Addendum StartPage : 0



Similar documents
NO. PLAINTIFFS' ORIGINAL PETITION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT. Now comes, Tommy Adkisson, individually, in his official capacity as Bexar County

CAUSE NO. PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL PETITION. Greg Abbott, and complains of OLD UNITED LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY ( Defendant ), and I.

CAUSE NO. THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF VS. TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS NEDITH TORRES JUDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL PETITION

NO. PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION. Plaintiff the STATE OF TEXAS, acting by and through the Attorney General of Texas,

NO. D-1-GN DEFENDANT S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Misc. Docket No. Il Appointment of a District Judge to Preside in a State Bar Disciplinary Action

NC General Statutes - Chapter 55 Article 14 1

FINAL ORDER. On June 8,2000, Petitioner Sheldon J. Kaplan, Ph.D., filed a Petition for Declaratory

FILE# )1L- Lf 'f- '7 25:" -1 S- 1.D. # 4 '7- :f--'2s- RQ- 00:l 2- Jl P

ER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DIVISION

ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

NO. STATE OF TEXAS, IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF Plaintiff, v. LIBERTY COUNTY, TEXAS. CVS PHARMACY, INC. Defendant. JUDICIAL DISTRICT

Misc Docket No

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DIVISION

Kenneth L. Smith, in propria persona Genesee Village Rd. COURT USE ONLY Golden, CO Phone: (303)

CAUSE NO. JULIE TORBERT, as next friend of IN THE DISTRICT COURT PHILIP ORMSTON V. DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION. Plaintiffs, C. A. NO. VS.

Case 4:13-cv RAS-DDB Document 142 Filed 11/17/14 Page 1 of 4 PageID #: 1584

CAUSE NO. D-1-GN THE STATE OF TEXAS IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF Plaintiff, v. TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS

The Rights of Landowners Under Wisconsin Eminent Domain Law. Procedures Under sec Wisconsin Statutes

Cause. IN THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT In re Joey CHARBONNEAU COURT No. 2, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

Case 1:15-cv RP Document 1 Filed 11/16/15 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

Case 4:13-cv RAS-DDB Document 141 Filed 11/17/14 Page 1 of 4 PageID #: 2035

ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

Chapter 213. Enforcement of Texas Unemployment Compensation Act... 2 Subchapter A. General Enforcement Provisions... 2 Sec

Misc Docket No

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

RDER OF THE SUP R EME COURT OF TEXAS

PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION AND APPLICATION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF. against LEAD CONCEPTS, INC. and CHRISTOPHER WEIR (collectively referred to as

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

Case 3:13-cv L Document 8 Filed 11/26/13 Page 1 of 5 PageID 170 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS. Misc Docket No. 96-9i72

SUBCHAPTER H. CANCELLATION, DENIAL, AND NONRENEWAL OF CERTAIN PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COVERAGE 28 TAC , , AND 5.

NO CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS

Misc Docket No

MISC Docket Nov 99m 90,25

CAUSE NO. D-1-GN MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE, SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS AND ORIGINAL ANSWER OF DEFENDANTS THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS

No. 45TH. Plaintiff EDGEWOOD INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT files its Original Petition

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Elton R. Mathis. Criminal DistrictAttorney Waller County

ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA DOMESTIC RELATIONS PROCEDURAL RULES COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION 140

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

Case 2:10-cv JCM-LRL Document 1 Filed 07/22/10 Page 1 of 8

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION. Debtors. (Jointly Administered)

Case sgj7 Doc 45 Filed 09/22/11 Entered 09/22/11 18:33:47 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 9

BILL ANALYSIS. Senate Research Center C.S.S.B By: Wentworth Jurisprudence 4/5/2007 Committee Report (Substituted)

ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

CIVIL DICTRICT COURT PARISH OF ORLEANS STATE OF LOUISIANA

Misc Docket No

ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

CAUSE NO. DC

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

Town of Mountain Park

PLAINTIFFS REPLY TO DEFENDANTS RESPONSE OPPOSING PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES AND COSTS AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT

Guidance on the Texas Environmental, Health, and Safety Audit Privilege Act

No B9-CV. In The Court Of Appeals COURT OF APPEALS For The Fifth District of Texas,-- JUN \,..4. GREG CUNNIGHAM, Appellant,

No. 48,259-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * Versus * * * * *

No. THE STATE OF TEXAS IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF. PLAINTIFF, v. TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS

LEGAL NOTICE OF PROPOSED CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS. MiSC DOCket NO. 98m 9133

1. The Plaintiffs, FS ORLANDO II LLC and FS ORLANDO GOLF LLC -1- COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

Prepared by: Hon. Duncan W. Keir, Judge U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Maryland. and. Richard L. Wasserman, Esq.

