Bradbury v. City of Lewiston

• Docket Number: 49667
• Decision Date: 10 July 2023
• Parties: JOHN BRADBURY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. CITY OF LEWISTON, a municipal corporation, Respondent.
• Court: Idaho Supreme Court

1

JOHN BRADBURY, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
CITY OF LEWISTON, a municipal corporation, Respondent.

No. 49667

Supreme Court of Idaho

July 10, 2023

Appeal from the District Court of the Second Judicial District of the State of Idaho, Nez Perce County. Richard D. Greenwood, Senior District Judge.

The judgment of the district court is affirmed in part and reversed in part.

John Bradbury, Lewiston, Appellant Pro Se.

John Bradbury argued. Clements, Brown &McNichols, PA, Lewiston, for Respondent. Bentley Stromberg argued.

MOELLER, Justice.

This appeal stems from a lawsuit brought by then-city council member, John Bradbury, to contest whether the City of Lewiston ("the City") had been collecting excessive utility fees and improperly spending municipal funds. Bradbury filed a petition against the City seeking a declaratory judgment and equitable relief. He now appeals the district court's dismissal of most of his claims at summary judgment and raises additional errors for appellate review. For the following reasons, we affirm the decision of the district court in part and reverse in part.

I. Factual and Procedural Background

Bradbury is a resident of the City of Lewiston and was an elected member of its city council. While serving in that capacity, he filed a petition alleging nine causes of action concerning various City funds and services, including those related to water, sanitation, wastewater, city streets, the library, and the municipally-owned Bryden Canyon Golf Course ("Bryden Canyon"). Several of these legal challenges overlap and fall under four main activities: (1) interdepartmental

2

fund transfers from sanitation to finance a new library building and a new irrigation system at Bryden Canyon; (2) the use of sanitation and wastewater fees to repair city streets; (3) the City's payments to private entities for tourism and economic development; and (4) irrigation water provided to Bryden Canyon.

The City operates three utility enterprise funds relevant to this case: one provides and distributes water (the water utility); another collects and treats sewage (the wastewater utility); and a third collects and disposes of garbage, recyclables, and vegetation waste (the sanitation utility). Each utility charges fees to ratepayers who use these respective services. Additionally, the City maintains a "golf course" fund for the operation of Bryden Canyon and a "library fund" for public library services. The City maintains a reserve in each of these respective funds sufficient to conduct their operations for a minimum of three months. Where the City anticipates greater future need, it sometimes maintains even higher reserves.

1. Bryden Canyon Golf Course and the City's Library

Bryden Canyon is a municipal golf course that was constructed with City funds between 1972 and 1974. It was built on a parcel of land leased from the Lewiston Airport. Since 1979, the City has leased the facility to a private entity that oversees operation of the golf course. The lease terms include an agreement that the City will provide irrigation water to the golf course as needed. In exchange, the City receives lease payments and a percentage of the total revenues generated by the golf course.

In 2010, the irrigation system at Bryden Canyon failed and required replacement. The city council accepted a bid for a replacement system, but the golf course fund lacked adequate funds to pay for its installation. As a result, the City transferred $1,138,713 from the sanitation utility to the golf course fund, to be repaid with interest over a 30-year period. This transfer was later refinanced into a 20-year repayment plan. No additional funds were raised or collected from ratepayers to carry out this interdepartmental transfer.

The City also owns a library that is governed by an independent board. In 2012, the City concluded that a new public library should be constructed. Because the library fund lacked sufficient capital for a new building, the City transferred $800,000 from the sanitation utility to the library fund, to be repaid with interest over a 20-year period. No rates were raised, nor were additional funds collected, to make the interdepartmental transfer possible. On July 12, 2021, the

3

city council voted unanimously to liquidate and repay the remaining balance on the library fund transfer.

2. Street Impact Fees

The City provides curbside garbage pickup services to all City residents. About twenty-five years ago, the City reviewed its existing policies concerning cost allocation across its enterprise funds. It became concerned about the costs of street maintenance and repair, particularly in light of research showing that repeated heavy sanitation vehicle traffic can accelerate deterioration and wear to roads. The City determined to account for the excess wear and tear on the pavement from sanitation vehicles by assessing an annual charge to the sanitation fund. It was called a "street impact fee" and was equal to 7% of the sanitation fund's annual expenditures related to heavy sanitation vehicles.

