Mealey's Water Rights

  • March 25, 2019

    California Appeals Court: Water Districts Can Raise Rates For Unfunded Mandates

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A California appeals court on March 20 said six water districts cannot use subvention to get the state government to pay for unfunded water mandates because the districts are able to recoup added costs by raising their water rates (Paradise Irrigation District, et al. v. Commission on State Mandates, et al., No. C081929, Calif. App., 3rd Dist., 2019 Cal. App. LEXIS 227).

  • March 13, 2019

    Last Claims In Interdistrict Water Lawsuit Dismissed By Stipulation

    SAN BERNARDINO, Calif. — The last remaining plaintiffs in an interdistrict water dispute were dismissed after the parties reached a settlement, a California state court was told March 1 (San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District, et al. v. San Gabriel Valley Water Company, et al., No. CIVDS13111085, Calif. Super., San Bernardino Co.).

  • March 13, 2019

    Multiplaintiff, Interstate Or Notable Water Rights Cases

    New developments in the following multiplaintiff, interstate or notable water rights cases are marked in boldface type.

  • March 13, 2019

    California Water Resources Ordered To Decide Whether To ‘Freeze’ WaterFix Plans

    FRESNO, Calif. — A California federal judge on March 11 ordered California’s Department of Water Resources (DWR) to say by March 22 whether it agrees to freeze all preparation work for the state’s WaterFix project (Bay.org v. David Bernhardt, et al., No. 17-1176, E.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38788).

  • March 12, 2019

    Colorado Supreme Court: 1909 Water Decree Is Not Enforceable Without Indicia

    DENVER — The Colorado Supreme Court on Feb. 25 affirmed a state water court ruling that a 1909 water decree cannot be enforced by a water user because the decree lacks “indicia of enforceability” such as an appropriation date, a priority number and quantification (Donald E. Dill, et al. v. Yamasaki Ring, LLC, et al., No. 17SA231, Colo. Sup., 2019 Colo. LEXIS 165).

  • March 12, 2019

    Nevada State Engineer Asks High Court To Reinstate Water Relinquishment Order

    CARSON CITY, Nev. — Nevada State Engineer Tim Wilson on Feb. 19 asked the Nevada Supreme Court to find that a state trial court erred in overruling an order that calls for a certain amount of water to be relinquished in exchange for relinquishing rights to an annual amount of water (Tim Wilson, et al. v. Pahrump Fair Water, LLC, et al., No. 77722, Nev. Sup.).

  • March 12, 2019

    Federal Water Master In Truckee-Carson Water Case Seeks Guidance On ‘Credits’

    RENO, Nev. — A federal water master for the Truckee River on Feb. 28 asked a Nevada federal court for further guidance on the categories of water eligible for recoupment by the United States and the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe (United States v. Board of Directors, Truckee-Carson Irrigation District, et al., No. 95-757, D. Nev.).

  • March 12, 2019

    Montana Supreme Court Denies Motion For Out-Of-Time Water Rights Appeal

    HELENA, Mont. — The Montana Supreme Court on Feb. 19 denied a motion by a water rights claimant to file an out-of-time appeal of a state water court denial of his claims as unsupported by evidence (Tom Pratt, et al. v. Russell E. Blalack, No. DA 19-0086, Mont. Sup., 2019 Mont. LEXIS 86).

  • March 12, 2019

    California Appeals Court: Water Rights Delicensing Challenge Filed Too Late

    SAN FRANCISCO — A California appeals panel on Feb. 22 reversed a trial court ruling in an abandoned water rights case, finding that a water district’s petition for a peremptory writ of mandate was untimely (Millview County Water District v. State Water Resources Control Board, et al., No. A146605, Calif. App., 1st Dist., Div. 1, 2019 Cal. App. LEXIS 152).

  • March 12, 2019

    Washington Appeals Court: Industrial Park Water System Isn’t ‘Residential’

    SPOKANE, Wash. — A Washington state appeals panel on Feb. 26 affirmed a decision by the state Pollution Control Hearings Board that an industrial park’s water system does not qualify as a municipal water supplier (Crown West Realty, LLC v. Pollution Control Hearings Board, et al., No. 35610-8-III, Wash. App., Div. 3, 2019 Wash. App. LEXIS 433).

