Borst

Borst v. The City of El Paso De Robles CA2/6

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 5, 2014B247408California3,593 words

Opinion

Opinion

Yegan, J.

Background The operative pleading is the "first amended individual and class action complaint" (complaint) filed in July 2009. The complaint alleges that appellants are bringing the action on behalf of themselves and "all other similarly situated individuals and businesses who pay or paid water fees and sewer fees to [City]." The complaint consists of two causes of action. The first cause of action alleges that, without complying with Proposition 218, City enacted three ordinances imposing water and sewer service fees that were actually "Utility User[] Taxes." "Utility User Taxes must be enacted in compliance with Proposition 218." Appellants sought "[a] refund . . . for themselves and for each payer of the Sewer and Water Fees imposed . . . ." "Adopted by California voters in November 1996, Proposition 218 added articles XIII C and XIII D to the California Constitution. Proposition 218 generally prohibits local governments from imposing taxes without voter approval. [Citation.]" (Owens v. County of Los Angeles (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 107, 128.) " 'Article XIII C concerns voter approval for local government general taxes and special taxes. Article XIII D sets forth procedures,…

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.