Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ooon; <br /> <br />Water Project Authority <br />Agenda and Data for Meeting-December 29,19S3 <br /> <br />( ) <br /> <br />() <br /> <br />\ <br />IV. . .LOWING ARTICLES OF ,. <br />UNAUTHORIZED BY OR VIOLAnVE <br />LAW. <br /> <br />A. Articles 26 and 28, providing that payment of <br />assessments or tolls is condition precedent to receipt <br />of water by water user. <br /> <br />B.Articles 12(b) and 17, providing that consent of <br />Secretary of the Interior is prerequisite to sale of <br />project _water outside district, an~ to use of water <br />. for nonagricultural purposes. . <br /> <br />C. Article 15(c}. providing for reservation by U. S. <br />oi right to waste. seepage, and return -Row water <br />derived from water furnished under contract and <br />discharged beyond district's boundaries. <br /> <br />) <br />..., ,AE <br />OF STATE <br /> <br />APPENDIX <br />OUTLINE OF REASONS TRIAL COURT <br />HELD IVANHOE CONTRACT INVALID <br /> <br />I. WATER SERVICE OR 9(e) PORTION OF CONTRACT. <br /> <br />A. Violates federal law because- <br /> <br />I. It does not contain a construction obligation. <br /> <br />2. It does not provide permanent water rights. <br /> <br />3. It implies that U. S. owns the water. <br /> <br />B. Violates California law because it does not provide <br />for permanent water rights appurtenant to the land. <br /> <br />V. ENTIRE CONTRACT TAINTED BY- <br /> <br />II. ACREAGE LIMITATION IN CONTRACT. <br /> <br />A. Violates federal law because-- <br /> <br />I. Act authorizing Central Valley Project does not <br />provide for acreage limitation. <br /> <br />2. Federal statute requires state law to be followed <br />and state law does not permit limitation. <br /> <br />B. Violates California law because-- <br /> <br />I. California statu.fes require irrigation districts to <br />apportion water in accordance with assessments <br />paid. <br /> <br />2. If California statutes permit compliance with <br />acreage limitation they unconstitutionally dele-, <br />gate legislative power to Congress. <br /> <br />C. Violates due process clause of U. S. and California <br />Constitutions because-- <br /> <br />J. It deprives excess landowners of right to propor- <br />tionate share of water filed on in 1937 by Director <br />of Finance. <br /> <br />2. Excess landowners must pay assessments on ex- <br />cess land without getting surface supply of water <br />for such land. <br /> <br />A. Deficiencies in notice of election on the contract. <br /> <br />I. Insufficient statement of- <br />tal Property to be conveyed by district. <br />(b) Maximum obligation of district for construc- <br />tion cost of main project works. <br /> <br />2. Fraudulent misrepresentation of district's obliga- <br />tion for construction cost of distribution system. <br /> <br />B. Failure of contract to recite which provisions of <br />Federal reclamation laws apply and which do not. <br /> <br />III. ARTICLE 32 OF CONTRACT (PROVIDING THAT <br />CONSENT OF SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR IS <br />PREREQUISITE TO DISTRICT BOUNDARY <br />CHANGES) CONSTITUTES UNLAWFUL DELEGA- <br />TION OF POWER TO SECRETARY OF THE IN. <br />TERIOR. <br /> <br />I~: <br /> <br />15 <br />