 
"5.14.5 Other Uses 
"Uses not c o v e r e d 
i n o t h e r 
s e c t i o n s . S p e c i a l 
D i s t r i c t s 
f o r uses not c o v e r e d 
e l s e w h e r e i n 
t h i s 
o r d i n a n c e and w h i c h a r e g e n e r a l l y of a n a t u r e so as 
t o be i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h most p e r m i t t e d uses may 
be 
a l l o w e d i n any d i s t r i c t e x c e p t the 'R' d i s t r i c t . 
The 
l o c a t i o n 
s h a l l 
be 
recommended 
by 
the 
P l a n n i n g 
Commission 
and 
approved by 
the Town C o u n c i l . I n 
a d d i t i o n , a complete development p l a n and any o t h e r 
i n f o r m a t i o n 
p e r t i n e n t t o the development 
or 
use 
s h a l l be i n c l u d e d a t the d i s c r e t i o n of the P l a n n i n g 
Commission. 
Such 
uses 
may 
i n c l u d e 
b u t 
a r e 
not 
l i m i t e d t o the f o l l o w i n g : 
"1) A i r p o r t or l a n d i n g 
f i e l d 
"2) Mausoleum 
"3) 
Commercial, 
r e c r e a t i o n a l 
or 
amusement 
development 
f o r temporary 
o r 
s e a s o n a b l e p e r i o d s . 
7 
1110400 
b e g i n i t s 
r e v i e w o f t h e [ r e z o n i n g ] 
[ a ] p p l i c a t i o n anew i n 
c o n f o r m i t y w i t h t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f S e c t i o n 5.5 o f t h e [Town's 
z o n i n g 
c o d e ] . [
6 ] " 
I n h e r c o m p l a i n t , 
Gibbons a l s o sought a 
judgment d e c l a r i n g § 5.14.5 o f t h e z o n i n g code v o i d ab i n i t i o ; 
"4) 
S a n i t a r y l a n d f i l l o p e r a t i o n 
"5) 
P r a c t i c e g o l f d r i v i n g range, p a r 
t h r e e 
g o l f 
c o u r s e 
o r 
m i n i a t u r e 
g o l f 
c o u r s e . " 
6 S e c t i o n 
5.5 
o f t h e Town's 
z o n i n g 
code, 
e n t i t l e d 
" U n c l a s s i f i e d Uses," p r o v i d e s : 
"In t h e event t h e Town o f V i n c e n t r e c e i v e s an 
a p p l i c a t i o n f o r p e r m i t t i n g o f a use t h a t i s n o t 
l i s t e d 
o r 
t h a t 
cannot 
a p p r o p r i a t e l y f i t 
i n a 
d i s t r i c t 
l i s t e d [ i n S e c t i o n 5.1 o f t h e 
Town's z o n i n g 
o r d i n a n c e ] , t h e f o l l o w i n g p r o c e d u r e s h a l l 
a p p l y : 
" I f 
c o m p a t i b l e 
w i t h t h e e x i s t i n g use 
d i s t r i c t 
i n t e n t , t h e u n c l a s s i f i e d use may be p e r m i t t e d as a 
s p e c i a l 
e x c e p t i o n 
by 
t h e B o a r d 
o f 
A d j u s t m e n t 
p u r s u a n t t o A r t i c l e 14. 
" I f t h e u n c l a s s i f i e d use would n o t 
be c o m p a t i b l e 
w i t h t h e i n t e n t o f t h e e x i s t i n g use d i s t r i c t , t h e 
P l a n n i n g Commission 
s h a l l make a d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f 
the most a p p r o p r i a t e use d i s t r i c t and r e q u i r e t h e 
a p p l i c a n t have t h e p r o p e r t y 
rezoned, 
and 
s p e c i a l 
e x c e p t i o n 
g r a n t e d 
by 
t h e B o a r d 
o f 
A d j u s t m e n t 
p u r s u a n t t o A r t i c l e 14 b e f o r e g r a n t i n g a p p r o v a l . 
" F o l l o w i n g f i n a l a c t i o n o f t h e u n c l a s s i f i e d use 
p e r above p a r a g r a p h s , 
t h e P l a n n i n g Commission may 
i n i t i a t e an amendment t o t h i s o r d i n a n c e t o l i s t t h e 
newly 
p e r m i t t e d 
use 
i n t h e most 
a p p r o p r i a t e 
d i s t r i c t ( s ) . " 
8 
1110400 
s p e c i f i c a l l y , Gibbons a l l e g e d t h a t the Town d i d not meet the 
n o t i c e r e q u i r e m e n t s of § 11-52-77, 
A l a . Code 1975, 
b e f o r e 
a d o p t i n g the 2009 amendment. 
I n the a l t e r n a t i v e , 
assuming 
t h a t the 2009 amendment was v a l i d l y adopted, Gibbons sought a 
d e c l a r a t i o n t h a t White Rock's p r o p o s e d use o f the l a n d i s 
c o v e r e d under § 5.5, not § 5.14.5, of the Town's z o n i n g code. 
On 
March 
23, 
2010, 
the 
p l a n n i n g 
commission 
h e l d 
a 
s p e c i a l l y c a l l e d m e e t i n g t o v o t e on the r e z o n i n g 
a p p l i c a t i o n . 
The p l a n n i n g commission u n a n i m o u s l y a g r e e d t o recommend t h a t 
the c o u n c i l "approve [the r e z o n i n g a p p l i c a t i o n ] as m o d i f i e d , 
amend the [Town's] Comprehensive P l a n and adopt an 
o r d i n a n c e 
r e z o n i n g the [land] t o S p e c i a l Use 
D i s t r i c t . " 
On A p r i l 6, 2010, White Rock p e t i t i o n e d the Town t o annex 
the 
86 a c r e s 
s i t u a t e d o u t s i d e the Town's c o r p o r a t e 
l i m i t s 
("the a n n e x a t i o n 
p e t i t i o n " ) . 
On A p r i l 14, 2010, White Rock 
f i l e d a m o t i o n t o i n t e r v e n e i n Gibbons's a c t i o n a g a i n s t the 
Town and the p l a n n i n g commission. 
The c i r c u i t c o u r t 
g r a n t e d 
White Rock's m o t i o n on June 9, 2010. 
