Legal Opinion

Beaumont Investors v. Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 5, 1985No. Civ. 29992PublishedCited by 37 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

McDANIEL, J.

On this appeal, we are asked to consider whether a facilities fee enacted by a water district constitutes a “special tax” within the meaning of article XIII A, section 4, of the California Constitution (Prop. 13), and thus must be approved by a two-thirds vote of the electors in the district.

Factual and Procedural Background

On September 4, 1980, the Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District Board of Directors (District and Board) adopted resolution No. 80-5 imposing a “facilities fee” payable upon application for connection to its water system. About three months later,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Amador Valley Joint Union High School District v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Los Angeles County Transportation Commission v. RichmondCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
  3. County of Fresno v. MalmstromCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
  4. Mills v. County of TrinityCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
  5. J. W. Jones Companies v. City of San DiegoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984

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

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. Silicon Valley Taxpayers' Ass'n v. Santa Clara County Open Space AuthorityCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008
  2. Sinclair Paint Co. v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Shapell Industries, Inc. v. Governing BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
  4. Jacks v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 2017
  5. Terminal Plaza Corp. v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986

32 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