The city of Okay, Oklahoma, is now billing its water customers an extra $10 each month to cover ongoing legal fees related to a property dispute. The surcharge comes as the city continues to contest a court ruling requiring it to pay $73,000 in damages to local resident Melisa Robinson. This amount has increased to approximately $200,000 due to accrued interest.
In 2009, city workers installed a sewer line on Robinson’s property without permission, leading her to sue for compensation. The Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled in her favor, but the city has yet to comply with the court’s order. Instead of paying Robinson, the city council has opted to levy a surcharge on water bills to finance its legal defense.
Residents are frustrated by the city’s decision, which was made without allowing public input. Robinson expressed her disappointment, stating, “If the city can do this to me, they can do it to anyone else.” She believes the surcharge unfairly penalizes residents for the city’s failure to adhere to the court’s decision.
The legal issue centers on the Fifth Amendment, which requires that the government provide just compensation when it takes private property. The Institute for Justice (IJ), which is representing Robinson, argues that the city’s refusal to pay damages continues to violate this constitutional principle.
The situation has sparked a debate about government accountability and the proper use of taxpayer money. The city’s decision to use surcharge funds to fight a ruling that it is legally obligated to follow raises questions about its commitment to justice and fairness.
As the dispute drags on, the residents of Okay face the financial impact of the surcharge and the broader implications of their city’s legal strategy. This case serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding constitutional rights and ensuring that governmental actions are held to ethical and legal standards.
