$30M Ruling Against Chatham County Fire Fee Could Impact City’s Plans to Implement Stormwater Fee – Savannah Agenda

By Eric Curl

Dec. 2, 2025 – A more than $30 million judgment against Chatham County concerning its abandoned fire fee has gotten the attention of city officials as they take steps to implement a stormwater fee to help fund drainage infrastructure.

In the October order in Chatham County Superior Court, a judge found that Chatham’s fire fee is an illegal tax according to certain criteria such as whether it was mandatory or provided any special benefits to those who paid it. As a result, the county was ordered to pay back about $26.9 million to the more than 36,000 unincorporated county residents who paid the fee, along with about $3.4 million in interest. Chatham, which has since replaced the fire fee with a property tax, is now appealing the judge’s verdict.

City Attorney Bates Lovett brought the ruling up as a warning during a city council workshop last week, when the council was being briefed on the stormwater utility fee ordinance city officials are planning implement in July.

“I’m here to warn you that there’s storms in the area and it’s not all wonderful news,” Lovett said.

The fee is being touted by city officials as a more equitable way to fund flood mitigation measures because all property owners would pay, even tax-exempt entities such as churches and nonprofits. But the city may have to abandon the plan if the legal system does determine that such fees are actually taxes or face similar litigation, and costs, as the county, Lovett said.

“Whether or not their intentions were good or bad and whether or not they wanted those that are exempt to pay their fair share, that’s not what the law allows for,” he said. “Even though that, again, they could have the best intentions of the world, it wasn’t a legal fee, it was a tax, and now they have a $30 million verdict out there.”

Lovett also noted that the Georgia Supreme Court recently upheld a previous ruling in favor of Athens-Clarke County’s own stormwater fee, which had also been challenged as a tax. However, a couple of the judges submitted concurring opinions that said they were only upholding the fee because they were bound by precedent. They warned that some judges now have doubts about the earlier decisions, and local governments creating new stormwater fees should proceed carefully. A stormwater “fee” may actually function like a tax, and cities should design their programs with that in mind, the judges wrote.

The city council is expected to vote on the stormwater ordinance at their Dec. 11 meeting, but the first bill would not go out until July and City Manager Jay Melder said they would have time to monitor the situation and “avoid risk.”

“We have put a tremendous amount of work and community effort into this, and our recommendation is – if city council wants to vote to approve the utility and the rates – now is a good time to do it,” Melder said.

Melder added that the city could raise the property tax rate as an alternative way to fund the improvements, but the city would have to raise the millage rate by one mill to raise the $8 million in revenue the stormwater fee is expected to generate. And only taxable properties would pay it, he said.

Mayor Van Johnson said during the Nov. 25 workshop that they should not abandon the plan at this time.

“I think we have the benefit of some gap time in order to get us where we want to be,” Johnson said. “I think we move forward and then if we have to do something different, then we’ll just do something different.”