On 7/15/2011 3:46 AM, Higgs Boson wrote:
On Jul 14, 4:06 pm, wrote:
Six weeks ago I got a letter from the city informing me of a new "drainage
fee" and assessing me $190/year for the "impermeable" surface on my
property.

Their thinking went, presumably, that this impermeable surface meant
rainfall ran off to the street where is was processed by the storm-sewer
system. This new fee is meant to add funds to the storm-sewer creation and
maintenance function of the city's government.

There are exceptions: One of which is if the property is served by an open
drainage ditch.

So, I go to the city's site for registering a protest. Ah ha, there is an
aerial view (Google Earth) of my property overlaid by some bit of software
that drew little rectangles over the "impermeable" areas (driveway,
sidewalks, out-buildings, dog just standing in the yard, etc.). This bit of
software evidently adds up the area comprising all the rectangles to achieve
a total square footage and assesses a fee of three cents per square-foot per
year.

Well, **** this nonsense. I protested the assessment allowing as how my
property is served by a drainage ditch to the rear that easily handles half
of the rainfall. (Man, the ditch is twenty feet deep and fifty feet wide -
it's more like a canal than a ditch.) I further opined that, since it hasn't
rained here since January, it seems a little disingenuous to be imposing a
DRAINAGE fee.

Anyway, the city just sent me an email saying my reasoning is flawed, the
original assessment stands, and I smell funny.

I'm gonna appeal.

Anyway, heads up. This silliness will spread, you mark my words, to your
town, too. Start thinking about camouflage paint for your garage and
outbuildings' roofs.

Santa Monica actually PAYS homeowners to convert hardscape into
permeable, and water-thirsty plantings into xeriscape -- especially
doing away with turf grass which is a huge consumer of water (and
chemicals). I think they said it is the largest crop in the
country?...

AFAIK, up to half the cost can be met by the City, providing the
homeowner follows certain protocols; makes out the requisite forms,
etc. Not a five-minute paperwork job; careful irrigation design is
part of the process. Also, we are STRONGLY encouraged to use rain
barrels and other collection devices which are sold inexpensively by
the City. Runoff is subject to penalty, which means I'd better set a
timer when I turn on a hose; this multi-tasking has got to endg.

I just attended a Landscape Design seminar sponsored by the City
(sneaked in as a ringer, since it was supposed to be for
professionals, but they don't really care).
Part of an extensive year-round group of seminars on all subjects
connected with water-saving, xeriscapic design, non-chemical
gardening, etc.
Maybe Colorado should visit Santa Monica's Sustainable Environment Web
site. This thing about forbidding people to collect rain water sounds
really weird!

Mebbe they want the runoff to end up in the Colorado river aquifer, for
the farmers and the down-river treaty signers? Any H20 that evaporates
or gets diverted never makes it into the water table. Calling it a
'drainage fee' hides their real goal. Or maybe they are just broke, and
truly need money to keep the canal banks bush-hogged, and the culverts
cleared.

Yer right, I got no idea what they are thinking....

--
aem sends...