Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Minnesota City to Tax Rainwater
The Winona Daily News ^ | August 22, 2002 | Jerome Christenson

Posted on 08/27/2002 11:48:09 AM PDT by lainie

Starting next year, rainwater will no longer be free in the city of Winona.

While it hasn't figured out how to tax air or sex, beginning in 2003 the Winona City Council will charge city property owners for the rain that falls on their land.

As part of the 2003 budget process, the council gave tentative approval to the creation of a $200,000 stormwater fund. The money will be generated by a charge, similar to water and sewer charges, billed to owners of property that drains into the city storm sewer system.

The stormwater fund was discussed by council and staff Monday night.

The new city fee comes compliments of the federal government, according to city manager Eric Sorensen. As part of an effort to control nonpoint source water pollution from runoff, the federal government is looking at putting water-quality standards on the discharge from city storm sewers. Runoff from lawns, streets and parking lots can carry a wide range of contaminants, including dog droppings, lawn chemicals, fertilizers, gasoline, oil and an assortment of litter.

Public works director Keith Nelson said that while the regulations haven't been formulated yet, one thing is safe to assume: "It's going to cost money." Establishing a stormwater fund at this time offers the city a degree of protection from the financial shocks that are likely to result from federal actions.

Nelson said fees will be based on a complex formula that factors in roof areas, paved surfaces, lawns, wooded areas, agricultural land and other features in determining how much water runs off to be collected by city storm sewers. A piece of property that is virtually covered by a building and paved parking lot would pay at a higher rate than a parcel the same size that was largely lawn, garden or woodland.

As very preliminary, non-specific estimates, Nelson suggested that a 1/3 acre residential lot in an R2 zone might be assessed about $14.15 a year or $3.54 per utility bill. A half-acre lot, zoned R1, might be assessed $15.92 a year or $3.98 on each utility bill.

"It's just like using city water or the sanitary sewer," Nelson said.

Councilman Dieter Mielimonka said when the charge is billed there should be a note added to every bill - "This charge due to a federal mandate."


TOPICS: Government; US: Minnesota
KEYWORDS: governmentlargesse; taxes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last
We'll put meters on their runoff, and tax the pollutants. And pass the buck, blaming the fedgov. Yeah.
1 posted on 08/27/2002 11:48:09 AM PDT by lainie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: madfly; farmfriend; AAABEST
ping!
2 posted on 08/27/2002 11:51:34 AM PDT by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lainie
This sounds a lot like the "surface water management" system "fees" with which Seattle-area properties are being bilked.

My church had been paying about $400/year despite all the runoff-management devices, cisterns etc. installed. Then the city took part of the property to widen the road, and now the bill is over $1000/year.

There's lots of money for the government to make here, and the residents of Winona better not get too conmfortable with these low rates.

3 posted on 08/27/2002 11:55:25 AM PDT by Eala
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eala
taxing God's life giving rainwater
what is hell is going on and why
would ANYONE put up with it ?
4 posted on 08/27/2002 11:58:20 AM PDT by cactusSharp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: lainie
I remember back when I thought the Brits were suckers
because the government required the purchase of a license
to watch television.
5 posted on 08/27/2002 12:13:36 PM PDT by The Duke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

TAXMAN (G. Harrison)

Let me tell you how it will be
There's one for you, nineteen for me
'Cause I'm the taxman, yeah, I'm the taxman

Should five per cent appear too small
Be thankful I don't take it all
'Cause I'm the taxman, yeah I'm the taxman

If you drive a car, I'll tax the street,
If you try to sit, I'll tax your seat.
If you get too cold I'll tax the heat,
If you take a walk, I'll tax your feet.

Don't ask me what I want it for
If you don't want to pay some more
'Cause I'm the taxman, yeah, I'm the taxman

Now my advice for those who die
Declare the pennies on your eyes
'Cause I'm the taxman, yeah, I'm the taxman
And you're working for no one but me.

6 posted on 08/27/2002 12:21:40 PM PDT by freeeee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lainie
This is being applied to cities of 50,000 or larger per the 1972 Clean Water Act. The issue concerns "impervious" surfaces such as parking lots and building roofs. All runoff must be captured and treated to prevent pollutants from being carried into rivers and aquifers. Pocatello proposed "fees" on small businesses that ranged from $15,000 to $95,000 per year. The businesses told the city they would be shutting down if this is imposed. Back to the drawing board for the politicians.

