Lauckhart

Lauckhart v. County of Yolo CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 8, 2022C092354California1,970 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND LAW AND FACTS

Section 6, subdivision (b)(4) of article XIII D of the California Constitution (section 6(b)(4)), adopted by voters as part of Proposition 218 in 1996, restricts an agency’s authority to impose fees without submitting the fee to the voters. (Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. v. City of Roseville (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 637, 640-642.) Section 6(b)(4) provides: “No fee or charge may be imposed for a service unless that service is actually used by, or immediately available to, the owner of the property in question. Fees or charges based on potential or future use of a service are not permitted.” In Capistrano Taxpayers Assn., Inc. v. City of San Juan Capistrano (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 1493 (Capistrano)), the Court of Appeal considered whether the cost of producing recycled water could be apportioned to all water customers, even those without

noticed documents. To the extent the opening brief technically violated rule 8.204, we will disregard the nonprejudicial defects. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.204(e)(2)(C).)

2 the ability to use the nonpotable water. The court held it did not contravene section 6(b)(4) for the city to charge a fee for the recycled water…

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.