The article still reads as another story on how the rich are getting richer and sticking it to the poor.
for example: "It is lovely to read politicians bragging that our taxes aren't going up. But read the fine print: It's just the wealthiest whose taxes aren't going up. The widows are paying through the nose." from the article: "Gustafson's yard is a normal lot, 50 by 125 feet. The city says that 4,800 of her 6,250 square feet are impervious to rainwater. Gustafson, who has mapped her lot carefully, says the true number is only 2,800 square feet" even if the city over estimated by 2000 sqft, that property is still in the high range so it wouldn't make a difference, would it? They way i see it, the storm water fee collected was not very accurate when tied to how much water you used. so for years and years, the high water user was footing the bill for those who used little water. the more i look at this, the more I see it as a change to make the collection of storm water runoff accurate to the actual runoff your property causes. Nick Coleman wants us to believe that the rich are getting off at the expense of church parking lots and the elderly living in duplexes. I am not sure this is true but i do wonder why duplexes are at a higher rate. John Harris webber-camden, single homowner with a smaller lot who uses little water and whose utility bill went up nearly $8 a month. 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
