Legal Opinion

City of Palmdale v. Palmdale Water District

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 9, 2011No. B224869PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

WOODS, J.

INTRODUCTION

In this appeal, the City of Palmdale (City) asserts the trial court erred in finding the Palmdale Water District (PWD) had adopted a new water rate structure in conformity with the constitutional requirements of Proposition 218.

After conducting an independent review of the record (Silicon Valley Taxpayers’ Assn., Inc. v. Santa Clara County Open Space Authority (2008) 44 Cal.4th 431, 448 [79 Cal.Rptr.3d 312, 187 P.3d 37]), we conclude PWD failed to satisfy its burden to establish that its new water rate structure complies with the mandates of Proposition 218 (as set…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Silicon Valley Taxpayers' Ass'n v. Santa Clara County Open Space AuthorityCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008
  2. Bighorn-Desert View Water Agency v. VerjilCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Ass'n v. City of RosevilleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
  4. Deetz v. CarterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Green Valley Landowners Ass'n v. City of VallejoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
  2. Capistrano Taxpayers Ass'n v. City of San Juan CapistranoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
  3. Griffith v. Pajaro Valley Water Management AgencyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
  4. Newhall County Water District v. Castaic Lake Water AgencyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
  5. Campana v. East Bay Mun. Utility Dist.California Court of Appeal · 2023

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API