City of Patterson v. Turlock Irrigation District

Good Law
173 Cal. Rptr. 3d 651·2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 563·227 Cal. App. 4th 484·2014 WL 2885394
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 25, 2014F067629California4,645 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sarkisian, J.

This appeal echoes a familiar cry from the American Revolution—“No taxation without representation!” Here, a surcharge, not a tax, is the source of discontent. The surcharge, is imposed by defendant Turlock Irrigation District (TID) on electrical rates collected from customers in a service area outside TID’s boundaries. These outsiders are not eligible to vote in TID’s elections or to sit on its board of directors and, therefore, are not represented in the ratesetting process.

Plaintiff City of Patterson (City or Patterson) sought to obtain voting rights for the disenfranchised customers by requesting that the Stanislaus Local Agency Formation Commission (Stanislaus LAFCO) approve an expansion of TID’s boundaries through an annexation of the electrical service area. TID opposed City’s request and, in accordance with procedures set forth in Government Code section 56857, submitted a resolution to Stanislaus LAFCO requesting the annexation proceedings be terminated.

City responded by filing this lawsuit to challenge the validity of TID’s resolution. City alleged that TID’s resolution did not meet the requirements of section 56857. In particular, City argued that the…

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.