State Court Refuses to Hear ‘View Tax’ Case

The city of Port Hueneme will soon be about $1 million poorer and 1,252 residents and their attorneys a little richer after the state Supreme Court declined to review the “view tax” court case.

Both sides had expected the California Supreme Court would refuse to hear the last-ditch appeal by the city of what lower courts have called an “illegal tax.”

The tax was actually an assessment the city levied on some residents to help pay for maintenance of a city beachfront park based at least in part on their ocean view. The city had reasoned those property owners benefited more from the park’s upkeep than owners farther away.

The court probably declined to hear the case because recent political history had reduced its wide-ranging impact, said attorney Glen Reiser, who represents the plaintiffs.

“When the voters passed Proposition 218 [in November 1996], it rendered special assessments an anachronism because it will be voters who will apply these special taxes to be placed against their properties,” Reiser said. “Prior to Proposition 218, the city council, board of supervisors or any special district could create a special assessment. . . . I’ll be interested in what the city has to say. When are they going to pay?”

As soon as the local courts tell the city to do so, said City Manager Dick Velthoen.

“We have it in reserves,” he said. “I don’t think that’s the best way to spend it. I think it’s benefiting a very few with respect to the use of that money, to the detriment of the entire city.”

The courts are expected to decide in the next few weeks exactly how much the victorious residents and their lawyers will receive.