Greenwood City Council approves temporary waiver, refunds for hurricane permit fees

Greenwood City Council voted unanimously at a special-call meeting Feb. 5 to temporarily suspend building inspection permit fees for repairs tied to Hurricane Helene and to establish a process for refunds for qualifying permits paid after the prior waiver lapsed.

The measure, which mirrors an extension adopted by Greenwood County, allows homeowners and contractors to apply during a 30-day window for fee waivers for hurricane-related repairs. Applicants approved for a waiver may pull permits through May and will have 180 days from the permit issuance date to complete repairs unless the building department grants an extension.

The action follows an initial fee waiver the city adopted in October after the storm; that waiver lapsed on Nov. 30, 2024, and the permit office began charging fees again on Dec. 1. County council approved an extension in late February, and city officials brought the same extension to council so city permit applicants would qualify under the same timeframe.

Under the approved process, people who paid permit fees between Dec. 1, 2024, and Feb. 4, 2025, for work that would have qualified for hurricane-related permit relief may apply for a refund. The refund/application deadline is set for March (per the county memo the council attached as an exhibit), and staff will compile applications into a central spreadsheet for review. The city and county will coordinate public outreach; the county's public information officer, Abby Banks, will lead distribution of the application materials and notices, which the city will share on its website and social media.

City staff said they do not have a reliable baseline count of how many permits were issued between Dec. 1 and Feb. 4 that would qualify for refunds; staff reported only a few applications had flagged hurricane damage. Council members said the lack of a clear count makes proactively issuing refunds to every potentially eligible applicant infeasible without an application process.

Council members emphasized the measure was intended to remove barriers to recovery rather than to penalize residents. The motion was made by Mister Miller and seconded by Miss Edwards; the council voted unanimously to approve the temporary suspension and refund procedure. During roll call, the council recorded yes votes from Mister Miller, Mister Bass and Mister Dean; the motion carried with six votes in favor and no dissent.

Officials also clarified administrative details: the refund must be made to the permit applicant on record (which may be a contractor), not automatically to the property owner, and refunds will be processed after staff completes the March review. The county manager's technical memo attached as an exhibit to the motion lays out the dates and application steps the city will follow. Staff said applicants will be asked to submit documentation such as damage photos or assessments as part of the application review.

The council did not specify the total dollar amount of potential refunds. Staff described the administrative work as substantial but doable and committed to coordinating with the county to push outreach and instructions to affected residents and contractors.

The meeting concluded after the vote. Councilmembers also mentioned upcoming downtown events and adjourned the special call session.