Earlier this year, Berlin officials adopted an ordinance creating a stormwater utility for the town to help stem its chronic flooding problems. Under the ordinance, all property owners in the town, both residential and commercial, are being required to pay a prorated share of the cost of establishing the new stormwater utility.
For residential property owners, a flat annual fee of $50 is assessed to help pay for the cost of setting up the utility. For non-residential property owners, a formula has been established based on the amount of impervious surface a particular property includes.
During spirited public hearings over the ordinance earlier this year, several non-residential property owners cried foul over the proposal they deemed inequitable to the commercial properties.
More
2 comments:
why should they be exempt? Do'nt they contribute to the runoff, or don't they use water?
Alright, a rain tax. Here's my question, Did the Hospital build a stormwater retention pond and stormwater management grading, drainage catch basins, and culvert piping before it was allowed to start the first foundation? If this utility is in place, then the hospital is not contributing to any flooding and runoff problems the town may have. I don't know the answer as I have not surveyed the property, but I know that when it was built, such things were required of commercial buildings everywhere.
Likewise, any property deemed to be contributing to a flooding or runoff problem should have the option of paying the tax or installing a system on their property that prevents runoff per the "100 year" standard. If the town then requires a tax be paid, it, too, must be responsible to build a plan to solve the runoff problem 100% and show the costs of the initial project as well as the yearly maintenance costs, and have it approved by the populous before enabling the tax to go forward, and it must hit the "100 year flood" standard.
Am I wrong here?
Post a Comment