Heck of a Deal: Lot Owner Need Only Pay Half for Nonexistent City Service
Objects to $94,600 Bill for Stormwater System He's Never Used
The case of the Green Cove landowner who got tired of paying a $94,600-a-year fee for using a city stormwater system that was never connected to his property just got a lot more interesting.
Just before the holidays, the interim city manager granted Ward Huntley a 50 percent “mitigation credit,” so now he is only expected to pay the city $47,300 for a city service that he cannot use and has never used.
After paying the fee—under protest—for 2022 and 2023, Huntley finally hired a lawyer and sued the city in September, alleging that the city had been unlawfully collecting stormwater fees for his property at the corner of State Road 16 and U.S. Highway 17.
Under city ordinances, landowners are supposed to be charged based on how much stormwater system capacity they use, which in Huntley’s case is zero. Further, the allocation of fees has to be “equitable.”
Huntley has his own system of ditches and culverts, which direct excess stormwater into the St. Johns River, using no city infrastructure.
A few hundred feet from his 111-acre lot is the sprawling Reynolds Industrial Park, which also has a private stormwater system constructed back when it was a Navy base. The difference is that Reynolds does not pay a stormwater fee to the city. That was one example Huntley’s lawyers cited in their argument that the city treatment of their client was inequitable.
Apparently, city officials once made some noise about hitting Reynolds with a stormwater fee, but the Reynold’s administration quickly shut that notion down based on the principle that you should not be charged for services you do not receive and are not even available to you.
Newly elected City Councilor Darren Stutts blamed the administration of former City Manager Steve Kennedy for perpetrating a fiscal injustice against Huntley and the former city council for standing idly by and letting it happen. Kennedy announced his retirement in October after the election of three city councilors less sympathetic to his style of governance, including Stutts.
City Attorney Jim Arnold barely defended the Huntley fees, saying it was not “100 percent certain” the city was in the wrong. Even so, the City Council went ahead last month and hired a high-buck Tallahasee law firm to defend against the Huntley lawsuit.
Stutts said he succeeded in limiting the budget allocation for paying the lawyers to $10,000 because why spend more when the city is going to settle the case or lose in court?
Stutts said Huntley’s current assessment should be reduced to zero, his prior-year fees should be refunded to him, and he should be reimbursed for his legal fees. He said he plans to introduce a motion to that effect at the next council meeting. “We need to make this go away,” he said.
Huntley himself said he would be willing to allow the city to keep what he’s paid as a credit to cover future taxes and fees.
The city’s Tallahasee lawyers recently filed their answer to Huntley’s lawsuit, which is being heard in Clay County’s Circuit Court. Most of their answers were perfunctory denials of Huntley’s allegations.
The affirmative defense section of their answer—the part where defendants argue their cause in depth—was notably lacking any assertion that Huntley’s fees were lawfully applied. Instead, the city’s lawyers faulted Huntley for supposedly not “exhausting administrative remedies” and, in contradiction of that, for not having sued the city sooner when he was assessed the earlier fees.
Huntley and his representatives have repeatedly said that they were in talks with the city for at least two years, but their pleas for fair treatment fell on deaf ears.
This whole mess sounds so petty and puerile on account of the city. They know they are in the wrong and yet the double-down and abuse their authority once they get sued.
Unbelieveable. Can't believe this is even happening to this man & his property. All a money grab is sounds like.