Dorgelo

Las Virgenes Municipal Water District v. Dorgelo

Good Law
154 Cal. App. 3d 481·1984 Cal. App. LEXIS 1902·201 Cal. Rptr. 266
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 13, 1984B002715California1,747 words

Opinion

Opinion

Roth, J.

The question in this original mandamus proceeding is whether the remaining portion of a water district’s bonds, the initial issuance of which was statutorily authorized in 1964 by an “absence of landowner protest” plan, may now be issued consistently with the mandates of Proposition 13. The 1964 authorization permitted petitioner water district to issue $3.2 million in bonds. Prior to the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, it had issued $1.7 million of those bonds. The district now seeks to issue the remaining $1.5 million of those previously authorized but heretofore unissued bonds. Because we find the original authorization in 1964 of the issuance of all of the bonds was a prior “indebtedness approved by the voters,” we find no constitutional impropriety in permitting the present issuance of the remainder of the bonds.

The facts are not contested. Petitioner water district was organized in 1958 under the Municipal Water District Law of 1911. (Wat. Code, § 71000 et seq.) Respondent is the district’s secretary. The district formed three improvement districts, designated Sanitation Improvement Districts U-1, U-2, and U-3, pursuant to Water Code section 71920 et seq., now…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.