Feds Can’t Keep Cabin Leases Secret State Wins Suit In Dispute Over Property Taxes

Idaho has won a lawsuit against the U.S. Forest Service to get the agency to turn over names of those with cabins on public land.

The Forest Service had routinely provided that information for years, and counties used it to charge property taxes. But last spring, on the advice of one of the agency’s Washington, D.C., lawyers, it decided the names should be secret to avoid invading cabin owners’ privacy.

Idaho Attorney General Al Lance was so outraged that he threatened to call U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, noting that he has her home number.

On Thursday, Lance was triumphant. “The court’s ruling recognizes that the law is very clear,” he said. “The public has an absolute right to know who is using the public’s land and how the public is being compensated for the use of its land.”

U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill issued a decision this week granting Idaho’s request for a summary judgment in the case, and throwing out the Forest Service’s similar request. Although Winmill ruled that the Forest Service must release names and home cities of lessees, he said street addresses could be kept secret.

When county assessors in 21 Idaho counties began complaining about the Forest Service’s new policy last spring, Lance first sent two letters to the Forest Service challenging the agency’s legal argument. He got no response to either.

Lance then filed requests for the names and addresses under the Freedom of Information Act. The Forest Service denied the requests and didn’t respond to Lance’s administrative appeal of the denial. So on May 29, he sued.

Every county in North Idaho has at least some Forest Service land that is leased to private parties. People who own cabins on Forest Service land pay property taxes on the buildings, although the land below them is public.

Winmill’s written decision rejected the Forest Service’s argument that the names of lease-holders and permittees should be kept secret under the federal Privacy Act, and under an exemption in the Freedom of Information Act for “personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”

He cited a previous Supreme Court decision that said the standard should be whether disclosing the information would help “citizens know what their government is up to.”

Knowing who is getting leases or permits on public land helps citizens check up on how the government is managing the land, Winmill wrote. It would show a citizen if, for example, favoritism was being used in awarding leases, or if people with a record of environmental abuses were getting leases. And the lease-holders’ home cities are part of their identification.

But Winmill ruled that street addresses don’t provide more information along those lines, and lease-holders do have an interest in keeping their addresses private.

Forest Service attorneys in Washington, D.C., couldn’t be reached for comment Thursday afternoon.

The decision orders the Forest Service to provide the state with the name and home city of everyone who holds a permit, license or lease on Forest Service land in Idaho.

Lance said if left unchallenged, the Forest Service’s position could have cost other property taxpayers more in the 21 counties with leased Forest Service land. That’s assuming the counties wouldn’t be able to assess property tax on the lessees’ cabins for lack of information.

“The effect of untaxed property is to shift the cost of local government to that property which is taxed, creating the higher taxes for the county’s property owners,” Lance said.

, DataTimes ILLUSTRATION: Color photo