On May 
28, 2010, White Rock p r e s e n t e d 
t o the c o u n c i l 
p r o p o s e d o r d i n a n c e s g r a n t i n g the r e z o n i n g a p p l i c a t i o n and the 
a n n e x a t i o n p e t i t i o n ("the White Rock o r d i n a n c e s " ) . 
On June 1, 
9 
1110400 
2010, 
the c o u n c i l h e l d a p u b l i c work s e s s i o n t o d i s c u s s the 
White 
Rock 
o r d i n a n c e s . 
F o l l o w i n g 
the 
work 
s e s s i o n , 
a 
r e g u l a r l y s c h e d u l e d c o u n c i l m e e t i n g was h e l d , d u r i n g which the 
White Rock o r d i n a n c e s were i n t r o d u c e d and 
r e a d b e f o r e 
the 
c o u n c i l 
f o r the 
f i r s t 
t i m e . 
The 
p a r t i e s 
do 
not 
i n d i c a t e 
whether n o t i c e f o r t h i s m e e t i n g was 
p o s t e d . 
On June 2, 2010, M a r l e r p o s t e d n o t i c e of a p u b l i c h e a r i n g 
t o be h e l d on June 17, 2010, 
by the c o u n c i l ; the purpose of 
the p u b l i c h e a r i n g was 
t o hear p u b l i c comments on the White 
Rock o r d i n a n c e s . 
The June 17, 2010, p u b l i c h e a r i n g was h e l d . 
On 
J u l y 
7, 
2010, 
M a r l e r 
p o s t e d 
n o t i c e of 
a 
s p e c i a l 
s e s s i o n 
of the 
c o u n c i l 
t o be 
h e l d on 
J u l y 
15, 
2010; 
the 
purpose of the 
s p e c i a l s e s s i o n was 
t o r e a d and d i s c u s s the 
White Rock o r d i n a n c e s and t o v o t e on t h e i r a d o p t i o n . 
A t the 
J u l y 15, 
2010, 
s p e c i a l s e s s i o n , the 
c o u n c i l c o n s i d e r e d 
and 
v o t e d on the White Rock o r d i n a n c e s , p a s s i n g them. 
On September 21, 2010, 
the 
c i r c u i t c o u r t h e l d a s t a t u s 
c o n f e r e n c e 
a t which, 
the 
p a r t i e s 
agree, 
the 
c i r c u i t 
c o u r t 
o r a l l y b i f u r c a t e d the case 
i n t o p r o c e d u r a l d u e - p r o c e s s 
and 
s u b s t a n t i v e d u e - p r o c e s s i s s u e s . 
The p a r t i e s a l s o agree t h a t 
10 
1110400 
the c i r c u i t c o u r t o r d e r e d the p a r t i e s t o f i l e summary-judgment 
motions c o n c e r n i n g the p r o c e d u r a l d u e - p r o c e s s i s s u e s . 
On 
O c t o b e r 
11, 
2010, 
Gibbons amended h e r 
c o m p l a i n t , 
a l l e g i n g 
t h a t the Town's passage of the White Rock o r d i n a n c e s 
v i o l a t e d 
her p r o c e d u r a l and s u b s t a n t i v e d u e - p r o c e s s 
r i g h t s ; 
Gibbons 
a l s o 
c o n t e s t e d 
the 
Town's 
passage 
of 
the 
2009 
amendment. 
S p e c i f i c a l l y , 
Gibbons 
a l l e g e d i n her 
amended 
c o m p l a i n t t h a t " t h e P l a n n i n g Commission's a c t i o n s p u r s u a n t 
t o 
A r t i c l e 11 [ o f the Town's z o n i n g code, as amended by the 2009 
amendment,] are 
v i o l a t i v e 
of the 
r e l e v a n t s u b s t a n t i v e 
and 
p r o c e d u r a l due p r o c e s s s t a n d a r d s and c o n s t i t u t e 
a c t i o n s beyond 
the P l a n n i n g Commission's s t a t u t o r i l y c r e a t e d power." 
On 
May 
24, 
2011, 
the Town and 
the p l a n n i n g commission 
f i l e d a motion f o r a summary judgment. 
On the same day, White 
Rock a l s o f i l e d a m o t i o n f o r a summary judgment. 
I n 
t h e i r 
summary-judgment m o t i o n s , 
the a p p e l l e e s argued, among o t h e r 
t h i n g s , t h a t the Town's z o n i n g code c o m p l i e s w i t h Alabama law. 
S p e c i f i c a l l y , 
the a p p e l l e e s a r g u e d : 
"Alabama law v e s t s the P l a n n i n g Commission w i t h the 
power t o recommend z o n i n g changes, the Town C o u n c i l 
w i t h the power t o e n a c t z o n i n g o r d i n a n c e s , and 
the 
[ Z B A ] 
o n l y 
w i t h 
the 
power 
t o 
g r a n t 
s p e c i a l 
e x c e p t i o n s t o e x i s t i n g 
z o n i n g . Ms. G i b b o n s ' s c l a i m 
t h a t 
the [ Z B A ] 
has 
j u r i s d i c t i o n 
i n t h i s 
case 
i s 
11 
1110400 
i n c o r r e c t f o r t h i s 
r e a s o n . 
The governmental power 
used i n t h i s case was the power t o r e z o n e . Alabama 
law a l l o w s the P l a n n i n g Commission t o recommend and 
r e q u i r e s the Town C o u n c i l t o l e g i s l a t i v e l y 
c r e a t e 
the S p e c i a l D i s t r i c t f o r the P r o p e r t y . Alabama law 
does not 
a l l o w 
a b o a r d 
o f a d j u s t m e n t 
t o 
rezone 
p r o p e r t y . " 
I n her r e s p o n s e t o the a p p e l l e e s ' summary-judgment m o t i o n s , 
Gibbons 
argued 
t h a t 
A r t i c l e 
11 o f t h e Town's z o n i n g 
code 
v i o l a t e d the z o n i n g s t a t u t e s i n t h a t A r t i c l e 11 
" i m p r o p e r l y 
bestows the power t o rezone p r o p e r t y s o l e l y upon the P l a n n i n g 
Commission, 
a framework 
t h a t i s c l e a r l y i n c o n t r a v e n t i o n t o 
Alabama l a w . " 
On May 25, 2011, Gibbons 
f i l e d a motion f o r a 
summary judgment. 
The 
c i r c u i t 
c o u r t h e l d a h e a r i n g on the 
summary-judgment motions on August 4, 2011. 
