Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stormwater Fee topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges revision of stormwater fee; council defends tiered structure and engineering basis
Summary
A Riverside resident testified that the city’s stormwater charge is higher than nearby communities and called for a fairer rate structure; councilmembers and the deputy mayor defended the tiered approach, citing an engineer study and deferred maintenance as the basis for the fee.
Tim Gosnell, a Riverside resident, used his public-comment time to urge council to revisit the city’s stormwater fee structure, saying his household’s calculation under the current tiering system produces a charge far higher than neighboring cities.
Gosnell read comparative figures from other jurisdictions (as presented to council): Xenia at about $4.75 per ERU, Trotwood about $5 per ERU, West Carrollton about $6 per ERU, Dayton about $6.09, Huber Heights roughly $8.39 for higher tiers, and Centerville about $9.50; he said these translated to annual charges materially lower than the approximately $216 per year he calculated for his own tiered classification in Riverside. “These fees are clearly double,” Gosnell said, and urged the newly seated council members to seek a more equitable approach, especially for seniors and small businesses.
Council members responded during the discussion period. The Mayor and other councilmembers noted that the city’s stormwater assessment was developed by engineers in an extensive study and is intended to address deferred maintenance and the actual cost of needed work; one councilmember said neighboring communities may have different policy choices and levels of deferred maintenance. Deputy Mayor said she had advocated for a tiered structure specifically to reduce the burden on residents in modest dwellings and said she remains open to discussion. Councilmembers also emphasized the economies of scale Riverside gains for trash services compared with neighboring jurisdictions.
There was no formal action on the fee at the meeting; council stated staff will continue engagement on the issue and the subject is on the committee/agenda schedule for further review in January.
