Fee Lawsuit Rumor Debunked

There’s a rumor circulating in Eugene that suggests the city could be vulnerable to city-services-fee-based litigation like the city of Des Moines, Iowa, which has been fighting lawsuits since 2004. Due to differences in the type of fee, state laws and locally based federal agencies, experts indicate that type of lawsuit wouldn’t be successful in Eugene.

Des Moines’ franchise fee was a charge on utilities that the Des Moines City Council raised from a longstanding 1 percent to 5 percent, which is too high under Iowa law. Oregon law allows cities to charge utilities up to 7 percent in franchise fees for the use of the public right of way, but EWEB pays the city about $12 million a year in taxes instead of using the franchise fee mechanism, according to EWEB spokesman Joe Harwood.

That Des Moines franchise fee is different from Eugene’s proposed city service fee, which would charge each residence a flat fee up to $10 per month, up to $30 for businesses. The Citizens’ Utility Board’s Bob Jenks says franchise fees are common in Oregon, though he hasn’t heard of too many flat, non-usage-related per-person or per-household fees that are collected by a utility.

The federal government sued the city of Des Moines in April because it has allegedly been collecting a city tax on federal agencies, which violates a provision in the Constitution. Opponents of Eugene’s proposed fee say that it’s a tax, not a fee.

The Oregon Department of Revenue’s Derek Gasparini isn’t familiar with Eugene’s proposed fee specifically, but he says, “In loose terms, a fee is usually a fee for a service provided, and it’s a direct service fee — you’re paying for what you get,” while taxes are more widely collected for the greater public good.

Whether the proposed fee would be a true fee or a tax might not matter in terms of taxing federal agencies in Eugene, though. “The only federal agencies that we deal with right now would be the GSA, and that’s for the federal courthouse,” Harwood says, and it would be pretty easy to exempt a single agency from a fee.

A Note From the Publisher

Dear Readers,

The last two years have been some of the hardest in Eugene Weekly’s 43 years. There were moments when keeping the paper alive felt uncertain. And yet, here we are — still publishing, still investigating, still showing up every week.

That’s because of you!

Not just because of financial support (though that matters enormously), but because of the emails, notes, conversations, encouragement and ideas you shared along the way. You reminded us why this paper exists and who it’s for.

Listening to readers has always been at the heart of Eugene Weekly. This year, that meant launching our popular weekly Activist Alert column, after many of you told us there was no single, reliable place to find information about rallies, meetings and ways to get involved. You asked. We responded.

We’ve also continued to deepen the coverage that sets Eugene Weekly apart, including our in-depth reporting on local real estate development through Bricks & Mortar — digging into what’s being built, who’s behind it and how those decisions shape our community.

And, of course, we’ve continued to bring you the stories and features many of you depend on: investigations and local government reporting, arts and culture coverage, sudoku and crossword puzzles, Savage Love, and our extensive community events calendar. We feature award-winning stories by University of Oregon student reporters getting real world journalism experience. All free. In print and online.

None of this happens by accident. It happens because readers step up and say: this matters.

As we head into a new year, please consider supporting Eugene Weekly if you’re able. Every dollar helps keep us digging, questioning, celebrating — and yes, occasionally annoying exactly the right people. We consider that a public service.

Thank you for standing with us!