EPHRATA — A Grant County Superior Court has ruled that Mick Hansen, who has waged a six-year legal fight against the Moses Lake Irrigation and Rehabilitation District, or MLIRD, does not have to pay a portion of the taxes the MLIRD has assessed on his property.

In an 18-page ruling issued on March 26, Judge David Estudillo wrote that the MLIRD “may not collect rates or tolls and charges” from Hansen’s lakefront property because the MLIRD’s irrigation taxes “are not reasonable under the circumstances presented.”

For 2020, the MLIRD has assessed 80 cents per $1,000 of assessed value on each of the district’s roughly 11,000 parcels to support the district’s operations, which largely involve maintaining the quality of the water in Moses Lake. Of that 80 cents, 20 cents is assessed under the portion of Washington state law that covers “irrigation and rehabilitation” districts, and 60 cents under the law that governs irrigation districts.

That money is used to fund the MLIRD’s 2020 budget of $1.7 million, a portion of which is being used this year to find ways to deal with the lake’s ongoing blue-green algae problem.

Estudillo wrote that the MLIRD did not set forth “factors and methodology” for the imposition of the irrigation district portion of the assessment, which, he said, the law governing irrigation districts demands be “reasonable.”

The judge also wrote that the MLIRD’s explanation of the irrigation assessment is “circular,” that the “tax is reasonable because it is part of the budget and because it is part of the budget the tax is reasonable.”

“Here, the district has never identified how it determined the assessment and/or tax imposed on plaintiff (and other members),” Estudillo wrote. “Absent the record containing an explanation of the methodology used to calculate the tax imposed against plaintiff’s land for irrigation, the court can only conclude the tax has been imposed without consideration and regard to the facts or circumstances of the plaintiff’s land and the district’s ‘irrigation’ services.”

In fact, Estudillo wrote that the MLIRD exists largely “to maintain Moses Lake as a reservoir” and has never maintained “an irrigation system that delivers water directly” to anyone.

Because there is no distribution system and Hansen is not receiving any benefit from the district, Estudillo also ruled the MLIRD is not entitled to tax Hansen’s land that is within the district but not adjacent to the lake.

Hansen sued the MLIRD in 2014, contending that the district both improperly taxed his land and improperly held elections to fill seats on the district’s board of directors. In late January, Estudillo threw out the portion of Hansen’s suit pertaining to district elections but asked for further arguments from the two sides on the issue of taxation.

Estudillo’s ruling is a narrow one, and it applies only to Hansen’s property. The judge also said his ruling does not apply to the “irrigation and rehabilitation” portion of the MLIRD’s assessment, which state law caps at 25 cents per $1,000 of assessed value.

Parties to the suit said that because Estudillo has not yet issued an order based on the ruling, they would not comment.

“As the final orders have not yet been entered in the case, both Hansen and I believe it best not to comment at this time,” said Thomas Burke, the attorney representing Hansen in the suit.

“The District is considering and analyzing the opinion to determine how best to respond in the interests of its ratepayers,” said MLIRD General Manager Chris Overland.

The Grant County Superior Court also would not comment on whether the ruling in Hansen’s suit had broader implications for property owners in the MLIRD.

“The court is not able to comment on litigation that remains pending at this time,” read an email from Deputy Court Administrator Shareen Laughlin.

Charles H. Featherstone can be reached at cfeatherstone@columbiabasinherald.com.