On 
November 
3, 
2011, 
the 
c i r c u i t 
c o u r t 
g r a n t e d 
the 
a p p e l l e e s ' summary-judgment m o t i o n s , as 
f o l l o w s : 
" W i t h the consent of the p a r t i e s , 
t h i s 
c o u r t 
u n d e r t o o k 
t o 
c o n s i d e r 
c r o s s - m o t i o n s f o r summary 
judgment 
s o l e l y 
a d d r e s s i n g 
a l l p r o c e d u r a l 
i s s u e s 
r a i s e d by P l a i n t i f f Anne Gibbons. H a v i n g 
c o n s i d e r e d 
the J o i n t S t i p u l a t i o n o f the P a r t i e s , the p a r t i e s ' 
motions f o r summary judgment and the s u p p l e m e n t a l 
m a t e r i a l s , 
t h i s 
c o u r t 
hereby 
d e n i e s 
P l a i n t i f f ' s 
m o t i o n 
f o r 
summary 
judgment. 
W i t h 
r e s p e c t 
t o 
D e f e n d a n t s ' motions the c o u r t f i n d s t h a t t h e r e i s no 
genuine i s s u e of m a t e r i a l f a c t and t h a t D e f e n d a n t s 
are e n t i t l e d t o judgment as a m a t t e r o f law. 
" A c c o r d i n g l y , 
the 
c o u r t 
h e r e b y 
g r a n t s 
the 
motions f o r summary judgment 
f i l e d by the Town o f 
12 
1110400 
V i n c e n t 
and White Rock 
Q u a r r i e s , 
LLC,[
7] on 
a l l 
grounds a s s e r t e d i n those 
motions e x c e p t f o r 
t h e 
s u b s t a n t i v e due p r o c e s s grounds s e t f o r t h i n 
... 
t h e 
Town's motion f o r 
summary judgment and ... o f White 
Rock's motion f o r summary j u d g m e n t . I n so 
r u l i n g , 
t h i s 
c o u r t 
d i s m i s s e s 
c l a i m s 
a s s e r t e d 
by t h e 
p l a i n t i f f i n : 
( a ) 
Counts One, Two, Three and F i v e o f 
the C o m p l a i n t and t h e Amended C o m p l a i n t ; and ( b ) 
o n l y those p r o c e d u r a l c l a i m s i n Count F o u r . 
"The 
c o u r t e x p r e s s l y d e t e r m i n e s t h a t t h e r e i s 
no 
j u s t r e a s o n f o r d e l a y and t h e C l e r k i s d i r e c t e d t o 
e n t e r f i n a l judgment p u r s u a n t t o R u l e 5 4 ( b ) , A l a . R. 
C i v . 
P. 
" U n a d j u d i c a t e d a t t h i s p o i n t , and r e m a i n i n g f o r 
t r i a l , 
a r e t h e s u b s t a n t i v e due p r o c e s s 
c l a i m s as 
a l l e g e d i n 
Count Four o f the 
Amended C o m p l a i n t which 
are s e t f o r t h i n p a r a g r a p h s 39 t h r o u g h 43 and 47." 
A l s o on November 3, 2011, Gibbons 
f i l e d a motion t o 
d i s m i s s h e r s u b s t a n t i v e d u e - p r o c e s s c l a i m s w i t h o u t p r e j u d i c e . 
On December 14, 2011, t h e c i r c u i t 
c o u r t 
g r a n t e d 
G i b b o n s ' s 
m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s , 
t h e r e b y 
a d j u d i c a t i n g a l l o f G i b b o n s ' s 
c l a i m s . 
Gibbons a p p e a l e d . 
S t a n d a r d o f Review 
We s e t f o r t h t h e s t a n d a r d o f r e v i e w 
a p p l i c a b l e t o our 
r e v i e w o f a summary judgment i n M a r t i n v. Cash E x p r e s s , I n c . , 
60 So. 3d 236, 244 ( A l a . 2010), as f o l l o w s : 
7The 
c i r c u i t 
c o u r t 
l a t e r amended i t s November 3, 2011, 
f i n a l 
judgment t o i n c l u d e t h e p l a n n i n g 
commission, whose 
o m i s s i o n was t h e r e s u l t o f a c l e r i c a l 
e r r o r . 
13 
1110400 
" ' I n r e v i e w i n g a summary judgment, an a p p e l l a t e 
c o u r t l o o k s a t the same f a c t o r s t h a t the 
t r i a l 
c o u r t 
c o n s i d e r e d 
i n r u l i n g on the motion 
[O]n 
a p p e a l 
a 
summary 
judgment 
c a r r i e s 
no 
p r e s u m p t i o n 
of 
c o r r e c t n e s s . ' Hornsby v. S e s s i o n s , 
703 
So. 
2d 
932, 
938 
( A l a . 1997). 
" ' I n 
r e v i e w i n g 
the 
d i s p o s i t i o n of 
a 
m o t i o n f o r summary judgment, we u t i l i z e 
the 
same s t a n d a r d as t h a t of the t r i a l c o u r t i n 
d e t e r m i n i n g whether the e v i d e n c e b e f o r e 
the 
c o u r t made out a genuine i s s u e of m a t e r i a l 
f a c t and whether the movant was 
e n t i t l e d t o 
a judgment as 
a m a t t e r of 
law. When 
the 
movant makes a p r i m a 
f a c i e showing 
t h a t 
t h e r e i s no genuine i s s u e of m a t e r i a l f a c t , 
the burden t h e n s h i f t s t o the nonmovant t o 
p r e s e n t s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e c r e a t i n g such 
an i s s u e . E v i d e n c e i s " s u b s t a n t i a l " i f i t 
i s 
o f 
"such 
w e i g h t 
and 
q u a l i t y 
t h a t 
f a i r - m i n d e d 
p e r s o n s 
i n 
the 
e x e r c i s e 
of 
i m p a r t i a l judgment can r e a s o n a b l y 
i n f e r the 
e x i s t e n c e 
of 
the 
f a c t 
sought 
t o 
be 
p r o v e d . " ' 
"Ex p a r t e G e n e r a l Motors Corp., 769 So. 2d 903, 
906 
( A l a . 
1999) 
( c i t a t i o n s 
o m i t t e d ) . 
