EAST ST. LOUIS - Cahokia Heights claims residents suing for better sewers filled a brief about a possible consent decree with inaccuracies, misstatements, and misrepresentations.
City counsel Erica Spitzig of Cincinnati filed a reply to the brief on March 20, asking U.S. District Judge David Dugan to continue a stay on two sewer suits.
He imposed a temporary stay in January to determine whether he should proceed or step aside while state and federal regulators adopt a decree.
He ordered Cahokia Heights to report on progress toward a decree and the city’s response added little to the record.
Plaintiffs asked Dugan to find the response so weak that it didn’t comply with his order.
Spitzig packed more punch into her short reply than she put into the report.
She claimed plaintiffs made misstatements about capacity in the city’s sewer system and a need to increase capacity.
Spitzig wrote, “The Cahokia Heights sanitary sewer system in the area of 82nd Street is connected to the combined sewer system owned by the City of East St. Louis.”
“Contrary to plaintiffs’ statements, the lack of sewer system capacity is in the East St. Louis sewer system, not the Cahokia Heights sewer system,” she wrote.
“The potential interceptor project referenced by plaintiffs would not increase capacity in the Cahokia Heights system to handle stormwater flow,” she added.
“Indeed, the projects being undertaken by Cahokia Heights are designed to prevent stormwater from entering the sanitary sewer system,” she continued.
Spitzig claimed any capacity problems in the Cahokia Heights system that are not caused by conditions in the East St. Louis system will be addressed through projects designed to remove stormwater and groundwater.
“Plaintiffs misrepresent the ability of the consent decree to address overland flooding through upgrades to the sewer system,” she wrote.
She claimed projects will be completed under the consent decree to remove stormwater from the sewer system.
“Defendants have always been transparent that these projects will not address overland flooding,” she wrote.
“Plaintiffs seem to suggest that the city should construct a new combined sewer system to handle both sanitary and stormwater flow,” she added.
Spitzig claimed Illinois prohibits new combined sewers, “unless they are part of an existing combined sewer system which the Cahokia Heights system is not.”
“Even so, the City is working with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Heartlands Conservancy on strategies to address stormwater and flooding issues,” she wrote.
Spitzig opposed a proposal of plaintiffs to install temporary stormwater storage above ground, stating they didn’t seek such relief in their complaint.
She challenged the basis for allegations of specific failures in the plaintiffs’ brief.
She claimed an inspection on 59th Street confirmed that overflows were caused by a private sewer lateral.
“Private sewer laterals are not owned by the City and the City is not responsible for maintaining or repairing them,” she wrote.
Spitzig claimed plaintiffs did not provide an address for an alleged overflow on 80th Street and the city was not aware of any recent overflows.
She claimed overflows were historically reported at a location on 80th Street, “all of which were caused by a broken private sewer lateral at the same address.”
She added that plaintiffs misrepresented that a new pump station in Piat Place didn’t function consistently due to a lack of backup power.
“There is not a new pump station in Piat Place,” she wrote.
Spitzig claimed plaintiffs incorrectly stated that an overflow at 219 North 82nd Street began discharging on Jan. 24 and continued for more than a month.
“The overflow concluded on Feb. 12 and there have not been any additional overflows from the City’s sewer system since that date,” she wrote.
Finally, she opposed bringing plaintiffs’ counsel into consent decree negotiations.
Spitzig claimed the Clean Water Act requires only that decrees be available for public comment for 30 days after they are lodged with a court and published in the Federal Register.
“No other public engagement is typical or required,” she wrote.
She claimed the Agencies met and corresponded with the plaintiff in one of the suits, Centreville Citizens for Change.
She added that Cahokia Heights agreed to give the group an opportunity to review the decree before the court or any other member of the public.
“Allowing plaintiffs to participate in negotiations between the city and the agencies will only delay the development and filing of the consent decree,” she wrote.
Spitzig claimed the city hasn’t participated in meetings at the group’s request and can’t make representations about the content of the meetings.
Mark Scoggins of Columbia and Michael Wagner of Belleville also represent Cahokia Heights.