| Title |
Offer of proof and brief in support of offer [of the] State of Arizona, complainant, v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Imperial Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, City of San Diego, and County of San Diego, defendants, United States of America and State of Nevada, interveners, State of New Mexico and State of Utah, parties. |
| OCR Text |
Show This document constitutes the offer of proof which the Special Master directed to be made by the California defendants. The offer of proof is submitted in compliance with the Special Master's ruling, by letter dated July 1, i960. That ruling is in response to our motion (incorporated in our comments upon the Draft Report) for an opportunity to litigate the following issue, alternatively stated:- "(l) Is the meaning of the words of the California Limitation Act, repeated substantially from the following words of section 4(a) of the Boulder Canyon Project Act, 'waters apportioned to the lower basin States by paragraph (a) of Article III of the Colorado River compact,' controlled by whatever meaning is properly to be given to Article Ill(a) of the Compact? "(2) Is the meaning of the above quoted words: M(i) 7.500,000 acre-feet from Lake Mead and the main stream below Lake Mead, contrary to the Compact meaning, or "(ii) 7,500,000 acre-feet apportioned to the lower basin states from the waters of the Colorado River system (i.e., the main stream and tributaries in the lower basin) in accord with the Compact meaning?" The Special Master's letter states that California may submit "an offer of proof specifying the witnesses to be called and the papers to be offered, together with a statement of the gist of the testimony which each witness is expected to give and the relevant content of each of the papers." The tendered proof is documentary. Because it has been impossible in the time allotted to complete the search for documentary materials relating to this issue which emerged on May 5, i960, with the circulation of the Special Master's Draft Report, the California defendants may ask leave at a later date to supplement the offer with additional documentary materials. This offer of proof consists of three sections. Part I states the findings of fact and conclusions of law which follow from admission of the documents offered. We also discuss here the interrelationship of the issues controlling the "contractual allocation scheme" proposed in the Draft Report. Part II lists the exhibit number and description of each document. Part III is our brief in support of the offer of proof. Approximately sixty exhibits have been organized into groups for convenience of reference and discussion.-/ We consider their relevance and, briefly, competence. The full text of these documents, or extracts therefrom relevant to this offer, has been reproduced and bound separately in exhibit size notebooks. We emphasize that the documents merely reinforce the plain, clear, and rational meaning of the words of the Project Act and the Limitation Act. The words of the statute control the determination of the issue to which our offer of proof is directed. |
