Printable Format24-403. Petition for organization of drainage district; definitions. (A) That the petition for the incorporation and organization of a drainage district shall be addressed to the board of county commissioners of the county in which the lands which it is proposed shall constitute the district are situated. The petition shall describe the territory proposed to be so incorporated by sections or subdivisions of sections, according to the government survey, or by metes and bounds, and state that the lands and property therein embraced are subject to injury and damage from the overflow of some natural watercourse, naming or describing it; that the improvement of the channel of such watercourse, the construction and maintenance of levees, drains or other works, including detention dams and reservoirs, are necessary to prevent such overflow; and that such improvement or works will be conducive to the public health, convenience, or welfare. And such petition shall contain a prayer that all of the territory within the boundaries defined in the petition be incorporated as a drainage district, under the corporate name to be therein designated. If any lands to be included in said district lie within the limits of any city or town, it shall be sufficient to describe same by their appropriate number as lots or blocks or parts of lots or blocks.
(B) Whenever the term: (a) "other improvements"; (b) "other works or improvements"; (c) "any work to be done"; (d) "other works to prevent overflow"; (e) "existing improvements"; (f) "other works"; or any terms or words of like import are used in the act of which this section is amendatory, and when used in any act supplemental to or amendatory of said act, commonly known as the drainage act of 1905, such terms shall be construed to include and mean, but not limited to, detention dams and reservoirs constructed in areas adjacent to watercourses.
History: L. 1905, ch. 215, § 3; L. 1909, ch. 132, § 1; R.S. 1923, 24-403; L. 1951, ch. 262, § 1; June 30.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. County commissioners, before organizing district, must make finding on petition. Roby v. Drainage District, 77 Kan. 754, 755, 95 P. 399.
2. Misdescription of lands in petition; district deemed de facto corporation. Railroad Co. v. Leavenworth County, 89 Kan. 72, 73, 77, 130 P. 855.
3. Statutory organization procedure must be substantially followed. State, ex rel., v. Drainage District, 116 Kan. 291, 292, 226 P. 478.
4. Pleadings claiming irregular organization reviewed, found defective. Wolf River Drainage Dist. v. Nigus, 133 Kan. 742, 745, 3 P.2d 648.
5. Taxpayers may not question integrity of corporate organization if functioning. Kimmel v. Wolf River Drainage Dist., 138 Kan. 209, 210, 25 P.2d 585.
6. Cited in holding organization petition under K.S.A. 24-458 insufficient. State, ex rel., v. Niotaze Drainage Dist., 140 Kan. 1, 3, 34 P.2d 124.
7. Organization petition not describing territory as statute requires makes incorporation a nullity. Jensen v. Buffalo Drainage Dist., 148 Kan. 712, 716, 84 P.2d 961.
8. County attorney may maintain action to recover moneys illegally expended by drainage district. State, ex rel., v. Baker, 156 Kan. 439, 443, 134 P.2d 386.
9. Act discussed; judgment against district for damages reversed for trial errors; findings by county commissioners under K.S.A. 24-406 conclusive. Wolf v. Second Drainage District, 179 Kan. 655, 659, 668, 298 P.2d 305; clarified on rehearing, 180 Kan. 312, 304 P.2d 473.