On May 20, CSDA led a local government coalition, including the California State Association of Counties (CSAC) and Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA), in submitting a letter to the Supreme Court of California, urging the court to grant a petition for review in the Paradise Irrigation District, et al. v. Commission on State Mandates case related to State of California’s refusal to pay special districts for state mandated local programs as required by the State Constitution.
Pursuant to Article XIII B, section 6 of the California Constitution, whenever the legislature or any state agency mandates a new program be implemented, or a new service required, the state must provide a reimbursement for the cost of implementation and increased levels of service. In Paradise, CSDA is asking the court to review and reverse the decision of the Third District Court of Appeals, which decided in March that water and irrigation special districts are ineligible for reimbursement for state-mandated programs and services because they have “authority” to impose increase fees and rates to comply with state programs.
Local governments, including CSDA, argued that Proposition 218 limits their ability to levy rates and fees without voter consent. However, the Third District held that the California Water Code provides water districts and irrigation districts statutory authority to “fix and collect charges” for services provided, and that the Proposition 218 protest procedure requirements do not divest them of their authority to levy such charges.
Ultimately, the Commission on State Mandates denial for reimbursement and the decision of the Third District Court could force Californians to choose between sacrificing the quality of their local services and paying ever-higher local utility rates to fund new state programs they haven’t asked for.
CSDA’s letter in support of the petition for review argues that the power to increase revenue for a local agency rests with the voters, stating “If voters have the power to deprive the local government of its ‘authority’ to levy a new or increased fee, then the ultimate authority unquestionably resides with the voters, not the local government.” Therefore, water and irrigation districts should be eligible to receive reimbursement from the Commission on State Mandates.
If the Supreme Court grants the petition for review, CSDA will work with local government coalition partners to submit an amicus brief in support of the districts involved in this matter of statewide significance for all special districts.
If you have any questions about this case, contact Legislative Analyst – Attorney Mustafa Hessabi at mustafah@csda.net.
#AdvocacyNews#FeatureNews