Sheetz v County of El Dorado __ S.Ct. __ [2024]

In Sheetz v County of El Dorado __ S.Ct. __ [2024], the Supreme Court of the United States held that fees imposed to mitigate traffic congestion that might result from erecting a home on a parcel of land must have an “essential nexus” to the government’s land-use interest  and must have a “rough proportionality” to the development’s impact on the land-use interest regardless of whether the fees are predetermined by a legislatively prescribed fee schedule or imposed on an individual and discretionary basis by an administrative branch of government.  The traffic impact fee would constitute an unlawful “exaction” of money in violation of the Takings Clause if the tests are not satisfied.

Posted in exaction, Takings, Takings Clause
No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Share via
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap