Title: Raymond J. Murphy v. Lee County
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: SC96-997
State: Florida
Issuer: Florida Supreme Court
Date: July 13, 2000

Supreme 
Court 
of 
Florida
  
____________
No. SC96997
____________
RAYMOND J. MURPHY,
Appellant,
vs.
LEE COUNTY, a political subdivision
of the State of Florida,
and
THE STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellees.
CORRECTED OPINION
[July 13, 2000]
PER CURIAM.
We have for review a final judgment validating Lee County’s proposed bond
issue.  We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(2) of the Florida
Constitution.  We affirm the decision below.
Pursuant to chapter 163, Florida Statutes, and an Interlocal Agreement, Lee 
County (County) joined with other political subdivisions to create the Florida
-2-
Governmental Utility Authority (GUA).  The purpose of the Interlocal Agreement
was to acquire and operate water and wastewater facilities owned by a private
company, the Avatar Corporation or its subsidiaries (Avatar Facilities), one of
which was a certain water and sewer facility located in Lee County and owned by
Florida Cities Water Company, a private company.
Pursuant to the Interlocal Agreement, the County retained the right to
purchase separately that portion of the Avatar Facilities that was within the
County’s boundaries.  On January 16, 1999, the County adopted Resolution 99-01-
30, which authorized the County’s acquisition of the Fort Myers System.  On
March 16, 1999, the County accepted assignment of the right to purchase the Fort
Myers System from GUA and authorized immediate acquisition of the system.
The County approved an addendum to the purchase agreement which
separated acquisition of the Fort Myers System into two distinct projects.  The
initial project was the portion of the Fort Myers System located within the
unincorporated area of Lee County (the 1999A Project).  The other project
consisted of that portion of the Fort Myers System located within the municipal
boundaries of the Town of Fort Myers Beach (the 1999B Project).  The County’s
resolution also established the purchase price of the two projects and set forth
details of the bond issuance.
-3-
Lee County filed in circuit court a complaint for validation of water and
sewer revenue bonds not exceeding $3.5 million.  Raymond J. Murphy, Mayor of
the Town of Fort Myers Beach (Town), intervened and filed a motion to dismiss. 
On September 24, 1999, the court found issuance of the bonds to be authorized.
The court found the County to be authorized to issue bonds to:  (1) pay the
cost of acquisition of a privately owned water system within the boundaries of the
Town (the 1999B Project); (2) fund a debt-service reserve account; and (3) if
necessary, pay costs associated with the issuance of the bonds.  The court stated
that the Town is not required to consent to the acquisition.  The water system is to
be owned and operated by the County.  The court found the bond resolution valid
and enforceable.
The court found that acquisition of the 1999B project serves a valid public
purpose, including but not limited to:  (1) it will consolidate water and sewer service
within the Town since the County already provides sewer service within boundaries
of the Town; (2) it will consolidate County water and sewer billing as well as allow
one point of contact for all County water and sewer utility matters within the
County; (3) the inclusion of the 1999B Project will help diffuse and mitigate impacts
due to significant system repair, replacement or upgrade costs for regulatory
compliance in that any such increased costs will be spread over an increased
-4-
customer base; (4) it will provide customers with increased opportunities for
providing input into decisions as to levels of utility services and rates; (5) public
ownership of the 1999B Project will provide that customer payments be applied
solely toward operation, maintenance, rehabilitation, and expansion of the County’s
utility system rather than for taxes and guaranteed profits of a private utility; (6)
future economy of scale will save on expenses for expansion; (7) further economy
of scale will be realized through consolidation of management, planning,
engineering, and operational functions; (8) better planning will be facilitated; and (9)
the acquisition will provide a more reliable long-term water supply from multiple
wellfields and regional water treatment plants.
Murphy argued that the Town was an indispensable party to the litigation and
that the County was required to obtain the Town’s permission to purchase the
water system located within the Town’s boundaries.  After a hearing, the court
denied the motion to dismiss filed by intervenor Murphy and found to be without
merit his constitutional argument that he was denied access to courts.  The court
noted that the 1999B bonds, being revenue bonds, do not require approval by a
vote of the taxpayers, property owners, or citizens of Lee County.  The court
found that all the requirements of law with respect to the issuance of the bonds had
been satisfied.  Accordingly, the court validated the bonds.  Murphy appeals in this
-5-
Court.  We agree with the trial court’s rulings.  Furthermore, we agree that the
Town was not an indispensable party.
The scope of this Court’s inquiry in bond validation hearings is limited to the
following considerations:  (1) determining whether the public body has the authority
to issue the bonds; (2) determining whether the purpose of the obligation is legal;
and (3) ensuring that the bond issuance complies with the requirements of law.  See
Noble v. Martin County Health Facilities Auth., 682 So. 2d 1089, 1090 (Fla. 1996).
After hearing argument and reviewing the record, we find no basis in the
record to disturb the trial court’s validation of the bonds.  Accordingly, we affirm
the final judgment of the circuit court below authorizing the issuance of the bonds.
It is so ordered.
WELLS, C.J., and SHAW, HARDING, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and
QUINCE, JJ., concur.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND
IF FILED, DETERMINED.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court in and for Lee County - Bond Validations
Jay B. Rosman, Judge - Case No. 99-3534-CA-JBR
John R. Beranek of Ausley & McMullen, P.A., Tallahassee, Florida; and Robert L.
Donald, Fort Myers, Florida,
-6-
for Appellant
Gregory T. Stewart and Virginia Saunders Delegal of Nabors, Giblin & Nickerson,
P.A., Tallahassee, Florida; James G. Yaeger, Lee County Attorney, and David M.
Owen and John J. Renner, Assistant County Attorneys, Fort Myers, Florida; Edward
W. Vogel, III of Holland & Knight LLP, Lakeland, Florida; Steven L. Brannock of
Holland & Knight, LLP, Tampa, Florida; and Joseph P. D’Alessandro, State Attorney
and Yolande G. Viacava, Assistant State Attorney, Fort Myers, Florida, 
for Appellees
Richard V. S. Roosa of Roosa, Sutton, Burandt & Adamski, LLP, Cape Coral,
Florida,
for the Town of Fort Myers Beach, Amicus Curiae