Finding for Bentonville will help creek's health
The City of Bentonville, Arkansas vs. Cooper Realty Investments Inc. and the Bentonville/Bella Vista Trailblazer's Association Inc., Case Number 04CV-19-1031, is back on the Benton County Circuit Court Docket for Sept. 4.
In the motion to intervene hearing, Benton County Circuit Court Judge John Scott will hear arguments from a Bella Vista man who claims to have a handwritten note from the builder of his 1920s cabin-style home promising that the lake could be seen from the porch of the cabin. His motion to intervene in the city of Bentonville's lawsuit claims this unrecorded note gives him specific rights of common ownership of Bella Vista Lake and therefore removal of its failed dam would be an illegal action by Bentonville.
The Bella Vista man's lawsuit also claims the poorly engineered Lake Bella Vista dam constructed quickly and cheaply across Little Sugar Creek in 1915 to create a small reservoir to support a soon-to-fail real estate development is a "natural dam which is a rare and unique geological formation within the Ozark Highlands Plateau."
Bentonville, represented by City Attorney George Spence, will ask Judge Scott to dismiss the complaint because, even if the authenticity of the note from the builder is confirmed, the note is not recorded in the county's real estate records. This recording would be required for it to be a burden on the city of Bentonville's title for the property, and, if filed, might create a legal interest for the Bella Vista man. The city attorney also states that while the Bella Vista man asserts his loss of lake view as damages, he does not have any kind of right under the law to that lake view.
In addition, it is quite interesting to note that the conveyance agreement Cooper Realty Investments Inc. claims binds the city of Bentonville to maintaining a dam forever is also not recorded in the county real estate records, as is the deed, which contains no such requirement for a forever dam.
At this point, there is not a hearing scheduled for Bentonville's May 2 complaint seeking a declaration on their legal obligations for the failed dam. If you want to stay up-to-date on these proceedings, the case number is 04CV-19-1031. The court will post the hearing schedules at https://caseinfo.arcourts.gov.
The public overwhelmingly supports dam removal over dam reconstruction. Dam removal is the much less expensive and more environmentally friendly option. Ongoing maintenance costs for a dam that is regularly overtopped makes dam reconstruction at this location an unsustainable option and a waste of taxpayers' money. Our community has an opportunity to offer up a how-to guide for improving watershed health, ecological sustainability and quality of life in the Ozarks. Removing the dam will improve the health of Little Sugar Creek's watershed. A healthier watershed means improved water quality and wildlife habitat, and mitigation of flood risk.
Let's hope the court rules the city of Bentonville has no obligation to waste taxpayer dollars on the intent/wishes/whims of any prior owner of the dam.
Free Little Sugar Creek!
Greg Van Horn
Bentonville
Editorial on 08/01/2019