Post in Applied for stormwater credit, got a 50% fee increase

Feb 22 00:09 UTC

Why doesn't this surprise me ?

  The credit began with (mostly) good intentions...encourage both residents and
businesses/institutions/apartments  to do the right thing and/or save money.
The city had an interest in complying with Met Council mandates (read,
fines)....while Green is a big thing now, only a few council people were
predominantly green-motivated.

  Many residents were upset with the new fees...residents were told this credit
would be a way to soften the blow.  CUE and others ran rain garden
workshops...several years ago a neighbor signed up for 2...she was surprised
when I told her she'd need an engineer (that was not mentioned at either
workshop).

  As far as I can remember at the time, only one council member questioned the
requirements for the credit.  How many home owners and regular folk could
afford to hire an engineer  to certify the work done met the city's standards?
That council member was very vocal.

  Application guidelines are needed to avoid some from taking advantage of the
credit.  If you make the process and standards too easy, the city loses
revenue.

  Perhaps the council  and public works needs to revisit the
ordinance/criteria/''forumula" and fee schedule. Maybe, the
Health/energy/environment committee needs to be a partner in the discussion.
And, maybe, the Mayor needs to provide direction and leadership on this.
Reality runs up against the Mayor's Green initiatives and the city's Comp Plan
for Sustainability 2030 goals and implementation.  (hope ya all got your
comments in..environment has it's own section).

  I'd be interested to know the dollar amounts spent on those teeny mini-grants
(which would be part of the city's funding source after NRP is eliminated)
versus revenue lost thru this credit system...and a cost:benefit analysis of
facilitating broader resident participation in this program.

  Perhaps the consequences were not 'unintended'.

  best wishes,
  cheryl luger
  nokomis east