West Melbourne files complaint in circuit court

By Gretchen Sauerman

Staff writer

sauerman@hometownnewsol.com

The latest in the ongoing water dispute between Melbourne and West Melbourne has the two municipalities headed to court.

On July 10, Melbourne city manager Jack Schluckebier sent West Melbourne a Notice of Breach of Contract of the water contract between the two cities.

Eight days later, West Melbourne filed a complaint in Circuit Court.

"Melbourne cannot stand by while West Melbourne breaches our water contract," said Mr. Schluckebier, in the notification letter. "If these breaches are not cured, Melbourne will have no choice but to seek appropriate recourse."

The problem, Mr. Schluckebier said, was twofold.

First, West Melbourne's plans to annex land west of Interstate 95 clashed with the terms of the 1978 contract, he said.

"You are hereby requested to cease and desist attempting to extend water service to an area you have already acknowledged to be within our service area by contract," said Mr. Schluckebier.

West Melbourne's plans to change the way the city grants permission to developers, essentially removing Melbourne from authority in granting or denying water certificates, "would prove injurious to our water system," he said.

The new policy could have "substantial impacts" on public infrastructure as well, he said.

West Melbourne city attorney Jim Wilson called the notice of breach "inappropriate and inaccurate."

Regarding the anticipated annexation of Watershed, a planned 280-acre urban village west of I-95, Mr. Wilson said the terms of the annexation agreement spelled out that the developer could negotiate for water service with Melbourne, Palm Bay or any other source.

"They've known about this for more than a year," said West Melbourne city manager David Reynal.

Furthermore, Mr. Reynal said, West Melbourne has not officially changed anything about the way the city negotiates water capacity with developers.

All that has been done so far is a transmittal to the state's Department of Community Affairs, requesting the state's agreement with the proposed idea.

"There is no breach," said Mr. Reynal.

A week after receiving Melbourne's notice of breach, West Melbourne was in court filing a complaint of its own.

In the 26-page document, West Melbourne asks the Circuit Court to decide some of the most contentious issues between the two cities.

One issue is an unpaid invoice for more than $400,000 that Melbourne believes is owed by West Melbourne.

The invoice is not for actual water consumed by West Melbourne customers, but for water reservation fees traditionally paid by developers.

Those developments, some of which have experienced lengthy delays, are not all at a point where they need to reserve water capacity, said Mr. Reynal.

"West Melbourne did not request, nor did it expect, Melbourne to reserve capacity for any of the (developments) until such project submitted its application and paid all applicable fees and charges," according to the complaint filed by West Melbourne.

Mr. Reynal was directed to file the complaint after a unanimous vote by West Melbourne's City Council last May.

"The main thing in a lawsuit is to figure out exactly the answers," said Mr. Reynal. "Do we owe this or not? What are our rights?"

Mr. Reynal also balked at the idea that Melbourne might be planning a rate hike for water service to his city, an idea that received support during July 9 special meeting of Melbourne's City Council.

"We will have to resist any rate change that targets West Melbourne unfairly," Mr. Reynal said.

Melbourne city attorney Paul Gougelman was unable to comment about the lawsuit because his city had not officially been served as of press time.

He said he still remained hopeful that an agreement can be reached.

"I hope we can come up with something that is viable and workable for both communities," he said.