For years, Palm Beach Gardens has stood alone among cities trying to redefine county rules for collecting and spending money from developers to pay for roads.
Last month, the city suffered a setback in its four-year legal battle with Palm Beach County. A judge threw out a 2023 challenge that the city had used to justify its refusal to pay the county it collected but didn鈥檛 share with the county.
The amount represents impact fees due from January 2020, when the city stopped collecting them on behalf of the county, until August 2023, when the city sought court clarification of a 2022 . The amount due has continued to grow.
Two years after the city filed its request for clarification, it got its answer on Aug. 22.
鈥淭his Court accepted at face value City鈥檚 claim that it sought clarification rather than rehearing of the trial court鈥檚 order that had been affirmed on appeal,鈥� .
鈥淎t the hearing, however, it became apparent that City is not, in fact seeking clarification of the trial court鈥檚 order, but instead seeks reconsideration of the order on bases already raised at the time of the injunction hearing (in 2022).鈥�
Sherman denied the city鈥檚 motion, saying the city failed to raise these issues on appeal and that the , issued by then-Circuit Judge Paige Gillman, 鈥渁re apparent on the face of the order.鈥�
City trying 鈥榯o run the clock out鈥�
The judge did not address whether the city has to immediately pay the county, a question that figured heavily in a two-hour hearing before Sherman on Aug. 11.
The county 鈥渉as real concerns that the city has no intention of ever paying,鈥� Assistant County Attorney Sean Fahey argued.
The city, he said, is 鈥渏ust trying to run the clock out,鈥� until a change in state law makes the issue moot before a full trial can be held. But that鈥檚 not right, he said, because 鈥渢he court has already concluded that the city鈥檚 actions in this dispute are irreparably injuring the county.鈥�
Can鈥檛 charge developers twice
City Attorney Max Lohman countered that Gillman鈥檚 2022 temporary injunction allowed the city to continue to charge developers a mobility fee on top of the county road impact fee but the city could not, under state law, charge developers twice for the same impact.
And going back and charging developers the county鈥檚 fee now 鈥渨ould precipitate hundreds of lawsuits against the city,鈥� he said.
The amount of money the city has been collecting under its mobility rules is not calculated the same as the county鈥檚 impact fee so it isn鈥檛 a matter of the city simply turning over the money to the county, he said.
Furthermore, granting the injunction, Gillman did not specifically order the city to pay the county from its own accounts, he said.
Lohman, backed by , objected to a county request for damages on top of the unpaid fees since the county had never sought damages in court pleadings.
鈥淭he county,鈥� he said, 鈥渁ttempts to have its cake and eat it, too.鈥�
The city asked the judge to hold off on ruling and order the county to comply with the new state law, a proposal the judge rejected.
Mobility fee effort began in 2017
The hearing did not get into the city鈥檚 decision this year to formally replace the county鈥檚 road impact fee with a city mobility fee under an updated state law that the city helped pass last year. The law gave both sides a year, until Oct. 1, to decide how to split the fee, but in-person negotiations have not taken place.
Like many cities, Gardens wanted more say in how the developers鈥� fees are spent within the city. The county spends the money on regional roads, which can mean money generated in the city goes to roads in Jupiter or elsewhere.
The impact fee also is limited to road work and cannot pay for sidewalks, bike paths and other alternative transportation options, as mobility fees can.
The city began pursuing its own mobility fee in 2017 and approved it in 2019 under a state law that city officials interpreted to mean they no longer had to collect impact fees on behalf of the county.
The in May 2021.
Suit languished after initial ruling went county鈥檚 way
After a five-day trial in 2022, Gillman ruled that the city had gone too far, granting the county a temporary injunction to require that the city keep collecting road impact fee payments on behalf of the county, as it had for decades.
鈥淭he city is temporarily enjoined from issuing permits to developers absent compliance with the county鈥檚 procedures relating to its assessment and the city鈥檚 collection of such road impact fees and remittance to the county,鈥� Gillman ruled.
Additionally, she ordered the city to collect the fees from developers and 鈥渞emit them to the county.鈥�
The county interpreted the ruling a year later to mean the city had to pay $3.1 million in back fees. The city refused in August 2023, asking the court to clarify its ruling.
Gillman, now Kilbane, was by Gov. Ron DeSantis in January 2023. Two years passed while the case shifted from one judge to another before Sherman agreed in February to hear the city鈥檚 motion for clarification of Gillman鈥檚 order.
Both county attorneys who tried the case in 2022 have departed, replaced by Fahey and Maureen Martinez. Both city attorneys, Lohman and Hawkins, remain.
While a full trial on a permanent injunction is not planned before November, the county has been working to determine how many building permits the city has issued since 2020 to figure out how much money it should be paid.
A county asking the city for five years of building permits didn鈥檛 go forward after the city calculated that gathering the material would and take one employee more than seven years.
The city objected to a similar county request issued as part of court discovery but agreed to pay a $500 fee to give the county access to the material through an electronic database.
In public presentations, neither the city nor the county has offered details on how much the lawsuit is costing taxpayers.
This story was originally published by , a SA国际传谋 News partner.
