How a New Ruling Could Cost Florida Cities Millions in Lost Revenue for Utilities
The decision cost the city at least $4 million in lost revenue, and could lead to similar fallout across the state if other agencies follow suit.
January 03, 2018 at 01:40 PM
4 minute read
A ruling in Palm Beach Circuit Court finding sovereign immunity protected a school board from paying stormwater utility fees could have statewide ramifications that cost municipalities millions in lost revenue.
The case pitted the School Board of Palm Beach County against the City of West Palm Beach in a dispute over whether a doctrine that protects government entities from civil and criminal suits also shielded the school board from the hefty utility bill.
Complicating the issue was a provision in Florida law that carves out water and sewer expenses, requiring sovereign agencies to pay for these services.
Attorneys for the school board of Palm Beach County argued legislators were explicit about that exception to the rule—but made no such provision for stormwater utilities.
“Any exemption must be clear, unequivocal and explicit,” said school board counsel John J. Fumero, shareholder of Nason Yeager Gerson White & Lioce in Boca Raton.
As a major landowner, the school board used to pay more than $500,000 a year to help maintain drains and other public infrastructure to control water runoff and prevent flooding. It stopped making those payments in May 2012, arguing it had sovereign immunity from any lawsuit the municipality could bring.
West Palm Beach disagreed and threatened to sever multiple school board properties from the city's stormwater system.
But a legal precedent bolstered the case for nonpayment after a state court in 2012 ruled in favor of a public agency claiming sovereign immunity against Key West fees. In that case, the court sided with Florida Keys Community College, and ordered Key West officials to issue a refund to the institution.
The ruling had an immediate ripple effect with the school board in nearby Palm Beach County.
“They advised the city that they were no longer going to pay stormwater utilities,” Fumero said.
In June 2014, the school board filed a complaint for temporary and injunctive relief, seeking temporary and permanent injunctions. It amended its complaint about two years later to include a count for declaratory judgment. In July 2017, it then asked the court to issue declaratory judgment, finding it enjoyed sovereign immunity from suit for nonpayment.
Assistant City Attorneys Douglas Yeargin and Anthony Stella represented West Palm Beach. They moved for partial summary judgment, asking the court to find that Chapter 403 of the Florida Statutes—which governs environmental controls—waived sovereign immunity for stormwater utility fees. They also argued the Key West case was inapplicable because that city had no operational stormwater infrastructure on the college's property.
But Palm Beach Circuit Judge Lisa S. Small ruled for the school board, finding the legal precedent that Fumero and Nason Yeager associate John “Jack” Rice cited ”both controlling and persuasive.”
“Whether the school board receives a benefit from the city's stormwater system is immaterial to a determination, as a matter of law, as to whether the school board enjoys sovereign immunity,” Small ruled.
The decision cost the city at least $4 million in lost revenue and could lead to similar fallout across the state if other agencies follow suit. It could also cost millions more if, like the Key West college, other plaintiffs seek reimbursement.
West Palm Beach spokeswoman Kathleen Walter declined comment, citing ongoing litigation, and Fumero said he client had made no decision about whether to seek a refund from the city.
“For all intents and purposes in our view the case is over,” Fumero said. “We are hopeful that the school board and city can move forward to deal with other important issues.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFlorida Supreme Court Paves Way for Attorney Fees Over $100k in Land Dispute
Miami’s Arbitration Week Aims To Cement City’s Status as Dispute Destination
3 minute readHit Song Ignites Multimillion-Dollar Legal Battle in South Florida
Ex-Big Law Attorney Disbarred for Defrauding $1 Million of Client Money
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250