
February 15, 2006 Mississippi Supreme Court Urged to Uphold City's Impact Fees CHICAGO —The American Planning Association (APA) urges the Mississippi Supreme Court to uphold the City of Ocean Springs's impact fees in the case City of Ocean Springs v. Homebuilders Association of Mississippi, Inc. (No. 2004-CC-1278). APA and its Mississippi chapter filed an amicus curiae brief in support of Ocean Springs. Oral argument was scheduled for February 15 at 9:30 a.m. Impact fees are important sources of revenue for cities to cover the costs associated with providing additional facilities or services needed as a result of new development. The City of Ocean Springs expects to see significant growth — as much as 41 percent — between 2000 and 2020. Without impact fees, the cost of expanding city services will likely fall to residents in the form of assessments or tax increases.
Mississippi doesn't provide explicit enabling authority for impact fees, but APA's brief argues that "impact fees, when based on a comprehensive plan and used in conjunction with a sound capital improvements plan, can be an effective tool for ensuring adequate infrastructure to accommodate growth where and when it is anticipated." APA's brief further states, "The Mississippi Code provides the City of Ocean Springs authority and responsibility to plan for the 'coordinated physical development' of the community 'in accordance with present and future needs' along with the authority to enforce and implement the plan. Miss. Code §17-1-11 (1)(a) and (2). The City reasonably relied on this planning authority in the preparation and adoption of its impact fees program." "APA supports state enabling legislation that provides clear and concise standards for impact fees," said Jeff Soule, FAICP, Policy Director of the American Planning Association. "In the absence of such authority, there are sound planning principles which must be followed and the City of Ocean Springs's impact fees are consistent with these principles." APA's amicus brief enumerates these important planning principles. Contact |
| |