2023-05-11-AC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

05/11/2023 AC Minutes 2 produced using aerial photography with manual tracing of areas deemed to be impervious. Impervious area is a proxy for the amount runoff generated by each property. • The database of impervious areas is complete and has been published. The median impervi- ous area for parcel with a single-family home is currently 3,290 sq. ft. This median area is designated as the Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU). Consultants recommend a baseline rate of $155 per ERU. • The Select Board favors a rate structure that assigns the majority of single-family residences to one of three tiers. o The lowest tier (25% of residences) includes those with impervious areas below 2,200 sq. ft., with a fee of $93, or 60% of the baseline. o The middle tier (50% of residences) includes those with impervious areas from 2,200 sq. ft. to 4,200 sq. ft., with a fee of $155, or 100% of the baseline. o The top tier (21% of residences) includes those at or above 4,200 sq. ft. in impervi- ous area but less than a cap of 7,000 sq. ft., with a fee of $248, or 160% of the base- line. o The fee for all non-residential properties, and for residences with impervious areas above the 7,000 sq. ft. cap, would be calculated as the number of the property's ERUs multiplied by baseline rate of $155. • All residences in one of the tiers would pay the same fixed fee. The escalating fee structure provides some equitability. • An important question for rate-setting is whether town-owned properties should be exempt from stormwater fees. If town-owned properties are not exempt, then the Town must bill it- self for stormwater fees using a transfer from the General Fund to the Stormwater Enterprise Fund. This shifts a portion of stormwater costs to the tax levy. Alternatively, if town-owned properties are exempt, then stormwater fees must be set higher to cover the full budget for the Stormwater Utility. • The Select Board has indicated that it prefers the former option, but we note that this goes against the recommendation of our consultants. The primary purpose of a Stormwater Enter- prise Fund is to allow fees to be set so as to cover actual costs without impinging on the Town’s main operating budget. • Mr. Livsey concluded that future expense projections vary dramatically due to uncertainty regarding the cost of phosphorus controls, and that the Town is waiting for a new MS4 per- mit from the EPA. Mr. Livsey suggested delaying adoption of a Stormwater Utility, possibly for a few years, until we have more clarity on the phosphorus issue. After the slide presentation concluded, the Committee had a discussion with Mr. Livsey, Ms. Scerbo, and Ms. Conchilla. Mr. Michelson questioned the choice to exempt town-owned properties. Ms. Kosnoff stated that the Select Board was aware of the tradeoffs, but they remained strongly in favor of this option, which would lower stormwater fees by approximately 8%. Mr. Michelson noted this would mean that tax- exempt organizations would not contribute to the cost of stormwater fees for town-owned proper- ties. Ms. Kosnoff responded that reducing the impact of new stormwater fees on tax-exempt organi- zations was a concern for the Select Board. Mr. Padaki asked if there would be an appeals process to contest stormwater fees. Mr. Livsey re- plied that an abatement board would be set up. Ms. Kosnoff stated that there would also be a credit program where home owners could reduce their fee by making specific updates to their property.