Mosby, Mo. — A proposal by landowner David Rhodus to voluntarily annex approximately 86 acres of his property into the City of Mosby has thrust the small municipality into the middle of a legal, political, and environmental firestorm. The annexation would allow Ideker Inc. to expand its underground limestone quarrying operation, an idea that has galvanized rural residents who say the current quarry is already damaging their homes, threatening property values, and disturbing the peace.
The issue exploded into public view during two highly charged public meetings held within the span of a week: the Clay County Commissioners meeting on Thursday, June 26, and a Mosby board of aldermen public hearing on Sunday, June 30. These meetings were followed by a third meeting on Thursday, July 9th, in which the Mosby board passed two zoning ordinances pertaining to mining within city limits.
Complicating matters is a competing annexation bid from the City of Excelsior Springs, along with a push from Mosby residents to have the annexation measure placed on the ballot for a public vote.
June 26: County Commissioners Hear Firsthand Accounts of Blasting, Damage
The June 26 meeting of the Clay County Commission in Liberty drew more than 40 rural residents, at least two Mosby aldermen, and landowner David Rhodus himself. Residents from neighborhoods near the quarry, especially along 140th Street and Cameron Road, gave emotional testimony that lasted over two and a half hours. Many described damage to their homes, including cracked foundations, separated window frames, and buckling walls, which they attribute to repeated underground blasting by Ideker Inc.
Eastern District Commissioner Joanne Lawson said she had visited with residents and witnessed the impact herself. “I was there when a blast happened,” she told the audience. “It’s not exaggerated. I felt it. I heard it.”
Lawson said Clay County is actively investigating the issue and reaching out to state-level agencies to determine whether existing laws and inspections are sufficient to protect nearby residents. She and her fellow commissioners suggested that Mosby city officials delay any action on the annexation until those inquiries were complete.
A tense moment occurred when Commissioner Jay Johnson confronted Rhodus about whether he felt it was fair to his neighbors to annex property for quarry expansion amid such significant opposition. Rhodus responded only, “There are consequences for every action,” and declined to elaborate.
Watch a full replay of the June 30, 2025, meeting on the Excelsior Citizen YouTube Channel.
June 30:Mosby Public Hearing Exposes Procedural Issues and Community Fractures
Four days later, Mosby City Hall was again packed with concerned residents during a city-led public hearing on the annexation. The session, which began at 6 p.m., was overseen by the city attorney, who opened the meeting by acknowledging a critical error: the original notice for a May public hearing had been published in the Richmond News, rather than the Excelsior Springs Standard, where local residents were more likely to see it.
Missouri law (RSMo 71.012) requires a public hearing to be properly noticed and held within 60 days of the submission of the annexation petition. This procedural error necessitated a second hearing, but the timing of the June 30, 2025, meeting may have exceeded the 60-day limit.
Attorney Jim Bowers, representing Rhodus and Ideker Inc., used his time to emphasize that all regulatory inspections had cleared Ideker of wrongdoing and that the expansion was necessary to continue supplying rock to regional construction projects. He stated that blasting levels remained well below the state’s seismic thresholds and introduced a Fibertech seismograph report as evidence.
However, Bower’s remarks, which lasted more than 13 minutes, far exceeded the five-minute limit that had been stated as the maximum, sparking frustration in the crowd. Resident Dave Thomas formally requested that all speakers be given equal time, a motion the city ultimately denied.
Over the next two hours, dozens of residents stepped forward to voice their concerns. Some read prepared statements. Others brought photo evidence of structural damage. One resident broke down in tears, describing how her grandchildren were now afraid to stay at her home due to the blasts.
“We’re not against Mosby,” said Chris McClaskey, who lives adjacent to the proposed expansion area. “We’re against the destruction of our homes, our peace, and our futures.”
Sunshine Request Discrepancy Raises Timeline Concerns
The timeline of the annexation petition itself is also questionable.
On the morning of June 30, The Excelsior Citizen spoke with Mosby City Clerk Linda Danner regarding a second Sunshine request submitted earlier that month. When asked about the signed and notarized petition from Rhodus, required to initiate the annexation process, Danner said she did not have it in her possession.
Later that day, at approximately 2:50 p.m., Citizen staff arrived to retrieve the requested documents and discovered that the signed and notarized petition had been added to the packet. The document, dated March 25, 2025, lacked an official city date stamp or a record of when it was received.
Danner acknowledged that after her conversation with Citizen staff that morning, she spoke with Mayor Clements. He returned to City Hall later that day with the petition. Danner confirmed it had not been in her possession until that afternoon.
This raises significant questions about whether the petition was submitted correctly in the required timeframe and whether Mosby’s annexation process can be considered legally valid.
Excelsior Springs Annexation Adds Further Complication
While Mosby weighs Rhodus’s voluntary annexation petition, a separate and overlapping annexation effort by the City of Excelsior Springs has already been approved to appear on the November 2025 ballot. That proposal, filed independently, covers the same property along with several neighboring parcels.
