State Water Resources Control Bd. v. Super. Ct.

Summary

The California Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District, reviews the State Water Resources Control Board’s petition for writ of mandate challenging the denial of its demurrer to several causes of action brought by Kings County Farm Bureau and others. The dispute concerns the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, the probationary designation of the Tulare Lake groundwater subbasin, alleged underground regulations, extraction fees, and declaratory relief. The court concludes that the trial court erred in overruling the demurrer and directs it to vacate that order and enter a new order granting the demurrer.

Holdings

1. Writ review was proper because the superior court improperly overruled the demurrer based on legal errors, and the proceedings presented issues of substantial public importance requiring immediate resolution.
2. All activities taken by the State Board under Water Code sections 10735.2 or 10735.8 are exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act under section 10736, subdivision (d)(1), including activities that imply or use procedural regulations, unless the State Board exercises its discretion to adopt such regulations under the APA.
3. The Farm Bureau's seventh cause of action, which attacked State Board extraction fees as unconstitutional taxes, was barred by California Constitution article XIII, section 32 because the challenged fees had not been paid and no exception to the pay-first rule applied.
4. Declaratory relief was unavailable because the Legislature designated a petition for writ of mandate as the method for reviewing State Board decisions and barred judicial review when a timely writ petition was not filed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether discretionary writ review was appropriate to challenge the superior court's order overruling the State Board's demurrer.
2. Whether Water Code section 10736, subdivision (d), exempts State Board activities taken under Water Code sections 10735.2 and 10735.8 from the Administrative Procedure Act's requirements concerning underground regulations.
3. Whether the Farm Bureau's challenge to State Board extraction fees as unconstitutional taxes was barred by California Constitution article XIII, section 32's pay-first rule.
4. Whether declaratory relief was available to review the State Board's administrative decision when the Legislature provided review by petition for writ of mandate.

Disposition

writ_granted