Opinion ID: 2294280
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Final Judgment And A Third Appeal

Text: The Circuit Court issued an order on December 15, 2006 intended to resolve all material issues and certified it as final pursuant to Maryland Rule 2-602. In its order, the court found that impact fee refunds are due to the current owners of specified impact fee paying properties ... in the total amount of $4,719,359, subject to the addition of 5% interest to the amount of refunds due from the date of each initial fee's payment[.] This figure included impact fees collected in 1988 through 1996. The court then directed the County to compile the names and addresses of all current owners of refund-eligible properties within 90 days ... and that the County must issue a notice to the current owner(s) of each refund-eligible property within 120 days[.] The County noticed its third appeal to the COSA (Appeal III) and the Owners noticed a cross-appeal. [6] On appeal, the County asserted, inter alia, that (1) the proper remedy for the County's failure to effectively extend the time for expending or encumbering transportation impact fees is a remand to the PZO to make new findings under a correct standard; (2) the Owners' claims are barred by limitations; and (3) the procedure under AACC, Section 17-11-210, by which owners must claim refunds after public notice, is superior to the ordered class action procedure, requiring the County to identify and individually notify owners entitled to a refund. The intermediate appellate court, in an unreported opinion, disagreed and affirmed the Circuit Court judgment on these issues. We issued a writ of certiorari to consider the County's following three questions: I. After the Circuit Court ruled that the County PZO had applied the wrong legal standard in making administrative decisions to extend the period for encumbering or expending impact fees, did the Circuit Court err by refusing to remand this case to the PZO for new decisions under the correct standard of law on grounds that the statutory time period for making the decisions had expired and thus current property owners had vested rights in refunds totaling $4.7 million, plus interest from the date of payment? II. Do causes of action seeking judicial review of the administrative decisions of the County PZO and Office of Finance (FO) as to whether impact fees are available for refund accrue for purposes of the statute of limitations in [CJP Section 5-101] on the date on which the County was required by law to make the decisions, even though there is no public notice of the decisions? III. Should this action to recover refunds of impact fees that have not been expended or encumbered in the prescribed period have been certified as a class action for damages under Maryland Rule 2-231(b)(3) even though there is a detailed administrative procedure in [Section] XX-XX-XXX of the County Code for making refunds that is much less difficult and costly to administer and will afford complete relief?