It began when I arrived at my property to find workers from the Geneva Water Works in the process of installing a water meter — one I had never requested.
My neighbor, Kenny Royals, husband of Chasity Royals, was present and watching. I immediately told the crew they could not install the meter on my property and asked that they should move it to Chasity's front yard or at a minimum to a location that would not encroach on my land. I have never seen a water meter installed several hundred feet away from the home it was serving. Chasity's home is nearly 400 feet away.
The Geneva Police arrived shortly after. I explained the situation, and the officers spoke with the Water Department crew. To my surprise, the officers on scene seemed to understand and sympathize with my problem. However, when the Water Department manager, Kayleigh Austin, arrived, she insisted the city held a six-foot right-of-way around the perimeter of my property. It didn't — the County Engineer later confirmed as much. Austin also told me the line they'd tapped into was a water main. It wasn't: I'd paid the Water Department years earlier to run a one-inch branch line under Highway 52 to serve my property alone, sized for one customer, not a main. Two flatly wrong statements, delivered with total confidence, from the person running the department.
It is worth pausing here to understand who Kayleigh Austin is in the context of this story. Austin's promotion from clerk to Water Department manager was, by many accounts, the product of an extra special friendship with Mayor David B. Hayes — not professional merit. Mayor Hayes is not only the Mayor of Geneva; he is also a member of the very Water Board that employs Austin. It later came to light that Austin and Chasity Royals — the neighbor at the center of this dispute — were long-time friends.
Some would ask why I would fight this. It is simple. First, the land is mine and no one asked permission to use it. Second, had they asked, I would have said no — because several years earlier I had asked Chasity and her late husband if I could buy water from them for my rental property until I could get the well repaired or municipal water installed. Phillip, her husband at the time — salt of the earth — was agreeable, but after talking with his wife, called me back and told me she'd refused because she didn't like my tenant. As Phillip explained it, the disagreement traced back to an incident involving Chasity's pit bull: my tenant told me the dog had growled at her and her children weeks earlier, and confronted the dog after it came into her yard. My other commercial tenants — a husband and wife — said they'd had the same problem with the dog.
I was fortunate that a neighboring church came to my aid and allowed me to buy water from them. Had that not happened, my tenants would have had to move. I didn't get next-day service from the Water Department either — it took them over two months to install my meter.
What appeared on the surface to be a routine utility matter was, in reality, a web of personal relationships being exercised against a private citizen who had done nothing more than say no.
"I demanded documentation of any easement or right-of-way. They produced nothing — not that day, not ever. The assertion of authority was the only authority they had."
The officer made several phone calls, and eventually an older gentleman arrived in a white truck. The officer spoke with him privately, then came to me and said that an agreement had been reached: the meter would be placed on the other side of my fence post, off my property. I accepted those terms. The meter was moved, and the matter appeared settled.
It is worth noting that this fence post had been placed following a professional survey done years earlier by PLS out of Troy — excellent surveyors. When I later spoke with the County Engineer, he confirmed that the county held no right-of-way along Faith Road, and that the state's right-of-way for Highway 52 extended 100 feet total — 50 feet either side of the centerline. That measurement aligned perfectly with my post. He refused to provide me a copy of the survey, however, claiming the file was too large because it covered the entire Highway 52 corridor in Geneva County. He also told me that he had relayed this same information to Mayor Hayes very early in the dispute. This conversation took place before the lawsuit was filed.
A few days later, my commercial tenant informed me that the Water Department had returned and moved the meter back onto my property. I contacted the officer who had brokered the agreement. He came out, surveyed the situation, and said plainly, "I thought we had an agreement."
In addition to moving the meter, the Royals had come onto my property and driven three steel rods into the ground around the meter — in my parking area. Chasity Royals later admitted they had installed the rods, and I have this on video. The rods posed a genuine safety hazard; someone could easily fall and be seriously injured or damage their vehicle.
The officer called Kayleigh Austin, who now claimed the Water Department had installed the rods and that the city had determined it did have a right-of-way on my property. The officer also reached the City Manager's office, which reportedly suggested that if I disturbed the area — which I had stated I intended to do, given the safety hazard — I should be arrested. On my own property.
