The following is a summary of a court action filed against the City of Nampa over their Stormwater Utility Fees:
Republic Storage of Nampa (aka Twin Islands LLC) is seeking declaratory or injunctive relief from "Nampa Storm Water Utility" fees imposed by Ordinance 3928. Republic is asserting the storm water fee is a tax implemented without Constitutional, State Legislative, or police power to enact. Further, Republic is citing this tax/fee as a violation of the Idaho Constitution Art. 7 sec. 5 as the tax/fee amounts to a non uniform tax on all property. Also claimed there is no discernible service connected with the Storm Water Utility fees.
The Plaintiff, Republic Storage is seeking injunctive relief to preclude any further collections of the Storm Water Utility fees pending litigation challenging the validity of Nampa Storm Water Utility fees.
David R. Frazier of the Boise Guardian reports there is a pending Class Action Lawsuit representing 80,000 people over the Storm Water Ordinance put together by Mayor Dale, City Councilors and his legal team.
This means Happy Holidays for the law firm representing Nampa. They got paid for the ordinance work and now they will have two legal challenges over Storm Water fees to further line their pockets with Nampa taxpayer dollars.
This means Happy Holidays for the law firm representing Nampa. They got paid for the ordinance work and now they will have two legal challenges over Storm Water fees to further line their pockets with Nampa taxpayer dollars.
Hopefully the courts will see that this "fee" is nothing more than the latest attempt by Tom Dale to squeeze the taxpayers of Nampa for more funds to waste on his pet projects.
ReplyDeleteThis had to be anticipated with the Idaho Supreme Court ruling on Lewiston vs Various Plantiffs on 11/7/2011, on a nearly identical case. What is especially disconcerting here is Nampa seems to have passed their ordinance after Lewiston's adverse District Court Summary Judgement and appeal to the Supreme Court. Nampa claims to have fixed the flaws in Lewiston's ordinance in their own. Nampas legal council is obviously smarter than the State of Idaho's Supremes.
ReplyDeleteThis all seems pretty "flippant" if not downright stupid on the part of the Nampa City Council. To so narrowly brush the intent of the law, possibly leaving themselves (the City of Nampa via it's Taxpayers) open to punitive damages is revealing themselves as the backdoor money grubbers they are. If, as Nampa claims, the expenses requiring this tax/fee are required, then cut expenses elsewhere or god forbid, raise taxes in a forthright manner, according to established precedents in the law.
Nampa city Attorney is probably licking his chops over fighting these upstarts who have the audacity to challenge what he drafted. He got paid to write it and now he gets to defend it on the taxpayers dime. No warrenty provided. Good for Republic Storage
ReplyDeleteNot to get off the subject, but there has been another issue to take notice of. I live in Nampa, and I have been setting my blue bin for recyles out, and it hasn't been picked up. I am being charged for it. Where has the blue bin truck been?
ReplyDeleteWhy is the mayor saying he has lack of knowledge of this? Surely a sitting mayor would have all of the lawsuits pertaining to his city in the top drawer in his desk. Seems like it should be his top priorty to know who is suing his city.
ReplyDeleteNampa is bumping up against the TAX CAP on property taxes instituted by the Legislature. Caldwell is already under the strictures of the TAX CAP as is Canyon County.
ReplyDeleteAt some point all the smoke and mirrors will have to stop and all taxing districts will start to live like citizens who are forced to live within their means.
Paul
I recycled my blue recycling bin by putting it in the gray roll around trash can. It's in the land fill somewhere I presume. I'm not going to do the work for the recycling company even though I'm being charged for the privilege to do so.
ReplyDeleteDid Mayor Dale and Nampa City Council think about the consequences of enacting storm water fees before the Lewiston case was adjudicated? Did they think Nampa business owners and citizens would take this laying down? Now we have a legal quagmire unless Mayor Dale capitulates and they put an instant stop loss order on this mess. Mr. Dale is truly "the man who would be King".
