Proposed stormwater fee not flowing well with public

The City Hall courtroom was filled to capacity last night with one topic weighing heavily on everyone's mind: The proposed storm water fee. 

Officials have maintained that no one will be exempt from the fee, which will help the city become in compliance with the federal mandates by the Environmental Protection Agency.

Discussion at the Sunshine meeting of the Terre Haute City Council lasted three hours. All council members were present except Councilwoman Amy Auler. Even more questions were raised by City Council and audience members as Mayor Bennett and other presenters attempted once again to explain the ordinance. In opening the meeting, Bennett said he expected to be met with opposition from church representatives..

The standing room only crowd shows the  proposed fee is not flowing well with the public.. However, a couple of council members made it clear during the meeting that they have major issues in consideration of the ordinance as  well now.

Councilman Earl Elliott alerted the audience that he had just been made aware of an alleged back room deal between the Indiana Finance Authority and the Sanitary District made last year which agrees to increase sewage rates by 15 percent or enact a storm water fee. Elliott was obviously frustrated that the City Council was not included in those discussions.

​"I don't think anyone on this council was aware of that provision," Elliott said, noting that he found out about the agreement just the night before this meeting. "I'm terribly disturbed to find this out."

Councilwoman Martha Crossen agrees, saying that it has become a "significant issue." President Todd Nation also expressed disappointment that the council was left in the dark on a measure they will have to consider.

Attorney Dennis Otten explained that the IFA oftentimes keeps a close eye on districts, particularly when they fall behind on meeting debt obligations. The agreement was reportedly made when the city fell behind on a few payments and had other legal issues.

Audience member and a local attorney Richard Shagley pointed out that no information has been presented indicating what projects will be completed to address the storm water issue.He joins in the general distrust of the fee felt within the community.

"It appears to me, the city needs a little more money -- and we're going to call it a storm water fee," Shagley said, agreeing with Elliott that the root of the problem is transparency. "All last year, we heard 'it's complicated and 'we're turning a corner.' When, as it turns out, the letter that Earl had in his hands-- the Mayor agreed  that he would raise rates next year."

He said the issue is not 'complicated," adding that he wonders what else is being kept from the public.

"We spend more than we bring in, and now they're trying to pass a storm water fee to get us out of this jam when we're hearing very little about what we're doing about our expenses," he said.

About a dozen other residents and business owners signed up to speak out against the ordinance, pleading with council members to vote it down or at minimum, amend it as it is written to exclude churches and non profit organizations. Religious leaders voiced opposition, saying they will be hit particularly hard. 

Rev. Jeff Harpole said it would cost his church about $10,000 per year. Bishop Donald Smith said the people of the community who are already struggling will not be able to pay the fee. He says the ordinance is not fair. An Otter Creek Township Trustee, Robert Salmon, indicated that he doesn't live in the city limits, however he does reside in the Sanitary District. He alleges the ordinance would be taxation without representation since he can not vote in city elections for city officials.

The item is on the agenda for action at the next council meeting, next Thursday at 6 p.m.

---


See updated story