Whichever city establishes legal precedent through proper filing and adherence to state law will likely gain jurisdiction. Given the uncertainty around Mosby’s document handling, Excelsior Springs’ bid may now be in stronger legal standing.
Watch a full replay of the July 9th Mosby meeting on the Excelsior Citizen YouTube Channel.
New Mining Ordinances May Be Moot After Legal Oversight
In what appeared to be a hastily organized special session held on Thursday, July 9, the Mosby Board of Aldermen adopted two major ordinances affecting how mining operations are regulated in the city. But some citizens are now questioning whether either ordinance is valid, because the board appears to have failed to meet basic statutory requirements for changing zoning regulations.
No Public Hearing, No Legal Standing?
Missouri Revised Statute §89.050 clearly states:
“No such regulation, restriction, or boundary shall become effective until after a public hearing… At least fifteen days’ notice of the time and place of such hearing shall be published in an official paper or a paper of general circulation in such municipality.”
The July 9 meeting:
- Did not include a public hearing
- Had no advance publication in any official or general circulation newspaper
These omissions directly contradict state law regarding zoning changes. As a result, both the ordinance permitting underground mining in M3 zones and the amendment requiring Conditional Use Permits (CUPs) for mining may be legally unenforceable.
Ordinances Passed
Despite the apparent legal deficiencies, the board of aldermen voted to pass:
- Resolution No. 01-07-09-2025
– Declares underground mining a permitted use in M3 (Heavy Industrial) zoning districts. - Amendment to Ordinance No. 400
– Overhauls the city’s mining regulations by making all mining a conditional land use, requiring a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and imposing substantial new application and compliance requirements.
The CUP application must now include:- A site plan
- Seismic monitoring and dust control plans
- Haul route and traffic impact plans
- Visual buffering proposals
- An emergency response plan
- Proof of insurance and environmental studies
- The ordinance also establishes operating standards, including:
- Rules for truck routing and weight limits
- Pre-blast notification and post-blast seismic monitoring
- Pre-blast structural inspections for nearby homes
- Development of a Community Impact Fund (to be funded by $0.13 per ton extracted or a percentage of gross receipts, TBD)
- Reclamation requirements, post-mining land use rules, and enforcement funding
Can It Be Applied to Existing Mining?
Near the end of the meeting, attendees raised serious questions about whether the new ordinance could be enforced retroactively, particularly against Ideker Inc., which, the board admitted, began underground mining in the area approximately one year ago without a Conditional Use Permit or prior approval from the city.
Concerns also surfaced about who would monitor compliance with the new ordinance. Mosby officials said enforcement would be handled by contracting with the Clay County Sheriff’s Department and potentially hiring a dedicated staff member in the future. Funding for enforcement and third-party reviews was included in the ordinance language.
Discussion also touched on the need for better recordkeeping, expanding similar rules to other industrial operators (such as a local asphalt plant), and formalizing procedures for handling resident complaints and damage reports.
Annexation Vote in Flux: No Public Notice as of Sunday, July 13
For weeks, Mosby leaders have told residents that the annexation vote on David Rhodus’ 86-acre petition would be held on Monday, July 14, at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall.
However, by Sunday evening, July 13, no formal meeting notice had been posted at City Hall, as required by the Missouri Sunshine Law. Under the law, public entities must post meeting notices at least 24 hours in advance, including time, date, place, and tentative agenda.
The lack of notice has caused confusion and concern among residents. Some say they’ve been told the vote is being postponed, but no official statement has been issued by the city. As of press time, the meeting remained unconfirmed.
Residents Push for a Public Vote
Despite the uncertainty surrounding the board’s next steps, residents continue to push forward with a legal challenge to the annexation.
Mosby resident Deena Mullin has gathered over 20 signed letters of objection to the proposed annexation. She submitted 10 letters on July 9 and plans to deliver more on the morning of July 14.
Under RSMo 71.012(3), if 5% of registered voters file written objections within 14 days of the public hearing (which occurred on June 30), the annexation process must shift to the more rigorous procedures laid out in RSMo 71.015 and related statutes, meaning the matter must go before voters.
With only 70 registered voters in Mosby, just four valid letters are needed to meet that threshold. If accurate, Mullin’s submissions surpass that figure fivefold.
What Comes Next?
With new mining ordinances on the books, an active citizen petition underway, and no posted notice for the annexation vote, Mosby is entering a period of legal and procedural uncertainty.
Should the city attempt to vote on July 14 without proper notice, it may face an open meetings law challenge. If they delay the vote, they must contend with the fact that residents have already triggered the legal threshold for requiring a public vote under Missouri statute.
Meanwhile, rural residents continue to collect evidence of damage and contact regulators and elected officials.
“Mosby doesn’t even have ordinances for underground mining,” one speaker said during the June 30 meeting. “How can they oversee an operation they didn’t even know was underground until May?”
For many, the annexation vote has become a tipping point.
