Russell City Energy Co. v. City of Hayward

Good Law
14 Cal. App. 5th 54·2017 Cal. App. LEXIS 686·222 Cal. Rptr. 3d 162·2017 WL 3381692
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 7, 2017A144749California8,288 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Jones, J.

*56 The "Payments Clause" of an agreement between Russell City Energy Company, LLC (Russell) and the City of Hayward (City)

*57 prohibited the City from imposing any taxes on the "development, construction, ownership and operation" of Russell's power plant except taxes tethered to ownership of real property. The question in this case is whether Russell's interpretation of the Payments Clause violates article XIII, section 31 of the California Constitution (Section 31) which provides "[t]he power to tax may not be surrendered or suspended by grant or contract."

*167 The answer is yes. We conclude Russell's interpretation of the Payments Clause-that the City contractually promised not to impose any taxes other than real property related taxes-violates Section 31 because it surrenders and suspends the City's power to tax the power plant. Thus, the trial court properly determined the Payments Clause was unenforceable and sustained the City's demurrer to Russell's complaint alleging claims premised on a breach of the agreement.

We also conclude, however, that Russell must be permitted an opportunity to amend its complaint to allege a quasi-contractual restitution claim.

FACTUAL AND…

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.