5/21/2019 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes of 5-21-2019 outcome. Water cannot be withheld from North Olmsted. As a utility, water must be provided to North Olmsted, but without knowing the outcome her concern is there could be transportation or delivery charges as the water might have to be rerouted. Or there may be no issues at all, it is just unknown at this point. Councilwoman Hemann said the City of North Royalton recently had a surcharge added and the residents don't know why. She said she can't explain that either, but her point is she doesn't know what she would tell a resident if there were surcharges or other things connected with the water being rerouted. Residents would not be happy with Council in that case. She said her recommendation about this issue is what is the rush. She said the agreements do have value, she has never disputed that, her question is just what is the rush and shouldn't we know the answer to these questions first. Director Gareau said he did have an opportunity to have a conversation with the Director of Law for the City of Cleveland and trial counsel for the matter between Cleveland and Westlake. As one would imagine lawyers don't show too much of their cards when they are in litigation. He said this has been going on for a better part of a decade. Director Gareau said he wishes he could say he got assurances one way or the other about the future. The City of North Olmsted has water lines running through it to provide water to member communities further south. He said it was not possible for Cleveland's lawyers to commit to any facet of what the future would hold until this litigation is finished. They could not necessarily say if they would charge residents or not charge residents. It was a cordial, but noncommittal conversation. They did not have the ability to offer up much regarding the questions Council had and the Commissioner said as much when he was here. It was very consistent to what the Commissioner provided to Council. However, Cleveland is quite confident in their position with some of the state law in respect to the underground utilities and who owns those and what the future would hold. With that they are fairly confident North Olmsted would be ok. There was certainly not a commitment one way or the other how this would go and no tipping of the hat so to speak. Mr. Brake 24881 Kennedy Ridge Road Mr. Brake said regarding the last point regarding the litigation he asked Councilwoman Hemann to make the connection between the surcharges and sort of the unknowns with the litigation and the particular matter of the legislation that is being discussed this evening. He said he isn't sure he sees the connection. Councilwoman Hemann said all of our water comes through Westlake. For gas lines or any other utility you could have delivery charges, transfer charges, line charges, you could have anything. Councilwoman Hemann said she doesn't think anyone other than herself has gone through and compared these documents one to the other. Each document references and goes back and forth to one another. She said, for example, the utility district, the MUD Agreement, as a standalone agreement seems fairly harmless. However, when you compare it back to the clauses of its reference in the Water Services Agreement, there are eminent domain uses where they have total control. She said each agreement on its own might look fairly simple and at first glance she kind of thought that too. She said this is why it took her six months, because every time she read it, she had to go back to another part of the other main Water Services Agreement to check those facts 6