California Water Districts Lawsuit

Tiered water fees for residents may violate California’s constitution

Attorneys with Gibbs Law Group LLP have filed a class action lawsuit against public water agencies Otay Water District, San Diego County Water District, and Metropolitan Water District of Southern California alleging the agencies’ fees for water service imposed on certain California residents exceed the proportional cost of service attributable to water usage levels.

The lawsuit is called Coziahr v. Otay Water et al. Case No. 37-2015-00023413, and is brought by a San Diego resident on behalf of residents and businesses throughout California, including in San Diego County.

High water bills?

If you’re a California resident and you believe your water utility provider may be charging you rates disproportionate with your use, our attorneys would like to hear about it. Contact us by calling toll-free (800) 254-9493 or send an email to: SAL@classlawgroup.com

Water fees under the California Constitution
According to the lawsuit, the California Constitution requires public water providers to anchor their rates to the actual cost of water service, and Article XIII D in particular forbids public water agencies from unilaterally imposing disproportionate fees for water service on its customers.

As a result, the lawsuit alleges, the agencies’ fees are an unauthorized and impermissible tax on water in violation of the California Constitution.

“As the courts have held time and again, absent voter approval, public water agencies cannot charge Californians excessive fees for water service,” Gibbs Law Group attorney Andre Mura said in a statement to Courthouse News Service.

Water rate model may reward conservation, penalize consumption

The lawsuit further alleges that the public water agencies may have instituted these disproportionate rate structures to reward water conservation and penalize water consumption. According to the complaint, Otay Water calls its lowest-rate tier for residences its “conservation” tier, and its highest-rate tier its “penalty” tier.

Despite the agencies’ reasoning, however, the complaint states that the agencies lack the authority under the California Constitution to adopt conservation policies that depart from article XIII D’s clear mandate that water conservation be achieved by pricing that reflects the actual cost of service for incremental levels of water usage.

When asked by Courthouse News Service about the need for conservation in California’s severe drought, Mura said:

“The California Constitution expresses the people’s view that water conservation is achieved by pricing that reflects the actual cost of water delivery service to a given property. This suit seeks to enforce the water conservation policies adopted by the people.”