• Online Edition
  • About
  • Support The Sheet
  • Contact

The Sheet

  • News
    • Mountain Town News
    • Sports and Outdoors
  • Arts and Life
  • Opinion/Editorial
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Dining

Judge to Town: Pay up

  • by Andy Geisel
  • in News
  • — 23 Mar, 2012

Following hearing, MLLA issues letter to Town confirming it will not sit down at mediation

It only took presiding Judge Roger D. Randall 15 minutes on the afternoon of March 23 to grant a petition previously submitted by Mammoth Lakes Land Acquisition (MLLA) to issue a writ of mandate that requires the Town of Mammoth Lakes to pay the entire $42 million judgment by the end of this fiscal year. Hours later, MLLA had issued a letter to the Town stating that it would  not participate in mediation. The letter also lays out the payment plan MLLA would like to see enforced. Click here to read the letter.

The Town now owes more than $42 million in judgment awards from what has been known as the Hot Creek litigation.

Earlier this month the Judge granted the Town and its legal counsel additional time to file any last pleas, motions and responses, but as of Friday afternoon, time ran out, and now the burden of payment rests squarely on the Town.

Prior to making his ruling, Judge Randall said he had reviewed all the material submitted by the Town and responses by the plaintiff, and asked for final comments from both parties.

Best Best & Krieger attorney John Higginbotham, representing the Town, said he didn’t have much to add. “The debt is owed,” he acknowledged. He went on to argue, however, that as per a recent California statue, precipitated by the recent City of Vallejo bankruptcy case, the Town should have 60 days of pre-Chapter 9 process time, or mediation. “We’re not suggesting that MLLA isn’t entitled to the writ, or that you shouldn’t grant it.”

Attorney John Pierce, representing MLLA, responded that without the writ, it would not be possible to properly enforce the judgment. “The Town would continue attempts at mediation, as if it were immune, which would be a waste of time.” According to the letter issued by MLLA this afternoon, it will not take part in mediation.

Both the Town and MLLA have repeatedly made attempts at coming to a settlement to no avail. Town leaders, such as Council member John Eastman, have said in previous interviews that the distance between the two parties remained great.

“The Town should be permitted to take advantage of a 10-year payment plan,” Pierce added. “It’s not a bad thing; on the contrary it’s an extraordinary remedy.”

Section 970.6 of California Code makes such a payment plan available if the governing body of the local public entity has adopted an ordinance or resolution finding that an unreasonable hardship will result unless the judgment is paid in installments. Judge Randall said he would make an additional finding of hardship, given the Town’s economic situation.

Higginbotham responded that, contrary to Pierce’s assertion that 970.6 benefits the creditor, the code in fact is written for the benefit of the public entity. “It’s our call, the Town’s decision [whether to invoke 970.6],” he said. Higginbotham added his take that it’s not even the Court’s place to order the Town to exercise that option, and indicated that there should be a proper hearing should the Town decide to invoke 970.6.

To be eligible for bankruptcy, the Town would first have to prove that it is insolvent.

Should the Town file for relief under the U.S. Chapter 9 Municipal Bankruptcy statute, its debt would be neither discharged, nor necessarily reduced in any way. In short, according to U.S. statute, Chapter 9 provides for “reorganization of municipalities, which includes cities and towns, as well as villages, counties, taxing districts, municipal utilities and school districts,” and restructuring debt, not erasing it.

In the more than 60 years since Congress established a federal mechanism for the resolution of municipal debts, there have been fewer than 500 municipal bankruptcy petitions filed.

Town Manager Dave Wilbrecht was present during the proceeding, but made no comment afterward.

 

Share

Topics: mammothMLLANewssheet

— Andy Geisel

You may also like...

  • Only stars are in the sky … for now 12 Nov, 2011
  • Mono County Supervisors debate merits of using AB 109 monies now versus later 17 Jun, 2013
  • Broncos battle Boron 11 Dec, 2010
  • Shrek or donkey 1 Jul, 2011

6 Comments

  1. Ken Warner says:
    March 24, 2012 at 9:09 am

    Well, it looks like we now know where the money we give the town through Prop. R and Measure U will go. Good thing us town folk had the foresight to tax ourselves to pay for our tireless “The debt is owed” legal team that our brilliant Town Council chose to represent us.

    And heck, we have so much money that we can afford to construct a monument to ourselves at the entrance of town. Paying $42 million dollars over ten years shouldn’t be a problem at all. The airport is such a great financial benefit given all the enplanements it generates and given all that extra money spent by people who fly into Mammoth that $42 million won’t even put a dent in our annual budgets.