"'Our 
r e v i e w 
i s f u r t h e r s u b j e c t t o the 
c a v e a t 
t h a t 
t h i s C o u r t must r e v i e w 
the 
r e c o r d i n a 
l i g h t 
most f a v o r a b l e t o the nonmovant and must r e s o l v e a l l 
r e a s o n a b l e 
doubts 
a g a i n s t 
the movant.' Hobson 
v. 
 
American C a s t I r o n 
P i p e 
Co., 
690 
So. 
2d 
341, 
344 
( A l a . 
1997)." 
D i s c u s s i o n 
F i r s t , Gibbons argues t h a t the Town f a i l e d t o comply w i t h 
the n o t i c e r e q u i r e m e n t s e t f o r t h i n § 11-52-77(1), A l a . Code 
14 
1110400 
1975, 
t h e r e b y r e n d e r i n g the 2009 amendment v o i d . 
S e c t i o n 
11¬
52-77 p r o v i d e s , i n p e r t i n e n t p a r t : 
"No 
o r d i n a n c e 
s h a l l be p a s s e d by any 
m u n i c i p a l 
c o r p o r a t i o n 
under 
the 
a u t h o r i t y of 
t h i s 
a r t i c l e 
u n l e s s 
and 
u n t i l 
the m u n i c i p a l 
g o v e r n i n g 
body 
has 
c o m p l i e d 
w i t h 
the 
p r o c e d u r e s 
s e t 
f o r t h 
i n 
s u b d i v i s i o n 
(1) ... of t h i s s e c t i o n . 
"(1) 
P r i o r t o a d o p t i o n , 
the p r o p o s e d 
o r d i n a n c e 
s h a l l be 
p u b l i s h e d 
i n 
f u l l 
f o r 
i n s e r t i o n and an a d d i t i o n a l i n s e r t i o n 
^ , , ^ ^ , ^ ^ - 1 
^ 
^ - p 
4-1-,^ ^^^^^^^^ 
^ n , ^ - ; ^ - , ^ ^ ^ 
one 
of a s y n o p s i s 
of the p r o p o s e d 
o r d i n a n c e , 
one week a f t e r the 
f i r s t 
i n s e r t i o n , w h i c h 
s y n o p s i s 
s h a l l r e f e r t o the date and name 
of 
the 
newspaper 
i n which 
the 
p r o p o s e d 
o r d i n a n c e 
was 
f i r s t 
p u b l i s h e d ; b o t h 
such 
i n s e r t i o n s 
s h a l l be 
a t 
l e a s t 
15 days i n 
advance of i t s passage and i n a newspaper 
of g e n e r a l c i r c u l a t i o n p u b l i s h e d w i t h i n the 
m u n i c i p a l i t y , 
o r , 
i f t h e r e 
i s 
no 
such 
newspaper, 
then 
by 
p o s t i n g 
the 
p r o p o s e d 
o r d i n a n c e i n f o u r c o n s p i c u o u s p l a c e s w i t h i n 
the m u n i c i p a l i t y , t o g e t h e r 
w i t h a n o t i c e 
s t a t i n g 
the 
time 
and 
p l a c e 
t h a t 
the 
o r d i n a n c e 
i s 
t o 
be 
c o n s i d e r e d 
by 
the 
m u n i c i p a l 
l e g i s l a t i v e 
a u t h o r i t i e s 
and 
s t a t i n g f u r t h e r t h a t a t such time and p l a c e 
a l l 
p e r s o n s 
who 
d e s i r e 
s h a l l 
have 
an 
o p p o r t u n i t y of b e i n g h e a r d i n o p p o s i t i o n t o 
or i n f a v o r of such 
o r d i n a n c e . " 
Gibbons 
argues 
t h a t 
the Town 
f a i l e d 
t o 
comply 
w i t h 
the 
r e q u i r e m e n t of § 11-52-77(1) t h a t n o t i c e of the 2009 amendment 
be 
p o s t e d 
a t 
l e a s t 
15 
days 
i n advance 
of 
i t s p a s s a g e .
8 
8As mentioned p r e v i o u s l y , Gibbons d i d not c h a l l e n g e below 
and does not c h a l l e n g e on a p p e a l the form of or the manner i n 
w h i c h n o t i c e of the Town's c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the 2009 amendment 
15 
1110400 
S p e c i f i c a l l y , 
Gibbons argues t h a t t h e Town's September 9, 
2009, n o t i c e o f t h e r e g u l a r m e e t i n g o f t h e c o u n c i l a t w h i c h 
the 2009 amendment was t o be c o n s i d e r e d was p o s t e d o n l y 13 
days i n 
advance o f t h e c o u n c i l ' s passage o f t h e 2009 amendment 
on September 22, 2009. 
The a p p e l l e e s argue t h a t , a l t h o u g h t h e September 9, 2009, 
n o t i c e was p o s t e d o n l y 13 days b e f o r e t h e c o u n c i l ' s a d o p t i o n 
of t h e 2009 amendment a t i t s 
r e g u l a r m e e t i n g on September 22, 
2009, n o t i c e o f t h e 2009 amendment was 
i n i t i a l l y p o s t e d on 
August 11, 2009. 
The August 11, 2009, n o t i c e i n d i c a t e d t h a t 
the 
c o u n c i l would d i s c u s s t h e 2009 amendment a t a p u b l i c 
h e a r i n g 
t o be h e l d on September 1, 2009, and t h a t 
p u b l i c 
comment would be h e a r d a t t h a t p u b l i c h e a r i n g c o n c e r n i n g t h e 
2009 amendment. The a p p e l l e e s argue t h a t t h e 
August 11, 2009, 
n o t i c e , w h i c h was p o s t e d 43 days b e f o r e t h e c o u n c i l adopted 
the 2009 amendment on September 22, 2009, was s u f f i c i e n t t o 
s a t i s f y t h e r e q u i r e m e n t i n 
§ 11-52-77(1) t h a t n o t i c e o f t h e 
p r o p o s e d o r d i n a n c e be p o s t e d a t l e a s t 15 days b e f o r e passage 
of a z o n i n g 
o r d i n a n c e . 
We agree. 
was p o s t e d . 
We assume t h e r e i s no "newspaper o f 
g e n e r a l 
c i r c u l a t i o n " p u b l i s h e d 
w i t h i n t h e Town and t h a t , 
t h e r e f o r e , 
p u b l i c a t i o n by p o s t i n g i s a l l t h a t was r e q u i r e d . 
