Subj: Birmingham Drainage District  
Date: 8/11/2005 1:31:27 PM Central Daylight Time
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Sent from the Internet (Details)

Mr. Bynum,

This is in response to your email to the CEIG, dated June 24, 2005,
pertaining to the Birmingham Drainage District. It is the Corps' position
that the Birmingham Drainage District is an authorized entity.  We provide
support to the levee system as authorized and required by law.  If you have
an issue with the District you should pursue your complaint with the Clay
County authorities.


Robert N. Jones
Inspector General
US Army Corps of Engineers

The area was incorporated by Kansas City in January 1962 and could not be reorganized when
the term of life expired in Dec. 1963. Corps of Engineers is the one who original informed the
district of the fact and got a response.
Scanned copy of this letter
Subj: Re: Birmingham Drainage District  
Date: 8/12/2005 11:23:17 AM Central Daylight Time
From: BynJam
To: [email protected]

Mr. Jones;
I want to thank you for your response. I am a little puzzled though. The last sponsorship of the
Birmingham Unit was signed in 1946 and the district expired December 22, 1963 after Kansas
City incorporated the area. Now you don't show the BDD as a sponsor.

Sponsorship of the Kansas Citys Levees Feasibility Study is dispersed among four local
sponsoring organizations as indicated.

Birmingham                                      City of Kansas City, Missouri for the                              
Birmingham Drainage District

Actually, I have taken this up with the Clay County authorities. Like you they don't want to open
this can of worms even though they know  there is a Missouri constitutional  prohibition that
prevents forming a drainage district within the City limits of Kansas City on a petition by

Several years ago I talked to John Holman in the Kansas City Office. These nice christian boys
operating the dead district and Kansas City was trying to tell me they had the authority to
prevent me from crossing the levee to get to our property. Holman thought that was kind of
funny and thought it would be to their advantage to buy us out regardless of the price we asked
for the land.  Now it is kind of hard to sue an entity that doesn't exist and we have offered the
land to both the City and Corps of Engineers at fair market price.

Our people are still farming the property. So its not a big deal. These guys had already lost one
lawsuit over trying to close the levee crossings.

In the mean time we had a look at what Holman was laughing about and why he thought they
would be better off paying whatever we asked. We were more interested in the story than filing
an inverse condemnation suit.

That is a very interesting story. It can be found at

The fact is the City does have the Constitutional right and responsibility to sponsor the
Birmingham Unit and a 1923 Missouri Supreme Court Opinion to back it up. It does tend to
make the Corps of Engineers look like they don't know what they are doing.

I really don't have a major problem with these people, but there is a couple of hundred
taxpayers that will once they understand the situation. The Church has decided to use the dead
district as a money machine. Clay County has gone from collecting $39,000. in 1999 to
$365.000. in 2004.

I am not implying that the Corps of Engineers has done anything wrong, other than the fact, the
Corps is the one who told the original Birmingham District about the 1923 ruling.  I just wanted
to make sure I had my facts straight.

Jim Bynum