San Diego County Water Auth. v. Metropolitan Water Dist. of So. Cal. CA1/3
A161144
| Cal. Ct. App. | Sep 21, 2021Background
- Metropolitan Water District (Metropolitan) supplies and transports Colorado River and State Water Project water to member agencies; San Diego County Water Authority (Water Authority) depends on Metropolitan’s conveyance (wheeling) service.
- Metropolitan’s rates include component charges: supply, system access, system power, and a "water stewardship" volumetric charge funding conservation programs; the 2003 Exchange Agreement tied Water Authority’s price to Metropolitan’s generally applicable conveyance charges.
- Water Authority sued (2010, 2012) challenging Metropolitan’s rates as unlawful for wheeling and under the Exchange Agreement; trial court invalidated inclusion of State Water Project transport costs and the water stewardship rate in wheeling and awarded damages.
- On appeal, this court (12 Cal.App.5th 1124) upheld Metropolitan’s inclusion of system-wide transportation (including SWP transport) costs but held the water stewardship rate unlawful in wheeling; remanded for recalculation of damages attributable to the stewardship overcharges.
- After remittitur the trial court entered judgment and a peremptory writ commanding Metropolitan to exclude the water stewardship rate from wheeling and transport rates and to enact lawful future rates; Metropolitan appealed the judgment and writ.
- The Court of Appeal affirmed: the water stewardship rate may not be recovered via wheeling/transportation rates; the trial court’s judgment and writ were proper, not time-limited to specific rate years, and enforceable despite Metropolitan’s repeal of a pre-set wheeling code section.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of including the Water Stewardship Rate in wheeling and Exchange Agreement transportation rates | Inclusion is unlawful because stewardship funds supply/conservation, not transportation; violates wheeling statutes and common-law cost-of-service rule | Inclusion is lawful as a system-wide cost allocation; stewardship benefits all users and is recoverable | Inclusion of the Water Stewardship Rate in wheeling and transportation rates is unlawful; Water Authority may recover overcharges attributable to it |
| Validity of including system-wide / State Water Project transportation costs in wheeling | WA said these allocations were improper | MWD said system-wide allocation is reasonable for an interconnected system | Inclusion of system access / SWP transportation costs in wheeling was upheld as lawful |
| Whether judgment/writ must be limited to specific rate years (2011–2014) | WA sought relief for the unlawful category of costs generally | MWD sought a temporal limit so judgment not read to bar future lawful rate designs | Court declined time limitation—ruling targets the cost category (water stewardship) and is not confined to particular years; trial court retains continuing jurisdiction |
| Validity and scope of peremptory writ (ministerial duty, overbreadth, mootness after repeal of Code §4405) | WA argued writ proper to compel lawful rate-making and exclude stewardship costs | MWD argued no clear ministerial duty, writ vague/overbroad, and moot/useless because it repealed pre-set wheeling code | Writ upheld: mandamus proper to compel lawful exercise of discretion under the wheeling statutes; writ not overbroad and repeal does not moot injunctive relief (risk of reenactment) |
Key Cases Cited
- San Diego County Water Authority v. Metropolitan Water Dist. of So. Cal., 12 Cal.App.5th 1124 (Cal. Ct. App.) (appellate opinion holding water stewardship charge unlawful in wheeling rate)
- Ayyad v. Sprint Spectrum, L.P., 210 Cal.App.4th 851 (Cal. Ct. App.) (remittitur and interpretation of appellate directions)
- San Luis Coastal Unified School Dist. v. City of Morro Bay, 81 Cal.App.4th 1044 (Cal. Ct. App.) (mandamus to enforce wheeling statutes and trial court continuing jurisdiction)
- California Assn. for Health Services at Home v. State Dept. of Health Care Services, 204 Cal.App.4th 676 (Cal. Ct. App.) (writ may compel future rate review consistent with appellate guidance)
- Raun v. Reynolds, 15 Cal. 459 (Cal. 1860) (remand to trial court to proceed consistent with appellate opinion)
- Marin County Bd. of Realtors, Inc. v. Palsson, 16 Cal.3d 920 (Cal.) (voluntary discontinuance of an illegal practice does not moot judicial relief)