16 
1110400 
Gibbons's argument i g n o r e s t h e f a c t t h a t t h e 
Town p o s t e d 
n o t i c e on August 11, 2009, i n d i c a t i n g t h a t t h e c o u n c i l , t h e 
Town's l e g i s l a t i v e body, would h o l d a p u b l i c h e a r i n g on t h e 
2009 amendment on September 1, 2009. N o t h i n g i n 
§ 11-52-77(1) 
r e q u i r e s t h e Town t o p o s t a 15-day n o t i c e o f e v e r y m e e t i n g 
h e l d c o n c e r n i n g t h e 2009 amendment. 
I n s t e a d , § 11-52-77(1) 
r e q u i r e s t h a t n o t i c e o f t h e 2009 amendment be p o s t e d a t l e a s t 
15 days b e f o r e t h e a d o p t i o n o f t h e 2009 amendment, w h i c h t h e 
Town a c c o m p l i s h e d by p o s t i n g n o t i c e o f t h e 2009 amendment on 
August 11, 2009, 43 days b e f o r e i t s a d o p t i o n by t h e c o u n c i l a t 
i t s 
r e g u l a r m e e t i n g on September 22, 2009. 
T h e r e f o r e , t h e 
Town c o m p l i e d w i t h t h e n o t i c e r e q u i r e m e n t o f § 11-52-77, and 
we a f f i r m t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t ' s judgment i n s o f a r as i t h e l d t h a t 
the Town's a d o p t i o n o f t h e 2009 amendment c o m p l i e d w i t h t h e 
n o t i c e r e q u i r e m e n t s i n 
t h e z o n i n g 
s t a t u t e s . 
Gibbons 
a l s o 
argues 
t h a t t h e Town's passage o f t h e 
o r d i n a n c e a n n e x i n g t h e 86 a c r e s 
i n t o t h e Town's 
c o r p o r a t e 
l i m i t s 
v i o l a t e d t h e n o t i c e 
r e q u i r e m e n t s 
o f § 
11-52-77. 
Gibbons argues t h a t t h e 
Town's z o n i n g code, as amended by 
t h e 
2009 amendment, " p r o v i d e [ s ] 
t h a t when a p r o p e r t y i s annexed 
i n t o t h e 
Town i t i s , by o r d i n a n c e , 
r e z o n e d t o A-1, one o f 
t h e 
17 
1110400 
Town's s t a t u t o r i l y c r e a t e d z o n i n g c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s . ... T h u s , 
the A n n e x a t i o n 
O r d i n a n c e , i f 
v a l i d , e f f e c t e d a r e z o n i n g and 
t h e r e f o r e must comply 
w i t h 
t h e 
f i f t e e n 
(15) day n o t i c e 
r e q u i r e m e n t i n s e c t i o n 11-52-77." Gibbons's b r i e f , a t 
pp. 36¬
37. 
We d i s a g r e e . 
Gibbons's 
argument i s based upon a 
f a u l t y 
p r e m i s e . 
A r t i c l e I V , § 4, o f t h e Town's z o n i n g code p r o v i d e s t h a t , 
" [ u ] n l e s s i n i t i a l l y c l a s s i f i e d , any p r o p e r t y h e r e a f t e r annexed 
t o the town s h a l l be c l a s s i f i e d A-1 A g r i c u l t u r a l 
D i s t r i c t . " 
(Emphasis added.) 
The z o n i n g o r d i n a n c e a n n e x i n g t h e 86 a c r e s 
i n t o the Town's c o r p o r a t e l i m i t s 
s p e c i f i c a l l y p r o v i d e s " t h a t 
upon a n n e x a t i o n , the [86 a c r e s ] w i l l w i t h o u t f u r t h e r a c t i o n be 
zoned and become a p a r t o f t h e S p e c i a l D i s t r i c t -- Other Uses 
( I n d u s t r i a l ) z o n i n g d i s t r i c t and be s u b j e c t t o a l l p r o v i s i o n s 
of [the r e z o n i n g o r d i n a n c e ] . " 
The 86 a c r e s was n o t r e z o n e d 
b u t , p u r s u a n t t o t h e Town's z o n i n g code, was annexed i n t o t h e 
Town's c o r p o r a t e 
l i m i t s as a p a r t o f t h e s p e c i a l 
d i s t r i c t . 
T h e r e f o r e , Gibbons's argument t h a t t h e 86 a c r e s was 
r e z o n e d 
and 
thus 
s u b j e c t t o t h e n o t i c e r e q u i r e m e n t s 
o f § 11-52-77 
f a i l s . 
18 
1110400 
Next, Gibbons argues t h a t "the r e z o n i n g p r o c e d u r e s s e t 
f o r t h i n t h e [Town's] 2009 z o n i n g code v i o l a t e Alabama law." 
Gibbons's b r i e f , a t p. 24. 
S p e c i f i c a l l y , Gibbons argues t h a t 
A r t i c l e 11 o f t h e Town's z o n i n g code c o n t r a v e n e s t h e z o n i n g 
s t a t u t e s i n t h a t A r t i c l e 11 o f t h e Town's z o n i n g code g r a n t s 
the p l a n n i n g commission, which i s 
n o t t h e Town's 
l e g i s l a t i v e 
body, t h e a u t h o r i t y t o rezone p r o p e r t y . 
S e c t i o n 11.1 o f 
A r t i c l e 11 p r o v i d e s : 
" S e c t i o n 11.1 Requirements f o r change. 
"Whenever t h e p u b l i c n e c e s s i t y , c o n v e n i e n c e , 
g e n e r a l w e l f a r e , o r good z o n i n g p r a c t i c e w a r r a n t s 
such 
a c t i o n , t h e P l a n n i n g 
Commission 
may 
amend, 
supplement, 
m o d i f y , o r r e p e a l t h e r e g u l a t i o n s o r 
z o n i n g d i s t r i c t b o u n d a r i e s h e r e i n e s t a b l i s h e d . " 
Gibbons argues t h a t t h e 
Town's z o n i n g code v i o l a t e s t h e z o n i n g 
s t a t u t e s because, under t h e z o n i n g s t a t u t e s , a m u n i c i p a l i t y ' s 
l e g i s l a t i v e body has t h e s o l e a u t h o r i t y t o rezone p r o p e r t y and 
a p l a n n i n g commission may a c t o n l y i n an a d v i s o r y c a p a c i t y . 