The term "fee" generally applies to money collected for services requested by a user who has the discretion to avoid the "fee" by not using the service. These "fees" are imposed upon property owners in an involuntary fashion. They are essentially property taxes, but taxes can't be levied without direct authorization from the voters.

7 posted on 08/27/2002 12:33:42 PM PDT by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lainie
Hey, if you don't like it, dig a retention pond on your property and don't let the rainwater run off.

That in fact is pretty common out here in the Chicago area. Commercial properties, and residential developments, all must be designed so that no more water runs off of them after development than before. Chicago is mostly on a flood plain, and prior to such laws the paving and re-landscaping that's performed during such development used to cause land that had previously retained rainwater to cause it to run off instead, flooding out the neighbors. So in the interests of flood control, you now must ensure that your property retains as much rainwater after a rain as it did before it was developed.
8 posted on 08/27/2002 12:36:25 PM PDT by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lainie
RE:Councilman Dieter Mielimonka said when the charge is billed there should be a note added to every bill - "This charge due to a federal mandate."
 
What a copout.
these ridiculous federal mandates may be ignored RE: the 10th ammendment if local Pols (and the public - most especially the public) had the cajones to do so.
9 posted on 08/27/2002 12:43:16 PM PDT by tomakaze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RonF
MMMM, retention ponds...skeeters just LOVE retention ponds!
10 posted on 08/27/2002 12:46:27 PM PDT by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: lainie
I wonder who will be the first public official to be literally tarred and feathered over this.

It's a fine American tradition that has been dormant far too long.

11 posted on 08/27/2002 12:46:47 PM PDT by Willie Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cactusSharp
It's not nice to fool around with mother nature.

I hope the sheeple decide to drown these frickin idiots out of office.


12 posted on 08/27/2002 12:49:02 PM PDT by unixfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
Roger that!

13 posted on 08/27/2002 12:50:44 PM PDT by 3k9pm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RonF
Hey, if you don't like it, dig a retention pond on your property and don't let the rainwater run off. We had a cop out here in Sacremento try to enlarge the "fishing pond" nearby and hit a water main flooding the area and causing a loss of water pressure to the whole area.
14 posted on 08/27/2002 12:50:49 PM PDT by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: lainie
This is a good "line in the sand" ....
15 posted on 08/27/2002 12:51:55 PM PDT by Centurion2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lainie
The impact of non-point regs on agribusiness will be more significant than impact on residential.
16 posted on 08/27/2002 12:55:38 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RonF
Hey, if you don't like it, dig a retention pond on your property and don't let the rainwater run off.

Then it becomes a standing pool and is subject to EPA regulations concerning endangered species. Didn't a man almost lose his farm because a puddle dried up and some frogs lost their home?

-PJ

17 posted on 08/27/2002 12:57:02 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: lainie
the Winona City Council will charge city property owners for the rain that falls on their land.

Knowing Winona, I expect most people to put the rainwater in their pocket and walk out of the store without paying the damn tax.

18 posted on 08/27/2002 1:01:44 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KLT; Mudboy Slim; sultan88; scholar; joanie-f
Now this calls for a *song*!!

__________________________________________

TAXMAN

Let me tell you how it will be
There's one for you, ninetenn for me
'Cause I'm the taxman, yeah, I'm the taxman

Should five percent appear too small
Be thankful I don't take it all
'Cause I'm the taxman, yeah, I'm the taxman

If you drive a car, I'll tax the street,
If you try to sit, I'll tax your seat.
If you get too cold, I'll tax the heat,
If you take a walk, I'll tax your feet

Don't ask me what I want it for
If you don't want to pay some more
'Cause I'm the taxman, yeah, I'm the taxman

Now my advice for those who die
Declare the pennies on your eyes
'Cause I'm the taxman, yeah, I'm the taxman
And you're working for no one but me

-g.harrison-

________________________________________

Almost forgot about you, joanie girl.

...which would've totally missed the point, eh? :o)

19 posted on 08/27/2002 1:05:56 PM PDT by Landru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lainie
In 1992 meters were installed in the discharge pipes at the West Los Angeles V.A. hospital along with sampling equipment.
20 posted on 08/27/2002 1:11:26 PM PDT by Old Professer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson