ITEM: |
DISCUSSION ITEM |
||||
|
|||||
10. |
CONSIDER REPEAL OF
ORDINANCE NO. 152 |
||||
|
|||||
Meeting Date: |
March 17, 2025 |
Budgeted: |
N/A |
||
|
|||||
From: |
David J. Stoldt |
Program/ |
|
||
|
General Manager |
Line
Item No.: |
N/A |
||
|
|||||
Prepared By: |
David J. Stoldt |
Cost Estimate: |
N/A |
||
|
|||||
General Counsel Approval: N/A |
|||||
Committee Recommendation: |
|||||
CEQA Compliance:
This action does not constitute a project as defined by the California
Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378. |
|||||
SUMMARY: In 2021, the Monterey Peninsula
Taxpayers Association (MPTA) brought a lawsuit against the District
seeking to suspend or sunset its Water Supply Charge MPTA v. MPWMD, Monterey
County Superior Court 21CV003066 which was decided against the District. The District subsequently appealed to the 6th District Court of
Appeal (H0-51128,) but the appellate court found against the District,
upholding the Superior Courts decision that the Water Supply Charge should be
suspended or sunset.
Four additional separate challenges
against District collection of the Water Supply Charge remain pending by MPTA. The
parties stipulated to resolve Petitioners claims through a refund process and
payment of attorneys fees incurred by MPTA, yet to be
approved by the court. The court continued Case Management for the open cases
pending implementation of a proposed settlement.
The Water Supply Charge was
established in 2012 via Ordinance 152. Section thirteen of Ordinance 152
(attached as Exhibit 10-A) allows the
District Board to amend the Ordinance to (i) temporarily suspend the Supply
Charge, (ii) reduce the rate of the Supply Charge, or (iii) repeal this
ordinance in its entirety.
The Board should review the options
allowed under the Ordinance and provide staff general
direction on whether to repeal, reduce, or suspend.
EXHIBIT
10-A Ordinance
152, Section Thirteen
U:\staff\Boardpacket\2025\031725\Discussion
Items\10\Item-10.docx