Public Meeting on Proposed Water Quality Fee

Summary

Meeting Overview

The City Council met in the Council Chambers under the presiding officer of the Mayor. The meeting included one agenda item focused on public comments regarding a proposed fee, which was handled as an informational matter. During the meeting, the Council heard 18 public comments from members of the community. No motions were voted on during this session.

Attendance

Present: - Council Member Blues - Council Member Gordon - Council Member Crosby - Council Member Stenet

Absent: - Vice Mayor Gray

Late: None reported

Public Comment

The meeting included eighteen public speakers addressing the proposed stormwater fee and related water quality initiatives.

Support for the Fee and Water Quality Protection

Jack Wilson, a former director of the Kentucky Division of Water, urged the council to maintain momentum on protecting Fayette County's water quality 32:15. Walt Gaffield, representing the Fayette County Neighborhood Council, supported the fee as essential to meet legal obligations under the Clean Water Act and warned against delays that could worsen flooding and pollution 47:58. Hank Coratti, speaking for Kentucky River Watershed Watch, framed the fee as an investment in the future and praised the task force's work 54:13.

Requests for Credit Systems and Exemptions

Multiple speakers advocated for credit systems to incentivize stormwater best management practices. Andrew Steckinger emphasized that credit systems still provide public and environmental benefits even with low utilization 4:56. Bill Lear criticized the one-size-fits-all fee structure and proposed a benchmark-based credit system with engineering review 10:19. Robert Ryan, representing Colony 4 Neighborhood Association, argued that residents maintaining stormwater ponds should receive credit or relief 16:54. Mary Wright from Fayette County Public Schools requested credit recognition for the district's existing investments in rain gardens 24:00. Tracy Spencer urged exemption of schools, churches, and hospitals from the fee 26:02.

Concerns About Fee Structure and Implementation

Louis McCoy expressed frustration about being taxed without prior stormwater guidance 29:52. Bernard McCarthy questioned the logic of taxing schools and churches 45:35. Billy Forbus warned that high fees could drive businesses away 56:27. David Trapp objected to the fee as a property tax with no end and demanded transparency on fund usage 1:00:22.

Green Infrastructure Recommendations

Dave Leonard urged funding for comprehensive urban forest management, citing Cincinnati's success 20:45. Sue Beard urged prioritization of green infrastructure like trees and rain gardens 51:27.

Mike Winkler yielded his speaking time to Andrew Steckinger 2:39.

Contested Items

The meeting featured three primary areas of contention:

Lack of Credit System for Stormwater Management

Multiple community members, including Bill Lear, Robert Ryan, and Mr. Quick, expressed strong opposition to the absence of a credit system for stormwater management. These speakers argued that without such a system, the proposal fails to incentivize green infrastructure investments and unfairly burdens property owners who already manage stormwater on their properties. The critics contended that a credit system would reward proactive environmental stewardship and create more equitable outcomes for those already implementing stormwater solutions.

Taxing Schools, Churches, and Nonprofits

Speakers Tracy Spencer and Bernard McCarthy criticized the proposed fee structure, specifically objecting to its application to schools and churches. They characterized the fee as unfair and expressed concern that it would be potentially harmful to community organizations that already serve important public functions. This opposition centered on the burden such fees would place on institutions that typically operate with limited budgets and serve the broader community.

Transparency and Use of Funds

David Trapp and other speakers raised procedural concerns about the lack of clarity regarding how the $30 million would be spent. These participants questioned the transparency of the proposal and demanded greater accountability. They specifically called for a defined end point for the fee, expressing concern that without clear parameters and spending plans, the financial commitment could become open-ended and lack proper oversight.

Public Comments about Proposed Fee

A public meeting was held to gather comments on a proposed water quality management fee. Multiple residents, organizations, and experts participated in the discussion.

Key Speakers and Participants

The following individuals provided comments during the meeting: Andrew Steckinger, Bill Lear, Robert Ryan, Dave Leonard, Mary Wright, Tracy Spencer, Jack Wilson, John Brunau, Mr. Quick, Robert Lail, Bernard McCarthy, Walt Gaffield, Sue Beard, Hank Coratti, Billy Forbus, and David Trapp.

Main Issues Discussed

Speakers expressed support for the necessity of the proposed fee but raised several significant concerns:

• Lack of credit systems – Commenters noted the absence of mechanisms to provide credits or reductions for those implementing mitigation measures
• Unfair burden on nonprofits and schools – Concerns were raised that these institutions would face disproportionate financial impacts from the fee
• Poor transparency – Multiple speakers highlighted insufficient clarity regarding how the fee would be calculated, collected, and used
• Need for green infrastructure – Participants emphasized the importance of incorporating green infrastructure solutions into the fee structure and planning
• Long-term planning – Speakers stressed the necessity for comprehensive, long-term planning to address water quality management sustainably

Outcome

The meeting was informational in nature, serving to document public input on the proposed fee rather than to reach a decision or resolution during the session.