ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

It was the night before Thanksgiving in 2019. She was awake but in a different part of the house, working on her computer. Hearing the noise, she got up to see what was going on.

“I looked out the window and saw water flowing down the street,� Alvarado says. “It was a flood of water.�

As her neighbor at the front door would point out, the city water main had burst under the sidewalk in front of Alvarado’s house in Lindenwood Park. She and her husband, David, have a toddler. The water soon surrounded the house, and at the low point in the back yard, started pouring into a door that led to the basement, where her elderly in-laws were staying, in town for the holiday.

The flood of water was powerful enough that it broke down the basement door, but not until Alvarado’s parents were awakened and moved to higher ground. Water would nearly fill the basement, to a height of more than 4 feet.

“We had to replace everything.�

Today, the basement has been remodeled. There’s a new washer and dryer, new furniture, drywall, carpet and tile. It’s been more than a year and a half since the water main break caused more than $100,000 worth of damage.

The problem is, the city of St. Louis is refusing any liability. That’s what Associate City Counselor J. Brent Dulle wrote to the Alvarados on March 27 last year. The couple had filed a claim with the city, after their insurance company told them the city was responsible because it was their water main that broke and caused the damage, as compared to a tornado or other natural occurring event.

The city said it had no responsibility.

“To impose liability for your claim, Missouri law requires proof that a public entity knew of, or could have known of, any problematic condition of the pipe in time to remedy that condition before it broke,� Dulle wrote. “Here, the Water Division had no knowledge of any such problem; this main break was a random, unpredictable, and unfortunate event. Thus, regrettably, the Water Division will not accept liability on your claim.�

Hogwash, says Clark Jones, the Alvarado’s attorney. He continues to push the city to pay for the damage.

“In short, the city’s notice argument is absurd,� Jones says. “A first-year law student would know that. Furthermore, even if notice were required (which it most certainly is not), there were prior issues with the water main in this area which should have put the city on notice that additional work was needed to ensure no further issues occurred.�

City counselor Michael Garvin declined comment because of the threat of litigation.

Alvarado said the entire neighborhood is aware of water main issues. She walked me up and down the block, pointing to various patches in the street where work has been done in the past on water lines. She points to an area not far from her backyard on Winona Avenue. That’s where a water break created a sinkhole that swallowed a car in 2018, she says.

The Alvarados were lucky enough to be able to borrow the money to make the repairs to their home and replace what they could, including the water heater and furnace.

“This was through no fault of our own,� Alvarado says. “It’s been a lot to deal with. I really feel for the people who don’t have the ability to borrow money.