EL DORADO COUNTY, Calif. — George Sheetz said he's worked hard all his life to save for retirement in El Dorado County.
With his engineering background, he saved on building costs on his property by doing much of the work himself.
“I purchased a manufactured home where I didn’t have to spend an enormous amount of money for a contractor to build me a home,” Sheetz said. “So, yeah, I cut every corner in the book to try to save money.”
Sheetz said he saved hundreds of thousands of dollars purchasing his 1,800-square-foot prefabricated home. He was astounded by the county traffic impact fee associated with his construction permit.
“When they told me that’s $23,600 because of my impact on the county, I said, ‘You people are crazy,’” Sheetz said.
Sheetz paid it and then sued the county over the fairness of the figure.
That was seven years ago, Sheetz said.
Fast forward to April 2024, and many state court hearings later, Sheetz’s case was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court, where he won.
“Nine justices all agreeing — it’s very rare,” Sheetz said. “I don’t know how many cases they’ve all agreed on something, but I’m told that this is extremely rare.”
In Sheetz’s case, the justices agreed that government fees, such as Sheetz’s construction permit fee, must be based on actual negative impacts.
The justices didn’t rule governments can’t impose fees, which El Dorado County, in a statement, said they are pleased the Supreme Court recognizes the county’s right to impose reasonable permitting conditions on new developments and looks forward to defending its program in any further litigation.
McGeorge School of Law professor John Sprankling, who specializes in property law, said this ruling will be felt nationwide.
“The big picture is, will this substantially impair the abilities of cities and counties to charge impact fees upfront on development?” Sprinkling said. “If it does, that may shift costs more onto regular taxpayers.”
The case has already been affected, with Shasta County voting to suspend development impact fees there.
The Supreme Court ruling also said lower courts must now decide how governments should collect these types of fees.
Sheetz hopes it doesn’t take another seven years and said he is happy where things stand.
“I think at this point, if we change the course of what’s been going on, I would have done my small part for this country,” Sheetz said.
A small part he said he’s happy to have had, so others possibly don’t have to go down the same road.