Oneida Tribe of Indians v. Village of Hobart
891 F. Supp. 2d 1058
E.D. Wis.2012Background
- Tribe sues Village of Hobart over storm water charges on subject trust lands within Hobart, seeking declaratory judgment and injunctive relief.
- Village claims its Storm Water Management Utility Ordinance imposes fees to fund the utility; Tribe contends lands held in trust by United States are tax-exempt and not subject to the Ordinance.
- Village filed a third-party complaint against United States; earlier APA claim was dismissed for lack of final agency action; Interior later denied payment of fees.
- United States holds in trust 148 parcels (~1400 acres) within Hobart; parcels are interspersed throughout the Village in a checkerboard pattern.
- Ordinance (adopted 2007) creates a Storm Water Management Utility and authorizes base charges, ERU-based charges, and other related assessments; Tribe has refused to pay.
- Court grants Tribe’s and United States’ motions, enjoining collection of charges on trust lands and dismissing the Village’s claims against the United States for lack of jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do Hobart's storm water charges on tribal trust lands constitute a tax? | Tribe argues charges are impermissible taxes on trust lands. | Village contends charges are fees for services benefiting all landowners. | Yes; charges are impermissible taxes on tribal trust property. |
| Can the Village collect charges against the United States as holder of trust title to the lands? | N/A (Tribe argues immunity protects trust lands from such charges). | Village seeks payment from United States under CWA Section 313. | No; Section 313 does not waive immunity to allow collection from the United States. |
| Does Section 313(a) provide a clear waiver of federal sovereign immunity for taxing Indian trust lands? | N/A | Village argues Section 313 authorizes charges on federal lands or title holders. | No; 313(a) does not clearly waive immunity for taxation of Indian trust lands. |
Key Cases Cited
- McLeod v. Columbia County, 254 F. Supp. 2d 1340 (S.D. Ga. 2003) (framework for distinguishing taxes from regulatory fees in storm water cases)
- San Juan Cellular Telephone Co. v. Public Service Commission of Puerto Rico, 967 F.2d 683 (1st Cir. 1992) (three-question framework for tax vs. fee analysis)
- County of Yakima v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of Yakima Indian Nation, 502 U.S. 251 (1992) (lands taken into trust exempt from state and local taxation under IRA)
- Okla. Tax Comm’n v. Chickasaw Nation, 515 U.S. 450 (1995) (tax immunity on Indian lands unless clearly authorized by Congress)
- Carpenter v. Shaw, 280 U.S. 363 (1930) (federal right governs; tax exemptions for Indians construed liberally)
- Massachusetts v. United States, 435 U.S. 444 (1978) (federal charges on state interests; not directly controlling tribal taxation questions)