=
Clean-=
water
bill is in trouble
=
Tom Meersman, Star Tribune
May=
5, 2005
|
|
|
|
Despite
support from the governor, businesses groups and conservation organizations=
, a
bill to clean up
At
issue is how to pay for the effort. The measure, known as the Clean Water
Legacy bill, would raise $80 million a year for the next decade by imposing=
a
$36 annual fee on most residential sewer bills and septic systems, and a
three-tiered charge for businesses, depending upon their size.
The
House Agriculture, Environment and Natural Resources Finance Committee reje=
cted
that funding proposal and has been discussing ot=
her
options during its last three meetings. They include fees based on the valu=
e of
residential and commercial buildings, a $36 deed and mortgage transfer fee
whenever property is purchased, and other measures.
At
the end of Wednesday's meeting, Chairman Dennis Ozment=
,
R-Rosemount, declared that the committee needed =
more
information about one of the options, which put the bill in a "holding
pattern" for at least a week. The bill faces other hurdles before the
Legislature's scheduled adjournment on May 23, suggesting that its chances =
of
passage are diminishing rapidly.
When
asked about the bill's future after the meeting, Ozmen=
t
said that committee members are split on how to pay for the program, and th=
at
increasing taxes is not an acceptable option. The Legislature's top priority
during its final days will be the state budget, not individual bills, he ad=
ded.
"The realistic thing is that I'm running out of time," Ozment said. "Unless something magical happens, =
we may
not get everything done."
The
proposal ran into trouble for several reasons. Some urban legislators
questioned whether residents would be paying too much compared with busines=
ses.
County officials didn't like the idea of notifying owners of septic systems
about the new fee by listing it as a separate item on their property tax bi=
lls.
Others questioned whether the state really needs $80 million a year to clea=
n up
the waters to comply with the federal Clean Water Act.
Rep.
Jean Wagenius, DFL-Minneapolis, suggested that
bond-financed improvements to sewage treatment plants, restoration of state
water-monitoring programs that suffered from earlier budget cuts and higher
fees on water-discharge permits would deal with most of the state's water
pollution problems.
"What
bothers me most about the bill is that it's designed to clean up only past
mistakes, not to prevent future water pollution," she added.
Mike
Robertson, environmental policy consultant to the Minnesota Chamber of
Commerce, said that delay on the bill would be a setback, and that business=
es
and residential areas will not be able to expand in some areas if rivers and
streams are not cleaned up.
A
bill in the Senate would pay for the Clean Waters Legacy effort using the
tax-supported general fund. It's not clear where the additional general rev=
enue
would come from.
"What
I'm beginning to feel is that this is one of the issues in the endgame: that
it's a priority issue that doesn't get addressed until the very end of the
session," Robertson said. "Even though a bill gets stalled, there=
's
always a possibility that it gets resurrected if it's a priority."
Tom Meersman is at meer=
sman@startribune.com.