ABSTRACT: RE: Intended Decision, Monterey Peninsula Taxpayers' Association, a California corporation, Ronald J. Pasquinelli, Thomas J. Rowley Jr. and Richards J. Heuer, III, Petitioners/Plaintiffs v. Board of Directors of the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District and the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District Respondents/Defendants, Case No. M123512, SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF MONTEREY, Dated: March 17, 2015. Discussion included The District May Only Refuse to Place a Referendum on the Ballot if the Petition Violates Technical Requirements; it Lacks Authority to do so on Substantive Grounds, The Referendum Petition Violated the Elections Code, The Water Supply Charge is Authorized by the Enabling Law and The Water Supply Charge Does not Violate the California Constitution. Disposition Petitioners' requested relief is denied. Respondents' counsel is to prepare an appropriate order consistent with this ruling, present it to opposing counsel for approval as to form, and return it to this court for signature. The MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT’S Press Release states, in part, The Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD) announced today at it has prevailed on all issues in Monterey Superior Court Case No. M123512 The Monterey Peninsula Taxpayers’ Association et al. v Board of Directors of the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District et al. Judge Efren N. Iglesia found in favor of the Water Management District, the defendant in the matter, and issued his Intended Decision on March 17, 2015.
“Judge Iglesia’s decision is a significant victory for the Water Management District,” said David J. Stoldt, General Manager of MPWMD. “While we respect the mission of the Taxpayers’ Association, this win is recognition of the District’s important legislative mandate and our overall mission to manage the water resources of the Monterey Peninsula.
The lawsuit claimed that the Water Management District violated the California Constitution and the District’s own Enabling Law by adopting ordinance 152 which instituted a water supply charge aimed at creating a new supply of drinking water for the Monterey Peninsula. Additionally, the MPTA claimed the District exceeded its powers by refusing to place the MPTA referendum – which sought to repeal the Ordinance – on the ballot. The Decision rules completely in favor of the District on each of these claims.
Intended Decision, Monterey Peninsula Taxpayers' Association, a California corporation, Ronald J. Pasquinelli, Thomas J. Rowley Jr. and Richards J. Heuer, III, Petitioners/Plaintiffs v. Board of Directors of the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District and the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District Respondents/Defendants, Case No. M123512, SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF MONTEREY, Dated: March 17, 2015.
REFERENCES:
Press Release, March 19, 2015
JUDGE RULES IN FAVOR OF WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT IN TAXPAYER ASSOCIATION LAWSUIT
District Prevails on All Issues Brought Forth By MPTA
Monterey, Calif., March 19, 2015
Judge upholds Peninsula water district charge
By Jim Johnson, Monterey Herald
Posted: 03/19/15
No comments:
Post a Comment