Legal Opinion

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. v. City of Roseville

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 10, 2003No. C039942PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

SCOTLAND, P. J.

At the November 7, 2000, General Election, a majority of the voters of the City of Roseville (the City) voted to approve two conflicting tax measures. Measure Q proposed to ratify the City’s utility user’s tax and to restrict use of its revenues to certain specified purposes. Measure S proposed to repeal the City’s utility user’s tax.

In an action for declaratory relief brought by plaintiffs Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and Phil Ozenick, the trial court determined that Measure Q proposed a special tax requiring approval by two-thirds of the voters and that, because…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Amador Valley Joint Union High School District v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Palermo v. Stockton Theatres, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Santa Clara County Local Transportation Authority v. GuardinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  4. City and County of San Francisco v. FarrellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Fuentes v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. CHIATELLO v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
  2. Neilson v. City of California CityCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
  3. Bay Area Cellular Telephone Co. v. City of Union CityCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
  4. Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency v. AmrheinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  5. Borikas v. Alameda Unified School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013

21 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