“This is more than a quarry,” said Dylan Obesen, whose home sits across from the existing mine. “It’s about who’s heard and who gets ignored. And we’re not going anywhere.”
Editor’s Note:
The Excelsior Citizen has submitted two Sunshine requests to the City of Mosby for documents related to the annexation. The first, in May, returned an unsigned petition. The second, fulfilled on June 30, included a signed and notarized copy that city officials later admitted had not been received until that afternoon.
Timeline: Mosby Quarry Annexation Dispute
March 25, 2025
– Date listed on David Rhodus’ signed and notarized petition to annex 86 acres into Mosby.
– Document is not stamped or acknowledged by the city until June 30.
May 1, 2025
– Attorney for Rhodus presents annexation request to the Mosby Board of Aldermen.
May 9, 2025
– City requests public hearing notice be published in the Excelsior Springs Standard, but it is mistakenly printed in the Richmond News.
May 22, 2025
– First public hearing on annexation is held.
– Later deemed invalid due to improper legal notice.
June 5, 2025
– City of Excelsior Springs passes ordinance to pursue involuntary annexation of overlapping land, which would create a ballot measure scheduled for November 2025.
June 6, 2025
– Regular Mosby board meeting held.
– No vote taken.
June 26, 2025
– Clay County Commissioners hold a 2.5+ hour meeting in Liberty.
– Dozens of rural residents speak out against annexation and quarry expansion.
– Commissioner Joanne Lawson testifies to witnessing blasting damage.
– Commissioner Jay Johnson challenges Rhodus over fairness to neighbors.
June 30, 2025 (Morning)
– Mosby City Clerk tells Excelsior Citizen she does not have a signed annexation petition on file.
June 30, 2025 (3:00 PM)
– The signed and notarized petition appears for the first time—without a city date stamp.
– Clerk states the mayor delivered the petition that afternoon following the Citizen’s inquiry.
June 30, 2025 (6:00 PM)
– Second public hearing is held by Mosby.
– Dozens of residents testify against the annexation.
– Tensions escalate over lack of zoning protections, damage claims, and legal timelines.
July 9, 2025 (4:00 PM)
– Mosby holds a special session posted on short notice.
– Board passes:
- Resolution No. 01-07-09-2025, making underground mining a permitted use in M3 zones
- Amendment to Ordinance 400, requiring Conditional Use Permits (CUP) for mining operations
– No public hearing is held and no 15-day legal notice is published, likely violating RSMo §89.050, rendering the ordinances legally questionable.
July 9, 2025 (Morning)
– Resident Deena Mullin submits 10 letters of opposition to the annexation from registered Mosby voters.
July 13, 2025 (Sunday Evening)
– As of the evening, no public notice has been posted at City Hall for the July 14 annexation vote.
– Some residents report hearing the vote may be postponed, but no official announcement is made.
July 14, 2025
– Final day for residents to submit written objections to trigger a public vote under RSMo 71.012(3).
– Mullin confirms she has gathered 20+ objection letters, well over the 5% threshold.
– The Mosby board was previously expected to vote on annexation at 6:00 p.m., though meeting status remains uncertain.
November 4, 2025
– Excelsior Springs residents will vote on involuntary annexation that includes the Rhodus property.
– If approved, it could supersede Mosby’s annexation attempt.
Did Mosby Miss the Legal Deadline?
Under Missouri law (RSMo 71.012), when a landowner files a voluntary annexation petition, the city must hold a public hearing:
“Not less than 14 nor more than 60 days after the petition is presented to the governing body.”
What the Law Requires:
- The petition must be signed and notarized
- Hearing must occur within 60 days of the municpality receiving the petition.
- Public notice must be published at least 7 days before the hearing.
What Happened:
- Petition is dated: March 25, 2025
- Hearing was held: June 30, 2025
- Elapsed time: 98 days
This exceeds the 60-day limit by 38 days.
Document Gaps:
- The petition was not stamped or recorded as received by the City of Mosby
- On the morning of June 30, the city clerk stated she had not received the signed petition
- That afternoon, after a call from the Excelsior Citizen, Mayor Harlan Clements brought in the document
Why It Matters:
- If the petition was presented on or near March 25, the hearing was held too late
- If it wasn’t presented until June 30, prior meetings and public notices were premature and possibly invalid
- No clear filing date undermines the legality of the process
- This flaw could make Mosby’s annexation vulnerable to legal challenge or reversal
Correction: The City of Excelsior Springs passed their ordinance to pursue an involuntary annexation of overlapping land on June 5, 2025 and not June 13, 2025, as previously reported. (7/14/25 at 1:20pm)
If you appreciate the value our local journalism brings to the community, please consider making a recurring contribution to the Excelsior Citizen!
This is some excellent, first-rate journalism. The story is highly detailed, well-explained, including a comprehensive summary list of important points. I highly commend your skills in reporting this story, and hope that it continues.
100% agree! Well done!!