BANGOR, Maine — Forty years after its passage, the Clean Water Act’s ripples continue to be felt and Bangor residents, businesses and agencies will feel them financially.
If approved by the full City Council, a utility fee plan charging most taxpayers $22 annually to fund stormwater/waterway work mandated by the 1972 Clean Water Act will be instituted in 2013.
“This is the minimum amount of work needed to be in compliance,” said City Manager Cathy Conlow, referring to a projected cost of $1,361,294 for required stormwater remediation in the first year of a five-year plan.
Seven of the nine councilors were present at a Monday afternoon workshop to hear a presentation by Brad Moore, Bangor wastewater treatment plant superintendent, and Paul Nicklas, assistant city solicitor. None of the seven were happy with what was characterized as an unfunded mandate, but agreed this is the best course of action to avoid penalties, fines and greater costs down the road.
“This program is called voluntary by the state, but I don’t buy it,” said Andrew Hamilton, a lawyer specializing in economic development at Bangor law firm Eaton Peabody. “It’s as close to mandatory as you can get.”
The presentation compared financial impact with a property tax approach versus a straight utility fee.
Under a property tax system, the average single-family home would pay $83 a year. A fast-food restaurant with 1 acre of impervious cover — or a surface that water can’t pass through or be absorbed into, such as a roof — would pay a $700 annual tax or a $475 utility fee. A large retail store with 10 impervious acres would pay a $5,000 tax and a $4,800 fee while a college or university with 15 acres would pay nothing in taxes and a $7,172 fee.
“We feel the fees are a much more equitable way of paying for the program than a tax,” said Moore. “I don’t perceive this as eventually rising to the point of a water bill.”
The plan’s utility fee structure is as follows:
• No charge for any residence or business with 500 square feet or less of impervious cover.
• A $22 annual charge for anyone with 501 to 3,000 square feet of impervious surface.
• After 3,000 square feet, an annual fee of $22 plus another $11 for each additional 1,000 square feet of impervious cover.
“We’ve calculated that based on this formula, 74 percent of single-family homes in Bangor would be charged $22 per year,” Moore explained.
The plan also provides for financial credits for businesses using accepted methods of stormwater reduction as well as an abatement program for those who qualify.
The utility program work includes such things as catch basin and storm line cleaning, drainage system repairs and alterations, and retrofit and construction projects in the Penjajawoc Marsh and Birch Stream.
Some of the costs will be paid by utility, grant and federal funds.
“We’ve gotten $3 million from the federal government that we’ll have to pay back half of,” said Nicklas. “We’ve put in systems underneath some parking lots that act as water filtration units and filters near streams to either cut down or clean the water that drains into them.”
As a property tax increase, too many “non-profits” would be exempt, forcing everyone else to cover the loss. As a fee – everyone pays.
I get your frustration (and have heard it before), but I have to tell you that going after non-profits makes no sense. Non-profit organizations are primarily funded by donation and by government grants and funding streams like Medicaid (known as Mainecare in this State). That funding comes from your wallet. By advocating that non-profits pay taxes, you are essentially demanding that the government tax the tax money that they collect from you. That’s nuts and does not solve a single problem.
What about churches?
Although hospitals get much of their funding through government, they also get a considerable amount through private means. The same is true of colleges. Additionally, they have quite the parking lots. Since the plan allows them to reduce their fee by utilizing systems that limit stormwater runoff, they will now have extra motivation to do so.
Since 40% of the properties in Bangor are designated “non-profit,” they would be exempt from an increased property tax. As a user fee, all would be charged.
Is it fair that the church with the 200+ car parking lot not have to pay their fair share?
Ban chemical lawn spraying.
I Love the old line, “It’s a fee not a tax”, in this case its both. Now people and buisnesses are being punished for the rain that strikes them from the sky! Unreal.
“Now people and buisnesses are being punished for the rain that strikes them from the sky! Unreal.”
No, it is for cutting down the forests. Take it like a man.
There goes the idea of paving my driveway this summer…
Depending upon the size of the property, paving the driveway may not increase your fee at all. If it does, it may only cost you $11/year.
“There goes the idea of paving my driveway this summer… ”
See ?
You just saved how much money by the doing environmentally better thing ?
gravel is considered to be impervious, same fee.
So what is
bears_beets complaint, then ?
Gravel….impervious. Nice one. Only the government can change the laws of physics.
Unfortunately this is an unfunded federal mandate with which Bangor must comply. The last thing the city wants to do is raise fees on its citizens, businesses, and non-profits, but the costs will likely be far greater if we do not comply with EPA regulations. And as one of the other commentators mentioned, on its face there is little difference between a fee and a tax increase, but for all intents and purposes a utility fee broadens the base and lessens the burden on any one group (i.e. property tax payers).
“unfunded mandates” and “user fees” ?
Oh, that’s what you get when people pretend you can really cut taxes and balance the budget isn’t it ?
The Occupy folks better stay on the grass and off the pavement. I’m sure they will want to pay their fair share to take care of the environment. If they can’t, maybe Mom and Dad will at their house.
So people that are living in subdivisions that have storm water control measures are still going to pay?Even though the developer had to pay for the engineering to address it before it could be approved on the state or local level?
In the last year, we have been down sizing every way we can including a smaller vehicle, setting a timer on our hot water, doing laundry less, etc. BUT now here’s another fee/tax/increase in addition to our lot rent going up, groceries have doubled, gas is sky high and what will it be next! When the cable bill goes up, it’s going! I’m still “hoping” for “change”.
Ahyup, there is going to always be more work to do until we live in a sustainable society.
User fees are a direct result of believing in trickle down or other voodoo economics like thinking you can cut taxes and balance the budget.
And one more thing………The Middle Class and small businesses are really hurting and trying to keep our heads above water and cutting everywhere we can. We need help and big change. I believe “everyone” should pay. The shoulders of the Middle Class are getting really heavy here.
All I can say is the Romans are at work digging deeper into your pockets. and more and more drugs come to Bangor and they just overlook it. I live by a dealer and they don’t even do anything about it go figure what is the city part of a drug gang.
I too have a problem with a fee/or tax increase being charged because I live in a condominum complex that is responsible for maintaining our own stormwater drainage system ourselves. And now it sounds like even though we pay for the upkeep of our system and the engineering fees divided by our 30 residents, we will still have to pay $22 a year to the city for the same purpose.
Again condo complexes get the short end of the stick in regard to city services even though we are assessed some of the highest tax rates in the city. We pay for our own street plowing, electricity for street lights, hydrant fees, trash and recycling pick-up, leaf pickup, street sweeping etc. Most of our residents are elderly and low income and are already struggling to maintain a comfortable lifestyle. Please consider an exemption for complexes that are already working with the DEP to maintain the rainwater run-off standards.
Are Brewer, Hampden and Orono doing this too? They must be if it is truly a Federal mandate.