According to Chasity Royals, a meeting had taken place just days before involving Mayor David B. Hayes, the Water Department, and others — she did not give full details — a meeting she herself was invited to attend, at which she says the Mayor declared my property a public right-of-way. I was not present at that meeting, and this account rests entirely on what Chasity Royals told me; I was not able to independently confirm it. I'll note, though, that the Water Department moving the meter back onto my property days later — with nothing having changed on my end — is at least consistent with her account; something prompted that decision, and no one has ever offered another explanation for it. If accurate, let that settle: a sitting mayor convened a meeting about a private citizen's land, held that meeting on that citizen's property without the citizen present, and decreed it public property. My property is not within the city limits. That is not governance. That is the tyrannical exercise of power by a man who apparently believed his title gave him the right to simply take what was convenient.
It is also worth understanding why the Royals wanted municipal water in the first place. Their well had failed, and it was cheaper to connect to city water than to repair it. That is the origin of this entire dispute — and it explains why Austin, whose relationship with Hayes had placed her in her position, and whose friendship with Chasity Royals gave her a personal stake in the outcome, was willing to go as far as she did.
The County Engineer's office later explained that neither the county nor the city actually owns Faith Road — it's only a prescriptive easement, one the county has long maintained without ever holding title to it — and that this was why the Water Department had no legal right to install infrastructure down it in the first place. My own view: if they had ignored that and simply run a proper water main down the road, no one would likely have objected, and I would have benefited along with everyone else — we'd all have come out ahead. Instead, I was the easier, cheaper target. I had already paid to cross Highway 52 on my own dime, and the Royals ended up running their own line under the road rather than have the Water Department do it properly. The precedent that sets is worth naming plainly: if you live down a dirt road and the Water Department won't run a proper line down it, expect them to install a meter in front of the nearest property instead and leave you to run your own line from there to wherever you actually need the water.
Following this, I reported to police that the Royals and the Herman family, who lived nearby, were driving past my property at high speeds — apparently to kick up dust, this is a dirt road — and shouting obscenities as they passed. The neighbors denied any such behavior when officers asked them about it, and the officers suggested I install security cameras. I did.
In apparent retaliation for the cameras, the Royals and the Hermans trespassed on my property and installed a camera of their own — on my land and aimed at me. The same officer responded when I called. After contacting city officials, he was told that this constituted a public right-of-way and that anyone could use it — worth remembering, again, that this property isn't within the city at all. The officer disagreed with the camera placement, called it unreasonable, and forced the neighbors to remove it. Even within a system aligned against me, that particular act was too far for the officer. I was thankful the city police officers are reasonable people. The property is not within the city limits but is within the city police jurisdiction, which means they can enforce state laws in that area — but not city ordinances or directives issued by the city. This road is maintained by the county and carries Hartford mailing addresses.
I consulted two attorneys in Geneva. The first told me it would be very difficult to find local representation because virtually every attorney in town was competing for contracts with the city. The second declined outright, explaining that he would have to continue working with these same individuals long after my matter was resolved. He also warned me candidly: expect that any procedural misstep on my part would be seized upon and exploited. He described Mayor Hayes, former Judge Fleming, the rest of the Water Board, and the City Council as a formidable and tightly aligned group — all of them friends. I had great respect for Judge Fleming up to that point. He was the only person I had ever crossed party lines to vote for. He ran for judge as a Democrat.
After exhausting my local options, I contacted an attorney in Enterprise. He also declined, citing Geneva County's well-known reputation for disregarding the law — noting that Geneva County came up in Bar Association meetings in Montgomery more often than any other county in the state. He did, however, offer useful background on the Water Department after reviewing a letter I had received from the city disavowing any relationship with it. He explained that the Water Department was a nonprofit corporation — quasi-public in nature, meaning it performs government-like services but is not actually a government entity. It is not a part of the city in any formal sense, except that the city council appoints the board members, as required by its own charter. This classification affords it significant financial opacity: nonprofits in Alabama are not required to open their books the way city or county governments are, and if they do produce financial statements, those statements are not held to normal business standards. He mentioned that a water department in the City of Prichard had been investigated by the state for operating essentially as a personal slush fund for its board members. You can search "Guccigate Alabama" for more on that story. To be clear, I'm not suggesting Geneva Water Works has done the same thing — only that this kind of financial opacity is what nonprofit-structured utilities like it are legally permitted under Alabama law, whatever has or hasn't happened here.
