A California Supreme Court ruling created a major hurdle for Apple Valley, a Southern California town that has spent years trying to take control of its private water system.
For residents, the decision could mean an even longer wait for any change tied to local control, including hopes of addressing water costs after years of frustration over rate increases.
Here's what to know
The justices unanimously concluded that Apple Valley cannot use a highly deferential standard to support its bid to take over Apple Valley Ranchos Water Co. Instead, according to Courthouse News, courts must decide for themselves whether the proposed takeover is necessary.
The dispute centers on the utility that serves 65,000 people in San Bernardino County and has been the subject of a decade-long fight. After Carlyle Infrastructure Partners bought the system in 2010 and rates rose sharply, the town began seeking public ownership.
In 2015, Apple Valley passed resolutions to acquire the system and brought an eminent domain action. Liberty Utilities — which purchased the water company and is owned by parent company Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp. — argued that the town had not established a legitimate public necessity for the takeover, per Courthouse News.
"The town of Apple Valley, which seeks to take over a privately owned water utility, argues that its decision to take the utility is subject to the usual standard governing judicial review of a resolution of necessity — meaning, in effect, that the court can disallow the taking only if it concludes that the town has grossly abused its discretion. The Court of Appeal accepted this argument. We do not," Supreme Court Justice Leondra Kruger wrote, as Courthouse News noted.
TCD Picks » Quince Spotlight
💡These best-sellers from Quince deliver affordable, sustainable luxury for all
More background
After a 67-day bench trial, Liberty won on the necessity issue and was awarded $13.2 million in legal fees. An appeals court overturned that result, but the California Supreme Court returned the case for further proceedings.
The fight also fits into a larger pattern in California. San Francisco, for example, has been trying to use eminent domain to take part of Pacific Gas & Electric's grid in hopes of reducing costs.
What's being done?
The case heads back to the lower court, where Apple Valley will have to meet a tougher legal standard. Instead of deferring to the town's resolution, the trial court must make its own assessment of the evidence.
"To evaluate a challenge to the taking of privately owned public utility property, the trial court, sitting as trier of fact, must exercise its independent judgment to determine whether the utility owner challenging the taking has rebutted the relevant presumptions and has thus established by a preponderance of the evidence that the taking is not authorized by the eminent domain law," Kruger wrote.
She added, per Courthouse News, "The resolution is not the be-all and end-all of a condemnation proceeding. As a general rule, public necessity is a matter for the public entity to decide, subject to limited judicial review."
Where can I learn more?
Here are some other articles focusing on similar topics:
• In California, a county settled discrimination claims after restrictions left Hmong residents dry.
• In Arizona, Greenstone's proposed purchase might change life for millions along the Colorado River.
• In Oregon, officials faced backlash over plans to cede water source ownership near Google's data center.
Across the West, battles over water governance keep coming back to affordability and accountability.
Get TCD's free newsletters for easy tips, smart advice, and a chance to earn $5,000 toward home upgrades. To see more stories like this one, change your Google preferences here.
