Ed's Notes

As I stated in the forty-eighth journal, I am filing a bill to protect property owners from paying for legal action by the state through the Oklahoma Water Resource Board (OWRB). This bill, HB 2202, amends existing language in Title 82, Section 105.6. The purpose of amending language in this section of law is to protect property owners from being forced to become parties in a state-initiated lawsuit. As parties to such a suit, they would be proportionally liable for the financial legal costs. The threat of such liability is highlighted in the following situation.

After being refused an opportunity to participate in the sale of water storage in Sardis Lake to Oklahoma City, the Tribal Nations of the Chickasaw and Choctaw filed a federal lawsuit to protect their water interests in the Kiamichi Basin. As indicated by the federal judge assigned to this case, mediation was seen as a possible solution. However, the State of Oklahoma through the Oklahoma Water Resource Board authorized their attorneys to file a stream adjudication lawsuit based on existing Title 82 language, thereby bringing this issue from the federal level to the state where they would have greater statutory clout. This is seen in the language that authorizes the Board to file this suit “on behalf of the state for the determination of all rights to the use of such water…The cost of such a suit, including the costs on behalf of the state shall be charged against each of the parties thereto in proportion to the amount of water rights allotted.”  In other words, by filing such adjudication the Board would be reaching into the pockets of persons who allege water rights in the affected stream system. 

My proposed legislation, HB 2202, would amend current statutes to set conditions that would be required to be met before this incursion into property owners’ rights when the Board independently files suit under the existing language. These conditions are as follows:

(1) The Board must provide notice to all persons in every county where a stream may exist;

(2)  Explain to all such persons who receive notice the reasons for this suit in its view and in the interests of the persons claiming rights in the stream system;

(3)  Consider impacts to the natural resources of the area and groundwater flows;

(4)  Hold a public hearing and allow a reasonable period of public comment on any planned adjudication; and

(5)  Fully and adequately respond to all comments received.

If a majority of persons claiming a right to use water in a stream system under consideration for stream adjudication objects to this action by the Board, the Board shall be prohibited from initiating the suit. The Board’s authority shall be restricted to only one defined stream system at one time. 

In conclusion, it is my view and that of others, that if left without these amended changes, the existing statute will be used by the Oklahoma Water Resource Board to force the state’s property owners into a prolonged and expensive suit. The sad aspect of this issue is that it could have been resolved through mediation, as recommended by the federal judge overseeing the current suit between the state and the Chickasaw and Choctaw tribes.

            If you would like to have my weekly Notes sent to you by email each week, please contact me at the address below.  If you wish to contact me please utilize any of the following: PO Box 98, Porum, OK  74455, by email at ed.cannaday@okhouse.gov , home phone: 918 484 5701, cell: 918 448 5702 or Legislative Assistant, Peggy Johnston, at 1 800 522 8502 or 405 557 7375 and fax 405 962 7685 at the Capitol. Web Site http://www.edcannaday.com  Ed Cannaday