I submitted Alabama's equivalent of Freedom of Information Act requests to the City of Geneva, the Geneva Water Works Board, and the County Engineer's office. The city denied any association with the Water Department — I have their letter. The Water Works Board responded with a letter from Al Danner — the same attorney who had handled the title work on my property years earlier; his name is on my deed. Someone close to me who has spoken with Mayor Hayes directly — Hayes sits on the Water Board himself — told me Hayes said this was a conflict of interest the Board was aware of. I can't independently confirm that beyond what was relayed to me, but Hayes would have no obvious reason to invent a conflict involving his own board.
The County Engineer's office said I had submitted my request incorrectly and denied it, but they were ultimately the most helpful — they spoke with me by phone in detail, confirmed they had no claim to my property, that they did not own Faith Road, and that the state held no right-of-way across my land. They explained that they had maintained Faith Road for many years and had the right to continue doing so, but nothing beyond that. The county could condemn my land if it chose to, but there is a process: the County Engineer told me the county's standard calls for 63 feet of total road width, and under Alabama law the county would have to pay just compensation — the value of the land taken plus any resulting damage to what's left, including devaluation. That would cost the county many hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The Enterprise attorney referred me to a newer attorney who was working to build his reputation and had already sued Coffee County. I hired him, despite some misgivings.
Within two weeks of filing, the Geneva Water Works came out and moved the meter for the fourth time — this time to a location just off my property, but barely, and they did an ugly job of it. I imagine they were tired of moving the meter, and perhaps Austin or Hayes told them to make it look as bad as possible. When I informed my attorney, his reaction was that it was an admission of their wrong doing.
The Water Department retained a high-profile attorney from Dothan, Steadman Shealy. My attorney's demeanor shifted noticeably — he seemed either impressed or intimidated. He immediately pushed to settle. When I refused, he said, "Which hill do you want to die on?" I knew at that point his resolve had evaporated. He argued that since the meter had been moved, the judge would likely dismiss the case and I would spend significant money for nothing. We had agreed we would complete discovery before entertaining any settlement discussions, so we could at least have a record of the Water Department's conduct. In their filed response to the lawsuit (Case No. CV-2024-900131.00 · Geneva County Circuit Court), the Water Department also claimed to be a state agency — a notable shift from the "not actually a government entity" description I'd been given earlier in this same process. He agreed to hold off on settlement talks — and then ignored that agreement entirely.
Without conducting discovery, he opened settlement negotiations. He reported that the Water Department had offered a settlement amount. I refused and reminded him of what we had agreed to. He became argumentative. A few days later he called back with a slightly higher offer, still with no discovery completed. My wife, knowing the toll this ordeal had taken on us, wanted it to be over. I reluctantly agreed.
I had paid my attorney's retainer long before the settlement, so the $3,000 difference cannot be explained as attorney's fees; had that been the arrangement, it should have been disclosed and the remainder paid to me. I have no reason to doubt the person who relayed the $7,000 figure to me, but no one has offered any accounting of the difference, if it ever existed.
I also owned the vacant property on the other side of Faith Road. For a time I had been in negotiations with a house mover named Hussey about a home they were relocating. They were asking a price I felt was too high. I made an offer, he declined my counter but said he had another buyer working on financing and would contact me if it fell through. It did fall through, and he came back to me with a price higher than what we had discussed. I declined, and frankly, after the battle with my neighbor on Faith Road, I had lost my enthusiasm for putting a nice home across the street from her.
My turn. I decided instead to put a trailer park on the property. My family talked me out of it and convinced me to build a campground. We ran the numbers and found that a campground would be considerably more profitable than a trailer park — and that removing a problem renter from a campground is a much simpler matter than evicting a tenant. They were right, my blood was still boiling but I listened to calmer heads. I had the land cleared and began moving forward.
When the Royals got wind of the plans, they did everything they could to stop it. They gathered signatures from some neighbors for a petition, which carried no weight. They contacted our County Commissioner, who told them plainly that I could put whatever I wanted on that property.