ReplyDeleteAfter Nampa's legal teams show of brilliant judgement, I would think hiring a different team of lawyers might be prudent. The current team has probably been seriously occupied changing their underwear.
ReplyDeleteI own a commercial property in Nampa that is leased. I have received the stormwater bills from the city twice and in my lease the leasee is to pay any such fees. I contacted the city billing dept to have these bills mailed directly to the leasee but the have been advised twice they could not do this because this was a utility. The lessee receives all other utility bills (water,sewer,etc) directly from the city. It would seem they think this fee is a tax. This situation seems very odd. Any ideas. The outcome of this lawsuit should add a little clarity.
ReplyDeleteIs it true Nampa has no contract with Terry White of White-Peterson Law Offices? White-Peterson has been doing legal work for Nampa for over 30 years and gets about $500,000 a year from the City of Nampa. I wonder how this could be verified.
ReplyDeleteConfused has hit the nail on the head! This outrageous "fee" is just another tax in sheep's clothing! The tax hungry city counsels of Nampa and Caldwell feel entitled to feed off the taxpayers wallet with no regard to the beleaguered taxpayer. The property owners need to fight these taxpayer money addicted oafs at every turn! Lawsuits against these "public servants" seem to be the only answer, to get them to act like financially responsible adults, instead of tantrum throwing children. Apologies to all tantrum throwing children for comparing them to these politicians! If you have a legitimate beef, file suit.
ReplyDeleteYou can verify the lack of a contract with Mr. White by filing a Freedom of Information request with city clerk as I did requesting a copy of the contract. I was told I could not see any contract as they did not have one. Also legal fees and specific payments to White's firm can be obtained same way or simply call Vikki Chandler at city finance office. It's all in the budgett
ReplyDeleteI recently spoke with a business owner in downtown Nampa. He stated that in the last 5 years his property tax has increased 61%. He currently has 1/3 the employees he had 5 years ago and his business has declined a like amount. This does not include the storm water tax. The interesting thing is that all newer developments either residintial or commercial have retention basins so that their water is retained on site. Why would anyone want to invest in Nampa until these costs are under control?
ReplyDeleteThere seems to be a question of whether White and company actually get $500,000/year
ReplyDeleteGo to city of Nampa website--click on central services
click again on accounts payable and in the left hand side of page are lists of what has been paid over last 2 or three months--Here is a sample
10-26 White-Peterson $49,536.51
11-30 White-Peterson $45,034.35
other items of interest include $65.00 for a limo in Denver Numerus airplane tickets and hotel charges as well as quite a few charges at Brick 29 and other places for meals etc. I have monitored this for well over a year and in my opinion there is very little control over expenditures. The Bujak case was very good to White-Peterson--They got to rewrite the contract 2 or 3 times and then got paid again after **** hit the fan when investigators came to intervirw them
Sounds like a bunch of crooked Irish politicians to me.
ReplyDeleteElected officials have kicked the can down the road on storm water and the brick wall is now in front of them. Here's just a few of the regs:
ReplyDeleteThe principal body of law currently in effect is based on the Federal Water Pollution Control Amendments of 1972[2] and was significantly expanded from the Federal Water Pollution Control Amendments of 1948. Major amendments were enacted in the Clean Water Act of 1977[3] and the Water Quality Act of 1987.[4]
Did they think all of the above were "suggestions"? We are ruled by fools and idiots!
Is the storm water fee or tax or utility or whatever new term the mayor and Kaldwell city counselors chose to call it, still being considered for Kaldwell? Do the gumshoe lawyers "servicing" the Kaldwell taxpayer have a job of work to figure and speculate on how Kaldwell city can squeeze a few more dollars a month out of the increasingly stressed out taxpayers? How much is enough for these leach like rulers? Will the counselors ever figure out that the more you take from the taxpayer, the less that will be invested in Kaldwell. Right now, the only one spending $$$$ in Kaldwell is the taxpayer, and we are getting a lousy deal. As the Czars in pre revolution Russia said to the peasants, pay up sucker!
ReplyDeleteProperty taxes are due December 20, don't forget!