Judge issues tentative decision against city in water system acquisition trial (Claremont v. Golden State Water) (November 10, 2016)
Contact: Tony Ramos, City Manager (909) 399-5441
Claremont, CA – The Honorable Judge Fruin of the Los Angeles Superior Court issued a tentative decision in the City’s eminent domain case to acquire the Claremont Water System today. Judge Fruin’s tentative decision favors Golden State Water, finding it is in the public’s best interest for the system to remain as a private investor-owned utility. The City has fifteen days to submit comments arguing against the tentative decision.
We are extremely disappointed in the court’s tentative decision, said Mayor Sam Pedroza.
We hope the judge considers the City’s arguments and issues his final ruling to support the City’s request to acquire the system.
The trial is the culmination of several years of research, community meetings, and evaluation by the City. On November 4, 2014, Claremont voters approved the revenue bond by over 70%. The overwhelming majority of Claremont voters supported the City Council’s decision to acquire the water system in order to control our water future.
Following the City Council’s adoption of the Resolutions of Necessity on November 25, 2014, the City filed its Eminent Domain complaint in the Los Angeles Superior Court on December 9, 2014. At the hearings on the Resolutions of Necessity, City staff, legal counsel, and members of the community outlined a series of reasons why City ownership of the system is in the public’s best interest, including greater local control, transparency, rate setting decisions made with community input, and increased conservation and environmental efforts.
The trial began on June 13, 2016 and lasted more than six weeks. Judge Fruin issued his tentative decision on November 10, 2016. Because the decision is tentative, both parties will have fifteen days to submit comments on the decision. A final decision will be issued once Judge Fruin considers the comments submitted by both parties. Should the final decision be against the City, the City Manager will forward a recommendation to the City Council to begin the appeal process.
I cannot thank our community and Council members enough for their continued support and patience during this long and difficult process, said City Manager Tony Ramos.
They have not faltered in their commitment to fighting for local control and belief that the future of our water resources is best protected by the public.
Information on water issues in the City is available on the City’s website at www.ci.claremont.ca.us.
Files related to Claremont
- 20150308 Acquiring AVRWC is right move for Apple Valley
- 20150314 Expense of possible AVRWC acquisition difficult to gauge
- 20150514 Claremont Water System — Supplement to 2012 Appraisal Report
- 20150905 Letter: Lawyers, water, and money (O’Neil)
- 20150918 TOAV fires back at Coupal
- 20150923 Editorial: Water, takeovers, and the people
- 20151015 Cities and private equity firms fight over ownership of water systems
- 20160712 Public records request (Manning)
- 20160721 Conflict of interest (Manning)
- 20160904 Letter: Peter Allen supporting Measure V (Nassif)
- 20161012 Claremont Set To Raise Rates For Utilities
- 20161018 Will Apple Valley become California’s Flint, MI?
- 20161110 Statement of tentative decision (Claremont v. Golden State Water)
- 20161110 Judge issues tentative decision against city in water system acquisition trial (Claremont v. Golden State Water)
- 20161114 Measures V and W
- 20161115 Polls and votes
- 20161116 Another false narrative
- 20161116 Liberty sees Claremont’s eminent-domain loss as sign of things to come in Apple Valley
- 20161121 Voters show they want a say in water takeover issue (Hanson)
- 20161215 Another costly day for Apple Valley
- 20161218 Time to pay attention: An open letter to Larry Cusack
- 20170111 Claremont city manager getting a $21,000 bonus
- 20170114 Price tag for Claremont’s failed attempt to take over water system keeps rising
- 20170115 Our View: Time for foes to sit down and talk
- Time for the Town Council to listen for a change
- Response to Thomas Lecoq (Carloni)
- Time for a second opinion? (Carloni)
- 20170209 Avoiding the Claremont disaster (video)
- 20170213 Valley Voices: Apple Valley would be wise to work with Liberty Utilities (Wright)
- 20170216 James Belna on the Claremont eminent domain disaster (video)
- 20170220 Claremont resident talks [about] avoiding ‘disaster’ in Apple Valley
- 20170220 Conflict of interest
- 20170220 Letter: Response to Thomas Rice (Belna)
- 20170226 Letter: James Belna’s visit (Hanson)
- 20170226 Letter: Rice rebuttal (Trozpek)
- Claremont public records request
- Truth not tricks (Carloni)
- Comments to the Town Council opposing the ballot measure
- 20170314 Town Council meeting (McCarthy)
- 20170322 Skewing the facts (Hanson)
- 20170323 Letter: Sit down and settle (Henard)
- 20170406 Guest commentary: Government takeovers of water systems don’t deliver results — study
- Who pays?
- Responding to claims made on Facebook
- 20170508 Liberty Utilities radio ad — Claremont (audio)
- Not paying attention
- 20171010 Claremont reaches $4.8 million settlement agreement with Golden State Water
- 20171017 Claremont settlement reignites Apple Valley water war
- 20171026 Claremont cuts ties with its city attorney, law firm