`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
`
`SCIOTO WATER, INC.,
`4707 Gallia Pike
`Franklin Furnace, Ohio 45629
`
` Plaintiff,
`
` vs.
`
`CITY OF PORTSMOUTH,
`728 Second Street
`Portsmouth, Ohio 45662-4036
`
` Defendant.
`
`
` CASE NO.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
`AND PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION
`(JURY TRIAL DEMANDED)
`
`
`Plaintiff Scioto Water, Inc. (hereinafter “SWI”) states for its Verified Complaint against
`
`
`
`
`Defendant City of Portsmouth (“Portsmouth”) as follows:
`
`
`
`
`
`PARTIES, NATURE OF THE ACTION,
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`1.
`
`SWI is a federally indebted nonprofit rural water association established in 1969
`
`to provide safe and potable water to residents, communities, and businesses in portions of Scioto,
`
`Jackson, Lawrence and Pike Counties.
`
`2.
`
`SWI’s principal place of business is located at 4707 Gallia Pike, Franklin
`
`Furnace, Ohio, where it operates a water treatment plant that produces .64 million gallons of
`
`water per day to serve thousands of customers.
`
`3.
`
`Defendant Portsmouth is an Ohio municipal corporation located in Scioto County,
`
`Ohio.
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00817-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/19/20 Page: 2 of 9 PAGEID #: 2
`
`4.
`
`This action arises from Portsmouth’s efforts to poach a current customer within
`
`SWI’s service area and less than one mile from SWI’s headquarters in violation of 7 U.S.C. §
`
`1926(b). This statute prohibits municipalities from curtailing or limiting water service provided
`
`or made available by any rural water association indebted to the USDA during the term of such
`
`indebtedness.
`
`5.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and the United States
`
`Constitution. Jurisdiction is also vested pursuant to the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, 28
`
`U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202.
`
`6.
`
`Venue is proper pursuant to 27 U.S.C. § 1391(b) since Portsmouth is in this
`
`judicial district and the disputed territory and related infrastructure is located here.
`
`
`
`FACTS COMMON TO ALL CLAIMS
`
`7.
`
`Since 1971, SWI has owned and operated a water distribution system to provide
`
`water services to residents and businesses throughout its service territory.
`
`8.
`
`In furtherance of those services, SWI has been indebted to the FmHA/USDA
`
`since 1971 and is a qualifying association under 7 U.S.C. § 1926(b) (hereinafter § 1926(b)).
`
`9.
`
`Title 7 U.S.C. § 1926(b) prohibits municipalities from exercising their powers to
`
`provide competing water supply services, and from placing conditions or restrictions on the
`
`service provided by § 1926(b) associations, when the exercise of that power would result in the
`
`curtailment or limitation of the service provided or made available by SWI.
`
`10.
`
`Since the early 1970s, SWI has provided water to all Green Local School District
`
`facilities.
`
`11.
`
`The current high school has received water service from SWI since it was
`
`constructed in the late 1970s.
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00817-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/19/20 Page: 3 of 9 PAGEID #: 3
`
`12.
`
`Beginning in 2018, the School District began planning to construct a new
`
`elementary and high school immediately adjacent to the current facility.
`
`13.
`
`14.
`
`Construction is now scheduled to begin in 2021.
`
`Despite SWI’s longstanding customer relationship with the School District and
`
`the presence of ample waterlines surrounding the property, Portsmouth is now attempting to
`
`provide competing potable water service to the new facility.
`
`15.
`
`Indeed, SWI has ample volume and pressure to serve the School District’s potable
`
`water needs, including its planned sprinkler system.
`
`16.
`
`The School District also plans to construct one or more fire hydrants around the
`
`exterior of the property; however, SWI does not presently provide hydrant service along Gallia
`
`Pike.
`
`17.
`
`In prior instances where SWI does not provide hydrant service, Portsmouth and
`
`SWI have worked cooperatively to ensure that SWI provides potable water while Portsmouth
`
`supports fire hydrants.
`
`18.
`
`Nonetheless, Portsmouth advised the School District that it will not provide
`
`hydrant service unless it also provides potable water to the buildings.
`
`19.
