Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />February 9, 2015 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 16 of 26 <br /> <br />(9. STORM WATER AND DRAINAGE TRUNK FEE REVIEW continued) <br /> <br />Levang stated the Council also needs to figure out how they are going to get to the $11 million and that if <br />the Council gives a 50 percent credit and allows the 2-acre lots to be calculated the same as the 5-acre <br />properties, the City will be losing money. <br /> <br />Loftus stated the fees were originally calculated based on a need. <br /> <br />Printup stated in his view generating $11 million in stormwater fees is probably unattainable. <br /> <br />Levang asked if it was determined to be unattainable at the time the City set the $11 million figure. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated the Council should look at the time necessary to collect the $11 million and that Staff <br />could look at the remaining land to be developed and the fees that will be generated from those <br />developments. Gaffron indicated the calculation was based on potential future properties and what it <br />would cost to do stormwater management for those developments. Gaffron stated to his understanding <br />the previous Council never determined that those fees would arrive at $11 million. Gaffron noted since <br />2002, the City has collected $850,000 in stormwater fees. <br /> <br />Levang noted the amount of land available for development is also shrinking. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated the City is probably 80 to 90 percent developed at this point as it relates to undeveloped <br />land. <br /> <br />McMillan stated the City has two sources of revenue currently as it relates to stormwater fees: the <br />subdivided land and the annual stormwater fee that is charged to the residents. <br /> <br />Levang stated if the City looks at adding vacant lots, tear downs, and an addition at a certain threshold, <br />the City would be adding two to three more sources, but if the 50 percent credit is given, it might be <br />evening it out. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated there is a lot of math involved in balancing that. Gaffron stated he agrees with the concept <br />that if someone is doing an addition and adding 10 percent hardcover as opposed to doubling it, <br />somewhere in between there might be a threshold point. <br /> <br />Walsh stated in his mind the question about how much money the City needs and how much money the <br />City should charge in stormwater fees are two separate questions. Walsh stated the questions the City <br />should be asking is what a fair fee to be charged is and is the current system working. Walsh stated if the <br />Council feels it is not working, then they should start over, and that in his view the City should start over. <br /> <br />Walsh stated a fairly simple solution might be to have the fee be hardcover based. Walsh stated the City <br />could have its standard fee for one or two acre lots based on 25 percent hardcover. The standard fee for a <br />one acre lot could be set at $5,000, and if the person is over the 25 percent hardcover, they would pay <br />more, and if they are under the 25 percent hardcover, they would pay less. Walsh stated the rates would <br />then be $2,500 for a half acre, $5,000 for one acre, $7,500 for two acres, $10,000 for three acres, $12,500 <br />for four acres, and anything above five acres would be $15,000. Walsh stated if the property has less than <br />25 percent hardcover; the fee would be less based on the percentage of hardcover.