I think Steve is on to something here, but wait, it gets weirder.  I was one of 
the lucky households, I guess, in that my total bill went down about $3.00 -- 
just like the SW Journal table said it would :o)

However went I went to the City's web page to pay my bill-online, (which is a 
cool thing and I've been doing it for years).  I got a message that they amount 
the City was going to charge me online didn't include the stormwater fee and 
that I should call the City's water billing office to find out why.  As my 
on-line bill was about $7.00 less than my mailed bill.  So is the City 
re-thinking it's stormwater fee in general or is my fee being reevaluated?  
I'll report next month to find out how its reflected.

If you want to check your water bill on-line, here's the link:

http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/utility-billing/pay-online.asp


Dean E. Carlson
East Harriet, Ward 10




----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Friday, April 15, 2005 3:50 pm
Subject: [Mpls] Stormwatergate

> I read the posts on "A little media disagreement" and conclude  that the  
> problem is not so much a difference between analysis by different  media  but 
> that the whole storm water fee was an idea that wasn't  completely  thought 
> through before it was put into place. 
> 
> The fact is that nobody can seem to get much information on how it was done.  
> I'm not sure that anyone (other than parking-lot owners) would  oppose the 
> idea of collecting something from people who cause substantial runoff costs 
> but pay absolutely nothing for the cost they  let others pay.  As David says, 
> there may be a difference between the  stormwater fees charged for duplex 
> properties and single properties.  And, that distinction may explain the 
> difference in David Brauer and  Nick Coleman's statements on the issue.  
> However, neither seems to have  picked up on the fact that whether a property 
> has a duplex sitting on it  or a single-family home sitting on it has 
> absolutely NOTHING to do with  the amount of stormwater runoff on the 
> property.  A "duplex" and a "single-family home" may be exacly the same size 
> -- as is evident 
> from the number of single-family units that have been converted into 
> duplexes.  The fact that there are two living units may add to the sanitary 
> sewer but does NOT affect the runoff of rain.  If so, why is > there a 
> difference in the charge for stormwater between the two types of  property?
> 
> Off the list, I had a conversation with David about the "model" that was used 
> by the city to calculate the stormwater fees.  As I recall, David  said that 
> the city's model may not allowed for changing the assumption  that people 
> getting billed $0 for water now would now still be charged something for 
> stormwater.  And my response was that if the city's "model" didn't allow for 
> doing that, then it was a very defective 
> model.  I'm beginning to suspect that it's even worse than David  said.  
> There may be NO "model" available to the city to use to calculate  the  
> stormwater fees.  Rather, they just guessed and put something in  place  with 
> the intention of refining the charges based on the  information of  several 
> months (or years) of use.  I suspect that whoever's guess  it was  as to what 
> charges should be imposed and how different properties  were to be 
> differentiated was wildly off.
> 
> And, if my guess is right, the downside is that if the error of  someone's 
> guess in stormwater rate structure may kill the whole idea --  and the basic 
> idea was good it's just that the execution may have  been wildly off.  I'd 
> suggest that if the city doesn't have any real model that they had better cut 
> all of the rates fast or they aren't ever going to have stormwater charges in 
> place long enough to be able to 
> gather enough information to make the charges really match each property.
> 
> Steve Cross
> Prospect Park


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

Reply via email to