By Andy Ross
Special Correspondent

For anyone who witnessed its intensity firsthand – and especially those who suffered devastating property losses – the destruction left in the wake of the Feb. 28, 2009 Wilderness Ridge wildfire is indisputable.

That a downed power line owned by Bluebonnet Electric Cooperative sparked the fire is another aspect of the disaster now universally accepted as fact.

What has recently emerged as a matter of dispute, however, is whether the power line should have been prevented from falling altogether.

In January, some 19 plaintiff parties whose property, business or land was affected by the Wilderness Ridge Fire filed suit in Bastrop County District Court against both Bluebonnet Electric Cooperative and Camp Wilderness Ridge, a 95-acre non-profit recreational youth camp whose property the power line in question ran through.

Seeking actual damages of $8 million against the two defendants jointly and severally – and punitive damages against Bluebonnet of twice the amount of actual damages – the lawsuit claims Bluebonnet was grossly negligent in its obligation of keeping the power line easement it owned through Camp Wilderness Ridge free of encroaching vegetation. In their original petition filed Jan. 13, plaintiffs also claim that prior to the fire, numerous residents of the Wilderness Ridge area requested Bluebonnet cut vegetation encroaching on power line easements but were ignored.

Such actions, say attorneys representing the plaintiff’s group, resulted in a diseased tree falling on the line and causing the subsequent fire.

“The thing is they (Bluebonnet) did not meet their obligations,” said Sugar Land-based attorney Roger Rider this week. “We want to get through to the truth of the matter on whether they maintained their easement.”

Rider is but one of four attorneys from firms in Sugar Land, Houston and Elgin representing the group of plaintiffs.

Cold shoulder

Rider says the lawsuit developed after victims of the fire became frustrated as they sought more definitive answers from Bluebonnet but were given the “cold shoulder” instead. Rider also says the investigation performed by Bluebonnet that determined they were not at fault was “a one-sided deal from early on.”

“Bluebonnet from the very beginning has taken little or no responsibility,” Rider said. “They are trying to say it was unforeseen and unavoidable and we just don’t agree.”

Carlos Leon of The Leon Law Firm is another attorney representing the group of plaintiffs. Leon says Bluebonnet and others have often used the phrase a “perfect storm” to describe the conditions which led to the fire. While acknowledging the severity of the drought conditions during early 2009, Leon says he takes issue with the fire being portrayed as an inevitable event.

“They have termed it a perfect storm and it really was unfortunately,” Leon said. “But the triggering action was something we felt could have been avoided.”

Not surprisingly, Bluebonnet does not agree with the attorneys.

When contacted on Thursday about the lawsuit, Bluebonnet Manager of Public Affairs Will Holford issued a statement saying “Bluebonnet respectfully denies any allegation that it was negligent, grossly negligent or that any act or omission on its part caused the fire. Because there is a lawsuit, Bluebonnet is limited in its ability to discuss the case. We cannot and will not try this case through the media.”

Holford’s statement did address the terms of the easement Bluebonnet reportedly entered into in 1989 with Camp Wilderness Ridge. The spokesperson said the easement defines the right of way for Bluebonnet as being an area 10 feet either side of the center line of its electric distribution lines and stipulates Bluebonnet is allowed to maintain or remove trees, brush or shrubbery to keep the easement clear. The easement also stipulates that the right-of-way crews maintaining this easement ‘leave as many large pines as possible.’ According to Holford, “the tree that fell and made contact with the line was well outside the easement.”

Denial, outrage

Bluebonnet has filed their original response as a general denial of all plaintiff’s claims.

In the plaintiff’s petition filed in 335th Bastrop County District Court, Camp Wilderness Ridge is named as a co-defendant due to a failure to demand Bluebonnet keep the easement running through the camp property clear.

In early February, Camp Wilderness Ridge filed their original answer, denying all liability and further claiming that under their easement agreement with Bluebonnet, it was the “sole responsibility of the utility company to maintain and keep the easement clear.”

Austin attorney Gary Schumann is representing Camp Wilderness Ridge and says the basis of the lawsuit against his client is an “outrage.”

“Camp Wilderness Ridge is as much a victim of the fire as anyone and the notion they would be sued because one of the trees in their 80-odd acre forest fell down is the epitome of a frivolous lawsuit,” Schumann said. “We intend to aggressively defend Camp Wilderness Ridge. The people who have filed this suit should be ashamed. As I understand it, a tree in a forest fell down. That’s what trees in forests do.”

Rider and Leon said this week there is a possibility more plaintiffs could join the lawsuit. A Web site the plaintiff’s attorneys are currently maintaining at  www.wildernessridgefire.com invites other parties to potentially join the suit and says “together we can rebuild what the Wilderness Ridge Fire has destroyed.”