OCR Text |
Show 182 This language reflects an understanding that the construction of the dam and other works depended on California's compliance with the terms of the condition as imposed by Congress and as understood by Congress. The language "and this act shall be so construed," can have no other purpose. However, even if the Project Act can be interpreted as an offer, it does not follow that the Limitation Act and Section 4(a) must be construed as adopting the Compact method of accounting. California contends that the intent of the California Legislature controls. But there is no evidence whatsoever that the California Legislature understood the Limitation Act to adopt the Compact accounting system. Indeed, there is no evidence of the California Legislature's understanding of the meaning- of the Section 4(a) "offer" nor of its intention in its acceptance of that "offer". To fill this void, California argues that the Legislature "accepted a communicated offer plain on its face."45 Thirty years of unabated controversy give unchallenged testimony that the language is not plain on its face. As explained at pages 170-172, supra, it is impossible to interpret the language of Section 4(a) literally, and none of the parties in this case has suggested a literal interpretation. That the California Legislature was aware of this ambiguity in the statutory language is suggested by Section 2 of the California Limitation Act. Section 2 provides, in effect, that the Limitation Act is to be interpreted in the same way that Section 4(a) of the Project Act is ultimately interpreted, hardly a necessary clause if the California Legislature understood the Project Act to be "plain on its face". Whether the congressional limitation be regarded as an offer or as a condition, California bound itself by that limitation when it adopted the California Limitation Act. It did so, aware of the risks of litigation, in return "Calif. Comment on Draft Report, p. 5. |
Source |
Original Report: State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Imperial Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California |