CIVIL TRIAL RULES. of the COURTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, TEXAS. Table of Contents GENERAL MATTERS. Rule 1.10 Time Standards for the Disposition of Cases...

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

No CV IN THE FOR THE RAY ROBINSON,

CHAPTER 234 HOUSE BILL 2131 AN ACT AMENDING SECTIONS , AND , ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES; RELATING TO TAX ADJUDICATIONS.

ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

Misc Docket No. 99- (3005

SB 588. Employment: nonpayment of wages: Labor Commissioner: judgment enforcement.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL, STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO

SMALL CLAIMS RULES. (d) Record of Proceedings. A record shall be made of all small claims court proceedings.

Case bem Doc 201 Filed 06/30/14 Entered 06/30/14 14:20:10 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 9

Eric L. Green, Esq. The IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 created Collection Due Process ( CDP )

COMMERCIAL PROPERTY ASSESSED CLEAN ENERGY ( C-PACE ) AGREEMENT

Form 304 General Information (Application for Registration of a Foreign Limited Liability Company) Commentary

Case: 4:15-cv Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/24/15 1 of 7. PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

State & Local Tax Alert Breaking state and local tax developments from Grant Thornton LLP

IN COURT OF APPEALS. DECISION DATED AND FILED September 24, Appeal No DISTRICT I JOHN C. HAGEN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS. MiSC Docket N m J^- A 1

ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

/ Court: 190

2015 IL App (1st) U. No IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

APPENDIX A IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

NO. GV ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '

RULES GOVERNING THE OPERATION OF THE TEXAS ACCESS TO JUSTICE FOUNDATION

ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

DISTRICT COURT, BOULDER COUNTY, COLORADO Court Address: 1777 Sixth Street Boulder, CO 80903

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA AMENDED COMPLAINT I. INTRODUCTION

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

No. Plaintiff Kelvin Bledsoe ( Plaintiff ), by his undersigned counsel, brings claims

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, ALABAMA BIRMINGHAM DIVISION

ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS. Misc Docket No. 97-_go I

Case Document 126 Filed in TXSB on 10/09/15 Page 1 of 5

Transcription:

Control Number : 42946 Item Number : 26 Addendum StartPage : House Bill (HB) 16 and Senate Bill (SB) 567 83`a Legislature, Regular Session, transferred the functions relating to the economic regulation of water and sewer utilities from the TCEQ to the PUC effective September 1, 214.

Cause No. qq ( D Filed 11 September 23 P4:27 Amalia Rodriguez-Mendo District Clerk Travis District D-1-GN-11-2972 TOWN OF PROVIDENCE VILLAGE Plaintiff, FILED IN THE V. JUDICIAL DISTRICT TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY and MARK R. VICKERY, Executive Director Defendant. C"] TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAW P-.l C:) - rv PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION,y TO THE HONORABLE IUDGE OF SAID COURT: t=" r crt COMES NOW, Plaintiff, Town of Providence Village ("The Town"), complaining of Defendant, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality ("TCEQ") and its Executive Director. By this Petition, The Town seeks review of a decision by the Executive Director on behalf of the TCEQ refusing to hold a hearing on an application for the sale, transfer, or merger of a retail public utility and therefore deciding to approve the application administratively. As a result, the Town is being denied an opportunity to present evidence to show that the application should not be approved. The water and sewer systems proposed to be transferred serve only the citizens of The Town and The Town itself and thus the Town's interests, and the public interest of the Town's citizens, will be adversely affected by the proposed transfer. 1. PARTIES 1. The Town of Providence Village is a Texas Type A, general law municipality. Its address is P.O. Box 838, Aubrey, Texas 76227. 2. Defendant, TCEQ, is an administrative agency of the State of Texas. Service of process may be accomplished by personal delivery of citation to the Executive Director of the TCEQ, Mr. Mark R. Vickery, P.G., located as 121 Park 35 Circle, Building F, Austin, Travis County, Texas 78753.