The neighbors then installed metal fence posts, rope, and flags as close to the dirt road as they could manage. They placed a wooden post in the corner of the property near the curve. And Chasity Royals replanted her mailbox — installed in an oversized flower pot — then moved it incrementally closer into the road, apparently to prevent a camper from being able to exit the campground. Remember the road is just a prescriptive easement and not owned anyone on that road or any government entity.
Then came the well problem. Because the Royals had abandoned their well in favor of city water, I needed them to sign a form for the Health Department officially confirming that abandonment. This was required so I could locate my septic drain field within 100 feet of where that well had been. Chasity Royals refused to sign and told the Health Department she intended to have the well repaired. That single refusal effectively strangled the project. Between the blocked road access and the septic restriction, the campground was no longer viable as planned. I wrote the Royals a letter explaining that if they did not sign, I would be forced to relocate the septic system and place a camper pad in that area instead, right in front of her house. This original plan would have left a clean grass strip 50 feet wide along the road between our properties. She never responded.
I was frustrated, and I threw in the towel on the campground. It was a real loss. While we were out there working, the Royals would play loud music and fire guns — clearly intended to discourage us. I could have pursued legal action over the road obstruction on grounds of prescriptive easement, but it simply was not worth the fight.
After stepping back from the campground, I decided to salvage something from the situation by returning to my original idea: a small trailer park. I had enough space and septic capacity for four to six small units, depending on size and bedroom count. I found a free trailer online — not ideal, but I had it moved onto the property, right into the location the septic restriction had forced me away from.
I will be honest: it was partly out of spite. A spite decision is an emotionally driven action intended to annoy another person, often at a high cost to oneself. The downfalls are real — strained relationships, and a lingering sense of unfulfilled vengeance. It is ultimately self-defeating. I was standing there when the Royals arrived home. Chasity drove past very slowly, taking in the new view. I felt satisfied — for a moment.
I have two other lucrative projects that have taken priority, so the trailer has sat empty for several months. I have recently had a break in those projects and have begun working on it again.
There was a young couple with children living next to Chasity. The husband and I had maintained a neighborly relationship, but he eventually took up Chasity's dispute. To be he appeared Chasity had made him her pawn.
In the end, he realized that Chasity was wrong and that I was right. Shortly afterward, he moved away with his family. I assume this was out of embarrassment, or perhaps his wife insisted on it.
The tree-cutting crew I hired to clear my property later performed work for Chasity. By the second day, one of the crew members was standing in Chasity's yard yelling and trying to provoke a fight.
Additionally, three other men who live on the road no longer stop to talk as they occasionally had in the past. If I see these men in town, they will still speak with me — but not within view of Chasity's home.
Her husband, Kenny, has supported her position throughout this situation. However, when I spoke with him privately, without Chasity present, he seemed reasonable and receptive to my concerns. He appears to be under his wife's strict influence. I have personally witnessed her berating him in her front yard, speaking to him harshly, as though he were the proverbial red headed step child.
Overall, the atmosphere on the road has deteriorated significantly.
I can't prove this, but I've wondered whether the county's next move was payback on the Mayor's behalf: not long after, the county filled in the roadside ditch, causing water to drain onto my property. When I asked why, I was told two vehicles couldn't pass on the road — but in 25 years of owning this property, vehicles always had.
This was never just about a water meter. It was about a mayor who sat on both the city government and the Water Board, whose relationship with his utility manager placed an unqualified person in a position of authority, and whose willingness to call private land public — without the landowner present — set the entire machine in motion. It was about personal friendships between officials and neighbors being used as leverage against a citizen who simply said: this is my land, and you do not have the right.
The meter is off my property. The record exists. And now, so does this account.
A dotted underline marks information relayed to me by someone else that I could not independently confirm myself — I've said so plainly wherever it appears.
This is an independent, privately operated website. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or associated with the City of Geneva, Geneva County government, the Geneva Water Works and Sewer Board, or any other governmental entity in any manner whatsoever. The accountability reporting on this page reflects the documented personal experience and opinion of a private property owner in Geneva County, Alabama. All factual claims are based on firsthand experience, documented records, on-the-record conversations, and — where noted in the text — information relayed to me by people I trust, which I could not independently confirm. Readers are encouraged to conduct their own research and draw their own conclusions. Nothing on this site constitutes legal advice.