Tooele Associates Ltd. Partnership v. Tooele City Corp., 247 P.3d 371

Tooele City enacted a civil inspection fee of 4% of bonded construction costs in 1996 without prior, detailed cost data.
Associates protested the fee and sought an independent study of actual inspection costs; city conducted an internal audit showing 3.9% costs.
District court dismissed several claims after finding phase 1-E inspections incomplete, preventing final cost determination.
City presented a five-year cost/revenue analysis (1998–2003) showing costs exceeded revenues, and Associates challenged the fee's reasonableness.
Court of appeals reversed the district court on constitutional standards, holding the focus should be on reasonableness of the fee relative to regulating costs, not fee-setting procedure.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
What is the proper constitutional test for a regulatory fee?	Associates argues procedure invalidates fee;	Tooele contends test is reasonableness relative to regulatory costs, not procedure.	Fee must relate to regulatory costs, not fee-setting method.
May a multiyear cost/revenue analysis support reasonableness of a regulatory fee?	Multiyear analysis could be manipulated and is improper.	Multiyear analysis is appropriate to reflect cost fluctuations and upfront revenues.	Multiyear analysis is appropriate and not prohibited.
Who bears the burden to show unreasonableness of a regulatory fee?	City bears burden to justify fee, not challenger.	Challenger must prove fee is unreasonable or used for general revenues.	Challenger bears burden to show fee is unreasonable or subsidizes general government; Associates failed.
Did the district court err in applying the standard by focusing on fee-setting procedure?	Procedure isn't the dispositive measure of reasonableness.	District court correctly scrutinized procedural aspects.	District court erred; test is fee reasonableness relative to regulatory costs.

V-1 Oil Co. v. Utah State Tax Comm'n, 942 P.2d 906 (Utah 1996) (distinguishes tax vs. regulatory fee; relates fee reasonableness to regulation costs)
City of North Logan v. Home Builders Ass'n, 1999 UT 63 (Utah 1999) (procedural burdens and reasonableness framework for regulatory fees)
Bennion Gas & Oil Co. v. Salt Lake City, 15 P.2d 651 (Utah 1932) (fee amount tied to services rendered; cost relation to regulation)
Salt Lake City v. Bennion Gas & Oil Co., 80 Utah 530 (Utah 1932) (fee reasonableness tied to cost of regulating and policing activity)
Walker v. Brigham City, 856 P.2d 347 (Utah 1993) (statutory challenge to fee setting; distinguished from constitutional challenge)