`
`Simply put, SWI has the exclusive right to provide potable water the School
`
`District but does not object to Portsmouth providing solely hydrant service. Indeed, the
`
`infrastructure for each entity to provide the respective service is already in place. Moreover, SWI
`
`is not required to provide hydrant flows to establish protection under § 1926(b).
`
`20.
`
`SWI raised its objection to Portsmouth’s actions; however, Portsmouth continues
`
`to persist and refuses to acknowledge the exclusive nature of SWI’s water service territory.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00817-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/19/20 Page: 4 of 9 PAGEID #: 4
`
`COUNT ONE
`Declaratory Judgment regarding SWI’s § 1926(b) Rights
`
`SWI incorporates by reference each allegation stated above.
`
`Portsmouth is unlawfully attempting to provide domestic water service to SWI’s
`
`21.
`
`22.
`
`existing customer.
`
`23.
`
`Portsmouth’s actions violate 7 U.S.C. § 1926(b), which states:
`
`The service provided or made available through any such
`association shall not be curtailed or limited by inclusion of the area
`served by such association within the boundaries of any municipal
`corporation or other public body, or by the granting of any private
`franchise for similar service within such area during the term of
`such loan; nor shall the happening of such event be the basis of
`requiring such association to secure the franchise, license, or
`permit as a condition to continuing to serve the area by the
`association at the time of the occurrence of such event.
`
`
`24.
`
`SWI is an “association” within the meaning of 7 U.S.C. §1926(b), is indebted to
`
`FmHA/USDA, and, at all times material hereto, has provided, or made available, water service to
`
`the School District.
`
`25.
`
`Accordingly, SWI is entitled to the rights, privileges and protections granted by 7
`
`U.S.C. §1926(b).
`
`26.
`
`Portsmouth’s attempted water service to the School District within SWI’s service
`
`area curtails and limits the water service provided, or made available, by SWI in violation of 7
`
`U.S.C. §1926(b).
`
`27.
`
`As there exists a dispute and actual controversy between the parties that cannot be
`
`resolved absent declaratory relief, SWI is entitled to a judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201
`
`and 2202 declaring the rights and legal relations of the parties as follows:
`
`a.
`
`That SWI is an “association” within the meaning of 7 U.S.C. §
`1926(b), is currently indebted to the FmHA/USDA, and, at all
`times material, has provided or made available water service to the
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00817-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/19/20 Page: 5 of 9 PAGEID #: 5
`
`subject territory;
`
`
`b.
`
`
`c.
`
`That SWI is entitled to the rights, privileges and protections
`granted under 7 U.S.C. § 1926(b) during the term of the
`indebtedness; and
`
`That the actions of Portsmouth and all those acting in concert with
`Portsmouth, in providing potable water service within SWI’s
`Service Territory will unlawfully curtail or limit SWI’s service in
`violation of 7 U.S.C. § 1926(b).
`
`COUNT TWO
`Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
`
`SWI incorporates by reference each allegation stated above.
`
`Portsmouth’s encroachment into SWI’s federally protected service territory
`
`
`
`28.
`
`29.
`
`constitutes a deprivation of SWI’s rights under color of state law.
`
`30.
`
`To establish a § 1983 violation, SWI must show (1) that Portsmouth has deprived
`
`SWI of a federal constitutional or statutory right (here under 7 U.S.C. § 1926(b)) or threatens to
`
`do so; and (2) that Portsmouth acted under color of state law when it deprived or threatened to
`
`deprive SWI of its federal rights under § 1926(b).
`
`31.
`
`SWI has a federal right under § 1926(b) to be protected from any curtailment or
`
`limitation of the water supply services that SWI has provided or made available.
`
`32.
`
`Portsmouth’s attempt to extend water service to SWI’s current customer
`
`constitutes a deprivation of SWI’s § 1926(b) rights.
`
`33.
`
`Portsmouth’s actions are conducted under color of state law by virtue of
`
`Portsmouth’s status as a municipality and its actions under state law to serve domestic water
`
`within SWI’s service territory.
`
`34.
`
`SWI will suffer damages as a result of Portsmouth’s unlawful encroachment in an
`
`amount yet to be determined.
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00817-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/19/20 Page: 6 of 9 PAGEID #: 6
`
`COUNT THREE
`Preliminary and Permanent Injunction
`
`SWI incorporates by reference each allegation stated above.
`
`SWI has demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on the merits.
`
`Should Portsmouth continue its unlawful actions in violation of 7 U.S.C. §
`
`
`
`35.
`
`36.
`
`37.
`
`1926(b), SWI will suffer irreparable harm.
`
`38.
`
`SWI has no adequate remedy at law.
`
`39.
`
`The issuance of a preliminary and permanent injunction will not cause substantial
`
`harm to Portsmouth or the School District.
`
`40.
`
`Absent injunctive relief, Congress’s purpose in enacting 7 U.S.C. § 1926(b) in the
`
`public interest will be thwarted. Title 7 U.S.C. § 1926(b) was enacted: (a) to encourage rural
`
`water development by expanding the number of potential users of such systems, thereby
`
`decreasing per-user costs and (b) to safeguard the viability and financial security of these
`
`associations and loans by protecting such associations from municipal encroachment.
`
`41.
`
`SWI is entitled to preliminary and permanent injunctive relief as follows:
`
`a)
`
`b)
`
`c)
`
`Enjoining Portsmouth from taking any further action to supply potable
`water to the School District; and
`
`Enjoining Portsmouth from taking any further action which will serve to
`curtail or limit the water service made available by SWI to the School
`District in violation of 7 U.S.C. § 1926(b); and
`
`Enjoining Portsmouth from taking any further action in violation of the
`declaratory judgment granted herein.
`
`COUNT FOUR
`Constructive Trust – Customers in Dispute
`
`SWI incorporates by reference each allegation stated above.
`
`Any and all water lines, mains, meters, tanks, pump stations, valves, and other
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`42.
`
`43.
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00817-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/19/20 Page: 7 of 9 PAGEID #: 7
`
`facilities owned or later constructed by Portsmouth and used to serve the School District must be
`
`declared to be held in constructive trust for the use and benefit of SWI, and conveyed to SWI as
`
`part of the equitable remedies sought by SWI in this case.
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`SWI demands a jury trial as to all issues triable by jury.
`
`WHEREFORE, SWI requests the following relief:
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`follows:
`
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`
`
`
`
`Judgment in favor of SWI on all claims for relief asserted herein;
`
`Declaratory judgment in favor of SWI pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202 as
`
`a.
`
`
`b.
`
`
`c.
`
`That SWI is an “association” within the meaning of 7 U.S.C. §
`1926(b), is currently indebted to the FmHA/USDA, and, at all
`times material, has provided or made available water service to the
`School District;
`
`That SWI is entitled to the rights, privileges and protection granted
`under 7 U.S.C. § 1926(b) during the term of the indebtedness; and
`
`That the actions of Portsmouth, and all those acting in concert with
`Portsmouth, in attempting to provide water service to the School
`District will unlawfully curtail or limit SWI’s service in violation
`of 7 U.S.C. § 1926(b).
`
`Preliminary and permanent injunctive relief in favor of SWI;
`
`An award of damages in an amount to be determined at trial,
`
`A judgment granting SWI the equitable remedy of forfeiture by Portsmouth
`
`and/or any third-party owner of all water lines and other infrastructure built by Portsmouth
`
`and/or a third-party to provide potable water service to the School District.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`An award to SWI of its costs and attorney fees; and
`
`Such other relief in law or in equity to which SWI may be entitled.
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00817-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/19/20 Page: 8 of 9 PAGEID #: 8
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`O’TOOLE McLAUGHLIN DOOLEY &
`PECORA, CO., LPA
`
`
`/s/ Matthew A. Dooley
`Matthew A. Dooley (OH 0081482)
`Stephen M. Bosak, Jr. (OH 0092443)
`5455 Detroit Road
`Sheffield Village, Ohio 44054
`Telephone:
`(440) 930-4001
`Facsimile:
`(440) 934-7208
`Email:
`mdooley@omdplaw.com
`
`
`sbosak@omdplaw.com
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff Scioto Water, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00817-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/19/20 Page: 9 of 9 PAGEID #: 9
`
`VERIFICATION
`
`My name is Jeffrey D. Spradlin, and I am the general manager of Scioto Water, Inc. and
`
`otherwise sui juris. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of
`
`America that the statements contained in this Verified Complaint are true and correct to the best
`
`of my knowledge.
`
`Executed this “day of October 2020 in Scioto County Ohio.
`
`
`
`