Lea este Aviso en Español →

The Superior Court of California for the County of San Luis Obispo

Authorized this Notice

NOTICE OF CLASS CERTIFICATION

Borst v. City of El Paso de Robles

Case No. 23CVP-0156

IF YOU ARE OR WERE A PASO ROBLES WASTE AND RECYCLE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMER WHO PAID RATES OR CHARGES FOR SERVICE PROVIDED WITHIN THE CITY OF EL PASO DE ROBLES BETWEEN JUNE 1, 2022 AND JANUARY 31, 2025, YOU MAY BE A MEMBER OF A COURT-CERTIFIED CLASS. THIS NOTICE EXPLAINS YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS AND OPTIONS.

The Court has not decided whether any party is correct.

This Notice is not a solicitation from a lawyer.

You are not being sued.

This Notice explains a class action lawsuit that may affect your rights.

Please Read This Notice Carefully

Plaintiff John Borst (Plaintiff), a resident of the City of El Paso de Robles (City), filed this lawsuit against the City on behalf of a class of Paso Robles Waste and Recycle (PRWR) customers. Plaintiff alleges that certain charges related to single-family residential solid waste services violate provisions of the California Constitution and California Vehicle Code section 9400.8. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that, under a franchise agreement, PRWR pays the City a franchise fee that PRWR embeds in fees it charges to its customers. Plaintiff alleges that the franchise fee is reflected in the rates charged to customers. Plaintiff contends that this fee constitutes an unlawful tax as “tax” is defined by Article XIII C, section 1, subdivision (e) of the California Constitution, and was not approved by voters as required by law. Plaintiff seeks, among other relief, restitution of amounts allegedly collected during the period June 1, 2022, through January 31, 2025.

The City denies Plaintiff’s allegations, denies that it did anything wrong or violated any law or engaged in any wrongdoing. The City contends that the challenged fees are not “taxes” as defined by Article XIII C, section 1, subdivision (e) of the California Constitution, and that they satisfy one or more of the enumerated exceptions to that definition. The City further denies that the franchise fee violates California Vehicle Code section 9400.8. The City has also asserted other defenses that, if proven, could limit or prevent any recovery.

This case is being overseen by the Honorable Michael C. Kelley in Department P2 of the San Luis Obispo County Superior Court (hereafter, the “Court”). It is titled: Borst v. City of El Paso de Robles, et al., Case No. 23CVP-0156.

The Court has allowed Plaintiff’s lawsuit to proceed as a class action and certified the “Class” as:

The Court has not yet determined whether Plaintiff’s claims or the City’s defenses have merit, and it has not determined whether the City has violated Proposition 218, or Vehicle Code section 9400.8. There is no money or other relief currently available for the Class, and there is no guarantee that any money or other relief will be available in the future. If you meet the definition of the Class set forth above, and do not timely request exclusion, you will remain a member of the Class, and your legal rights may be affected by the outcome this case. You must decide whether to remain in the Class or request exclusion from the Class.

YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS ARE AFFECTED EVEN IF YOU DO NOT ACT

Read This Notice Carefully

You have two choices regarding your participation in this lawsuit: you may do nothing and remain in the Class, or you may ask to be excluded from the Class.

YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS AND OPTIONS
Do Nothing — Remain in the Class	You may choose to stay in the lawsuit by remaining in the Class. If you remain in the Class, you will be represented by Plaintiff and his attorneys, you will be bound by any decisions of the Court that determine the Class’ legal rights, and you will receive benefits, if any, that may result from a trial or settlement. However, you will give up any right to sue the City separately on the legal claims in this case. No action is required to remain in the Class. You may enter an appearance through your own counsel of record at your own expense.
Opt-Out — Exclude Yourself from the Class	You may choose to opt out of the lawsuit by excluding yourself from the Class. If you exclude yourself from the Class, you will not be bound by any decisions of the Court that determines the Class’s legal rights, and you will retain your right to sue the City separately on the legal claims in the case. However, you will not share in any direct benefits, including any potential refunds, if any, that may result from a trial or settlement in this action. To exclude yourself from the Class, you must send a Request to Be Excluded from the Class form to the class notice administrator, no later than September 16, 2026. For more information, see section 15 of this Notice. If you choose to exclude yourself and you want to pursue your own claims against the City, you should consult your own attorney at your own expense.

BASIC INFORMATION — PLEASE READ

1. Why did I get this Notice?

This Notice explains that the Court has allowed, or “certified,” this lawsuit to proceed as a class action. PRWR’s records show that you may be a member of the Class, based on the class definition set forth above. Accordingly, this notice is to inform you that you have legal rights and options that you may exercise at this time before the trial takes place or the case is settled.

