Written Testimony for Agenda Items
View written testimony submissions for current agenda items. Written testimony is shared with members of Council. Testimony is archived as a part of the record after Council acts on the item.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10
|Agenda Item||Name||Position||Comments and attachments|
|983||Vigor||Support with changes||
|983||Bob Wilson, Tyee Yacht Club||Oppose||I would question as to why it is so important to the BES to charge for stormwater that they do not in any way affect. As you can see from the materials presented by BES, that less than half of one percent of the cities area is floating structures. The truth is that the majority of the floating structures are recreational in nature. Most of us live somewhere else and pay our stormwater charges at… Read more|
|983||Mark Birnbaum, Jantzen Beach Moorage||Support with changes||BES states its #1 objective in proposed rate structure* is to: 1. “Adjust all rates to ensure that all customers are billed fairly based on the cost of serving them. The “cost of service” principle is the underlying basis for all recommendations. BES sidesteps the overall picture the vast majority of overwater structures exist in. a) Overwater structures, at the very least, are… Read more|
|983||Anonymous||Support with changes||We thank the commissioners for acquiescing to the wishes expressed by owners of overwater structures, but I am disturbed that the BES continues to make questionable and even untrue assertions in the matter.
|983||Maren Calvert, attorney at Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt||Oppose||Commissioner Mapps did an excellent job listening to the people of Portland about the flaws in the BES Proposed Code related to overwater structure stormwater fees. Unfortunately, simply removing the phrase “overwater structures” from the Proposed Code does not solve all of the problems. The Revised Proposed Code still significantly expands stormwater fee authority, fails to achieve equity,… Read more
|983||Dave Lear||Oppose||I oppose a rate re structure when it targets specific, low impact users. The idea that docks and floating homes need to support stormwater discharge is outrageous. We are regulated regulated by the following fees: Title 28 Floating Structures, Chapter 28.03 Administration and Enforcement L. “Impervious Area” means the area of a property that does not allow rainwater to percolate naturally… Read more|
|983||Portland Utility Board (submitted by PUB staff on behalf of Board)||Support||Please accept the attached written testimony of the Portland Utility Board. Note that the testimony was approved by the Board when the item was originally scheduled as item 942, so the Board has not had a public meeting to consider changes made since the original submission and will be unable to do so prior to the hearing.
|983||Tom Liptan||Support with changes||Dear Portland City Council,
I am one of 177,000 single family residences who have been paying an inequitable flat stormwater fee for more than 40 years. The new tier structure will not eliminate the inequities of the flat rate because the tiers will create 3 flat rates which will benefit some and still injure the majority of rate payers, especially many of those least able to afford the fees.… Read more
|983||Jas. Adams||Support||I support Commissioner Mapps' decision not to include in Agenda Item 983 the proposal by BES in Agenda Item 742 to impose a stormwater infrastructure user fee on overwater structures, which have no need for and do not use the City's stormwater infrastructure to channel rain runoff that such structures directly discharge into rivers.
|983||Arlene Kavlock, Portland Rowing Club||Support||I would like to thank Commissioner Mapps and his staff for having given those of us who would be profoundly effected by the original overwater structure proposals from BES opportunities to express our concerns. Commissioner Mapps not only heard our concerns, but acted on them. I support the approval of the amended BES recommendations regarding stormwater fees.|