McPherson Landfill, Inc. v. Board of County Commissioners of Shawnee County, 274 Kan. 303

Summary

The Kansas Supreme Court reviews Shawnee County's denial of McPherson Landfill, Inc.'s application for a conditional use permit to establish and operate a construction and demolition landfill. The appeal concerns whether the county's proceedings were procedurally fair and whether the permit denial was arbitrary or unreasonable under Kansas zoning-law standards. The opinion discusses due process in quasi-judicial zoning proceedings, the Golden factors, and the applicable scope of judicial review.

Holdings

1. Prehearing statements by Commissioners Meier and Ensley did not establish unconstitutional prejudgment because the record did not show that either commissioner had an irrevocably closed mind or failed to consider the evidence presented at the public hearing.
2. The ex parte communications did not render the Board's decision unlawful because the record did not show that undisclosed matters were considered without giving McPherson Landfill an opportunity to respond or rebut them.
3. The Board's denial of the conditional use permit was reasonable and not arbitrary because substantial competent evidence supported its consideration of traffic and school safety, environmental concerns, residential growth, professional staff recommendations, alternative property uses, and the applicable land-use plan.
4. The Board's denial of the conditional use permit did not constitute a taking because the property retained alternative economically beneficial uses and the denial merely refused to expand the existing right to use the property.
5. McPherson Landfill was not entitled to relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because it failed to establish that the Board deprived it of a federal right.

Questions Presented

1. Whether statements and prehearing conduct by two county commissioners demonstrated prejudgment and denied McPherson Landfill due process.
2. Whether ex parte communications concerning the conditional use permit denied McPherson Landfill a fair and impartial hearing.
3. Whether the Board's denial of the conditional use permit was arbitrary and unreasonable under Kansas zoning-review standards.
4. Whether the Board's denial of the permit constituted a taking under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.
5. Whether McPherson Landfill was entitled to relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Disposition

affirmed