The Nebraska Supreme Court ruled on July 17, 2026, that the Airport Authority of the City of Omaha did not impose an unconstitutional tax on Park 'N Go of Nebraska, LLC. The court's decision reverses a previous ruling by a district court that had declared the charge a tax in violation of the Nebraska Constitution. This ruling affects off-airport parking companies operating near Eppley Airfield and clarifies the legal distinction between user fees and taxes.
The dispute began when Park 'N Go, which operates a parking lot and shuttle service near the airport, challenged a charge imposed by the Airport Authority. The charge was based on a percentage of Park 'N Go's gross receipts and was intended to cover the costs associated with using designated passenger pickup and drop-off lanes at the airport. The ruling is significant as it sets a precedent regarding the authority of airport entities to impose fees on private businesses.
Background
The parties involved in this case are Park 'N Go of Nebraska, LLC, a limited liability company that provides parking services near Eppley Airfield, and the Airport Authority of the City of Omaha, a political subdivision responsible for managing the airport. The Airport Authority enacted a resolution in June 2021 that imposed a monthly charge on off-airport parking companies for access to the airport's Commercial Vehicle Lanes, starting in August 2021.
Park 'N Go filed a lawsuit in July 2021, claiming that the charge was an unconstitutional tax rather than a legitimate user fee. The company argued that the charge did not comply with the Nebraska Constitution, which stipulates that taxes must be imposed by legislative authority. The case eventually reached the Nebraska Supreme Court after a district court ruled in favor of Park 'N Go, declaring the charge an impermissible tax.
The Ruling
The Nebraska Supreme Court ruled that the charge imposed by the Airport Authority was not an unconstitutional tax. The court determined that the charge was a permissible user fee, stating, "The charge imposed by Airport Authority was not an unconstitutional tax." The ruling reversed the district court's decision and instructed the lower court to dismiss Park 'N Go's complaint.
The Supreme Court's opinion emphasized that the charge was intended to support the operating costs associated with the airport and was not a general tax on income. The court noted that the previous court had erred in applying a three-part test to determine whether the charge was a fee or a tax, stating that such tests should not be rigidly applied in every case.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for off-airport parking companies and other businesses that operate near airports. It clarifies the legal framework surrounding user fees and taxes, reinforcing the authority of airport authorities to impose charges that are tied to the use of airport facilities. The decision may encourage other airport authorities to implement similar user fees without fear of legal challenges.
Furthermore, the ruling sets a precedent for how courts will interpret the distinction between user fees and taxes in future cases. It suggests that charges based on gross receipts can be considered user fees as long as they are directly related to the services provided and not intended to generate general revenue.
What's Next
Following this ruling, there is no indication that Park 'N Go intends to appeal the decision. The case has clarified the legal standing of user fees imposed by airport authorities, and no related cases are currently pending that would challenge this ruling.