Joomla Login LightBox powered by WowJoomla.com

Follow Us

More News Headlines

Current Poll

Now that not wearing your seatbelt is a primary charge, will that change whether or not you will wear a seat belt?

	yes
	no

High court reverses ruling

News - Louisburg

Written by Brian McCauley

Wednesday, 03 June 2009 08:00

It’s back to square one for the city of Louisburg and Miami County Rural Water District No. 2.
The Kansas Supreme Court on Friday overturned an earlier ruling by District Judge Richard M. Smith and remanded the territorial dispute between the two entities to be reexamined using appropriate procedures.

Louisburg’s continued expansion in Miami County is at the heart of the dispute, which spurred RWD No. 2 to file a petition in 2005 attempting to force the city to comply with state statutes regarding compensation for city-annexed land within rural water district territories.

In March 2007, a three-member appraisers’ panel ruled that Louisburg needed to pay $133,200 to RWD No. 2 for the reasonable value of the property, facilities and improvements located on the more than 1,800 acres of annexed land in question.

RWD No. 2 was seeking between $8 million and $12.8 million for lost future revenue on the tracts of land, and it appealed the ruling in April 2007. The issue was sent to District Judge Richard M. Smith, who sat on the bench in December 2007 during a reenactment of the initial two-day trial.

Smith ruled that RWD No. 2 failed to meet its burden to prove the appraisers’ award of $133,200 was unreasonable, but Friday’s Kansas Supreme Court ruling stated that RWD No. 2 was entitled to an entirely new trial and not just a reenactment.

“Because the water district was not permitted a trial de novo in the district court when it challenged the appraisers’ award in this case, we must reverse and remand for the appropriate procedure to be employed,” the ruling stated.

The decision reopens up the dispute between the two entities, although it is clear the burden of proof is still that of RWD No. 2.
“The water district concedes that it bears the burden of proving the appraisers’ award unreasonable, as it is the party challenging it. The district court fact finder, whether ultimately a judge or a jury, must decide whether the water district has carried that burden by a preponderance of the evidence, and, if so, the correct reasonable value, based on all of the evidence presented in the district court proceeding,” the ruling stated.

When asked on Monday what the ruling means for Louisburg, former city administrator Ted Hayden said he hadn’t yet read the transcript, but the city is subject to the court’s decision.

“We’ll just have to work through the process,” he said.

Rural Water District board member Alan Hire said he had no comment about the ruling, and RWD No. 2 general manager Jerry Bennett could not be reached for comment.

In January 2008, following a mediation process, the city of Paola and RWD No. 2 reached a territorial agreement to avoid litigation.

As Paola annexes land that is within RWD No. 2 customer territory, the city will pay RWD No. 2 a set amount for new development but not take any of the district’s infrastructure.

— Staff writer Robin Hixson contributed to this story.

Set as favorite

Bookmark

Email This

Trackback(0)

TrackBack URI for this entry