Dorff

Metropolitan Water District v. Dorff

Good Law
138 Cal. App. 3d 388·188 Cal. Rptr. 169·1982 Cal. App. LEXIS 2246
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 21, 1982Civ. 29121California3,567 words

Opinion

Opinion

McDANIEL, J.

This is an original proceeding brought by the Metropolitan Water District (the district) seeking a writ of mandate to compel its secretary (respondent) to publish notice of sale of $30 million worth of bonds (series F bonds). The secretary has declined to do so thus far because she has concluded that it would be in violation of 1978 Proposition 13.

Issuance of the bonds was authorized in 1966 when, pursuant to an ordinance adopted by the district’s board, an election was held and a majority of the voters voted to allow the district to “incur a bonded indebtedness in the principal sum of $850,000,000” to acquire and construct facilities for supplying the inhabitants of the district with water. The maximum rate of interest as specified in the ballot measure was not to exceed 6 percent per annum, “the actual rate or rates of interest on said bonds to be determined at or prior to the time of the sale or sales thereof.”

The district issued $185 million of series A and B bonds in 1967 and 1968 at 6 percent interest. After the decision in Eastern Mun. Water Dist. v. Scott (1969) 1 Cal.App.3d 129 [ 81 Cal.Rptr. 510 ], which held that Water Code section 71960 authorized…

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.