Opinion ID: 2495667
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Spillover development into the proposed annexation area

Text: ¶ 11. The chancellor found that the spillover developments that Horn Lake attributed to its need to expand were actually subdivisions and other developments that were part of an area that Horn Lake previously had annexed in 2002. Specifically, the chancellor found that the subdivision developments, particularly along and either side of State Highway 302[,] also known as Goodman Road, within the first square mile of the city's western municipal boundary and other developments are the result of spillover growth from Horn Lake... that were in place and largely developed prior to Horn Lake's 2002 annexation[,] which extended its municipal boundaries along that state highway for a period of one and a half to two miles. Further, the chancellor opined that a municipality can hardly be credited with spillover growth when it races to [sic] within a particular development which already exists and then claims that it exceeded and `spilled over' from its municipal boundaries. ¶ 12. The proposed annexation area sought by the City of Horn Lake almost entirely encompassed the proposed annexation area sought by the Town of Walls. At trial, Chris Watson, the Town of Walls's expert, explained the concept of spillover growth. Specifically, he said that [s]pillover development can have different meanings. One meaning ... is literally a cup runneth over type spillover, and that would be ... where development occurred within the municipality, and that development began literally falling over ... the city limits. Watson stated that neither Horn Lake nor Walls fit that form of spillover development. ¶ 13. Another approach to spillover development requires consideration of the location of the development. Specifically, Watson evaluated the development of the Delta Bluff subdivision and an apartment complex near that subdivision, which were developed separately and apart from any other municipality in DeSoto County and were not spillover development from either the Town of Walls or the City of Horn Lake. Watson opined that those developments occurred at a point in time when several events were taking place: (1) flight out of Memphis, (2) development of a significant employment base from the gaming industry that had developed in Tunica County in the early 1990s, and (3) the transportation corridors provided by Highway 61, Interstate 55, and Interstate 69. Watson further reasoned that those events had led to an influx of people working at the Tunica County casinos, but living in DeSoto County, Tate County, and the surrounding area. ¶ 14. Watson also theorized that the Twin Lakes subdivisions that Horn Lake sought to annex were developed as a result of existing sewage infrastructure that was developed by North Mississippi Utility Company, which the City of Horn Lake later acquired. However, Arthur Michael Slaughter, the City of Horn Lake's expert, deduced that the Twin Lake subdivisions and newer developments have expanded because of spillover growth from the City of Horn Lake. ¶ 15. The chancellor was presented conflicting, credible evidence from experts for both municipalities, and the chancellor's finding that the subfactor of spillover development did not favor annexation by Horn Lake was supported by substantial, credible evidence, was well within his discretion, and was not manifestly wrong.