Duke countersues JacksonWritten by Becky Johnson
- Haywood water systems join forces to aid each other in times of need
- In the wake of the drought, Haywood towns besieged by water shortage search for answers
- Locked in the longest-running ping-pong match in mountain politics, Joe Sam Queen reflects on his latest loss
- The last chapter: Reflections on Mark Swanger’s political era
- Haywood School board races complicated, important
Duke Energy has fired back at Jackson County’s attempt to seize the Dillsboro Dam with a counterclaim of its own.
Duke claims that it is the victim of abuse of process by the county and is seeking damages.
Despite the county’s claims that it wants the dam and adjacent river shore to create a park, Duke alleges that Jackson has an “ulterior purpose.” Jackson County has long been an opponent of dam removal, fighting tooth and nail to save the dam before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Seizing the dam through eminent domain was seen as a trump card and last resort held by the county.
Duke argues the condemnation move is “solely for the purpose of interfering with and circumventing” dam demolition, not a true desire to create a park. Duke claims the county has “willfully misused” its condemnation powers.
Duke further took issue with the miserly sum of $1 Jackson County has offered to pay for the property it hopes to seize. The county would be required to compensate Duke for the monetary value of the dam and shoreline property if condemnation is successful. The county argues that $1 is sufficient, since Duke would be saved the trouble and expense of tearing it down, an undertaking that would have cost more than $1 million. That savings should more than suffice as the monetary compensation Jackson would otherwise owe Duke, the suit argues.
Duke said the snub is “further evidence of the county’s bad faith and improper purpose for bringing this action.”
Duke’s counterclaim filed last week seeks an unspecified sum covering attorneys’ fees and monetary damages.