Beutz

I. INTRODUCTION

In 2006, the County of Riverside (the County) formed a special assessment district consisting of all residential properties in the community of Wildomar in order to pay the annual ongoing costs of refurbishing and maintaining landscaping in four public parks in the community. Plaintiff Steven Beutz, an owner of residential property in Wildomar, filed suit against the County to void the landscape assessment on the ground it violated article XHI D of the California Constitution (art. XIII D, § 4, subd. (a)), which was enacted following voters’ adoption of Proposition 218 in 1996. Beutz claimed the County failed to separate the general benefits from the special benefits of the landscaping, and to assess only for the special benefits the landscaping would confer on assessed parcels. Following the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment, the trial court entered judgment in favor of the County, and Beutz appeals.

We conclude the County properly based the assessment on the larger public improvement project of which the landscaping costs were a part, namely, a master plan to acquire and develop the parks and park facilities, rather than on the landscape…