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