09-29-1994 LAW OFFICES
JOHN R. COOK
202 NW 5TH AVENUE
OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA 34972
TELEPHONE (813) 467-0297
FAX (813) 467 4798
September 29, 1994
Landers Parsons
310 West College Ave.
Tallahassee, Florida ?2702
att: Richard A. Lotspeich
re: O.B.W.A. vs. City of Okeechobee
Dear Rick:
Enclosed is the draft of a water service extension agreement
prepared by Michael Minton, who as you may have heard, is legal
counsel retained by the parties to effect the drafting of the final
utility authority agreement for all parties.
Our concerns are based on the following:
1. The OBWA contract c.L'ires October 1, 1994. At present, the City
council agreed at the September 20 meeting to continue water
service at the rates set out in our rate resolution, with the
specific understanding that !the existing agreement will in fact
expire on 1 October.
2. Any extension of the agreement must take into account the
authority may not happen, and we would have to return to court
to continue the litig- :.Lion. Thus, we do not want anything in the
formal extension agreement to permit either side to extend lines
into disputed areas, and then:use that expanded service as
leverage in the lawsuit to claim the "new" service area. (Of
course we would not mind if the City were able to gain that
advantage).
3. I am of the opinion that after October 1, any prohibition in
extending service lines in existing OBWA agreement is out
the window, and either of u4 could extend lines at will. This
will not be the case of course, if we enter into the formal
extension prepared by Minton.
4. The new service mentioned in the agreement, the "Tripp Park" is
a 150 unit mobile hem° park to be constructed at the
'intersection of Hwy 7r and Ferrell road. It is true the OBWA has
a six inch lino _uj.::.G._.nt to that property. The problem is that
September 29, 1994
Richard A. Lotspeich
1
they must have wastewater, :and Drago does not want to provide
that without providing water to meter the flow, upon which to
base wastewater service charges. We are still discussing a
resolution of this, although you can see the proposal Minton
sets out in his agreement.
5. Lastly, while Drage had intended to charge OBWA debt service
charges on t.hoir bill for water bond indebtedness only, they
agreed at the September 20 meeting to the charges in the rate
resolution, which charges dbt service for both water and waste-
water bond indebtedness. I am of the opinion that we should only
charge OBWA debt service for the water portion of the debt, and
not wastewater, since they '.receive zero benefit from the
wastewater service. In fact!, Burton Conner has indicated that
the Association may legally challenge such a charge, which I
want to avoid. This may, be outside the scope of your work for us
but if you have an opinion I would appreciate it.
My intent here is for you to review this for any suggestions
or possible pitfalls as this extension agreement relates to the
lawsuit. We are presenting this at our October 4 meeting, so please
FAX a response before Tuesday evening if you could.
Kindest Regards,
John R. Cook
JRC /rb
1