Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer Dist. v. Bath Twp. (Slip Opinion), 44 N.E.3d 246

Sewer District seeks to implement a regional stormwater-management program within its multi-member service area.
Some member communities and landowners argued the District lacked authority under R.C. Chapter 6119 and the District charter, and that the fees were unconstitutional.
Trial court granted partial summary judgment in 2011 upholding authority under Chapter 6119 and the charter; the court of appeals reversed.
The court of appeals held the statutory scheme limits the District to traditionally defined wastewater purposes and did not authorize a stormwater program.
The majority reverses the court of appeals, concluding the District is authorized to implement the regional stormwater program and to charge fees under statute and the charter; the concurrence/dissent splits on the extent of fee authority.
The dissent would limit or negate the fee authority, arguing the statutory basis does not support current stormwater charges and that fees may constitute an unlawful tax.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Is the regional stormwater program authorized by statute and charter?	Sewer District argues 6119 and charter authorize regional stormwater.	Appellees contend authority is limited to waste water and not stormwater.	Yes; both statute and charter authorize the program.
Are the stormwater fees authorized by statute and charter?	Sewer District asserts fees are allowed as charges for use/services of a water-resource project.	Appellees contend fees apply to a future project and/or are unlawful taxes.	Yes; fees are authorized by statute and charter (majority view).

Youngstown Club v. Porterfield, 21 Ohio St.2d 83 (Ohio 1970) (interpretation of statutory words and ordinary meaning)
Columbus-Suburban Coach Lines, Inc. v. Pub. Util. Comm., 20 Ohio St.2d 125 (Ohio 1969) (requirement to give words their plain meaning)
Reith v. McGill Smith Punshon, Inc., 163 Ohio App.3d 709 (Ohio App. 1st Dist. 2005) (definitional reading of 'waste water' and statutory scope)
Nat'l Cable Television Ass'n., Inc. v. United States, 415 U.S. 336 (U.S. 1974) (fee vs. tax distinction in regulatory charges)
Bolt v. Lansing, 459 Mich. 152 (Mich. 1998) (stormwater charges as fees if tied to benefits; otherwise tax)
Drees Co. v. Hamilton Twp., 132 Ohio St.3d 186 (Ohio 2012) (factors distinguishing fees from taxes in local assessments)
Sanborn v. Hamilton Cty. Budget Comm., 142 Ohio St.3d 20 (Ohio 2014) (tax vs. fee analysis for local government financing)