Source: http://ksag.washburnlaw.edu/opinions/2000/2000-038.htm
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 02:48:08+00:00

Document:
The City of Colwich is authorized to establish a municipal water utility system and impose fees for such service. Moreover, the City has the power to require property owners to connect to the water system by paying a mandatory connection fee and may impose minimum water service fees regardless whether the owner chooses to use the service. Finally, the City may enact an ordinance creating a lien for unpaid connection fees and water service fees. Cited herein: K.S.A. 12-842;12-1674a; 65-3401.
The Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) is considering loaning funds to the City of Colwich for a municipal water utility system. The City proposes to pay the loan through ad valorem taxes and user fees. The City intends to impose user fees on all property owners regardless whether the owner actually uses the water. You indicate that there are numerous property owners who have private water wells and may oppose having to pay for a service that they may not use.
1. Can the City, by enacting an ordinary ordinance, establish a water utility system and impose fees for such service?
In Cunningham v. City of Iola(2) the Kansas Supreme Court concluded that K.S.A. 12-842 impliedly authorizes cities to impose fees for the utility services listed in the statute.
Additionally, the Home Rule Amendment to the Kansas Constitution(3) allows cities to "determine their local affairs and government," subject only to enactments of the Kansas Legislature that apply uniformly to all cities. There are no statutes that apply uniformly to all cities concerning establishing a water utility system and imposing fees. Therefore, it is our opinion that the Home Rule Amendment would also allow the City of Colwich to establish a water utility system and impose fees for such service.
2. Can the City require all residents to connect to the water utility system by imposing a connection fee?
Therefore, it is our opinion that the City of Colwich may require all property owners to connect to the City's water system even in the absence of a known health hazard if the City is establishing the water system for public health, safety or welfare purposes.
3. Can the City impose mandatory minimum fees for water service against a property owner who doesn't use the service?
In Zerr v. Tilton,(11) the Kansas Supreme Court considered whether a county can impose mandatory trash fees on property owners to support the county's solid waste management program. The property owners argued that they did not use the trash pick-up service provided by the county and, therefore, should not have to pay. The Court reviewed K.S.A. 65-3410, which allows a county to impose fees "upon persons receiving the service," and concluded that the mandatory fees were appropriate because the service was available to the owners even though they chose not to avail themselves of the service.
We note that K.S.A. 12-1674a restricts cities in certain counties(12) from imposing fees for services unless the person is a user or is required by law to use the service. However, this statute does not apply to the City of Colwich because it is located in a county with a population in excess of 215,000. Therefore, applying the Tilton rationale, it is our opinion that the City of Colwich may impose a minimum fee for water service whether or not the property owner uses the service.
4. Can the City impose a lien on the real property for failure to pay any unpaid connection fees and/or unpaid water service fees?
In Attorney General Opinion No. 80-215, Attorney General Robert T. Stephan opined that a city may enact an ordinance creating a lien on property for unpaid water bills.(13) There has been no legislation or appellate court decisions that would invalidate General Stephan's conclusion and, therefore, it is our opinion that a city may enact an ordinance creating a lien for unpaid connection fees and water service fees.
Summarizing, it is our opinion that the City of Colwich may establish a municipal water utility system and impose fees for such service. Moreover, the City may require property owners to connect to the water system by paying a mandatory connection fee and may impose minimum water service fees regardless whether the owner uses the service. Finally, the City may enact an ordinance creating a lien for unpaid connection fees and water service fees.
1. K.S.A. 12-842. (Emphasis added).
2. 86 Kan. 402 (1912).
3. Article 12, § 5.
4. 33 S.Ct. 290, 227 U.S. 303, 57 L.Ed. 520 (1913).
5. 57 L.Ed. at 523.
6. Stern v. Halligan, 158 F.3d 729 (3rd Cir. 1998); Shrader v. Horton, 471 F.Supp. 1236 (W.D. Virginia, 1979), affd., 626 F.2d 1163 (4th Cir. 1980).
7. 158 F.3d at 732.
8. 471 F.Supp. 1236 (W.D. Virginia, 1979), affd., 626 F.2d 1163 (4th Cir. 1980).
9. 158 F.3d 729 (3rd Cir. 1998).
10. 158 F.3d at 735. See also Kusznikow v. Council of Stafford, 730 A.2d 930 (N.J. Superior Ct. 1999) (property owner must connect to city water system and pay fees even if owner doesn't use city water).
11. 224 Kan. 394 (1978).
12. Counties with a population of not less than 175,000 and not more than 215,000.
13. See also Attorney General Opinion Nos. 84-105 and 2000-14.

References: v. 
 v. 
 § 5
 v. 
 v. 
 v.