Teton County refunded a $24,325 housing fee and apologised, leaving the constitutional question open
Teton County refunded a $24,325 housing fee and apologised, leaving the constitutional question open
2026-09-19 · Wyoming · Courts
What happened. Teton County settled a federal takings suit over its affordable-housing mitigation fee by refunding the fee with interest, paying the plaintiffs’ counsel, and sending a written apology. The constitutional challenge to the fee itself was never decided.
The case
Trey and Shelby Scharp sued Teton County in the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming in May 2025, represented without charge by the Pacific Legal Foundation through attorney Austin Waisanen of Cody. The claim was that the county’s affordable and workforce housing mitigation fees are an unconstitutional taking under the Fifth Amendment, applying Nollan, Dolan and the Supreme Court’s 2024 decision in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado.
The county had charged them $24,325 in 2022 on a 4,065 square foot home built beside a historic 1,952 square foot cabin.1
The settlement
In early March 2026 the county sent the Scharps a letter:
“Teton County made a mistake. We required you to pay an affordable housing mitigation fee that you did not need to pay. We are sorry.”
The county said its planners had mis-applied the historic-structure credit; applied correctly, the project fell below the 2,500 square foot mitigation threshold. The refund was $24,325 plus 7% interest, or $29,909, with roughly $25,000 more to the Pacific Legal Foundation — over $50,000 in total.2
The plaintiffs did not seek that outcome. “We didn’t choose to settle,” they said. A defendant who concedes the individual claim on non-constitutional grounds removes the vehicle for the constitutional one.
Why this reaches community associations in Teton County
Teton County is the only Wyoming local government charging housing mitigation fees, and the program dates to 1995. The county budgeted $1.4 million in mitigation-fee revenue for FY2026 and has put $5.5 million of fee money into acquiring the Virginian RV Park for affordable housing, according to commission chair Mark Newcomb. Reporting puts the program’s output at more than 400 homes over 30 years.
Those homes are deed-restricted. A deed restriction limiting occupancy to a qualifying local worker, capping resale price, or requiring employment in the county is a recorded covenant, and in Teton County it very often sits inside or alongside a homeowners association’s own declaration. The mitigation fee is the funding mechanism that produces those restrictions in the first place, so the durability of the fee and the durability of the deed-restricted inventory are the same question.
What the exemption threshold means in practice
The fee attaches above 2,500 square feet, and the credit for an existing historic structure is what the county got wrong. After the settlement, Commissioner Luther Propst said he was open to exempting moderately sized homes, and Representative Andrew Byron (R-Hoback) has argued for raising the exemption from 2,500 to 3,000–3,500 square feet. Neither change has been adopted.
The legislative attempt, and how it died
Wyoming lawmakers tried to ban the fees outright in the 2026 Budget Session. HB0141, the “Fifth Amendment Protection Act,” sponsored by Representative John Bear (R-Gillette), passed the House on February 23, 2026. On March 2 the Senate voted 24–7 to block it.3
The reasons given had nothing to do with takings law. Senate President Bo Biteman (R-Ranchester) said the bill was “tainted by a cloud of suspicion and mistrust.” Majority Floor Leader Tara Nethercott (R-Cheyenne) said: “The bill is now about threats, and intimidation, and money.” Both were referring to a campaign-check incident on the House floor on the first day of the session that produced new chamber rules, a governor’s executive order, a House Special Investigative Committee and a law-enforcement inquiry.
The introduced and engrossed versions of HB0141 exist on the Legislature’s site; there is no enrolled version, which is what a Senate defeat looks like in the record.
What remains unresolved
Four things are open, and it is worth being precise about which is which:
- The constitutional question was not answered. No court has ruled on whether Teton County’s mitigation fee is a taking under Sheetz. The settlement resolved one family’s bill.
- The fee is still in force, at the same threshold, funding the same programme.
- The statutory ban failed, and for reasons unconnected to its merits, which leaves the subject available to a future session.
- The exemption threshold is under discussion at the county and in the Legislature, with no adopted change.
Wyoming has no statute governing how local governments impose housing exactions and no comprehensive common-interest-community act, so the deed restrictions the programme generates are governed entirely by the recorded instruments themselves.
Related Wyoming HOA Topics
- “Wyoming county apologizes for wrongful fee, pays family back,” Pacific Legal Foundation, Mar. 13, 2026 ↩
- Clair McFarland, “Teton County says it miscalculated $24,000 housing fee, ends lawsuit,” Cowboy State Daily, Mar. 16, 2026 ↩
- Maggie Mullen and Jasmine Hall, “Wyoming Senate squashes housing bill at center of check controversy,” WyoFile, Mar. 2, 2026 (HB0141) ↩
- HB0141 (2026), “Fifth Amendment Protection Act” — introduced bill text, Wyoming Legislature ↩
Stay on top of Wyoming HOA law
Every week: new Wyoming legislation, court rulings, and regulatory developments affecting condos, planned communities, and property managers. Free.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.