As a r e s u l t , 
Gibbons a r g u e s , t h e Town has f a i l e d t o e n a c t a 
z o n i n g code a l l o w i n g i t 
t o rezone p r o p e r t y . 
The Town argues 
t h a t , r e g a r d l e s s o f § 11.1, § 5.14.5 
c o m p l i e s w i t h the z o n i n g s t a t u t e s by e n a b l i n g t h e c o u n c i l , t h e 
Town's l e g i s l a t i v e body, t o rezone p r o p e r t y . 
The Town argues 
19 
1110400 
t h a t § 5.14.5, w h i c h s t a t e s 
i n p e r t i n e n t p a r t 
t h a t 
" [ t ] h e 
l o c a t i o n 
[of a s p e c i a l d i s t r i c t ] s h a l l be recommended by 
the 
P l a n n i n g 
Commission 
and 
approved 
by 
the 
Town 
C o u n c i l , " 
p r o p e r l y a u t h o r i z e s the c o u n c i l t o rezone p r o p e r t y . 
Gibbons 
argues i n response t h a t § 5.14.5 does not v e s t the 
c o u n c i l 
w i t h 
the 
a u t h o r i t y t o rezone p r o p e r t y . 
We 
agree w i t h 
the 
Town. 
In B a l l v. Jones, 272 A l a . 305, 309-10, 132 
So. 
2d 
120, 
123 
(1961), 
t h i s C o u r t h e l d : 
"A 
c i t y or m u n i c i p a l 
c o r p o r a t i o n does not have 
the 
i n h e r e n t 
power 
t o 
e n a c t 
and 
e n f o r c e 
z o n i n g 
r e g u l a t i o n s . White v. L u q u i r e F u n e r a l Home, 221 A l a . 
440, 
129 
So. 
84 
[ ( 1 9 3 0 ) ] ; L e a r y v. Adams, 226 
A l a . 
472, 
147 
So. 
391 
[ ( 1 9 3 3 ) ] ; 
Alabama 
A l c o h o l i c 
 
Beverage C o n t r o l Board v. 
C i t y of Birmingham, 
253 
A l a . 
402, 
44 
So. 
2d 
593 
[ ( 1 9 5 0 ) ] . 
M u n i c i p a l 
c o r p o r a t i o n s were g r a n t e d the power and a u t h o r i t y t o 
e n a c t 
comprehensive 
z o n i n g 
o r d i n a n c e s 
under Code 
1940, 
T i t . 37, §§ 772-773.[
9] T h i s c o u r t i n M a r s h a l l  
v. 
C i t y of 
M o b i l e , 
250 
A l a . 
646, 
35 
So. 
2d 
553 
[ ( 1 9 4 8 ) ] , 
r e c o g n i z e d 
the 
well-known 
r u l e 
t h a t 
m u n i c i p a l a u t h o r i t i e s a c t i n a l e g i s l a t i v e 
c a p a c i t y 
i n 
the enactment of 
z o n i n g 
o r d i n a n c e s . 
A l s o , 
the 
amendment t o a comprehensive z o n i n g o r d i n a n c e or a 
r e z o n i n g of a c e r t a i n a r e a ... becomes a p a r t of the 
e x i s t i n g comprehensive o r d i n a n c e and, a f o r t i o r i , i s 
a l e g i s l a t i v e a c t . P h i l l i p s v. C i t y of Homewood, 255 
A l a . 
180, 
50 So. 2d 267 
[ ( 1 9 5 1 ) ] . " 
9Alabama Code 
1940, 
T i t . 37, 
§ 
772 
e t 
seq., 
i s 
the 
p r e d e c e s s o r t o the z o n i n g s t a t u t e s . 
20 
1110400 
F u r t h e r , 
i n 
F e r r a r o 
v. 
Board 
of 
Zoning 
A d j u s t m e n t 
of 
 
Birmingham, 970 
So. 
2d 299, 
303 
( A l a . C i v . App. 
2007), 
the 
Alabama C o u r t of C i v i l A p p e a l s 
h e l d : 
"In Alabama, 
l i k e many o t h e r s t a t e s , 
c i t i e s [ ] 
and 
o t h e r m u n i c i p a l c o r p o r a t i o n s do 
not have 
the 
i n h e r e n t 
power 
t o 
enact 
and 
e n f o r c e 
z o n i n g 
r e g u l a t i o n s . Swann v. B o a r d of Zoning A d j u s t m e n t of  
J e f f e r s o n County, 459 
So. 
2d 
896, 
898 
( A l a . C i v . 
App. 
1984). M u n i c i p a l c o r p o r a t i o n s i n Alabama 
do 
have 
the 
power 
t o 
e n a c t 
comprehensive 
z o n i n g 
o r d i n a n c e s 
under 
e n a b l i n g 
a c t s 
p a s s e d 
by 
our 
l e g i s l a t u r e , 
but 
any 
' z o n i n g o r d i n a n c e s w h i c h 
are 
e n a c t e d under t h i s d e l e g a t e d 
l e g i s l a t i v e a u t h o r i t y 
must be 
e n a c t e d 
p u r s u a n t 
t o , 
and 
i n 
s u b s t a n t i a l 
c o n f o r m i t y 
w i t h , 
the 
e n a b l i n g 
a c t . ' 
I d . 
( c i t i n g 
Lynnwood 
Prop. 
Owners 
v. 
Lands 
D e s c r i b e d 
i n 
 
C o m p l a i n t , 
359 So. 2d 357 
( A l a . 1 9 7 8 ) ) . " 
S e c t i o n 11-52-70, A l a . Code 1975, 
a l l o w s a m u n i c i p a l i t y t o 
adopt "such o r d i n a n c e s as n e c e s s a r y t o c a r r y i n t o e f f e c t 
and 
make 
e f f e c t i v e 
the 
p r o v i s i o n s of 
t h i s 
a r t i c l e , " 
t h e r e b y 
v e s t i n g the m u n i c i p a l i t y w i t h the 
l e g i s l a t i v e 
a u t h o r i t y t o 
zone l a n d w i t h i n i t s c o r p o r a t e b o u n d a r i e s . 
