Legal Opinion
FOOTHILL-DE ANZA COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT v. Emerich
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 19, 2007No. H031120PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
PREMO, J.
I. Introduction
If a local public entity desires to issue a bond to be repaid by taxes on real property it must generally obtain approval of two-thirds of its voters. (Cal. Const., art. XIII A, § 1, subd. (b)(2).) Proposition 39 reduced the approval requirement to 55 percent for bonds issued by school districts, community college districts, and county offices of education to pay for certain types of projects. The 55 percent approval applies only if the bond proposition submitted to the voters meets the accountability requirements specified by Proposition 39. (Prop. 39, § 4, as…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Holt Civic Club v. City of TuscaloosaSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Bowland v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Lazar v. Hertz Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1999
- McClung v. Employment Development DepartmentCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- In Re Redevelopment Plan for Bunker Hill v. GoldmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Gorman v. Tassajara Development Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2009
- City of San Diego v. ShapiroCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
- Broyles v. TexasDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2009
- Sanford v. RasnickCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- Berkeley Cement, Inc. v. Regents of the Univ. of Cal., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.