Court Reaffirms Applicability of Proposition 218 to Groundwater Production Fees and Explains Mandates
October 29, 2013 -- Client Alert
In its recent decision, Griffith v. Pajaro, the Sixth District of the Court of Appeal answered questions about Proposition 218 that it did not have the opportunity to address in its 2007 decision, Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency v. Amrhein (2007) 150 Cal.App.4th 1364. In Griffith, which was a consolidated appeal with related case, Pendry v. Pajaro, the Court reaffirmed its holding that Proposition 218 (specifically, article XIII D, § 6 of the California Constitution) applies to fees imposed upon groundwater production and further clarified that such fees are not subject to the ratification election required for all property-related fees, except fees for “sewer, water, and refuse collection services.”