§Why CasetextPricing

CITIZENS FOR FAIR REU RATES v. CITY OF REDDING

Amicus Curiae Brief of Pacific Legal Foundation

25 Cited authorities

  1. Amador Valley Jt. Un. High Sch. v. State Bd. of Equal

    22 Cal.3d 208 (Cal. 1978)   Cited 409 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding that although initiative measure's title and summary were technically imprecise, they substantially complied with the law

  2. Santa Clara County Local Transportation Authority v. Guardino

    11 Cal.4th 220 (Cal. 1995)   Cited 229 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Discussing statewide right to initiative

  3. People v. Davis

    57 Cal.4th 353 (Cal. 2013)   Cited 109 times
    In Davis, a jury convicted the defendant of sale and possession of a controlled substance based on the chemical name of the substance in question, without evidence showing that the substance met the statutory definition of a "controlled" substance.

  4. Carman v. Alvord

    31 Cal.3d 318 (Cal. 1982)   Cited 226 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Ruling on issue raised for first time in responsive brief and then addressed in plaintiff's reply brief

  5. California Farm Bureau Federation v. State Water Resources Control Board

    51 Cal.4th 421 (Cal. 2011)   Cited 71 times
    In Farm Bureau, we considered and rejected a facial challenge to a statutory user fee on certain water rights holders for purposes of supporting the State Water Resources Control Board's Water Rights Division.

  6. Sinclair Paint Co. v. State Bd. of Equalization

    15 Cal.4th 866 (Cal. 1997)   Cited 87 times   6 Legal Analyses
    In Sinclair Paint, supra, 15 Cal.4th 866, 64 Cal.Rptr.2d 447, 937 P.2d 1350, this court addressed the distinction between taxes, which require two-thirds approval, and regulatory fees, which do not.

  7. Apartment Assn. of Los Angeles County, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles

    24 Cal.4th 830 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 77 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In Apartment Assn. of Los Angeles County, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (2001) 24 Cal.4th 830, 102 Cal.Rptr.2d 719, 14 P.3d 930 (Apartment Association), our Supreme Court considered whether an inspection fee imposed on owners of residential rental properties violated article XIII D. The fee, measured at $12 per unit per year, was imposed by the City of Los Angeles on " ‘[o]wners of all buildings subject to inspection,’ " which in turn included " ‘all residential rental properties with two or more dwelling units on the same lot’ " with certain exceptions.

  8. City and County of San Francisco v. Farrell

    32 Cal.3d 47 (Cal. 1982)   Cited 127 times
    In City and County of San Francisco v. Farrell (1982) 32 Cal.3d 47, 184 Cal.Rptr. 713, 648 P.2d 935, "we construe[d] the term ‘special taxes’... to mean taxes which are levied for a specific purpose...."

  9. Richmond v. Shasta Community Services Dist.

    32 Cal.4th 409 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 67 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Richmond, supra, 32 Cal.4th 409, 9 Cal.Rptr.3d 121, 83 P.3d 518, our Supreme Court held "a charge that a local water district imposed as a condition of making a new connection to the water system, and that the district used to finance capital improvements to the water system," was not subject to article XIII D's restrictions, as the district did not "impose the capacity charge on real property as such, but on individuals who apply for new service connections."

  10. Greene v. Marin County Flood Control and Water Conservation District

    49 Cal.4th 277 (Cal. 2010)   Cited 49 times
    Finding Government Code section 53753, enacted specifically to address the balloting scheme for assessments adopted under article XIII D, section 4, was persuasive on the question whether such ballots must be voted on in secret in accordance with article II, section 7

  11. Section 1

    Cal. Const. art. XIIIC § 1   Cited 63 times
    Exempting from the definition of tax " charge imposed for the reasonable regulatory costs to a local government for issuing licenses and permits, performing investigations, inspections, and audits, enforcing agricultural marketing orders, and the administrative enforcement and adjudication thereof"

  12. Section 3

    Cal. Const. art. XIII § 3   Cited 61 times

    The following are exempt from property taxation: (a) Property owned by the State. (b) Property owned by a local government, except as otherwise provided in Section 11(a). (c) Bonds issued by the State or a local government in the State. (d) Property used for libraries and museums that are free and open to the public and property used exclusively for public schools, community colleges, state colleges, and state universities. (e) Buildings, land, equipment, and securities used exclusively for educational

  13. Section 4

    Cal. Const. art. XIIIA § 4   Cited 60 times

    Cities, Counties and special districts, by a two-thirds vote of the qualified electors of such district, may impose special taxes on such district, except ad valorem taxes on real property or a transaction tax or sales tax on the sale of real property within such City, County or special district. Cal. Const. art. XIIIA § 4

  14. Section 6

    Cal. Const. art. XIIID § 6   Cited 40 times

    (a)Procedures for New or Increased Fees and Charges. An agency shall follow the procedures pursuant to this section in imposing or increasing any fee or charge as defined pursuant to this article, including, but not limited to, the following: (1) The parcels upon which a fee or charge is proposed for imposition shall be identified. The amount of the fee or charge proposed to be imposed upon each parcel shall be calculated. The agency shall provide written notice by mail of the proposed fee or charge

  15. Rule 8.520 - Briefs by parties and amici curiae; judicial notice

    Cal. R. 8.520   Cited 3,146 times

    (a)Parties' briefs; time to file (1) Within 30 days after the Supreme Court files the order of review, the petitioner must serve and file in that court either an opening brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (2) Within 30 days after the petitioner files its brief or the time to do so expires, the opposing party must serve and file either an answer brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (3) The petitioner may file a reply brief on the merits or