The Coachella Valley Water District’s $102 per acre-foot rate for users of the Coachella Canal was an improper tax, and users who paid it should be refunded, the Court of Appeal ruled Jan. 31.
Their published ruling upholds Riverside Superior Judge Craig Riemer’s finding that the water district should pay out $18 million to its former ratepayers.
Follow Our Courts reached out to both the water district, and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, which brought the case, for comment. Neither organization had responded at publication time.
The water district had charged agricultural users $34 per acre-foot, and domestic users $102 per acre-foot, according to the appellate ruling.
Randall Roberts, the original litigant in the case before the HJTA took over, argued that the rate was an improper tax, which would have to have been approved by voters before going into effect. The HJTA’s operative complaint claimed that the rates forced domestic users to subsidize “the interests of a few large agricultural property owners,” in violation of the California Constitution.
The Coachella Valley Water District argued for their structure on an argument that farmers are entitled to free canal water, based on historical priority, an argument Riemer found unsubstantiated.
The Court of Appeal ruled that customers were entitled to a tax refund because the unlawful tax was a deprivation of property that must be reversed to avoid a violation of due process rights.
Associate Justice Michael Raphael wrote the opinion, which was joined by Presiding Justice Manuel Ramirez and Justice Art McKinster.
Jeffrey Costell and John Haytol of Costell & Adelson Law Corp., and Joshua S. Stambaugh and Sara McDuffie of Frost, represented the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.
Michael Colantuono, Pamela Graham and Liliane Wyckoff of Colantuono, Highsmith & Whatley represented the water district.
Case No. RIC1904943
Appellate Case No. E080870
Read the appellate ruling here.
Read our previous coverage here.
