Two western Kansas cities are accusing a neighboring county of interfering with their efforts to provide water to their residents to combat frequent droughts and contamination.

The towns of Hays and Russell filed a lawsuit last week against Edwards County over zoning regulations they say target their plan to draw groundwater from the R9 Ranch in Edwards County for supplement their municipal water supplies.

Hays and Russell’s lawsuit claims their current supplies are “highly susceptible to drought and contamination” and calls their ranch water project “existentially important.”

According to the lawsuit, Edwards County opposed the R9 Ranch project from the start.

“The county’s opposition to the cities’ plan is based on the unreasonable assertion, contrary to Kansas law, that the groundwater on the R9 Ranch belongs to Edwards County residents, or more specifically to a few farmers with wells irrigation facility near the R9 Ranch,” the lawsuit states, adding that Kansas law states that all water belongs to the state.

Hays City Manager Toby Dougherty said even without Edwards County’s historic opposition to the city’s plan, the regulations would be illegal. But in addition to their distaste for the project, “it is not difficult to discern the intention.”

“It’s not hard to discern that this is just a blatant case of NIMBYism for a project they don’t like,” Dougherty said.

NIMBY is an acronym for “not in my backyard.”

Edwards County Attorney Mark Frame declined to comment, saying the county was still reviewing the information in the lawsuit.

“We’re taking that under advisement,” he said, “and we’ll go from there.”

Hays and Russell, like most of the arid regions of central and western Kansas, are easily hit by drought. Both cities’ municipal water supplies rely on the Smoky Hill River and Big Creek, which have experienced periods of minimal or no flow, according to the lawsuit.

Realizing he would one day need to supplement his existing water sources, Hays purchased the R9 Ranch, located more than 70 miles away, in 1995. Russell soon after purchased an interest in the ranch. The towns evaluated other options for years before determining in 2014 that drawing water from the R9 Ranch was their best option, Dougherty said.

Since the towns purchased the R9 Ranch, the lawsuit claims, Edwards County has taken a number of steps, contrary to Kansas law, to prevent Hays and Russell from completing the project.

In 1996, Edwards County created a five-member planning commission composed almost exclusively of individuals opposed to the R9 Ranch project, the lawsuit says. According to the lawsuit, one member said at a public meeting regarding the purchase of the ranch that Hays and Russell “might get that water someday, but not until they have exhausted all resources to stop you.”

The following year, the commission adopted zoning regulations requiring a county permit to develop land in unincorporated parts of the county for purposes other than agricultural or single-family residences. In the preamble to the regulation, the county states that land uses other than agricultural and residential purposes “are not appropriate in most cases” outside of the county’s large cities.

“The stated ‘purpose and intent’ of the conditional use permit system clearly demonstrates the County’s plan to prohibit the Cities’ project,” the lawsuit states.

Regulations prohibit new water supply well fields unless the county’s zoning appeals board determines it will not adversely affect neighboring properties.

The lawsuit notes that some of the members of the County Commission and Planning Commission are nearby property owners “who have repeatedly alleged – albeit unsuccessfully – that the use of their properties would be ‘adversely affected’ by the city ​​project.’

Dougherty said Hays and Russell waited to challenge the county’s 1997 regulations, choosing first to ensure their plan would clear state regulatory hurdles. He said as they prepared for trial over the 1997 regulations earlier this year, Edwards County added more roadblocks to their zoning codes.

According to the lawsuit, the county in April adopted more zoning regulations “as part of its relentless and most brazen effort to date to ban the cities project outright.”

The new regulation, according to the lawsuit, prohibits the issuance of permits for a “water supply project” that would cross a county right-of-way or county-owned property.

“This provision constitutes an outright ban on the towns project because the pipeline intended to transport water from the R9 Ranch to the towns must cross several county roads between the R9 Ranch and the Edwards/Pawnee County line,” the lawsuit states.

Dougherty called the regulations a county-level version of the state law that governs water transfers, “except it made it much more cumbersome, much more complex and almost impossible to comply with.”

Edwards County adopted the regulations after a state hearing officer sided with Hays and Russell earlier this year in a regulatory process to transfer water from Edwards County.

That decision faces yet another level of review by a state panel, which is subject to further litigation from city critics of the project who challenge the panel’s makeup.