Wilde

Wilde v. City of Dunsmuir

Good Law
240 Cal. Rptr. 3d 88·29 Cal. App. 5th 158
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 15, 2018C082664California7,548 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hoch, J.

*163 In 1996, California voters adopted Proposition 218 (as approved by voters Gen. Elec. Nov. 5, 1996, eff. Nov. 6, 1996 < https://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/sov/1996-general/official-declaration.pdf> [as of Nov. 14, 2018], archived at < https://perma.cc/PZ9U-ABQ6>) (Proposition 218) to add article XIII C to the California Constitution by which they expressly reserved their right to challenge local taxes, assessments, fees, and charges by initiative. (See generally Bighorn-Desert View Water Agency v. Verjil (2006) 39 Cal.4th 205 , 208-209, 46 Cal.Rptr.3d 73 , 138 P.3d 220 ( Bighorn-Desert ).) This case presents the question of whether section 3 of article XIII C to the California Constitution silently repealed voters' right to challenge by referendum the same local levies for which they expressly preserved their power of initiative.

Here, the City of Dunsmuir (City) rejected a referendum measure submitted by one its residents, Leslie T. Wilde. The City rejected the referendum even though there is no dispute Wilde gathered sufficient voter signatures to qualify the referendum for the ballot to repeal Resolution 2016-02 that established a new water rate master plan. The City's…

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.