Legal Opinion

Santa Barbara County Taxpayers Ass'n v. County of Santa Barbara

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 3, 1987No. B023919PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

GILBERT, J.

Article XIII B of the California Constitution, also known as Proposition 4, limits the amount of tax revenues a government entity may spend. Section 5 states, in pertinent part: “Each entity of government may establish . . . retirement . . . funds .... Contributions to any such fund . . . shall . . . constitute appropriations subject to limitation . . -”

Here we conclude that the section means what it says, and that a county may not exclude from its annual appropriations contributions to its employees’ retirement fund.

Facts

Beginning in 1985, the County of Santa Barbara had…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Friends of Mammoth v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  2. Rose v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. In Re Marriage of BouquetCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Carman v. AlvordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Freedland v. GrecoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. State v. CousanSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1996
  2. San Francisco Taxpayers Assn. v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Weidenfeller v. Star & GarterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
  4. Bolt v. Arapahoe County School District No. SixSupreme Court of Colorado · 1995
  5. Hobbs v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991

14 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