  • March 11, 2019

    2 Environmental Groups Get $3.21M In Fees, Costs For Winning Dam Operation Suit

    LOS ANGELES — A California federal judge on March 5 awarded two environmental groups $2.92 million in attorney fees and $297,328 in costs as the prevailing parties in an Endangered Species Act (ESA) case against the operator of dam on the Santa Clara River that allegedly resulted in the loss of an endangered fish species (Wishtoyo Foundation, et al. v. United Water Conservation District, No. 16-3869, C.D. Calif., S. Div.).

  • March 07, 2019

    California Appeals Court Remands Water Rate Case For More Complete Records

    LOS ANGELES — A California water rate lawsuit was remanded to a trial court on March 4 after a state appeals panel said the administrative records are insufficient to determine whether the groundwater rates charged by a water district to a city for three years “bore a reasonable relationship to the burdens on or the benefits of its conservation activities” (City of San Buenaventura v. United Water Conservation District, et al., No. B251810, Calif. App., 2nd Dist., Div. 6, 2019 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1523).

  • March 05, 2019

    Colorado Supreme Court Affirms Dismissal Of Water Augmentation Plan Challenge

    DENVER — The Colorado Supreme Court on Feb. 19 affirmed dismissal of an objection by a water and sanitation district to a plan to use additional sources of replacement water under another water district’s decreed augmentation plan (Well Augmentation Subdistrict of the Central Colorado Water Conservancy District, et al. v. Centennial Water & Sanitation District, et al., Colo. Sup., 2019 Colo. LEXIS 146).

  • February 28, 2019

    Judge: Agencies’ Analysis Of Central Valley Water Contracts Was Proper

    FRESNO, Calif. — A federal judge in California on Feb. 26 ruled that federal agencies performed the proper analysis for the impact water contracts would have on the Central Valley Project, a federal water management project in California, and he denied environmental organizations’ claim that a 2015 document issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) was invalid (Natural Resources Defense Council, et al. v. David Bernhardt, No. 05-1207, E.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30649).

  • February 13, 2019

    Multiplaintiff, Interstate Or Notable Water Rights Cases

    New developments in the following multiplaintiff, interstate or notable water rights cases are marked in boldface type.

  • February 13, 2019

    New California Governor Supports 1-Tunnel Design For WaterFix Project

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — In his first State of the State address, California Gov. Gavin Newsome, D., on Feb. 12 said he supports a single tunnel for the state’s WaterFix project, a move that could substantially lower the project’s $15 billion price.

  • February 13, 2019

    Lake Users Association Sues California County For Inverse Condemnation

    SAN LUIS OBISPO, Calif. — An association of people who use a large California lake on Jan. 15 sued Monterey County and related entities in the San Luis Obispo County Superior Court, alleging inverse condemnation for drawing more water from the lake than permitted by the state when the lake was created (Nacimiento Regional Water Management Advisory Committee v. Monterey County Water Resources Agency, et al., No. 19CVP-0010, Calif. Super., San Luis Obispo Co.).

  • February 13, 2019

    California Fisherman, Tribe Sue Water Department, United States Over Water Project

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Four fishermen’s groups and a Native American tribe on Jan. 16 sued the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, alleging that recent agreements between the two defendants violate the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and other water project enabling agreements (North Coast Rivers Alliance, et al. v. Department of Water Resources, et al., No. 34-2019-80003057, Calif. Super., Sacramento Co.).

  • February 13, 2019

    Nevada Federal Judge Won’t Reconsider Restitution Order Against Water District

    RENO, Nev. — A Nevada federal judge on Feb. 4 denied a motion to reconsider an order requiring a water district to replace water it wrongfully diverted from a river, saying that the motion is untimely and that the court’s action was for restitution under a water settlement agreement and not designed to punish the water district (United States v. Board of Directors of the Truckee-Carson Irrigation District, et al., No. 95-757, D. Nev.).

  • February 13, 2019

    California County, State Urge State High Court To Rule On Well Permitting Standard

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A California county and the state environmental department on Jan. 14 told the state Supreme Court that it should find that the permitting of water wells is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq. (Protecting Our Water & Environmental Resources, et al. v. Stanislaus County, et al., No. S251709, Calif. Sup.).

Can't find the article you're looking for? Click here to search the Mealey's Water Rights archive.