Skip to content Skip to right sidebar Skip to footer

MAGSA & James ID Lawsuit

IMPORTANT UPDATE: A term sheet identifying the broad critical points of agreement between MAGSA and James Irrigation District is signed.  All lawsuits between MAGSA and James are being suspended. This means that landowners who have been served with legal documents do not need to respond to the court, and there will be no further legal action from James ID toward MAGSA landowners. MAGSA and James ID are now working together on the final comprehensive agreement that will add the clarifying details and ongoing cooperative conditions to the points identified in the term sheet.

Landowners in the McMullin Area Groundwater Sustainability Agency (MAGSA) may be affected by a lawsuit involving MAGSA and James Irrigation District (James ID). We understand this may be confusing and concerning. Our goal with this webpage is to explain what’s happening, why, and how you can confidently move forward.

MAGSA is dedicated to achieving groundwater sustainability for local farmers and residents consistent with our Groundwater Sustainability Plan. MAGSA’s Groundwater Export Policy is part of this Plan, created to ensure responsible management of groundwater exported out of MAGSA’s boundaries. James Irrigation District  and MAGSA are currently in a legal dispute about this Export Policy. Even so, MAGSA has been, and is continuing to seek an amicable resolution through negotiations with James ID, aiming for a mutually beneficial outcome.

Read the statement below to read MAGSA’s position on the lawsuit.

Read MAGSA's Statement
Review Lawsuit Timeline

Frequently Asked Questions

Why are MAGSA landowners being sued by James Irrigation District?

The McMullin Area Groundwater Sustainability Agency (MAGSA) is dedicated to achieving groundwater sustainability for local farmers and residents consistent with our Groundwater Sustainability Plan. MAGSA’s Groundwater Export Policy is part of this Plan, created to ensure responsible management of groundwater exported out of MAGSA’s boundaries. James Irrigation District and MAGSA are currently in a legal dispute about this Export Policy. 

After the adoption of MAGSA’s Export Policy, James ID continued to pump groundwater for export to James ID from its well field within MAGSA’s boundaries. While James ID’s continued pumping is not prohibited, MAGSA’s Export Policy and Regulations require James ID to obtain a permit and pay a per-acre-foot fee for groundwater exported in advance of its anticipated pumping in any water year. Despite clear warnings from MAGSA, James ID has not complied with the policy continuing to export groundwater without a permit or payment of fees.

Consequently, both MAGSA and James ID have filed lawsuits against each other. 

Unfortunately, James ID has gone one step further by including every MAGSA landowner in its most recent lawsuit, including churches, a school, and homeowners.

Why does MAGSA have an Export Policy and what is it?

MAGSA adopted the Groundwater Export Policy in 2020, creating a framework for anyone pumping groundwater within MAGSA for use outside of MAGSA’s boundaries. Two years later, MAGSA’s Board adopted the corresponding Implementing Rules and Regulations for exporting groundwater. 

The goal of both the Export Policy and Implementing Rules and Regulations is to allow for pumping groundwater within MAGSA for use outside of MAGSA’s boundaries while at the same time ensuring we steward our limited groundwater resources responsibly on behalf of our local farmers and residents and in line with our Groundwater Sustainability Plan.

Did James Irrigation District know about MAGSA’s Export Policy before it was established?

MAGSA’s policies and regulations go through a rigorous, transparent approval process, including a minimum 20-day public comment period where anyone can provide feedback on the content of the policy or regulation. The Groundwater Export Policy and Implementing Rules and Regulations were subject to this public review process, which included the participation of James ID leadership.

What is the current status of the James Irrigation District and MAGSA lawsuits?

There are three pending lawsuits between James Irrigation District  and MAGSA.  The first lawsuit was filed by James Irrigation District against MAGSA to invalidate MAGSA’s Groundwater Export Policy and related implementing rules and regulations.   That lawsuit was dismissed, and James Irrigation District is appealing the dismissal.  

After continued requests by MAGSA for James Irrigation District to comply with the policy, James Irrigation District continued to pump and export groundwater. Consequently, MAGSA filed a lawsuit against James Irrigation District asking for financial penalties and a restriction on pumping until they comply with the Export Policy. MAGSA is waiting for the court to assign a hearing date for the lawsuit. 

As part of this second lawsuit, James Irrigation District has initiated additional legal proceedings, including all MAGSA landowners as cross-defendants. James ID is asserting that  its rights to the groundwater that it pumps from the well field located within MAGSA’s boundaries are superior to all MAGSA landowners’ groundwater rights. MAGSA has asked the court to dismiss this legal proceeding on several grounds. A court date of October 1, 2025 has been scheduled to hear MAGSA’s request to dismiss James ID’s lawsuit.

What is MAGSA’s position on the lawsuits?

From MAGSA’s perspective, the best solution is a mutually beneficial agreement between the two agencies. Lawsuits can be a terrible waste of resources and time. MAGSA’s staff and Board are continuing to actively work toward an amicable result before the added costs of the lawsuit begin to take hold. MAGSA has engaged in ongoing discussions for the past three years with James ID, including in-person meetings, phone calls, and email exchanges to negotiate an agreement. MAGSA’s Board of Directors recently proposed to James ID leadership that they hold regular, joint public board meetings to negotiate a settlement. Ideally, MAGSA and James ID will work through this issue and settle outside of court.

Why doesn’t MAGSA represent the landowners in the lawsuits?

From MAGSA’s perspective, the best solution is a mutually beneficial agreement between the two agencies. Lawsuits can be a terrible waste of resources and time. MAGSA’s staff and Board are continuing to actively work toward an amicable result before the added costs of the lawsuit begin to take hold. MAGSA has engaged in ongoing discussions for the past three years with James ID, including in-person meetings, phone calls, and email exchanges to negotiate an agreement. MAGSA’s Board of Directors recently proposed to James ID leadership that they hold regular, joint public board meetings to negotiate a settlement. Ideally, MAGSA and James ID will work through this issue and settle outside of court.

What is MAGSA doing on behalf of the landowners?

On July 23, MAGSA confirmed with James ID an additional extension to the response time for those who have been or will be served legal documents by James Irrigation District in their lawsuit against MAGSA landowners. The last week of August, an additional 60-day extension was confirmed. This means there is currently a total of 150 days from the date of service of the legal documents before either the immediate need for an attorney or a requirement for a response to the court becomes necessary.

Contact MAGSA’s office if you have any questions regarding the extension.

MAGSA is also holding an upcoming workshop to provide important information about the lawsuit. MAGSA will hold future workshops as needed to assist landowners.

We encourage landowners to register for email updates about the lawsuits here.

Translate »