Conflicting info on storm water fees from yours truly and Nick Coleman.
In my editorial in the new SW Journal, I wrote:
"For homeowners the pain isn’t huge — despite what you may hear, a bill can’t go up by more than $10.60 a month, or $127 a year. (Almost all increases are smaller, and because of other offsetting rate cuts, many homeowners will actually pay less.)"
I wrote those words Wednesday. Today, in Nick's column, he wrote:
"What else can you call it when a homeowner suddenly finds himself dunned $37 a month for the rain that falls on his yard? This gives the word 'soaking' a new meaning. In Neuwirth's case, Minneapolis plans to soak him $444 a year -- the equivalent of about 45 haircuts at his going rate of $10 a head -- for something called a "storm water utility fee."
One of us is clearly wrong. I'm prepared to admit it's me - but not quite yet.
According to our reporting, the highest of the three homeowner storm water rates is $10.60 a month - so there's no way a homeowner can get a $37 a month bump. (It's different for businesses and institutions, but Nick and I both clearly refer to homeowners.)
Can anyone in the know reconcile the disparity between my reporting and Nick's? One of us needs to correct the record publicly.
David Brauer Kingfield Editor, Skyway News & Southwest Journal REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