2. Where is this lawsuit pending?

This lawsuit is currently pending in Department P2 of the San Luis Obispo County Superior Court, before the Honorable Michael C. Kelley. It is titled: Borst v. City of El Paso de Robles, et al., Case No. 23CVP-0156.

3. What is a class action and who is involved?

In a class action lawsuit, one or more named parties called “Class Representatives” sue a defendant on behalf of other people who have similar claims against that defendant. Each person is a member of the Class unless they make a timely request to be excluded from the Class. All claims brought on behalf of the Class are resolved in a single case before a single court for all members of the Class who will be bound by the judgment. Entities such as businesses and non-profits can also be members of the Class.

Plaintiff John Borst is the Class Representative in this case. The City of El Paso de Robles is the defendant.

4. Why is this lawsuit a class action?

The Court decided that this lawsuit can proceed as a class action because it meets the requirements of California Code of Civil Procedure, section 382, which governs class actions in California state courts. More information about why the Court is allowing this lawsuit to proceed as a class action can be found in the Court’s order certifying the Class, which is available at https://www.slo.courts.ca.gov/online-services/online-case-lookup.

THE CLAIMS IN THE LAWSUIT

5. What is the lawsuit about?

In this lawsuit, Plaintiff claims that the City has violated California Constitution article XIII C, section 2 (Proposition 218) which prohibits the imposition of taxes without voter approval. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that PRWR pays the City, under the terms of a franchise agreement, a franchise fee that PRWR embeds in fees it charges to its customers. Plaintiff alleges that the franchise fee is an unapproved tax, as defined by California Constitution article XIII C, section 1, subdivision (e) (Proposition 26). Plaintiff further alleges that the franchise fee violates Vehicle Code section 9400.8 to the extent the City utilizes it to fund street maintenance and repairs. Amongst other relief, Plaintiff seeks a refund of all amounts Plaintiff alleges constitute unlawful taxes embedded in fees for services provided by PRWR to residential customers during the period June 1, 2022, through January 31, 2025.

For more information about Plaintiff’s allegations and claims, please review Plaintiff’s First Amended Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint for (a) Declaratory Relief; (b) Reduction in Property Tax Revenue (Gov. Code § 53728) and (c) Refund, which can be found at https://www.slo.courts.ca.gov/online-services/online-case-lookup.

6. How does the City of El Paso de Robles answer?

The City denies Plaintiff’s material allegations and any wrongdoing. The City contends that the franchise fee at issue is lawful and does not constitute a tax requiring voter approval because it falls within an exception to the definition of “tax” set forth in article XIII C section 1, subdivision (e) of the California Constitution (Proposition 26). The City also denies that the franchise fee violates Vehicle Code section 9400.8, or that Plaintiff, or any member of the Class is entitled to a refund or any other relief. The City further contends that Plaintiff’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, by other legal and factual defenses. The Court has not decided whether Plaintiff’s claims or the City’s defenses are correct.

For more information about the City’s defenses, please review its Answer to Plaintiff/Petitioner’s First Amended Verified Petitioner for Writ of Mandate and for Declaratory Relief, Reduction in Property Tax Revenue (Gov. Code § 53728) and Refund which can be found at https://www.slo.courts.ca.gov/online-services/online-case-lookup.

7. Has the Court decided who is correct?

No. The Court has not yet decided whether Plaintiff or the City is correct, nor has it entered judgment in favor of any party. By certifying the case as a class action, the Court is not expressing any opinion regarding the merits of Plaintiff’s claims. Those claims will be resolved by the Court at trial or by a motion, or by the parties should a settlement be reached. The City continues to deny all material allegations, and certification of the class is solely a procedural ruling that does not reflect any determination regarding the merits of Plaintiff’s case.

8. What is the Plaintiff asking for?

In general, Plaintiff seeks (a) refunds in the amount of the franchise fee embedded in solid waste service fees paid for solid waste collection services provided by PRWR during the Class Period; (b) a writ of mandate directing the City to cease the imposition of the franchise fee on PRWR; (c) a judicial decree declaring that the franchise fee is a “tax”; and (d) an order compelling the County of San Luis Obispo to reduce the City’s share of property tax revenues in the amount of the alleged illegal taxes imposed.

9. Is there money or other benefits available now?

No. There is no money or other benefits available at this time because the Court has not yet determined whether the City violated any laws. There is also no guarantee that money or other benefits will be obtained, and if the City prevails, no relief will be available at all. If at some point money and other benefits are available, either after trial or as the result of a settlement, members of the Class who have not requested exclusion will be sent further notice, including instructions for how they may receive their share.

WHO IS IN THE CLASS?

