California Court of Appeal

In a suit brought by a water retailer challenging a groundwater extraction fee imposed on water it draws from wells on its property, the trial court's award of a complete refund of the charges paid by plaintiff on the grounds that the charge violated the provisions of both the District Act and Article XIII D of the California Constitution, is reversed where: 1) the fee is a property-related charge for purposes of Article 13D, and thus subject to some of the constraints of that enactment; 2) however, it is also a charge for water service, and as such exempt from the requirement of voter ratification; 3) the pre-suit claim submitted by Great Oaks did not preserve any monetary remedy against the District for the violations of Article 13D found by the trial court; and 4) because the matter was treated as a simple action for damages when it should have been treated as a petition for a writ of mandate, the trial court failed to apply a properly deferential standard of review to the question whether the District's setting of the fee, or its use of the resulting proceeds, complied with the District Act.

Appellate Information

• Decided 08/12/2015
• Published 08/12/2015

Judges

• RUSHING

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel