MWD practices in Palo Verde draw lawsuit

BLYTHE — The Metropolitan Water District, in recent years, has bought additional farmland in the Palo Verde Valley with allegedly questionable lease terms in order to increase its water supply from the Colorado River, according to a lawsuit filed by the Palo Verde Irrigation District last week.

In the lawsuit filed in the Riverside County Superior Court on Sept. 20, the Palo Verde Irrigation District alleges that MWD has crafted leases with farmers within the PVID service area to drastically minimize the water that can be used for irrigation, in order to divert that Colorado River water for MWD’s use in its service area, which according to the lawsuit is a breach of their current 2004 agreement, which allows farmers to get paid for fallowing farmland.

Both PVID and MWC are among the group of California water agencies that have an allocation of Colorado River water along with the Imperial Irrigation District.

Under the 2004 fallowing agreement, MWD was able to incentivize farmers to fallow land in order to allow the conserved water to be made available for MWD.

The irrigation district argues that the 2004 deal doesn’t allow MWD to impose any additional restrictions, which PVIV says MWD has implemented in recent lease agreements encompassing nearly 13,000 acres of land MWD bought in 2015, most of the land is located in Riverside County and the rest in Imperial.

“Palo Verde Irrigation District has taken action to protect the agricultural lands in its service area that sustain the local economy and feed so many families throughout the world,” said Ned Hyduke, general manager at Palo Verde Irrigation District in a statement.

In addition to the alleged practices, PVID notes that the close to 13,000 acres of land MWD acquired were sold for $264 million, which PVIC says is $125 million more than the market value of the property and therefore, since the property was paid with public funds, the excessive amount paid in PVID’s perspective should be regarded as a gift of public funds.

“To recognize MWD’s scheme, one need only follow the money, which in this case is more than a quarter billion dollars to fund a land deal that closed in three weeks without any appraisal. The purchase followed immediately by secretly negotiated farm leases, represents the most predatory water practices since MWD member agency Los Angeles Department of Water and Power drained the Owens Valley in the early 1900’s.”

MWD General Manager Jeffrey Kightlinger denies the agency has done anything improper.

“Metropolitan disputes all of the allegations in the PVID lawsuit. Metropolitan’s land transactions and leases have been undertaken in compliance with the 2004 Forbearance and Fallowing Agreement negotiated between MWD and PVID, and as noted by PVID, the long-standing partnership embodied in this agreement has resulted in a number of benefits in the Palo Verde Valley,” Kightlinger said in a statement.

In the lawsuit, PVID calls MWD actions as “predatory” they assert that in order to increase the amount of water that can be sent to MWD’s service area, the agency has set water caps for its lessees and requires farmers to use 3.5 to 4 acre-feet of water per irrigable acre, which is lower than the typical 5 acre-feet average used for crops.

Also, PVIC attorneys argue that any additional conserved water generated in excess of what is stipulated under the 2004 agreement belong to the irrigation district and not MWD.

“It is disappointing to hear Metropolitan’s actions, which I have been told is supported by farmers in the Palo Verde Valley, described as a ‘scheme.’ The PVID farmers who voluntarily entered into leases with Metropolitan do not describe the lease terms, which include both reduced rent and no rent owed for land that is fallowed, as ‘predatory,’” Kightlinger said. “In addition, after more than a year of public proceedings and after sharing draft lease terms with PVID board members and farmers throughout the Palo Verde Valley, it also is difficult to understand how Metropolitan’s actions can be characterized as ‘secret.’”

PVID is asking the court to nullify the recent agreements and to have MWD vacate the claim to properties in question within six months.