Garden City Fire Protection Utility $1.4 Million Settlement for Illegal Fire Fees

Garden City’s Fire Protection Utility collected “fire protection service fees” from property owners within city limits between Oct. 7, 2020, and the date a judge approves the settlement. The dispute centered on whether those fees were properly authorized under Georgia law. In a class action filed on behalf of customers, plaintiffs alleged the utility effectively imposed an illegal tax—specifically a non–ad valorem tax—because the charge was not tied to property value the way Georgia property-tax rules require. Instead, the plaintiffs said it functioned like a flat fee, raising constitutional and state-law concerns about how local governments may assess taxes connected to real property. The lawsuit was filed to challenge the legality of that fee structure and to recover money for affected customers, resulting in a $1.4 million settlement. Its significance for consumers is that eligible class members—customers who paid the assessed fire fees during the class period—may receive pro rata cash refunds, with an expected average payout of about 27% of the fire fees they paid (the exact percentage can change based on the number of claims and settlement deductions). Current customers were told they generally do not need to take action because refunds will be mailed to addresses on file after final approval, while former customers may need to submit a claim form; this reflects how class settlements turn a legal dispute into a practical, administrative refund process. Broader implications extend beyond Garden City: challenges to fees that resemble taxes are a recurring theme in local-government and utility litigation, especially where residents argue a charge is assessed or structured in a way that conflicts with state constitutional limits or statutory authority. Similar cases can involve questions like whether a “service fee” is truly a fee for services or functions as a tax, and whether the methodology for assessing it complies with state requirements. In Georgia, these issues intersect with rules on property taxation and the validity of local assessments, and they underscore why regulators, courts, and utilities often scrutinize how “utility” or “protection” charges are calculated, disclosed, and collected—making this settlement a reminder that consumers may have recourse when government-imposed payments are challenged as unlawful.