Fresno County judge rules against Westlands Water District’s deal with federal government
A Fresno County judge has issued a tentative ruling denying a contract between the Westlands Water District — a water supplier to major farming operators on the west side — and the federal Bureau of Reclamation over water.
The irrigation district failed to provide “any new or different facts, circumstances, or law” to justify renewal of its prior motion for “validation” of its contract with the federal government, Superior Court Judge D. Tyler Tharpe wrote in his ruling, issued Thursday.
Although some of Westlands’ critics hailed the ruling as a blow against powerful agriculture interests, Westlands officials said the judge did not reject the substance of the contract. He had a problem with the process of validation, said Shelley Cartwright, general manager of external affairs at Westlands.
“He is not saying we did not comply or did anything wrong, he is saying he doesn’t have the information he needs and he doesn’t have jurisdiction,” Cartwright said.
Westlands has long operated on an interim contract basis, renewing its water deal with the federal government every two years. But a law passed at the end of the Obama administration allows contractors to convert those contracts into permanent ones, so long as they agree to pay back the federal government for the cost of the water infrastructure.
The permanent contracts have to be validated by a state court.
One of the issues raised in the ruling was the requirement for public notice. In 2019, the Westlands board discussed the proposed contract but it lacked specifics, including the price of the repayments and when they had to be made.
“Furthermore, while Westlands claims that it has now provided additional evidence to show it complied with the Brown Act’s notice requirements before the October 2019 meeting, it has not shown that it was diligent in presenting this evidence,” Tharpe wrote. “A party moving for reconsideration or renewal must not only show that new facts exist, but it must also explain why it could not have presented those facts earlier.”
Cartwright said that because of the timing of filing the lawsuit, the district had a limited time frame in which to submit evidence and it received the necessary information after that window closed.
Despite Thursday’s ruling, Cartwright said the district’s daily operations are not affected. The board has also not decided if it will appeal the tentative ruling.
The judge has set a status conference on the matter for Dec. 2 in Dept. 501.
This story was originally published October 29, 2021 at 5:00 AM.
