Regional & Multi-Regional & Multi-Jurisdictional Fee Jurisdictional Fee

SystemsSystems

Tyson Smith, AICP, JDTyson Smith, AICP, JD

Freilich, Leitner & CarlisleFreilich, Leitner & Carlisle

Kansas City, MOKansas City, MO

““Planning is Politics …”Planning is Politics …”

Dr. Ernest Bartley, PhDDr. Ernest Bartley, PhD

Professor of Urban and Regional PlanningProfessor of Urban and Regional Planning

University of FloridaUniversity of Florida

Dual Rational Nexus TestDual Rational Nexus TestThe local government must demonstrate a The local government must demonstrate a

reasonable connection, or reasonable connection, or rational nexusrational nexus, , between:between:

the the need need for additional capital facilities and the for additional capital facilities and the growth in population generated by the growth in population generated by the subdivision; andsubdivision; and

the expenditures of the funds collected and the the expenditures of the funds collected and the benefits benefits accruing to the subdivisionaccruing to the subdivision

Hollywood, Inc. v. Broward CountyHollywood, Inc. v. Broward County431 So.2d 606 (Fla. 4431 So.2d 606 (Fla. 4thth DCA 1983) DCA 1983)

St. Johns Co. v. Northeast Florida Builders St. Johns Co. v. Northeast Florida Builders Ass’n, IncAss’n, Inc., ., 583 So.2d 635 (Fla. 1991)583 So.2d 635 (Fla. 1991)

Free Public SchoolsFree Public Schools

Uniform School SystemUniform School System

““Needs” Prong metNeeds” Prong met

““Benefit” Prong Benefit” Prong notnot met met

Schools

County Development

City Develop-ment

Impact Fee

No Impact Fee

Benefit

Disproportionate BenefitDisproportionate Benefit

No requirement that No requirement that everyevery fee fee payer benefit or that payer benefit or that eacheach person person who benefits pay.who benefits pay.

But “But “substantially all of the substantially all of the populationpopulation” that benefits must pay ” that benefits must pay the impact fees for that facilitythe impact fees for that facility..

Cherokee County, Georgia

Cherokee Co. v. Greater Atlanta HBACherokee Co. v. Greater Atlanta HBA, 566 , 566 S.E. 2d 470 (June 13, 2002)S.E. 2d 470 (June 13, 2002)

County-wide Costs and GrowthCounty-wide Costs and GrowthStatutory ProportionalityStatutory ProportionalityEqual Protection – Due ProcessEqual Protection – Due ProcessAuthority to act w/in Incorp. Areas?Authority to act w/in Incorp. Areas? No ClassificationNo Classification No AuthorityNo AuthorityProportionality – Tax StandardProportionality – Tax Standard

See also, See also, Wellington River Hollow v. King Co.Wellington River Hollow v. King Co.2002 WL 31103632 (WA Ct. of Appeals)2002 WL 31103632 (WA Ct. of Appeals)

`

Sheriff;Public Safety; and Fire

County Develop-ment Pays the Fee

City Development pays No Impact Fees

Libraries; Parks & Rec; & Roads

BenefitBenefit

Benefit

Benefit

What is a County to do?What is a County to do?

Work TogetherWork Together

Initiate Discussions pre-politicsInitiate Discussions pre-politics

County Retains Collection County Retains Collection responsibilitiesresponsibilities

Point in municipal approval process Point in municipal approval process where County approval is required?where County approval is required?

Demonstrate benefits and “nexus” to Demonstrate benefits and “nexus” to City and City residents, particularly City and City residents, particularly schools, parks, roadsschools, parks, roads

Planned Countywide Park

Park Benefit District Cities

Unincorporated Area OnlyUnincorporated Area Only

Asses surcharge for use of servicesAsses surcharge for use of services

Be certain City is not Providing the Be certain City is not Providing the same servicesame service

Distance Public Facilities from cityDistance Public Facilities from city

How significant is the new growth How significant is the new growth “population” benefiting but not paying“population” benefiting but not paying

Planned Countywide Park

Park Benefit District

City

“Which would you prefer? To get the short end of the stick or left holding the bag?”