Concerned Citizens v. West Point Fire etc. Dist. 6/29/11 CA3

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » California » Court of Appeal » 2011 » Concerned Citizens v. West Point Fire etc. Dist. 6/29/11 CA3

State: California

Court: 1st District Court of Appeal 1st District Court of Appeal

Docket No: C061110

Case Date: 10/19/2011

Preview:Filed 6/29/11

CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Calaveras) ---CONCERNED CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. WEST POINT FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT et al., Defendants and Appellants. C061110 (Super. Ct. No. CV33828)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Calaveras County, John E. Griffin, Jr., Judge. Dismissed in part and reversed in part with directions. Stephanie J. Finelli; and Robert K. Reeve for Plaintiffs and Appellants. Nossaman LLP and Stephen N. Roberts for Defendants and Appellants.

Pursuant to the California Rules of Court, rules 8.1105(b) and 8.1110, this opinion is certified for publication with the exception of part I. of the Discussion. 1 (SEE CONCURRING OPINION)

Squeezed by a lack of resources from existing tax revenues, the tiny, rural West Point Fire Protection District (the District) decided to levy what it called a special assessment that would bring in $146,000 per year for additional fire suppression services. The District commissioned an engineer`s

report that created a three-tiered structure for imposing assessment fees, purporting to allocate the assessments based on the special benefits accruing to improved and unimproved properties from enhanced fire protection services. An election was held, the assessment passed by 62 percent of the vote, and the District`s board passed a resolution to levy the assessments. The resolution authorized the County of

Calaveras to collect the assessments beginning with the 20072008 tax year. Plaintiffs and appellants Concerned Citizens for Responsible Government and William Doherty (collectively Concerned Citizens) filed this reverse validation action, claiming the new assessment violated the provisions of Proposition 218,1 which restricts a public agency`s ability to impose special assessments. The trial court ruled against It

Concerned Citizens, finding that the assessment was valid.

also awarded the District more than $104,000 in attorney fees.

1

Article XIII D of the California Constitution; further references to articles are to the California Constitution. 2

We shall reverse the judgment because the assessment did not comport with the substantive provisions of Proposition 218, as elucidated by the California Supreme Court in Silicon Valley Taxpayers` Assn., Inc. v. Santa Clara County Open Space Authority (2008) 44 Cal.4th 431 (Silicon Valley). This

disposition also necessitates reversal of the attorney fee award. We shall also reject the District`s fallback arguments that, due to procedural defects, the lawsuit should have been dismissed at its inception. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The District is a special district located in Calaveras County that was formed in 1948 for the purpose of responding to structural fires, wildland fires, vehicle accidents and medical emergencies within its borders. The District encompasses 2,364

parcels and generates $149,000 in property taxes to meet its community service obligations. Between 2000 and 2006, there was a 340 percent growth in service calls within the District. However, this increase was At a special meeting

not being matched by increases in revenue.

of the District`s board in May 2006, the directors discussed a benefit assessment that would generate an additional $130,000 to $150,000 in revenue. An engineer`s report was commissioned in purported compliance with the requirements of Proposition 218. The

engineer noted the lack of sufficient resources to provide fire 3

suppression services 24 hours per day, seven days per week, and recommended the low cost solution of a ballot assessment to generate the needed additional revenue. three goals to be achieved: The report identified

(1) to make missed calls for

assistance a thing of the past` by providing at least one full-time emergency medical technician (EMT) senior firefighter on duty at all times; (2) to increase the number of volunteer firefighters on duty at any given time; and (3) to [e]mpower the community and hold the District accountable by conducting periodic town hall meetings and reviewing the assessment every five years. The report calculated that it would cost the District $146,000 to keep one senior firefighter on duty around the clock. The report used a methodology taken from a 1995 law

review article to calculate the benefits (based on proportionate costs) conferred on three different types of parcel owners-- improved, unimproved and exempt2--for fire protection services. Acknowledging that under Proposition 218 only special benefits to each parcel could be subject to the assessment, the report purported to separate special benefits conferred upon the parcels from the general benefits accruing to the community at large. In order to reach the goal of an additional

$146,000 in funds for increased fire suppression, the report

2

Properties whose land value was less than $5,000 and whose structural improvements did not exceed $5,000 according to county records, were considered exempt. 4

proposed the following allocation of assessments:

Improved

parcels--$87.58, unimproved parcels--$45, exempt parcels--$0. Following receipt of the engineer`s report, the District conducted an election in which each parcel owner was asked to vote on the proposed assessment. The ballot counting started on

April 19, 2007, (all further unspecified calendar dates are to that year) and the final results were certified on April 22. The measure passed, with 61.8 percent voting in favor and 38.1 percent voting against. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Filing of the Lawsuit and Service of Summons On June 14, the District adopted Resolution No. 07-06, authorizing the imposition of the assessments recommended in the engineer`s report. The resolution authorized Calaveras County

to collect the assessment for the District and to deduct 1 percent from the billed assessment as an administrative cost. On June 21, Concerned Citizens filed the present lawsuit as a reverse validation action, requesting judicial invalidation of the assessment. (Code Civ. Proc.,

Download Concerned Citizens v. West Point Fire etc. Dist. 6/29/11 CA3.pdf