In 2012, the City considered assessing the street impact fee to its water and wastewater funds as well. Wastewater and water services became a similar concern and point of focus for cost allocation "because maintenance on existing water and sewer lines regularly requires street cuts,"-i.e., cutting or removing sections of the street to access the underground lines-which shortens the lifespan of a road surface. Thus, the City set an additional street impact fee at 2% of total annual revenues in the water and wastewater funds. Bradbury alleged that since the additional fee was imposed, these street impact fees have diverted $935,000 from the water fund; $990,000 from the wastewater fund; and $3,483,668 from the sanitation fund. Dan Marsh, the City's chief financial officer, declared that these fees were consistent and comparable to charges imposed by other municipalities to allocate costs.

3. Payments to Private Entities: Valley Vision and Visit Lewis-Clark Valley

Bradbury alleges that the City made improper donations to two local businesses: Valley Vision and Visit Lewis-Clark Valley. The record shows that the City pays Valley Vision $40,000 per year "for assistance in recruiting and retaining businesses, assisting with City workforce development and assistance with the creation of a community strategic plan." The City also pays Visit Lewis-Clark Valley $15,000 per year for "tourism activities within the City that benefit the general public and to act as the City's tourism liaison and also to develop an economic development tourism strategy." The City claims that both businesses provide regular reports to the City on their promotional services and other activities performed on behalf of the City.

4. Water Services to Bryden Canyon Golf Course

4

The City's water utility provides services to most of its residents. Lewiston Orchards Irrigation District ("LOID") provides water services to other residents living in the areas not served by the City. Bradbury does not receive water services from the City. At all times relevant to this litigation he has been a LOID water customer.

Bryden Canyon has obtained water from both the City and LOID over the years. For a few decades following its initial operations, Bryden Canyon purchased surplus irrigation water from LOID at competitive rates. This continued through the early 1990s until the supply was deemed too unreliable. In 1998, the City constructed a well and pumping station to serve Bryden Canyon. It was funded in part by a special assessment fee collected from golf course users, which ultimately paid for approximately 40% of the well's total cost.

From 1998 to 2012, Bryden Canyon's use of the well water was not metered. The City considered the golf course fund to be a part owner of the well, and consequently "believed that it would be improper to charge the Golf Fund anything other than a proportionate share of the costs of operation, maintenance and depreciation of [the well]." In 2000, the City Public Works Department calculated that cost to be $27,600 per year, with an annual 2% increase to account for inflation. The City has since allocated that annual sum from the golf course fund to its water enterprise fund in bi-annual payments.

Despite the installation of a new irrigation system in 2010, this flat water rate has continued to be paid towards the "maintenance, upkeep and depreciation of" the well and "in exchange for all irrigation water needs of the municipal golf course." The city council even amended the Lewiston City Code in 2019 to specifically permit this flat fee arrangement with Bryden Canyon for irrigation water, citing Lewiston City Code section 36.5-5(c). The amended city code also provides the city council with discretion to allocate funds from the City's general fund to the water fund "to offset, in full or in part, the costs associated with providing water for the public purposes" of Bryden Canyon or other municipal water needs. LCC § 36.5-5(d). Today, the City continues to provide water to Bryden Canyon in exchange for lease payments, and it transfers approximately $36,000 per year from the golf course fund to the City's water fund "for water provided to the golf course." The City's water fund has also bought out the golf course fund's ownership share in the well to help pay down the earlier transfer from the sanitation fund.

5

5. Procedural History

Bradbury first raised his concerns of illegal City activities in a city council meeting held on August 24, 2020. He claims he moved to amend the budget "to purge the illegal acts and . . . resolve the problems," but the other council members refused to second his motion. As a result, Bradbury filed this action against the City on March 29, 2021. He stated that he brought the petition "in his capacity of City Councilor and in his capacity [as] a utility...