Sanitary authority brought declaratory judgment action against city alleging city ordinance was invalid and sought to enjoin city from collecting a 5% franchise fee. The Circuit Court granted summary judgment in favor of city, and authority appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Authority appealed.
The Supreme Court of Oregon held that:
- City had authority as home-rule municipality to impose the franchise fee on the authority;
- Imposition of fees on the sanitary authority by city was not preempted by state law; and
- Authority failed to preserve for appeal its argument that the Circuit Court erred when it granted summary judgment as to the calculation of city’s franchise fee.
City ordinance provided for collection of a fee from sanitary authority, not a tax, and therefore city had authority as a home-rule municipality to impose franchise fee on the authority for its use of city’s rights-of-way for the authority’s operations within the city.
Statutory provisions governing municipal regulation of public utilities and taxation on public utilities operating without a franchise did not preempt the imposition of fees on a sanitary authority by city. Neither provision unambiguously expressed a legislative intent to preempt local action, and provisions and legislative history suggested that the legislature in fact did not intend to preempt local governments from imposing such conditions on the use of their rights-of-way by sanitary authorities.