[Mpls] Stormwatergate

[C Becker]

Al Iverson asked

> What's the incentive if the bill is based on statistical modeling and 
> averaging as opposed to actually taking measurements?

If this is the same proposal I worked on about ten years ago, we found that 
the cost of doing actual measurements was cost-prohibitive.  At the time, 
the City didn't have all of the footprints of things like concrete driveways 
or patios or other hard surfaces for every property in the City in its GIS 
system and the cost was prohibative to get it in relation to the revenues 
raised.  So I assume this is why the city went with its statistical 
approach.

In fact, ten years ago the cost of putting together such a fee was too high 
given the amount of revenues raised.  I haven't pursued it but it would be 
helpful for the Mayor to put out some information on the cost of creating 
such a tax vs the revenues that are being raise as well as the tax 
incidence.

For people who are not tax geeks, the question of "tax incidence" is a 
question about who ends up paying the tax.  I would be curious if 
residential payers are now paying more or less of the sewer cost than in the 
past.  For example, the City used to pay for its garbage costs through its 
property taxes.  But it moved to a garbage fee in the 1990's.  Under the 
property tax, homeowners paid about 35% of the bill while under the garbage 
fee, homeowners paid 100% of the cost, a huge shift in burden.

So, anyone out there in the City that can tell us what the incidence is for 
the new sewer fee and why residents are seeing their bills go up so much?

Carol Becker
Longfellow