Subject:
Title
Approval of Settlement Agreement with Nathan and Christy Barnett in Barnett v. Brevard County, Case No. 05-2024-CA-056074 (18th Cir.) and Barnett v. Brevard County and St. Johns River Water Management District, Case No. 26-1210 (DOAH)
End
Fiscal Impact:
The proposed settlement involves the parties’ mutual release of their respective claims and dismissal of the pending litigation in the Circuit Court and the Division of Administrative Hearings, with each party to bear their own attorneys’ fees and costs. The settlement obligates the County to install a vegetative buffer at a cost not to exceed $5,000 and may require the County to perform minor grading. The settlement obligates Nathan and Christy Barnett to provide a drainage easement to the County.
Dept/Office:
County Attorney’s Office / Public Works Department
Requested Action:
Recommendation
It is requested that the Board of County Commissioners approve a settlement that will resolve the cases of Barnett v. Brevard County, Case No. 05-2024-CA-056074 in the Circuit Court for the 18th Judicial Circuit, and Barnett v. Brevard County and St. Johns River Water Management District, Case No. DOAH 26-1210 (F.O.R. 2026-04) before the Division of Administrative Hearings.
End
Summary Explanation and Background:
Oak Park is a neighborhood in Suntree. The roads within Oak Park are dedicated to the public and maintained by the County. For years, the roads in Oak Park, particularly Oak Park Drive, experienced routine flooding. At the request of the Oak Park homeowners’ association and residents, the County undertook a study to determine how to address the road flooding. The County then designed and contracted for the construction of a drainage project to alleviate the flooding (the “Project”).
A portion of the Project is located within a drainage easement on Property owned by Nathan and Christy Barnett (the “Barnetts”). The Barnetts contend that the drainage easement was eliminated, abandoned, or vacated, or alternatively, that the Project overburdens the easement. The Barnetts sued the County in the case styled Barnett v. Brevard County, Case No. 05-2024-CA-056074 in the Circuit Court for the 18th Judicial Circuit. The Barnetts also filed an administrative challenge to the permit issued by the St. Johns River Water Management District in the case styled Barnett v. Brevard County and St. Johns River Water Management District, Case No. DOAH 26-1210 (F.O.R. 2026-04) before the Division of Administrative Hearings.
In the circuit court case, after a three-day trial the County obtained an injunction preventing the Barnetts from interfering with the Project and successfully defended the injunction on appeal. The Project is now largely complete, but the litigation goes on. Among other things, the Barnetts seek damages for an alleged taking of their property. The County filed a counterclaim against the Barnetts seeking to recover the increased Project costs resulting from delays caused by the Barnetts.
The parties have been litigating for two years. The County’s investment in attorney and staff time and hard costs will soon increase dramatically as the civil case is on an upcoming trial calendar and the DOAH case is scheduled for hearing as well. The cost of continuing to litigate these cases will likely exceed the County’s recovery should it prevail on its counterclaim, and there is no applicable provision for the court to award prevailing party attorneys’ fees.
To avoid the continued time, expense, and uncertainty of litigation, the County Attorney’s Office recommends that the Board approve the attached Settlement Agreement. The key provisions of the Settlement Agreement are summarized as follows:
(1) Drainage Easement: The Barnetts will execute a drainage easement in favor of the County across the portion of the Property where the drainage infrastructure was constructed. This will eliminate any doubt as to the continued existence of the drainage easement.
(2) Restoration/Regrading: The Barnetts claim that the Project resulted in ponding water on the rear of their Property. The County will compare the pre-Project topographic survey of the Property with an as-built topographic survey. If the as-built survey demonstrates that post-Project elevations vary materially from the pre-Project survey, the County will regrade and restore the elevations to the conditions depicted in the pre-Project survey.
(3) Vegetative Buffer: The County will install bushes or other ornamental vegetation to obscure the view of the new drainage outfall from the Barnetts’ residence up to a cost of $5,000.
(4) Partial Vacation of Easement: Part of the Barnetts’ pool, patio, and screen enclosure encroaches into the disputed drainage easement. The Barnetts will apply to the County to vacate the portion of the drainage easement on which their pool, patio, and screen enclosure are located. Staff will support the vacation application, however, because vacations require a public hearing, the Board will have discretion whether to grant the request.
(5) Dismissal / Release: The parties will dismiss the circuit court and DOAH cases and release each other from claims that were or could have been raised in these cases.
Clerk to the Board Instructions:
Upon approval by the Board, execution by the Chair, and attestation by the Clerk, please return the fully executed Settlement Agreement to the County Attorney