§Why CasetextPricing

SAN BUENAVENTURA, CITY OF v. UNITED WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT

Amicus Curiae Brief of Jack Cohen

36 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. Silicon Valley Taxpayers Assn., Inc. v. Santa Clara County Open Space Authority

    44 Cal.4th 431 (Cal. 2008)   Cited 119 times
    Concluding assessment was invalid for failure to meet the requirements of Proposition 218 but not addressing the validity of the assessment district

  3. Sierra Club v. Superior Court (County of Orange)

    57 Cal.4th 157 (Cal. 2013)   Cited 81 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Sierra Club, a CPRA statute specifically excluded" '[c]omputer software' from the definition of a public record" and defined" 'computer software'" as including "computer mapping systems."

  4. Bighorn-Desert v. Verjil

    39 Cal.4th 205 (Cal. 2006)   Cited 74 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Rejecting argument that rates based on usage were not subject to Proposition 218

  5. City of Barstow v. Mojave Water Agency

    23 Cal.4th 1224 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 85 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Article X, § 2 of the California Constitution"dictates the basic principles defining water rights: that no one can have a protectible interest in the unreasonable use of water, and that holders of water rights must use water reasonably and beneficially"

  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. Capistrano Taxpayers Assn., Inc. v. City of San Juan Capistrano

    235 Cal.App.4th 1493 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015)   Cited 28 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In Capistrano, the water district conceded that its tiered pricing did not reflect increased costs and that it "effectively used revenues from the top tiers to subsidize below-cost rates for the bottom tier."

  11. Section 1

    Cal. Const. art. XIII § 1   Cited 206 times

    Unless otherwise provided by this Constitution or the laws of the United States: (a) All property is taxable and shall be assessed at the same percentage of fair market value. When a value standard other than fair market value is prescribed by this Constitution or by statute authorized by this Constitution, the same percentage shall be applied to determine the assessed value. The value to which the percentage is applied, whether it be the fair market value or not, shall be known for property tax

  12. Section 2

    Cal. Const. art. X § 2   Cited 117 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Describing the principles of beneficial use and reasonableness as "self-executing"

  13. 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"

  14. 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

  15. Section 2

    Cal. Const. art. XIIID § 2   Cited 44 times

    Definitions. As used in this article: (a) "Agency" means any local government as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 1 of Article XIIIC. (b) "Assessment" means any levy or charge upon real property by an agency for a special benefit conferred upon the real property. "Assessment" includes, but is not limited to, "special assessment," "benefit assessment," "maintenance assessment" and "special assessment tax." (c) "Capital cost" means the cost of acquisition, installation, construction, reconstruction

  16. 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

  17. Section 3

    Cal. Const. art. XIIID § 3   Cited 28 times

    (a)No tax, assessment, fee, or charge shall be assessed by any agency upon any parcel of property or upon any person as an incident of property ownership except: (1) The ad valorem property tax imposed pursuant to Article XIII and Article XIIIA. (2) Any special tax receiving a two-thirds vote pursuant to Section 4 of Article XIIIA. (3) Assessments as provided by this article. (4) Fees or charges for property related services as provided by this article. (b) For purposes of this article, fees for

  18. Section 1

    Cal. Const. art. XIIID § 1   Cited 10 times

    Application. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the provisions of this article shall apply to all assessments, fees and charges, whether imposed pursuant to state statute or local government charter authority. Nothing in this article or Article XIIIC shall be construed to: (a) Provide any new authority to any agency to impose a tax, assessment, fee, or charge. (b) Affect existing laws relating to the imposition of fees or charges as a condition of property development. (c) Affect existing