A Superior Court judge recently issued a formal ruling in favor of utility companies that would have had to pay the county a fee for use of public rights of way in unincorporated areas.

In a written decision, Judge Samuel Chung said the county does not have the authority to impose franchise compensation, equivalent to a rental agreement, between it and the utilities for using public roads or other rights of way in order to distribute services. For now, utility customers — including on Vashon — will not see their rates hiked for water, sewer, gas and electricity as a result of the fee, but the county plans to appeal the decision.

“The case is more or less out of the county’s hands at the moment,” said David Shurtleff, director of communications for the King County Council.

In January, the county sought a declaratory judgment from the court to interpret the standing of a 2016 ordinance that was intended to collect rent payment for the utilities’ use of rights of way. King County anticipated that the ordinance would have contributed about $10 million per year to the general fund, according to county staff, offsetting concerns about an impending budget deficit at the time.

Some of the revenue would have been used to avoid cutting felony jail bookings at the Maleng Regional Justice Center in Kent, according to The Kent Reporter, a sister paper of The Beachcomber.

Shurtleff added that the council will set the biennial budget between October and December when the question of how to restore jail bookings at that facility will be revisited.

“If there’s going to be new options on the table, it would be then,” he said.

More than 20 water and sewer districts across King County, including the Vashon Sewer District, were named in the declaratory judgment. The group later filed a countersuit against having to comply with the ordinance.

The fee imposed on utilities would have been determined based on land value, service demand and what would be considered a “reasonable rate of return for the use,” according to an August transcript of the proceedings when the judge first gave his ruling during a conference call.

Some utility companies, including on the island, proposed raising rates for service in order to manage the additional cost and potential hit to their bottom line.

On May 25, the Burton Water Company filed a proposal with the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission to increase its general service rate by 33 percent. In the filing, the company cited the rights-of-way fee as a reason that the adjustment was necessary, as well as to support infrastructure improvements and a staff wage increase.

Before approving the rate increase, the commission asked that Burton Water remove the rights-of-way fee from its initial filing until the judge’s ruling had been issued. The company agreed, dropping the increased water service rate by an estimated $5 or $6 per household, according to Evan Simmons, an owner of the Burton Water Company. The general rate adjustment for the company’s 400 customers took effect on Sept. 1.

The Dockton Water Association was included as a defendant in the judge’s final motion issued on Sept. 4. John Havekotte, president of the board, said the association would have had to increase their service rate by $5 per household had the judge ruled in favor of the county.

Havekotte said he and members of the board decided to join the countersuit as a matter of defending what they believed was fair.

“We did feel, as a group of individuals, that the concept of renting the rights of way to utilities was inappropriate,” he said. “We didn’t feel King County had the authority to do that. That’s why we joined the lawsuit.”

Islander William Shadbolt, president of the Washington Rental Housing Association, was in court to hear the oral arguments and remains skeptical of the county’s intentions.

“The judge’s written ruling focused on the fact that the county does not have the authority to enact such a fee or tax, nor require utilities to pay it. Interestingly, he pointed out that a franchise agreement is negotiated and not imposed by the government,” Shadbolt wrote in an email. “We saw the negative effect of the tax on Vashon with utilities asking the [commission] for blockbuster raises to help cover the cost. Now that it has been ruled unlawful, there is no need for them.”

The county believes the ordinance is fair and comparable to the exchange between utility companies and landowners in instances where easements are sold for use of private property.

“King County believes it has clear authority to ask utilities to pay compensation for placing their utility pipes and lines in road rights-of-way,” a statement provided by Cameron Satterfield, communications manager for the Department of Executive Services, states.

“Public and private utilities have obtained substantial revenue through their free use of the rights-of-way.”

In the statement, the county said it is preparing an appeal to the ruling with the prosecuting attorney’s office.