F u r t h e r , § 11-52¬
71, A l a . Code 1975, 
a l l o w s o n l y the " l o c a l 
l e g i s l a t i v e body" 
t o " d i v i d e the m u n i c i p a l i t y i n t o d i s t r i c t s 
" 
In o r d e r f o r 
a m u n i c i p a l i t y t o i n v o k e 
the 
a u t h o r i t y g r a n t e d 
i t by 
the 
l e g i s l a t u r e , 
the m u n i c i p a l i t y ' s l e g i s l a t i v e body must pass a 
v a l i d 
z o n i n g 
o r d i n a n c e 
e f f e c t i n g 
p r o v i s i o n s of the 
z o n i n g 
21 
1110400 
s t a t u t e s , t h e r e b y e n a b l i n g t h e 
m u n i c i p a l i t y ' s 
l e g i s l a t i v e body 
t o rezone 
p r o p e r t y . 
C o n s i s t e n t w i t h our p r e c e d e n t , t h e p a r t i e s agree t h a t a 
p l a n n i n g commission can a c t o n l y as an a d v i s o r y body. 
I n 
P e e b l e s v. M o o r e s v i l l e Town C o u n c i l , 985 So. 2d 388 ( A l a . 
2007), t h i s C o u r t h e l d t h a t , p u r s u a n t t o t h e z o n i n g s t a t u t e s , 
a p l a n n i n g commission i s 
an a d v i s o r y body and cannot be v e s t e d 
w i t h t h e 
power t o rezone 
p r o p e r t y : 
"Under § 11-52-76, A l a . Code 1975, 
t h e z o n i n g power 
d e l e g a t e d t o e v e r y 
m u n i c i p a l i t y u l t i m a t e l y 
r e s t s 
w i t h t h e l e g i s l a t i v e 
body o f t h a t m u n i c i p a l i t y , 
i . e . , t h e c i t y o r town c o u n c i l -- n o t t h e z o n i n g 
commission o r 
t h e 
m u n i c i p a l p l a n n i n g commission. See 
§ 11-52-76, A l a . Code 1975 ('The l e g i s l a t i v e body o f 
such m u n i c i p a l i t y s h a l l p r o v i d e f o r 
t h e manner i n 
w h i c h such [zoning] r e g u l a t i o n s and r e s t r i c t i o n s and 
the 
b o u n d a r i e s 
o f 
such 
d i s t r i c t s 
s h a l l 
be 
d e t e r m i n e d , 
e s t a b l i s h e d and e n f o r c e d and from time 
t o 
time amended, supplemented o r changed and may 
adopt such o r d i n a n c e s as may be n e c e s s a r y t o c a r r y 
i n t o 
e f f e c t and make e f f e c t i v e t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f 
t h i s 
a r t i c l e . ' ) . 
A 
m u n i c i p a l i t y i s r e q u i r e d t o 
o r g a n i z e n e i t h e r a z o n i n g commission nor 
a m u n i c i p a l 
p l a n n i n g commission b e f o r e e n a c t i n g a comprehensive 
z o n i n g o r d i n a n c e . Both such commissions a r e 
o p t i o n a l 
and, even i f c r e a t e d , a r e s t r i c t l y 
a d v i s o r y . See, 
e.g., Rose v. C i t y o f A n d a l u s i a , 249 A l a . 333, 
335, 
31 So. 2d 66, 66 (1947) ('It 
i s 
n o t mandatory t h a t 
a z o n i n g commission be a p p o i n t e d , 
a l t h o u g h 
such a 
commission may be d e s i g n a t e d 
. . . . ' ) ; and C i t y o f  
M o b i l e v. Karagan, 476 So. 2d 60, 62-63 ( A l a . 1985) 
('[T]he C i t y [of 
M o b i l e ] , w i t h i n t h e c o n t e x t o f 
t h e 
z o n i n g o r d i n a n c e and w i t h i n t h e l i m i t s imposed by 
the Code, has t h e u l t i m a t e a u t h o r i t y t o rezone, and 
22 
1110400 
the 
P l a n n i n g 
Commission, 
i n 
c o n s i d e r a t i o n 
of 
a 
r e z o n i n g amendment, i s an 
a d v i s o r y body o n l y . 
The 
P l a n n i n g Commission can recommend t o the C i t y what 
i t t h i n k s s h o u l d be done, but i t cannot pass 
f i n a l l y 
on an a p p l i c a t i o n t o r e z o n e . The 
C i t y i s not bound 
by a recommendation of the P l a n n i n g 
Commission.')." 
P e e b l e s , 
985 So. 2d a t 397. 
F u r t h e r , i n F l e e t w o o d Development 
Corp. v. C i t y of V e s t a v i a H i l l s , 282 A l a . 439, 
442, 
212 So. 
2d 
693, 
694 
(1968), t h i s C o u r t s t a t e d : 
"As n o t e d i n 58 A.L.R.2d 
1086: 
"'While 
i t 
i s 
c l e a r 
t h a t 
c e r t a i n 
f u n c t i o n s i n the e x e c u t i o n 
of z o n i n g 
p l a n s 
can and must be e n t r u s t e d t o a d m i n i s t r a t i v e 
boards 
or 
o f f i c e r s , 
i t i s e q u a l l y 
c l e a r 
t h a t the power t o zone, as such, 
i n v o l v e s 
l e g i s l a t i v e 
f u n c t i o n s w h i c h cannot be 
so 
d e l e g a t e d 
under c o n s t i t u t i o n a l p r i n c i p l e s 
of s e p a r a t i o n of g o v e r n m e n t a l powers.'" 
See a l s o W. 
E. S h i p l e y , A t t a c k on V a l i d i t y of Zoning S t a t u t e , 
O r d i n a n c e , or R e g u l a t i o n 
on Ground of Improper D e l e g a t i o n 
of 
A u t h o r i t y t o Board or O f f i c e r , 58 A.L.R.2d 1083, 
1089 
("It has 
f r e q u e n t l y 
been 
h e l d 
t h a t 
the 
l e g i s l a t i v e 
body 
may 
not 
d e l e g a t e 
t o a d m i n i s t r a t i v e 
o f f i c i a l s 
the power t o e s t a b l i s h 
zones or zone b o u n d a r i e s , s i n c e t h i s power i s of the essence 
of the 
l e g i s l a t i v e 
f u n c t i o n . " ) . 
C o n s i s t e n t 
w i t h the z o n i n g 
s t a t u t e s , the Town e n a c t e d § 
5.14.5 e n a b l i n g the c o u n c i l , the Town's l e g i s l a t i v e body, t o 
23 
1110400 
rezone 
p r o p e r t y 
w i t h i n t h e Town's m u n i c i p a l 
l i m i t s 
as a 
s p e c i a l 
d i s t r i c t . 
