THE LITIGATION MANAGEMENT –RAYMOND
BASIN
Asad Kalim Fatmi (Roll no: 23)
Shubhojeet Chatterjee ( Roll no: 24)
Faiz Ahmad Hashmi ( Roll No: 11)
GROUP MEMBERS
Some Terminologies
Litigation: Ultimate legal method for settling controversies or disputes between and among persons, organizations, and the State. In litigation process, a case (called suit or lawsuit) is brought before a court of law suitably empowered (having the jurisdiction) to hear the case, by the parties involved (the litigants) for resolution (the judgment).
Game Theory: A model of optimality taking into consideration not only benefits less costs, but also the interaction between participants. Game theory attempts to look at the relationships between participants in a particular model and predict their optimal decisions.
RIPARIAN RIGHTS: These rights usually come with owning a parcel of land that is adjacent to a source of water. With statehood, California adopted the English common law familiar to the eastern seaboard; such law also included the riparian doctrine.
OVERLYING RIGHTS: Among the rights you may acquire when you purchase a piece of land in California is a right to groundwater. Groundwater rights are called "overlying rights," and like riparian rights they attach to your land.
Also like riparian rights they are "correlative"; you own a percentage of the percolating water that exists under your land in common with the other landowners in your neighbourhood.
APPROPRIATIVE RIGHTS: To minimize disputes among miners, both mining claims and water diversion claims were subject to right by priority of having put both the land and the water to use mining gold.
Simply put: whomever got the claim first got to work it first, and whomever diverted the water to work the claim first (for sluicing and sorting the gravels and separating out gold) had priority over claimants who came later. Hence, the appropriative right is summed up by the phrase: First in time, first in right.
INTRODUCTION
The Raymond Basin is located in the northwest part of the San Gabriel Valley, in eastern Los Angeles County
Small basin with a surface area of 40 square miles
The cities of Pasadena , Sierra Madre , Arcadia , Altadena , La Canada – Flintridge , South Pasadena , San Marino , and Monrovia are located on the surface of the basin
The city of Alhambra lies on its border appropriates water from the basin for use within the boundaries.
Pasadena was largest producer of water from the basin
Map
Pasadena production equaled the production of other 30 producers combined
ACCORDING TO OSLON’S MODEL :
If the Raymond Basin producers had been a privileged group, the city of Pasadena would have borne all costs.
The prediction is consistent with some ,but not all the activities pursued by the city of Pasadena.
Pasadena approached ,but did not reach the position of a dominant actor in a privileged group.
NEGOTIATION
1913 Overdraft of
Raymond Basin begins
1914 – 1923 City of Pasadena Water
Department initiates a program to
replenish the basin by conserving and spreading storm runoff on gravel
beds at the foot of the San Gabriel
Mountains. Pasadena continued the
spreading program until 1924, by which
time it had replenished the
basin by more than 20,000 AF, using
water that otherwise would have made its
way to the Los Angeles River
In the late 1920s , the city of Pasadena was a leading participant
in the formation of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California , which would eventually
construct an aqueduct to bring water 250
miles to the Los Angeles area from the
Colorado River.
1930s – Pasadena was
no longer willing to undertake
independent action .
Pasadena tried unsuccessfully to negotiate a
voluntary settlement .
1937 – Pasadena
initiated legal proceeding
against the city of Alhambra and 30 other producers.
The case was then referred to the Division of
Water Resources of the California Department of
Public Works for determination
of the geologic structure of the basin , the safe
yield of the basin , and
whether or not there was a
surplus.
Bargaining Situation by overlying & Appropriators
A series of bargaining problem aroused between
appropriators and non
appropriators
As per the assumption if the overlying owners were withdrawing
12000 .
And the appropriators
were withdrawing 18000 acre
feet.
The total withdrawal would be
30000 acre feet.
END OF NEGOTIATION
1944 - On April 5, 1944, Judge Collier
designated the Division of Water
Resources to serve as watermaster for
the stipulation.
A short trial was held to hear the objections of the
California – Michigan Land and
Water Company and to assign the division of water resources of the
California Department of Public Works to
serve as the watermaster - an official monitor – to supervise the
agreement.
Judge Collier signed the
judgment on December 23,
1944, adopting the stipulation worked out by the parties.
By mid 1944, all of the parties
except the California-Michigan Land and
Water Company had agreed to the stipulation. His decision is known as
"mutual prescription
".
The term "mutual
prescription“ has been
used to describe the concept used
by these parties as the
foundation for their
negotiated settlement.
The signatory parties
agreed to share the cutback
proportionately instead of
pursuing further legal
procedures to determine
whose rights took
precedence.
The proportional division of
the cutback is
represented by point D.
The final judgement declared all
of the decreed
rights to be of equal
standing in any future
dispute and enjoyed all
parties from taking more than their decreed rights.
RESULTThe stipulation and judgment in Pasadena v. Alhambra completed the first phase of institution building in Raymond Basin.
Water users had constituted a governance structure for the basin through the adjudication process. The stipulation and judgment also established a management program for the basin, within and subject to this basin governance system.
The provisions of the stipulation and judgment designated:
1. The set of authorized users of the basin and provided for their entry and exit.2. Assigned them rights to specific quantities of pumped water each year and provided for the exchange, lease or sale of those rights.3.Limited them in the aggregate to the basin's estimated safe yield.
A short trial was held.
The main Moto was to resolve the objection
of the Californian Michigan land and water company.
Judgment came on 23 December 1944.
The judgment declared all of the
decreed rights to be of equal standing in any
future dispute.
The judgment enjoyed all parties from taking
more than their decreed rights.
Contd……
Contd..
The parties has ended the pumping race faster and at a lower cost than they could
have through a court proceeding .
They also have gain farm and marketable Rights to defined shares of the safe
yield of basin.A Market for those water
rights developed, and most of the smaller right-holders have sold their rights to the water companies, for whom
the rights have a higher value.
There are now Seventeen Active producers from the
basin , and they are almost all municipal of
Private Water companies.
Only three overlying land
owners continue to produce water from
basin.
The areas within the basin that did not have access to imported water formed a
municipal water corporation in 1953 and
started receiving imported water in 1955.
Contd..
Later litigation…….
DWR report 1955
1974, the second modification of Raymond Basin Judgment was
signed allowing parties credit for
spreading of canyon diversions
in spreading grounds in the vicinity of the
Arroyo Seco, Eaton Wash, and Santa
Anita Creek Canyon.
1984: Formation of Raymond Basin Management
Board
2004: Southern California Foothill
Communities Water Supply
Reliability Program (WSRP).
Thank You