Trial began Wednesday in the lawsuit brought by a collection of homeowners who are challenging San Diego's trash collection fee.
The homeowners sued the city following the passage of Measure B, which ended free trash pickup services for single-family homes. The plaintiffs allege the fees violate Proposition 218, a state ballot measure that holds utility fees cannot exceed the costs of providing those services.
Former San Diego City Attorney Michael Aguirre, one of the attorneys representing the homeowners, said in his opening statements on Tuesday afternoon that while voters approved a monthly fee of between $23 and $29, the San Diego City Council approved imposing a nearly $44 monthly fee.
Aguirre also said the city used an incorrect estimate for the number of customers that would be paying the fee, resulting in higher monthly costs than expected for homeowners.
"This is draining money from people's homes and if they are not able to pay, they are terrified that they will be foreclosed on," Aguirre told Superior Court Judge Euketa Oliver, who will render a verdict herself instead of a jury.
Attorneys representing the city have elected to make their opening statements when their case in chief begins.
But a trial brief filed by the city outlines some of their expected arguments, including that the fee complies with the law because the revenues it is projected to generate don't exceed the projected costs of service.
The city also argues that discrepancies in its customer estimates were not as drastic as the plaintiffs argue and that despite a reduction in the number of properties served since Measure B passed, disposal costs have actually increased.
The trial was nearly set aside when word of a potential settlement emerged last week.
An attorney representing the city said during a pretrial hearing that a settlement had been reached and would be going before the San Diego City Council on Monday for consideration. However, councilmembers voted in closed session against the settlement offer on Monday, the terms of which have not been disclosed.
Oliver also denied a request from the city last month to dismiss the lawsuit. The judge wrote in a tentative ruling she later confirmed that the plaintiffs had presented enough evidence "to call into question the validity" of cost projections presented by the city's attorneys.
