City of El Monte v. Commission on State Mandates
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
SCOTLAND, P. J.
In this appeal from the trial court’s denial of a petition for writ of administrative mandate, we are called upon to determine whether legislation requiring local redevelopment agencies to contribute to a local Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) constituted a reimbursable state mandate under article XIII B, section 6 of California’s Constitution.
As we shall explain, we agree with the trial court that the legislation did not constitute a reimbursable state mandate and that plaintiffs were accorded a fair hearing before the Commission on State Mandates.…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
- Serrano v. PriestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Topanga Assn. for a Scenic Comm. v. CTY OF LOS ANGELESCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- Butt v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- County of San Diego v. StateCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- California Redevelopment Ass'n v. MatosantosCalifornia Supreme Court · 2011
- County of Sonoma v. Commission on State MandatesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
- City of Scotts Valley v. County of Santa CruzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Cuenca v. CohenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
- Grossmont Union High School District v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.