| ||||||||||||||||
GUEST COLUMN ABOUT STORMWATER REFERENDUM |
|
| |
|
Council left out key provisions when stormwater ordinance implementedBy John Evans posted 10/26/2007
The Committee was unanimous in their belief that the County should not be given a blank check in perpetuity for funding storm water abatement. The Council left out two key elements in the Committees recommendation: that the County appoint a citizens storm water oversight committee to review the proposed projects and budgets, and that there be a "sunset" provision in the ordinance that would require the County to evaluate the funding stream and progress after either three or six years. The general feeling on the Storm Water Committee was that the storm water fee being charged should actually solve real storm water problems and that once the work was done, most if not all of the fee or tax should go away. The Committee felt that the fee should not simply become another revenue stream for County government. As to the funding itself, the Committee felt that an across the board fee on property owners was something that could be justified. Since the Committee made its fee collection recommendation, it has become clear that a more targeted approach is what the citizens of the County expect. It is being pointed out that current storm water regulations require a person who creates new impervious surfaces to deal with the excess storm water their development creates at their own expense. Further, that the existing storm water problems are local to specific watersheds and should be dealt with and paid for by those areas. I had hoped that the Council would step up to the plate and make the adjustments in the ordinance. They have not. Therefore, I recommend that the voters reject the current ordinance and send it back to the Council. Thank you for listening.
John Evans |
|
|
SAN JUAN ISLANDER © 2008 |
|