Miami‑Dade, Hialeah declare impasse in $17.8 million sewer billing dispute; order mediation

Miami‑Dade County commissioners and Hialeah city officials declared an impasse in a dispute over unpaid wholesale sewer bills—about $17.8 million—during a joint public meeting and directed the parties to mediation, county staff said.

The vote followed presentations from Miami‑Dade Water and Sewer Department officials and Hialeah public works staff who sharply disagreed over whether county meters at a Hialeah pump station have produced inaccurate readings that led the city to withhold portions of payments. Commissioners voted unanimously to send the matter to a certified mediator, require both governments to complete any necessary independent testing before mediation, and set a 90‑day target for the mediation to take place. The board also approved a tolling agreement to preserve legal options while mediation proceeds.

The issue centers on wholesale sewer charges the county bills monthly to Hialeah for processing the city’s wastewater. Roy Koehler, Miami‑Dade’s chief utilities and regulatory officer, told the joint meeting the outstanding balance for unpaid bills from fiscal years 2020–21 through 2022–23 stands at about $17,800,000 and noted the county’s contract allows interest; “That interest would be 2 and a half million,” he said. Koehler said the county’s tests show the meter in question is operating within contractual tolerances and that the county will credit Hialeah if the city presents evidence of an error: “We don't want to collect anything that's not owed to us,” he said.

Hialeah’s public works director, Kevin Linsky, urged the county to credit the city, saying internal county emails and independent consultants show the meter application and installation produced readings that register air as flow and therefore overstate wastewater volumes. Linsky said Hialeah retained an external engineering expert who concluded the meter “appears to be registering air as actual flow.” Mayor Esteban Bovo, appearing remotely, asked the bodies to consider a deduction to address the city’s concern and to preserve the relationship between the city and county.

County staff described two provisions of the wholesale sewer agreement they said are material to resolving the dispute. Koehler cited section 15, which sets meter‑accuracy requirements (presented at the meeting as operating within about 98–102 percent of actual consumption), and section 16, which gives either party the right to test meters and to audit the county’s billing records for the fiscal year in question. Koehler said the county’s meter tests and a manufacturer‑arranged reviewer found the meter and its application appropriate; Hialeah officials said their own third‑party reviewer reached a different conclusion and that prior internal county emails raised concerns.

Commissioners pressed both sides over process. Several members asked why the city had not used contractual audit and testing rights earlier; Hialeah representatives said earlier calibrations would not resolve their concern because the city contends the meter records air mixed with wastewater and therefore can read “accurately” while still overstating billed flow. Commissioner concerns also focused on the source of any credit: county officials said credits drawn from Miami‑Dade Water and Sewer Department (WASD) enterprise funds could violate bond covenants and that, absent a court finding, any large write‑off would have to come from the general fund.

The board’s motion, moved by Commissioner Cohen Higgins and seconded by Senator Garcia, directed the mayor’s designee and the county attorney’s office to schedule mediation under Florida Statutes Chapter 164, to require both parties to retain independent experts (not the manufacturer of the disputed meter) and to provide testing results to the mediator, and to aim to complete mediation within 90 days. The motion also instructed the county attorney to begin collection actions, including filing suit, if mediation failed; commissioners said litigation would follow statutory steps only after mediation and after the agreed timelines elapsed. Miami‑Dade commissioners recorded a unanimous roll‑call vote; the Hialeah City Council also voted unanimously to participate.

The joint meeting also agreed, by separate action on the record, to include discussion of Hialeah’s reverse‑osmosis water‑treatment plant in the broader set of conversations between the parties; county attorneys clarified that the plant discussion is separate from the billing dispute’s legal process and would follow its own joint‑meeting procedures if pursued further.

Next steps: the parties must identify a mediator within 14 days under the statute or accept a mediator appointed by the Florida Conflict Resolution Consortium, complete mutually agreed independent testing and submit those results to the mediator, and begin mediation aiming to finish within 90 days. If mediation ends in impasse, commissioners directed staff to proceed with collection actions consistent with Chapter 164 and other applicable law.

Votes at a glance: the board voted unanimously to (1) declare an impasse and direct mediation, testing before mediation, and contingency litigation if unresolved; and (2) approve a tolling agreement to preserve legal claims through June 30, 2026, while the parties pursue mediation.

Why it matters: whichever party eventually prevails, Miami‑Dade commissioners said, unresolved billing could shift costs across the county’s wholesale customers if the county had to absorb uncollected charges; Hialeah leaders said the dispute affects their municipal budget and residents’ utility costs. The mediation timeline and required pre‑mediation testing aim to provide a record for any future legal or legislative steps.