3. Defendant, Mark R. Vickery, Executive Director, is the Executive Director of the TCEQ. Service of process may be accomplished by personal delivery of citation to the Executive Director of the TCEQ, Mr. Mark R. Vickery, P.G., located as 121 Park 35 Circle, Building F, Austin, Travis County, Texas 78753. 4. Other related entities are the Providence Village Water Control & Improvement District of Denton County ("Providence WCID") and Mustang Special Utility District ("Mustang SUD") 5. Providence WCID, a political subdivision of the State, is the applicant/transferor in an Application for Sale, Transfer, or Merger of a Retail Public Utility (STM Application). 6. Mustang SUD, a political subdivision of the State, is the transferee of the water and sewer facility assets to be transferred in the STM Application. II. DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN 7. This is a suit for judicial review of an agency decision. No discovery is anticipated at this time. III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 8. This is a suit for judicial review of the Executive Director's decision issued on August 24, 211 (the "Ruling"). A copy of the Ruling is attached hereto as Exhibit "A." 9. This action is brought pursuant to 5.351 of the Texas Water Code, which authorizes a "person affected" by a ruling or order of the TCEQ to file a petition to review, set aside, modify or suspend the TCEQ's act. 1. The Town is a "person affected" under 5.351 because it sought to obtain a hearing on Providence WCID's request that the TCEQ transfer the water and sewer systems from 1283371 2

Providence WCID to Mustang SUD, and the hearing request was denied. The Town is also a person affected for the additional reasons stated herein. 11. This action is timely filed under the provisions of 5.351. Section 5.351 provides that the person affected by a ruling must file his petition within 3 days of the effective date of the ruling, order, or decision. The effective date of the Ruling is August 24, 211, so this petition is timely under 5.351. 12. Venue is proper in Travis County District Court pursuant to 5.354 of the Texas Water Code, which provides that a suit brought under section 55.351 must be brought in a district court in Travis County. IV. FACTS AND GROUNDS FOR APPEAL 13. The Town incorporated as a municipal corporation on May 8, 21. 14. The city limits of The Town are covered by dual water and sewer CCNs held by Mustang SUD and Providence WCID. 15. The developer of the area that is now The Town created Providence WCID and controlled the appointment process of its board. 16. Mustang SUD and Providence WCID - while the board was controlled by the developer - entered into a series of contracts for water and sewer service. 17. Mustang SUD had originally been created as a rural water supply cooperation to serve farms and ranches. In order to allow for construction of a large, high-density residential community that now comprises The Town, Mustang SUD consented to Providence WCID's dual certification and allowed all the new homes to be retail water and sewer utility custorhers of Providence WCID, in part because Mustang SUD was unable to construct the infrastructure or provide retail water or sewer service to the new highdensity development. 1283371 3

18. In 23, Providence WCID issued its first series of $31 million in bond issues that paid for the construction of the water and sewer infrastructure to serve the developer's property. 19. 2. Under various contracts entered into from 2 to 27, the District pays Mustang SUD Mustang SUD to perform utility billing and collection services and for a 15% fee for maintenance of Providence WCID's infrastructure. The application seeks to cancel Providence WCID's CCN and gift the District's entire Mustang SUD lacks adequate resources water and sewer infrastructure to Mustang SUD. Mustang to operate the water system that provides services to The Town and its citizens. SUD has insufficient capacity in its sewer system. Further, Mustang SUD's audited financial statements for 29 and 21 show losses. These facts show that Mustang SUD will be unable to adequately serve the retail water and sewer customers in the Town. 21. In 28, Mustang SUD asked the Attorney General to approve the issuance of $2.7 million dollars in bond indebtedness. The Attorney General refused unless Mustang SUD paid off $833,. of debt it incurred in 26. 22. Mustang SUD has not demonstrated that it can even adequately bill customers. It has created problems that were not rectified until The Town reported them. 23. Mustang SUD excludes residents of the Town and Providence WCID from serving on the board. Mustang SUD has already started the process of eliminating at-large elections and divided the Board into single-member districts to preserve the power of rural customers. 24. Providence WCID's rates were traditionally lower than Mustang SUD's rates. Providence WCID recently raised its rates only because it was required by its contracts with Mustang SUD to do so, before transferring the assets to Mustang SUD. 128337_ 1 4