S e c t i o n 5.14.5 p r o p e r l y r e c o g n i z e s t h e 
p l a n n i n g 
commission as an a d v i s o r y body by 
l i m i t i n g i t s 
f u n c t i o n t o recommending t h e l o c a t i o n o f t h e p r o p o s e d s p e c i a l 
d i s t r i c t . 
Under § 5.14.5, t h e c o u n c i l , 
a f t e r 
r e c e i v i n g a 
recommendation from t h e p l a n n i n g commission, may then rezone 
the a t - i s s u e p r o p e r t y t o a s p e c i a l d i s t r i c t by a p p r o v i n g t h e 
p l a n n i n g commission's recommendation, w h i c h i s 
what o c c u r r e d 
i n t h i s case. 
P u r s u a n t t o § 5.14.5, t h e p l a n n i n g commission 
recommended t h a t t h e 
p r o p e r t y be rezoned as a s p e c i a l 
d i s t r i c t 
and 
t h e 
c o u n c i l 
approved 
t h e 
p l a n n i n g 
commission's 
recommendation, 
t h e r e b y 
r e z o n i n g t h e p r o p e r t y . 
The Town 
c o m p l i e d w i t h t h e z o n i n g s t a t u t e s by a d o p t i n g § 5.14.5, w h i c h 
e n a b l e s t h e c o u n c i l t o rezone p r o p e r t y as a s p e c i a l 
d i s t r i c t . 
Based on our h o l d i n g 
t h a t t h e Town's enactment o f § 
5.14.5 p r o p e r l y a u t h o r i z e d t h e c o u n c i l t o rezone p r o p e r t y as 
a s p e c i a l d i s t r i c t and t h a t t h e Town's r e z o n i n g o f t h e l a n d , 
as w e l l as t h e a d j a c e n t 86 a c r e s annexed by t h e Town, as a 
s p e c i a l 
d i s t r i c t was p r o p e r 
under § 5.14.5, we need not 
d e t e r m i n e whether t h e remainder o f t h e Town's z o n i n g 
code 
c o m p l i e s w i t h t h e z o n i n g s t a t u t e s . 
24 
1110400 
L a s t l y , 
Gibbons 
argues 
t h a t 
"the Town's 
p u r p o r t e d 
r e z o n i n g o f t h e 86 a c r e s was v o i d ab 
i n i t i o . " 
Gibbons's 
b r i e f , a t p. 34. 
Gibbons argues t h a t t h e Town 
f a i l e d t o 
comply w i t h § 11-52-85, A l a . 
Code 1975, w h i c h a u t h o r i z e s a 
m u n i c i p a l i t y t o pre-zone p r o p e r t y t h a t i s i n t h e p r o c e s s o f 
b e i n g 
annexed 
i n t o 
t h a t 
m u n i c i p a l i t y ' s c o r p o r a t e 
l i m i t s . 
S p e c i f i c a l l y , Gibbons argues t h a t t h e Town d i d 
n o t comply w i t h 
§ 11-52-85(d), which p r o v i d e s : 
"(d) 
N o t h i n g 
c o n t a i n e d i n t h i s 
s e c t i o n 
s h a l l 
a l l o w a m u n i c i p a l i t y t o zone t e r r i t o r y o u t s i d e t h e 
c o r p o r a t e l i m i t s o f t h e m u n i c i p a l i t y t h a t i s 
n o t 
i n 
the 
p r o c e s s 
o f b e i n g 
annexed 
i n t o t h e c o r p o r a t e 
l i m i t s o f a m u n i c i p a l i t y as p r o v i d e d by l a w . " 
White Rock f i l e d t h e r e z o n i n g a p p l i c a t i o n , which i n c l u d e d 
a r e q u e s t t o rezone t h e a d j a c e n t 86 a c r e s , on October 21, 
2009. 
On March 23, 2010, t h e p l a n n i n g commission u n a n i m o u s l y 
a g r e e d t o recommend t h a t t h e c o u n c i l approve t h e r e z o n i n g 
a p p l i c a t i o n . 
On 
A p r i l 
6, 
2010, White 
Rock 
f i l e d 
t h e 
a n n e x a t i o n 
p e t i t i o n t o annex the a d j a c e n t 86 a c r e s i n t o the 
Town's c o r p o r a t e 
l i m i t s . 
Gibbons argues t h a t because t h e 
p l a n n i n g 
commission 
a g r e e d t o recommend 
t h a t t h e 
c o u n c i l 
approve t h e r e z o n i n g a p p l i c a t i o n b e f o r e White Rock f i l e d t h e 
a n n e x a t i o n 
p e t i t i o n , t h e a n n e x a t i o n p r o c e s s 
r e l a t i n g t o t h e 
25 
1110400 
a d j a c e n t 86 a c r e s had n o t y e t 
begun and, t h u s , t h e 
Town f a i l e d 
t o comply w i t h § 
11-52-85(d). 
We d i s a g r e e . 
The p r o c e s s o f a n n e x i n g t h e 86 a c r e s 
i n t o 
the Town's c o r p o r a t e l i m i t s began when White Rock f i l e d t h e 
a n n e x a t i o n p e t i t i o n on A p r i l 6, 2010. 
A l t h o u g h White Rock 
f i l e d i t s r e z o n i n g a p p l i c a t i o n b e f o r e t h e a n n e x a t i o n p r o c e s s 
began, t h e Town d i d 
not pre-zone t h e 86 a c r e s u n t i l i t p a s s e d 
t h e White Rock o r d i n a n c e s on J u l y 15, 2010, which was 
a f t e r 
the a n n e x a t i o n p r o c e s s began on A p r i l 6, 2010. T h e r e f o r e , we 
h o l d t h a t t h e Town c o m p l i e d w i t h § 11-52-85 by p r e - z o n i n g t h e 
86 a c r e s a f t e r t h e a n n e x a t i o n p r o c e s s began. 
C o n c l u s i o n 
Based on t h e f o r e g o i n g , we a f f i r m t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t ' s 
judgment. 
AFFIRMED. 
Malone, C.J., 
and W o o d a l l , S t u a r t , B o l i n , Shaw, Main, and 
Wise, J J . , c o n c u r . 
Murdock, J . , 
c o n c u r s i n t h e r e s u l t . 
26