Apex lawsuit dismissed

Wednesday, Feb. 13, 2002 | 9:33 a.m.

A District Court judge has agreed to dismiss a lawsuit filed by developers of the Apex Industrial Park against the Las Vegas Valley Water District.

Judge Nancy Saitta's dismissal, however, is being questioned by two power generating companies that are building plants in the Apex area.

The Apex developers filed suit last year in a dispute over access to water for the project about 15 miles northeast of Las Vegas. The water district has now agreed to provide water and pumping facilities at cost to the developer.

The district also has in place contracts to provide water to Duke Energy and Mirant, two companies planning power plants in Apex. In return for the water, the companies had agreed to sell at least 25 percent of their energy to the district and Southern Nevada Water Authority, which uses the power to pump water throughout Clark County.

The power companies were not direct parties in the lawsuit but, wrote Saitta on Feb. 8 -- the same day the suit was formally dismissed -- "dismissal of any party at this time is premature."

Representatives from the district and Apex Industrial Park said their settlement will not affect water needed for the generating plants.

"Those contracts (to Duke and Mirant) still exist and are in no way affected," district attorney Charles Hauser said. "They have the right to develop and use our water for 25 years."

"We do not believe that their deal with the water district is impacted at all by our deal," agreed Adam Titus, Apex Industrial Park chief operating officer.

Attorneys for Duke and Mirant were tight-lipped on their reasons for asking that Saitta reopen the case. Duke's Paul Veasy, in Salt Lake City, refused comment.

Mirant's Gregory Walch said he is in negotiations with the parties to the suit and that those talks are important to the state's emphasis on providing power.

"We do anticipate a positive resolution for everyone," Walch said.

District Court Judge Michael Cherry could not comment on the case directly, but said it is unusual for a judge to reopen a dismissed case -- particularly at the request of an outside party.