25, Providence WCID currently funds contracts to pay neighboring local entities for fire and sheriff services from utility system revenue, from which The Town benefits. If the water and sewer facilities are transferred to Mustang SUD, Providence WCID will no longer have the utility revenues it currently uses to pay for basic public safety services. Mustang SUD does not currently pay for public safety services and does not intend to pay for public safety services after the transfer. 26. The above recitations show that the Executive Director, under the factors of 3 Tex. Admin. Code 291.19(e), abused its discretion by not requesting a hearing on the transfer. 27. Section 5.122(a)(3)(A) only allows the TCEQ to delegate decision making authority to the Executive Director in a case which is "uncontested and does not require an evidentiary hearing." In this case, the Executive Director's decision to deny The Town's hearing request and grant the application is clearly contested by The Town. Moreover, this case does require an evidentiary hearing to address the various grounds raised by The Town which show that the statutory criteria for approval of the application have not been satisfied. Accordingly, the Executive Director is not statutorily authorized to make the decision on this contested matter. 28. For all of the reasons previously stated in this Petition, the Ruling is invalid, arbitrary, and unreasonable pursuant to Texas Water Code and should be overturned. 29. The Town is significantly and adversely affected by the application. Under Texas law, The Town should be afforded an opportunity to present evidence concerning such adverse impacts and to demonstrate that the statutory criteria for TCEQ approval of the STM application have not been met. 1283371 5

PRAYER WHEREFORE, The Town prays that the Court determine that Ruling is invalid, arbitrary, or unreasonable and therefore must be overturned, and that the cause be remanded to the TCEQ for a hearing on the public interest of the proposed transfer. The Town additionally prays for any further relief to which it shows itself entitled, in law or in equity. Respectfully submitted, KELLY HART & HALLMAN LLP \ I Brenda L. Clayton State Bar No. 783837 Stephen C. Dickman State Bar No. 58365 31 Congress Ave., Ste. 2 Austin, TX 7871 Telephone: 512-495-64 Facsimile: 512-495-641 128337_I 6

Bryan W. Shaw, Ph.D., Chairman Buddy Garcia, Commissioner Carlos Rubinstein, Commissioner Mark R. Vickery, P.G., Executive Director EXHIBIT IT A `...jv..,.ts Ms, Julie Y. Fort, McKamie Krueger, LLP 27 N. Collins Blvd., Suite #51 Richardson, Texas 758 TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Protecting Texas by Reducing and Preventing Pollution August 24, 211 Re: Application from Mustang Special Utility District (SUD), Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (CCN) No. 11856, to Transfer Facilities and to Transfer and Cancel CCN No. 132 from Denton County Fresh Water Supply District.(FWSD) 9, in Denton County; Application No, 36966-S Application from Mustang SUD, CCN No. 293, to Transfer Facilities and to Transfer and Cancel CCN No. 2922 from Denton County FWSD 9, in Denton County; Application No. 36967-S CN: 61363534; RN: 11222669 (water) 1294619 (sewer) (Mustang SUD) CN: 6739387; RN: 114114 (water & sewer) (Denton FWSD 9) Dear Ms. Fort: The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) received your letter on April 22, 211, requesting a public hearing concerning the above referenced application. In order for the TCEQ to hold a public hearing to determine if the transaction will serve the public interest, we must consider the criteria in 291.19(e) of the agency's rules. We have carefully reviewed your request and have determined that the concerns listed in your letter do not meet the criteria in 291.19(e), Therefore, a public hearing will not be scheduled. However, your name will be added to the mailing list for this application. Thank you for taking the time to contact the TCEQ. If you have any questions or reasons other than those listed in your letter to object to the transaction, please contact Mr. Brian Dickey by phone at 512/239-963, by fax at 512/239-6972, or by email at Brian.Dickey@tceq.texas.gov. If contacting our office by correspondence, please include MC 159 in the letterhead address. Sin erely, Tammy Benter, Manager Utilities & Districts Section Water Supply Division TB/BDD cc: Mr. John Rapier, Rapier, Wilson & Wendland, P.C. P.O. Box i3o87 Austin, Texas 78711-387 512-239-1 www.tceq.texas.gov How is our customer service? www.tceq.texas.gov/goto/customersurvey prudrd m. r.,,, L,I cqa uwn6 Y brinl,ni;

c J g z W Z O W E 9 n X F- C > E co C a) E C 2 lj co (n' N r C O ' > C co ' C d N_ co 'id E C: 6 = M plt U m K co m= x can w W!U',.L.! cr Ir O LU J F-- O ( U