RulesofCivilProcedure.com Civil Procedure · Every State

§ 1245.250.Resolution Conclusively Establishes Matters Referred to In Section 1240.030

Title 7. Eminent Domain Law · Chapter 4. Precondemnation Activities · Article 2. Resolution of Necessity · Last amended 1993 · Last verified July 29, 2026

In one sentenceSection 1245.250 makes a properly adopted resolution of necessity conclusively establish the § 1240.030 findings, except that a resolution taking local electric, gas, or water utility property creates only a rebuttable presumption, and a resolution taking property outside the entity's own boundaries creates only a presumption affecting the burden of producing evidence.

Full Text of § 1245.250

Text sizeJump to: (a) (b) (c) (d)

(a) Except as otherwise provided by statute, a resolution of necessity adopted by the governing body of the public entity pursuant to this article conclusively establishes the matters referred to in Section 1240.030.
(b) If the taking is by a local public entity, other than a sanitary district exercising the powers of a county water district pursuant to Section 6512.7 of the Health and Safety Code, and the property is electric, gas, or water public utility property, the resolution of necessity creates a rebuttable presumption that the matters referred to in Section 1240.030 are true. This presumption is a presumption affecting the burden of proof.
(c) If the taking is by a local public entity and the property described in the resolution is not located entirely within the boundaries of the local public entity, the resolution of necessity creates a presumption that the matters referred to in Section 1240.030 are true. This presumption is a presumption affecting the burden of producing evidence.
(d) For the purposes of subdivision (b), a taking by the State Reclamation Board for the Sacramento and San Joaquin Drainage District is not a taking by a local public entity.

Plain-English Summary

This is what gives the resolution of necessity its legal force. Ordinarily, once the governing body adopts a valid resolution, it conclusively establishes the three matters § 1240.030 requires — public necessity, compatible planning, and the property's necessity for the project. A property owner generally can't relitigate those questions in the condemnation case itself.

Two situations soften that conclusiveness. When a local public entity (other than certain sanitary districts) takes electric, gas, or water public utility property, the resolution instead creates only a rebuttable presumption — one that affects the burden of proof, meaning the owner can put on evidence to overcome it. And when a local public entity takes property that isn't located entirely within its own boundaries, the resolution creates a lesser presumption still, one affecting only the burden of producing evidence.

These carve-outs recognize that a local entity reaching outside its own territory, or condemning utility infrastructure, presents a different risk profile than the ordinary in-jurisdiction taking — so the law gives owners a somewhat easier path to challenge the resolution's findings in those settings.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I argue in the condemnation case that the property isn't really needed?

Generally, no — a validly adopted resolution of necessity conclusively establishes that the property is needed and that the other § 1240.030 findings are true, subject to the exceptions in subdivisions (b) and (c) and to the challenges § 1245.255 allows.

Is there any situation where I can more easily challenge the findings?

Yes. If a local public entity is taking electric, gas, or water utility property, or taking property outside its own boundaries, the resolution creates only a presumption rather than a conclusive finding, giving the owner more room to contest it.

What's the difference between the two presumptions in subdivisions (b) and (c)?

The utility-property presumption in subdivision (b) affects the burden of proof, requiring the owner to prove the findings wrong. The out-of-boundary presumption in subdivision (c) affects only the burden of producing evidence, a lighter showing.

Amendment History

Amended by Stats. 1992, Ch. 812, Sec. 3. Effective January 1, 1993.

Source & verification. Section text is reproduced verbatim from the Deering's California Codes Annotated / vLex. Enacted by the California Legislature. Last verified July 29, 2026. · Official source
Also known as: conclusive presumption resolution of necessity californiachallenge resolution of necessity utility property