City of Watsonville v. State Department of Health Services

Good Law
133 Cal. App. 4th 875·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 1664·2005 Daily Journal DAR 12722·35 Cal. Rptr. 3d 216·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9340
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 26, 2005H028111California5,668 words

Opinion

Opinion

Premo, J.

In November 2002, the voters of the City of Watsonville (City) passed a ballot initiative known as Measure S. Measure S prohibits introduction of any substance into City’s water supply unless the substance conforms to listed requirements. We hold that to the extent Measure S applies to fluoridation it is preempted by state law.

I. Factual and Procedural Background

In the fall of 2002, City was poised to begin a water fluoridation project when City’s voters passed Measure S and halted City’s fluoridation efforts. Measure S prohibits introducing any substance into City’s drinking water (other than substances used to make the water safe to drink) unless, among other things, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the substance for safety and effectiveness. Since the FDA does not regulate additives to public water supplies and has never specifically approved the use of fluoride as an additive to public water supplies, Measure S effectively prohibits fluoridation. There is no question that the initiative was designed for that purpose.

City had begun its fluoridation project as required by Health and Safety Code sections 116410 and 116415. Section…

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.