The City of Lewiston, Idaho, passed an ordinance creating a stormwater utility and stormwater fee for the operation and maintenance of the City’s stormwater system. Five political subdivisions of the state challenged that ordinance, claiming that the stormwater “fee” was, in fact, an unconstitutional tax that could only have been passed by the state legislature. The Idaho Supreme Court agreed with the plaintiffs and held that the City’s stormwater fee was an unconstitutional tax. The case is Lewiston Independent School District et al v. City of Lewiston.
This case is important, because the City of Coeur d’Alene also imposes a stormwater fee with its utility bill.
Here is the Idaho Supreme Court’s conclusion:
The Court’s decision includes some useful information to help citizens understand how the law differentiates between taxes and fees.
This ought to be good. I am just waiting to see Mike “$125,000” Gridley, City Attorney, strap on his chaps and defend the city. Its a plain as the nose on his face that this one is going down. That’s just my opinion and I’m not an attorney, but I have one just like every attorney.
Comment by Ancientemplar — November 7, 2011 @ 4:41 pm
Does the public record reveal what discussions were conducted by CDA city officials when this same “fee” was established here by ordinance? If its legality is questioned now, I wonder if CDA officials will offer an excuse they used before; “we didn’t know”.
Comment by Gary Ingram — November 7, 2011 @ 4:48 pm
Ancientemplar,
I haven’t compared word-for-word the Lewiston and Coeur d’Alene ordinances, nor do I intend to. That’s what the Coeur d’Alene City Attorney gets paid to do (or contract out to someone who can). Still, it seems reasonable that when the D2 judge ruled against Lewiston in his District Court and the appeal was filed, our City might have considered suspending its collections of that tax until after the Black Robed Boyz of Boyzee ruled.
Comment by Bill — November 7, 2011 @ 4:51 pm
Gary,
I don’t know, but I’ll look. Lewiston began collecting the tax in October 2008, and the lawsuit contesting that was filed about 11 months later.
Comment by Bill — November 7, 2011 @ 4:54 pm
Ordinances from City’s stormwater webpage
Comment by Bill — November 7, 2011 @ 5:06 pm
Will the cities be required to return the fees they have illegally collected?
Comment by mary — November 7, 2011 @ 6:09 pm
Mary,
Probably not.
If CdA’s ordinance is structured similarly to Lewiston’s, then logically the City of CdA ought to stop collecting the illegal tax until it can positively determine its ordinance is constitutional.
Comment by Bill — November 7, 2011 @ 6:43 pm
An acquaintance of mine lives in the Landings in CdA told me that he is billed separately for his street lights. How does that compare?
Also, what about the city forcing residents to get garbage service?
Comment by concerned citizen — November 7, 2011 @ 7:48 pm
concerned citizen,
I think the answer to both your questions is in the Court’s “Analysis.”
Comment by Bill — November 7, 2011 @ 8:00 pm
That is understandable with the lighting.
How would that relate to the garbage service since it is a private sector garbage company contracting with the city? They do not use city employees or city equipment so it doesn’t come from the general fund. Still I do not understand how the city can force citizens to have garbage service?
Comment by concerned citizen — November 7, 2011 @ 9:07 pm
Rather than continue speculation, I have sent a request to Mayor Bloem to respond to its possible application to our ordinances.
Comment by Gary Ingram — November 8, 2011 @ 12:42 pm
CC while I expect you would keep your garbage under control remember we live in N Idaho and just looking at some of the homes in the city and the mess they are even WITH garbage service imagine what it would look like without.
Comment by Eric — November 8, 2011 @ 3:20 pm
Eric
That is personal responsibility.
Comment by concerned citizen — November 8, 2011 @ 4:21 pm
Regarding the stormwater fee, Mayor Bloem wrote to me that the city attorney is looking at our ordinance as it applies to the Supreme Court’s decision.
Comment by Gary Ingram — November 8, 2011 @ 6:09 pm
Well, it’s in the news this morning. Not surprising. The stormwater fees in Coeur d’Alene will be suspended. I suspect our ordinance and Lewiston’s ordinance was some kind of boilerplate ordinance drafted by the Association of Idaho Cities. Clue. Look for other Idaho cities to suspend stormwater fees. I know from my experience as a lawmaker, you have to read the bills whether a legislator or councilman!
There are some good questions above that remain unanswered such as street lighting fees and previously collected stormwater fee refunds.
Comment by Gary Ingram — November 16, 2011 @ 11:50 am