Loading...
1993/08/05Lawsuit to settle dispute over water service area By TWILA VALENTINE Just who has the legal right to service certain county residents with potable water will be decided in court. Unable to reach an agreement with the City of Okeechobee con- cerning the disputed service area, Okeechobee Beach Water Association Inc. filed a lawsuit Tuesday in circuit court asking for the court to settle the issue. Representatives of the private company appeared before the Okee- chobee City Council on June 1, 15 and July 6, 1993, asking that the L62 Jones n n Hammon cut_ st. 26 TO TN/ 53ON 30.. city agree, in writing, that beach water can service its current cus- tomers. Over the three meetings, the discussions moved from near agree- ment to total disagreement on the Issue. The private company has been supplying water to more than 2,000 users in an area which both the city and beach water claim as their ser- vice area. According to the lawsuit. the appli- cation for a consumptive water use permit by OBWA is being delayed by the South Florida Water Management District because of the "overlap area City's "201" Service Area Okeechobee Beach Water Association contract area Beach Water's current service area SOURCE: City of Okeechobee documents claimed by the city as a part of their consumptive use permit. The beach water association is a cooperative organization and has operated a water works system in the southern part of the county since 1965 for the benefits of its member- ship. The water was obtained from the city of Okeechobee through a series of bulk water wholesale agree- ments. The current agreement expires on Sept. 30, 1994. Please see WATER /5 �yores Cr 28 21 6J- 2S 1 Beach water association and city council failed to reach agreement WATER /From 1 When negotiations for a new agreement failed, beach water informed the city they did not intend to renew Its contract, and Instead Intended to build a 1.5 million gallon per day treatment facility to supply water to its members. The company had hoped to get the plant on -line by Oct. 1, 1994, but the company has not start- ed construction because they can't get the permit from the district. In recent meetings. the members of city council have stated they do not object to the association building the sys- tem. They don't want them to turn in on to supply water In the controversial area. Beach water said the description of the land Is the same one which has been described in the contracts between the city and the pri- vate company since 1970. According to the suit. in 1976. the city obtained a con- sumptive water use permit from the water management district to serve an area of Okeechobee County, which shows all of beach water's area, Including the Buckhead Ridge subdivision located in Glades County. These areas had been served by beach water since 1965. The suit states this was done without the knowledge of beach water and was contrary to the service area agreement existing at that time. In June 1983. the city adopted an ordinance describ- ing the service area to which they were purporting to claim, and again included zones where beach water had been serving customers since 1965. On April 29, 1993, Okee- chobee County granted to beach water a non exclusive franchise agreetent for them to operate and maintain a water system in a legally described area, the same description that has been included in the agreements between the city and beach since 1970. The area described in the 1970 contract between the city and beach water refers to boundaries marked on an attached map. That boundary line is the same line used to delineate the area In the recent franchise agreement between beach water and the county. The suits asks the courts to declare the rights of beach water under its existing con- tract with the city, and also under the franchise agreement with the county. which per- mits beach water to serve Its existing customers and future members within the same ser- vice area. During recent meetings between Burton Conner, the attorney for beach water and the Okeechobee City Council, the city officials have stated they have not relinquished any of the service area they claimed with their 1983 ordi- nance, which contains the "overlap" area. In the second motion filed, beach water is requesting that the city admit the truth of a series of factual statements. These statements call for the city to admit the passage of the 1983 ordinance, admit the customer list attached as an exhibit to the complaint for declaratory judgment is a true and accurate list. that the exhibit attached to the com- plaint accurately identifies parcels of land owned by beach water's members /cus- tomers. and the location and ownership of the system of pipes and facilities by which beach water supplies potable water to Its members. The motion also asks for the city to admit that the con- tracts attached to the com- plaint are true copies of the various contracts between the two entities through the years. and that the city has no water lines running to the parcels of land depicted as being served by beach water.