May 1 Water Talks - MWD Litigation

464 views

Published on

Water Authority Board Chair Michael T. Hogan provides an overview of the MWD rate litigation case. Presented at the May 1 Water Talks: The Colorado River and its future.

Published in: News & Politics, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
464
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

May 1 Water Talks - MWD Litigation

  1. 1. Water Authority Board Chair Michael T. Hogan May 1, 2012 1
  2. 2. San Diego County Water Authority
  3. 3.  Highly reliable water supply that benefits entire Southern California region and helped prevent greater cutbacks to businesses and residents during last drought Water Authority buys transportation services from MWD to move IID and Canal Lining Transfer water Water Authority filed suit in June 2010 over MWD’s illegal misallocation of water supply costs to transportation charges 3
  4. 4.  The amount of money at stake in the Water Authority’s rate lawsuit vs. MWD (over 45 years): $1.3 billion to $2.1 billion 2012 Impact: $40 million taken out of San Diego’s economy 4
  5. 5. Undercharge Overcharge 5
  6. 6.  MWD is required to place disputed payments made by the Water Authority into an escrow account ◦ If the Water Authority wins the case, MWD must return the money to the Water Authority ◦ Water Authority Board adopted policy Feb. 23, 2012 to return any net escrow funds, minus costs of the litigation, to its member agencies 2011 escrow balance: $38 million End of 2012 escrow balance: $78 million End of 2013 escrow balance: $135 million 6
  7. 7. Percent of Percent of M&I M&I Melded Member Melded Supply Estimated Member Supply Estimated Agency Deliveries Refund Agency Deliveries RefundCarlsbad 4.13 $1,569,400 Rainbow 3.07 $1,166,600Del Mar 0.28 106,400 Ramona 1.23 467,400Escondido 2.94 1,117,200 Rincon 1.46 554,800Fallbrook 2.04 775,200 San Diego 41.08 15,610,400Helix 4.92 1,869,600 San Dieguito 0.62 235,600Lakeside 0.89 338,200 Santa Fe 1.27 482,600National City 1.25 475,000 South Bay 1.79 680,200Oceanside 5.76 2,188,800 Vallecitos 3.84 1,459,200Olivenhain 4.85 1,843,000 Valley Center 2.41 915,800Otay 7.75 2,945,000 Vista 2.99 1,136,200Padre Dam 2.78 1,056,400 Yuima * 0 0Pendleton 0.01 3,800 Total $38,000,000Poway 2.64 1,003,200 7
  8. 8.  Case assigned to San Francisco Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer ◦ Case has been designated as “complex”  Assigned to single judge for all purposes  Complex cases generally get more attention and resources from the court Estimated trial court decision in late 2012 Jan. 6, 2012: Court granted Water Authority and IID motion to allow discovery in case ◦ Important victory in the case because it will allow Water Authority to look into process and “secret meetings” that went into the rate setting process 8
  9. 9. Visit our website: SDCWA.orgsdcwa.org/mobile-news-app @sdcwa 9

×