In January, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments for a case many landowners and developers are watching closely: Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, California. The case involves the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and its outcome could dramatically affect the real estate development impact fees state and local governments charge.
In 2004, the County of El Dorado, California, adopted a general development plan. In an effort to limit the impact of new development on roads, the plan was amended in 2006 to include a traffic impact mitigation (TIM) fee program, authorizing the county to condition issuance of building permits on the payment of TIM fees. Those fees would then be used to fund the construction of new roads and the widening of existing ones. The county calculates the fee using a formula, but it does not make any determination as to the specific traffic impact of a particular development project.
In 2016, George Sheetz applied for a permit to build a manufactured home on land he owned in El Dorado County. The county agreed to issue the permit to Sheetz on the condition that he pay a TIM fee of $23,420. Sheetz paid the fee and was issued the permit...