10. Am I part of the Class?

The Class includes all PRWR solid waste collection customers with Single Family Residential accounts who have paid rates and charges to PRWR for services provided in the City of El Paso de Robles during the period June 1, 2022, through January 31, 2025.

According to PRWR’s records, you may be a member of the Class, and unless you ask to be excluded from the Class, you will be bound by any decisions of the Court that determine the Class’s legal rights, including a decision to approve a class settlement in the future. For information on how to be excluded from the Class, see section 15 of this Notice.

If you are unsure whether you are a member of the Class, you can obtain free help by contacting the lawyers representing the Plaintiff in this case at the email or phone number listed in section 12 of this Notice.

11. Who is the Class Representative?

The Court has appointed Plaintiff John Borst to serve as the Class Representative.

THE LAW FIRM REPRESENTING THE CLASS

12. Is a law firm representing the Class in this case?

The Court has appointed the law firm of Benink & Slavens, LLP as “Class Counsel.” If you remain in the Class, this law firm will represent your interests in this case. Class Counsel may be reached as follows:

Eric J. Benink, Esq. eric@beninkslavens.com BENINK & SLAVENS, LLP 8880 Rio San Diego Drive, 8th Floor San Diego, CA 92108 Tel: (619) 369-5252

13. Should I get my own lawyer?

Because Class Counsel is working on behalf of Class members, Class members do not need to hire their own lawyer. Those who choose to opt out of the Class may hire their own lawyer at their own expense. Even if you remain in the Class, you are free to hire a different lawyer to make an appearance in this lawsuit if you choose. However, you will have to arrange for payment of that lawyer yourself.

14. How will Class Counsel be paid?

Class Counsel has entered into a contingency fee agreement with Plaintiff. This means that it is not charging client or the Class any fees in this case and will only be paid if this case is successful.

If Plaintiff prevails or the case settles, Class Counsel will ask the Court to issue an order providing for the payment or reimbursement of their fees and costs, either by deducting the fees and costs from any money obtained for the Class or by ordering the City to pay those fees and costs directly. The Court must approve any such requests.

YOUR RIGHTS AND OPTIONS

15. Do I need to do anything now?

At this time, you must decide whether you want to remain in the Class.

(a) NO ACTION REQUIRED to remain in the Class

You do not need to do anything to remain in the Class. If you do not take any action, you will automatically be a member of the Class on September 16, 2026.

(b) ACTION REQUIRED to be excluded from the Class

To exclude yourself from the Class, you must send a completed Request to Be Excluded from the Class form to the following address:

This form can be downloaded and printed here, or from borst-v-paso.phoenixcases.com. IT MUST BE POSTMARKED NO LATER THAN SEPTEMBER 16, 2026, OR EMAILED NO LATER THAN 11:59 P.M PACIFIC TIME ON SEPTEMBER 16, 2026, TO BE VALID. ANY LATE REQUESTS TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE CLASS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

If you are considering excluding yourself from the Class, please note that any legal claims that you separately assert against the City may be subject to statutes of limitations, which could prevent or limit your available relief. If you intend to pursue any claims against the City, you should not hesitate in doing so and you should consult your own attorney at your own expense.

16. What are the risks if I remain in the Class?

If you stay in the Class, you will be bound by the decisions of the Court and any judgment entered in the case. This means that even if you do not receive any money or benefits as a result of your participation in this case, you will not be able to pursue a separate lawsuit against the City based on the same claims that Plaintiff has alleged on behalf of the Class in this lawsuit.

17. What are the benefits if I remain in the Class?

If you stay in the Class, you do not have to sue the City on your own for any of the claims that Plaintiff has brought against the City in this case. If there is a recovery, either after trial or as a result of a settlement, you may be entitled to a proportionate share of that recovery.

18. Do I have to come to the trial or any hearings?

No. You do not have to come to the trial or to any hearings in this case. Class Counsel and the Class Representative will represent you. You are welcome to come at your own expense.

19. Has a trial date been set?

No trial date has been set.

20. Has the case settled?

No settlement has been reached.

21. Will I get money or other benefits from this case?

There is no guarantee that any money or other benefits will be obtained, and if they are obtained, there is no guarantee of when that will occur. If you stay in the Class and Plaintiff obtains money or other benefits after trial or as a result of a settlement, you will be notified about how to participate in the recovery.

GETTING MORE INFORMATION

A copy of this Notice, Plaintiff’s Verified Petition and Complaint, the City’s Answer to the Verified Petition and Complaint, the order certifying the Class, and the form to Request to Be Excluded from the Class can be viewed and downloaded at borst-v-paso.phoenixcases.com. If you have any questions, you may contact Class Counsel identified in section 12 of this Notice.

Please do not contact the Judge or the Court directly.