    Maybe we should build a second monument to ourselves at the airport explaining all the hard work our town leaders put forth to enable real air service (at various times of the year) so people can go to Yosemite whenever they can find an available flight.

    Everybody should just relax — you won’t feel a thing. And when all is said and done — we will still have that really great airport to serve all of our second home owners at various times of the year.

    This is the best of all possible worlds.

  2. Eyenever Sayno says:
    March 25, 2012 at 7:32 pm

    FWIW, with the exception of the holidays, I’ve skied nearly every day on the hill this season, and I’ve met a ton of vacationing folks from all over the world who have told me they flew into the Mammoth Airport. It would seem that moving forward, air service is indeed an important component of the town’s economic future. And sprucing up the entry with a gateway seems like a good idea; railing against it penny wise and pound foolish.

  3. Ken Warner says:
    March 26, 2012 at 9:40 am

    How many people are “a ton”? If there where 50 flights a day each with the current average number of 60 passengers, that would be 3000 people which doesn’t even equal a poor day for the local businesses. And where would you put 3000 or 4000 rental cars assuming two people per car for a 2 day stay?

    And please don’t point to public transportation as an alternative. It’s not designed to shuttle fly in people. And redesigning our public transportation to serve fly in people would cost as much as the airport subsidy if not more.

    The Mammoth Yosemite Airport is an airport in the sky of your mind. The “benefit to the community” that is sold to the community on a daily basis will never be realized.

    And maybe spending $250,000 on “sprucing up” a pile of rocks seems like a good idea to you but not to me. What better way to demonstrate to MLLA that Mammoth has discretionary funds available to pay what the town owes them than to squander the yearly salary of 4 or 5 town employees on a pile of rocks that everybody is going to forget about 5 minutes after it’s done.

    You could buy a house for $250,000. But of course you are free to contribute all the money you feel is needed.

  4. Just don't get it says:
    April 8, 2012 at 10:54 pm

    Ken Warner:

    If the Town of Mammoth Lakes were as you would have it, the Old Mill would still be standing, would be in operation and the primary employer. Those that reside in town would still be living in canvas tents up in Old Mammoth. Oh, and the primary mode of transportation would remain the horse driven carriage.

    The Mammoth Yosemite Airport will grow Ken. Progress will happen Ken. Either accept it or move to Bodie where your type mindset prevails…. hint.

  5. Just don't get it says:
    April 8, 2012 at 11:06 pm

    Oh and Ken Warner,

    As far as your comment that the Mammoth Yosemite Airport is not designed to shuttle fly in people. Well Ken, neither are over 50 percent of the airports in the lower 48 states of the United States as well as over 80 percent of the airports in the state of Alaska. But they do the job adequately and safely and have been doing so for well over 50 plus years.

    Do your homework Ken Warner prior to disseminating your negative prehistoric self-centered propaganda. What is even worse than your continued rants of untruths, is the sad reality that many people actually read and believe your totally untrue negative malarkey.

  6. Ken Warner says:
    April 14, 2012 at 4:12 am

    Dear Just don’t get it:

    Please take a remedial reading class at Cerro Coso.

    “And please don’t point to public transportation as an alternative. It’s not designed to shuttle fly in people.” is what I said.

    Negative, prehistoric, self-centered propaganda alert — see below!!

    Mammoth Lakes owes MLLA $42 million dollars because idiots like you think you can get rich if we destroy what was once a nice place to live by grinding it to dust under the heels of a horde of tourists whom you imagine will all be waving their money around like they were in an Apple store. Lift up your eyes from your “Get Rich Quick” app and take a look around. It aint happening!

    Then move to Norco since that’s what Mammoth would be like if you had your way — hint.

  • Previous story This ain’t Sesame Street
  • Next story Mono SAR assists in Death Valley search
  • Special Publications

  • Recent Posts

    • GET A PIECE OF THE ROCK
    • OBITUARY: BRIAN SIEBERT 1973-2026
    • SEAL OF APPROVAL
    • GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME … $1.1M
    • IT’S A HARD KNOCK LIFE FOR BEARS
  • Special Publications

  • News
    • Mountain Town News
    • Sports and Outdoors
  • Arts and Life
  • Opinion/Editorial
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Dining

© 2026 THE SHEET. DEVELOPED BY PENDERWORTH.