WSP05598 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

, t ,. ! I ( :1 ~ ~ I \ "~'8 ,.w..., LEGAL 67 . submission of briefs. the Superior Court of Riverside County denied the motions. The District has appealed to the Fourth Dis- trict Court of Appeal. At the close of the period under considera- tion, the records on the appeals were being compiled for filing in the appellate court. The action brought by the United States for the use of Recon- struction Finance Corporation in behalf of Defense Plant Corpora- tion against the District for the purpose of acquiring the rigbt to construct and maintain within the area of certain easements of the District, structures necessary to a synthetic rubber plant, was still pending in the United States District Court at Los Angeles, Negotiations for settlement had progressed to the point of approv- ing the formal documents necessary to authorize judgment vesting in the plaintiff only such rigbts as were to be sought by an amended complaint to be tiled in the action, with provisions in the judgment adequate to protect the District, The District was made a party defendant to the action pending in the District Court of the United States for the condemnation by the United States of the rights of way and properties necessary for the construction by the Navy of the San Diego aqueduct, ex- tending from a connection with the Colorado River aqueduct, at the west portal of San Jacinto tunnel. to San Vicente reservoir in San Diego County, By this procedure the United States sought to acquire the right to make the physical connection with the Colorado River aqueduct. A stipulated judgment was entered July 3, 1946, granting the necessary permanent and temporary easements to the United States but retaining in the District title to the transition and diversion structures being constructed by t.he Government to conllect the t.wo aqueducts, TheNav)"s,co'ltractor" - 'under'tlle aeciee so'ente,.ed~ \I"'" able' to rnake the connection dur- ing the construction of the San Diego aqueduct at a lesser cost than would have been incurred had the connection been made later. This was another development in the program for making Colo. rado River water available to the San Diego area if annexed to t.he District (see Annexation), Water j'i[Jhts Further study was given to the relative rights of the claimants of Colorado River water, both under the contracts with the United St.ates l1nd under the laws ami regulations of t.he seven Colorado River basin states, The effect of the Mexican treaty upon t.he Colorado River Compact, the Boulder Canyon Project Act, the