Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.
City of Dixon Sewer Utility Rate Reduction Initiative (November 2016)
| Dixon Sewer Utility Rate Initiative |
|---|
|
| The basics |
| Election date: |
| November 8, 2016 |
| Status: |
 Not on ballot
|
| Topic: |
| Utilities |
| Related articles |
| Utilities on the ballot November 8, 2016 ballot measures in California Solano County, California ballot measures |
| See also |
| Dixon, California |
A City of Dixon Sewer Utility Rate Reduction Initiative ballot question was not put on the ballot for Dixon voters in Solano County, California, on November 8, 2016.
| A "yes" vote would have rescinded sewer utility fee increases enacted by the city council in April 2014, rolling back sewer utility fees to 2008 rates of 23.99 per month for the average user. |
| A "no" vote would have left sewer utility fee increases enacted by the city council in April 2014 in place, resulting in fees of $48.62 per month for the average user by the year 2017. |
This initiative was sponsored by the Dixon Branch of the Solano County Taxpayers Association in order to rescind sewer utility fee increases enacted by the city in April 2014. The council's plan mandated sewer rate increases for four years, with the first going into effect on June 1, 2014, and the next planned for April 2015. If this initiative had been put on the ballot and approved by voters in 2016, the increases to the sewer rates authorized by the city council would have been rolled back to 2008 levels.[1]
As of March 2015, after the first scheduled increase, the sewer rate for an average single-family user amounted to $27.11 per month, with actual rates varying by usage. The rates were set by the city's ordinance to increase incrementally to $48.62 per month for the average user by the year 2017. This initiative, if put on the ballot and approved, would have reduced the sewer rates to a maximum set at the pre-ordinance levels of $23.99 per month for the average user.[2]
Support
Supporters
The Dixon Branch of the Solano County Taxpayers Association sponsored this initiative.[1]
Arguments in favor
Supporters of this initiative were opposed to the city's plan to approximately double monthly sewer utility rates by 2017. They argued that the city should manage its current revenue more efficiently and cut unnecessary expenditures instead of raising taxes on the already over taxed citizens of Dixon.[1]
Lawyers representing the taxpayers association responded to the city's lawsuit and arguments by stressing the importance of the citizen initiative power. The association argued that the city is hiding attacks on the initiative power behind the threats of state fines and public safety, even though other options were available to the city to avoid the fines and ensure public health. Supporters of the initiative argued that the city had other methods than sewer rate increases to fund repairs to the sewer plant, making the initiative legal and appropriate. Proponents of the initiative also argued that cheaper improvements could have brought the city into compliance with the state's water control board mandate.[1][3]
Opposition
Opponents
The city council voted to approve the original ordinance targeted by this initiative and opposed this effort to roll back the increases.[1]
Arguments against
| Voting on Utilities | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
| Ballot Measures | ||||
| By state | ||||
| By year | ||||
| Not on ballot | ||||
|
Mayor Jack Batchelor said the initiative would remove revenue that the city needs to perform updates and upgrades mandated by the state and “put the operation of the wastewater treatment plant in a deficit.”[4]
Batchelor continued, “There would not be enough funds to operate the treatment plant and, therefore, you would have a health and safety issue."[4]
City Attorney Doug White said the initiative involves a public health issue and a state mandate and is, thus, outside the scope of the citizen initiative power.[3]
The lawsuit authorized by the city council and filed by Churchwell White LLP of Sacramento contained the following argument against the initiative:[3]
| “ |
A local taxpayer group has put the city of Dixon between a rock and a hard place, thus forcing the filing of this lawsuit. The “rock” is the state of California, which has mandated that the city clean up its ground water or face penalties of $10,000 per day. The “hard place” is a local initiative that would lower sewer fees — already approved by city residents as required by Proposition 218 — to a level that would prevent the city from complying with the state mandate. Because state law trumps a general law city’s legislation in this field, the city seeks an order from this court declaring the initiative invalid and an injunction or peremptory writ of mandate preventing local officials from placing it on the November 2016 ballot.[5] |
” |
| —Churchwell White LLP on behalf of the city council[3] | ||
The lawsuit also argued that the initiative “would also underfund the city’s sewer enterprise fund such that the city would be unable to provide sewer service — an essential government function — as required under federal and state law."[3]
Background
| Voting on taxes | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||
| Ballot measures | ||||||||
| By state | ||||||||
| By year | ||||||||
| Not on ballot | ||||||||
| ||||||||
