San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu is getting into the ring with the Supreme Court, leading a national coalition to defend the use of development impact fees. Chiu and several organizations are backing a legal battle against a homeowner's challenge that's got local economies and housing development at stake, the city attorney’s office said in a statement.
According to the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office, development impact fees are essential for communities to handle growth by funding infrastructure like schools and roads. The case at hand, George Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, has San Francisco aiming to keep the practice legal after Sheetz' petition grabbed the high court's attention.
Impact fees, as one-time charges slapped on development projects, aren't pocket change. They're earmarked for all sorts of public needs that new developments trigger, from streets to utilities. City Attorney Chiu stressed the fees are crucial for fairness, claiming, "An adverse ruling in this case could have severe consequences for local governments and slow production of badly-needed housing."
Chiu's coalition, formed with several national bodies representing localities all over the map, fears what scrapping these fees could mean. The City Attorney's Office warned they're worrying about sticking existing residents with the bill for new infrastructure funded by taxes or other means and slowing down housing development.
The legislative approach for setting these fees aims for transparency and allows folks to chime in. Without it, every project could become an expensive headache for studies and appeals. Having joined a crusade of local government organizations, Chiu's office argues for the importance of these fees in keeping the engine of urban growth humming without passing the cost onto current residents and businesses.
El Dorado County homeowner George Sheetz kicked off this fray over a transportation fee tacked onto his project. Despite losing twice in state courts, Sheetz carried the fight to the Supreme Court, which decided to hear him out. The coalition, including the National League of Cities and the Government Finance Officers Association, insists on the Supreme Court upholding the precedent that has long governed local infrastructural funding.
