1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Cal.Rptr.2d
  4. 84 Cal.Rptr.2d
  5. 84 Cal.Rptr.2d 804 (1999)
 

HOWARD JARVIS TAXPAYERS v. CITY OF SAN DIEGO

No. D031348.

84 Cal.Rptr.2d 804 (1999)

72 Cal.App.4th 230

HOWARD JARVIS TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. CITY OF SAN DIEGO, Defendant and Respondent.

Court of Appeals of California, Fourth District, Division One.

Review Denied August 18, 1999.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Trevor A. Grimm, Los Angeles, Jonathan M. Coupal, Sacramento, and Timothy A. Bittle, for Plaintiffs and Appellants.

Casey Gwinn, City Attorney, Anita M. Noone, Assistant City Attorney, and James M. Chapin, Deputy City Attorney, for Defendant and Respondent.

Richards, Watson & Gershon, Michael G. Colantuono, Rubin D. Weiner and T. Peter Pierce, Los Angeles, for 85 California Cities and Towns as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendant and Respondent.

KREMER, P.J.

The issue here is whether a Business Improvement District (BID) assessment imposed on businesses is governed by Proposition 218 (Cal. Const., arts.1 XIII C, XIII D). We conclude Proposition 218 does not apply and affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The plaintiffs in this case are four businesses2 in Pacific Beach who are subject to a levy pursuant to the Pacific Beach BID...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases