Washington Evening Journal

Fairfield Ledger   Mt. Pleasant News
Neighbors Growing Together | Oct 23, 2017

Lawsuit motion denied

Judge cites wrong kind of motion submitted
By David Hotle | Feb 18, 2013

Judge Joel Yates wrote in the court documents for a hearing on a Motion to Dismiss a lawsuit filed by Residents for a Better Richmond (RBR) against the Washington County Board of Supervisors that the issue the county attorney argued would have been more appropriate for a Motion for Summary Judgment than a Motion to Dismiss.
The motion was denied during a hearing Friday in Iowa District Court for Washington County.
According to the motion to dismiss, filed Jan. 11, Washington County Attorney Larry Brock argued that there was no valid reason stated in the lawsuit for any relief to be granted.
Yates cited several precedents in the document. He wrote that the Plaintiff (RBR) had standing and the argument was not an appropriate basis to grant a motion to dismiss.
At the heart of the lawsuit is an amendment to a 28E agreement between Washington County and the Regional Utility Service Systems (RUSS) to cover the cost of additional expenses of a proposed Richmond sewer system.
In the suit, filed Nov. 6, 2012, in Iowa District Court for Washington County, RBR is seeking to declare the changed agreement, which the supervisors approved 4-1, void. The suit said that on Oct. 23 the county entered into a loan agreement that obligates Washington County to fund the payment of bonds from the general fund. The bond will fund a loan agreement to finance the sewer system. The suit alleges that according to Iowa code, the county cannot enter into a loan agreement or issue bonds that incur indebtedness to the general fund.
RBR opposes building a lagoon system in Richmond. Members have argued that the lagoon system is not necessary to bring the unincorporated town of Richmond into compliance and that individual septic systems can be used instead.
The suit also cites that part of the project is being constructed in a floodplain, which it claims violates federal law.
“Based on the foregoing, the actions of the Defendant (the Washington County Board of Supervisors) in adopting the aforesaid resolution exceeded its authority,” the suit says.
The resolution authorized the issuance of the General Obligation Sewer Improvement Loan Agreement Anticipation Project Note in principal not to exceed $273,000. In a legal opinion from Washington County Attorney Larry Brock, the amendment to the agreement was found “acceptable” and it was Brock’s recommendation the board sign it. The opinion said that the changes did not significantly alter the underlying purpose and terms of the original agreement.
During the meeting in which the amendment was approved, Supervisor Ron Bennett, who cast the sole “no” vote, said he was concerned Brock’s estimate of $30,000 for legal fees for eminent domain was too low.
The additional costs include expenses that were not included in the original 28E agreement from the county, including acquiring a lagoon site and condemnation proceedings.
The Washington County Board of Supervisors approved the plan for the Richmond lagoon system after Iowa Department of Natural Resources (DNR) cited the county for water quality violations. A recent test showed that the water quality in Richmond remains at a level for the county to be in violation. The DNR has also indicated that if the county fails to come into compliance, the DNR can fine the county as much as $10,000 a day.

Comments (1)
Posted by: Peggy A Duwa | Feb 19, 2013 13:45

I live in Richmond and take exception to your statement that the water quality in Richmond is at an unacceptable level! My water and many other residents is just fine. Only in isolated areas on the pheriphry of the community is this true. Thank you


If you wish to comment, please login.