California Supreme Court Determines Groundwater Pumping Charge Is Not for Property-Related Service

California Supreme Court Determines Groundwater Pumping Charge Is Not for Property-Related Service

California Supreme Court

The California Supreme Court ruled that a water conservation district's groundwater pumping charge does not qualify as a charge for a property-related service as defined by the state constitution because the charge is imposed on the taxpayer in its capacity as the extractor of groundwater for the public, not in its capacity as the owner of the land on which wells are located.

The California Supreme Court ruled that a water conservation district's groundwater pumping charge does not qualify as a charge for a property-related service as defined by the state constitution because the charge is imposed on the taxpayer in its capacity as the extractor of groundwater for the public, not in its capacity as the owner of the land on which wells are located.

The California Supreme Court ruled that a water conservation district's groundwater pumping charge does not qualify as a charge for a property-related service as defined by the state constitution because the charge is imposed on the taxpayer in its capacity as the extractor of groundwater for the public, not in its capacity as the owner of the land on which wells are located. The court remanded the case to the California Court of Appeal to determine whether the water conservation district's fees imposed on the taxpayer are proportionate to the benefit it receives from the district's conservation activities, as required by the state constitution.

The California Supreme Court ruled that a water conservation district's groundwater pumping charge does not qualify as a charge for a property-related service as defined by the state constitution because the charge is imposed on the taxpayer in its capacity as the extractor of groundwater for the public, not in its capacity as the owner of the land on which wells are located. The court remanded the case to the California Court of Appeal to determine whether the water conservation district's fees imposed on the taxpayer are proportionate to the benefit it receives from the district's conservation activities, as required by the state constitution.