For nearly 20 years, the city has faced an ongoing struggle with the California Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board over the condition and practices of the city's wastewater treatment facility. Finally, the water board ordered the facility to cease and desist operation until the city completed repairs and upgrades on the facility requiring a loan of about $28 million, according to city estimates. Moreover, the water board threatened fines that could, at $10,000 per day, amount to as much as $11 million if the city did not comply. In fact, in 2008, the state water board fined the city in the amount of $223,000. In 2014, the city voted to increase the sewer rates in order to pay off this loan, plus interest.[1][3][4]
The Taxpayers Association first tried a veto referendum petition that would have halted the city's ordinance until an election could be held. This petition was unsuccessful. The association then worked to qualify this initiative for the ballot.[1]
Path to the ballot
After the city council voted to approve Resolution No 14-061, increasing sewer rates to pay off a loan needed to upgrade the city's wastewater treatment plant, the Dixon Branch of the Solano Taxpayers Association began circulating a veto referendum petition. This petition failed due to a technicality regarding the material that was presented to those signing the petition. The association, however, succeeded in collecting the required signatures to qualify this initiative for the ballot. On January 13, 2015, the city clerk certified the number of valid signatures submitted by the petitioners. Although the association collected more than the approximately 1,500 valid signatures needed to qualify its initiative for a special election in 2015, the city voted to put the measure on the 2016 general election ballot. The city justified this move by saying the group failed to explicitly request a special election in its intent to circulate and other required documentation.[6][7]
Lawsuit
| Lawsuit overview | |
| Issue: Preemption; the lawsuit alleged that the content of the initiative exceeded the scope of the local initiative process power. | |
| Court: Solano County Superior Court | |
| Ruling: The court ruled in favor of the city and blocked the initiative from the ballot. Judge Paul L. Beeman's decision stated that the initiative was unconstitutional because it related to an administrative action, not a legislative one, and, therefore, the tax increase was not subject to the initiative or veto referendum power. | |
| Plaintiff(s): City of Dixon | Defendant(s): Solano Taxpayers Association |
| Plaintiff argument: The state had mandated a certain level of funding for certain utility services, making the initiative—which affected revenue designed to fund such utility services—illegal because it violated state-mandated funding requirements. | Defendant argument: The city had lots of avenues to achieve state-mandated funding levels, making the initiative appropriate and within the proper scope of the initiative process. |
Source: The Reporter and Daily Democrat
At the same meeting that the city council was forced to put the initiative on the ballot, council members also voted four-against-one to launch a lawsuit against the Taxpayers Association, seeking a court order to stop the initiative. The city's argument was based on the fact that the increased fees targeted by the initiative were to fund a state-mandated expense and were required to ensure the safety and proper health standards of the community. City attorneys argued in the lawsuit that these conditions remove the sewer rates from the scope of the local initiative power.[1]
Lawyers representing the association responded by stressing the importance of the citizen initiative power and the city's multiple efforts to thwart the petition. They also defended the initiative by arguing that the city had other methods than sewer rate increases to fund repairs to the sewer plant, making the initiative legal and appropriate. Proponents of the initiative also argue that cheaper improvements could have brought the city into compliance with the state's water control board mandate.[1][3]
A judge of the Solano County Superior Court ruled in favor of the city and blocked the initiative from the ballot. Judge Paul L. Beeman's ruling stated that the initiative sought to overturn an administrative action—the utility rate increase—not a legislative one, and, therefore, the action was not subject to the initiative or veto referendum power.[8]
Recent news
The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Dixon sewer rate initiative. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 The Reporter, "Dixon votes to place wastewater initiative on the ballot, sue group behind it," February 3, 2015
- ↑ Dixon Municipal Government website, "Resolution 14-061," accessed March 20, 2015
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 The Reporter, "City of Dixon's Lawsuit Local Taxpayers Group is Filed," February 21, 2015
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 The Sacramento Bee, "Dixon sets vote on sewage rate increase, then sues to block it," February 25, 2015
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ Dixon City Government website, "Report on Sewer Rate Initiative Petition," January 27, 2015, accessed March 20, 2015
- ↑ Dixon's Independent Voice, "Dixon Taxpayers Group Files Notice of Intent for Initiative to Roll Back Sewer Fees," August 25, 2015
- ↑ Daily Democrat, "Dixon finally begins construction on wastewater treatment facility," August 19, 2015
| |||||
