City mulls fees for lights, drains

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

The city council is considering charging city residents with two new utility fees -- a "street lighting" fee and a "storm water drainage" fee.

These fees, $1 each, will be added to monthly utility bills.

The charges would cover maintenance of the city's lighting in residential areas and a better system for storm drainage. With the city's budget being limited, finding some additional ways to help cover costs that would be passed on to local residents if the fees are approved is needed, city officials said.

A public hearing on the proposal will be on Monday, July 13, at city hall, beginning at 6 p.m.

Comments
View 5 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • I would have no problem paying for either of these if I had said services in my neighborhhod. I live off of 10th (Saddleridge) and there are neither lights nor storm drains on my street.

    -- Posted by Manshima on Wed, Jun 17, 2009, at 10:37 AM
  • *

    Ok I have to say foul on this one. The CITY approved the design of any of the storm systems and now wants us to pay for the problems they approved. So bottom line, we have to pay to fix what the CITY approved.

    I do understand the need for the fee to maintain lighting and would gladly pay that. But as for the storm drain fee, I would gladly pay it if I saw any attempt to improve some of the current problems. For example, the drainage area off S5th West has massive amounts of vegatation growing in it and this can only impede the flow of water. Those up hill from this area have had slow drains for years and in 10 years, I hve never seen this area cleaned.

    -- Posted by B Mullen on Wed, Jun 17, 2009, at 7:30 PM
  • *

    Isn't lighting a public safety issue?

    As far as storm water drainage......

    WHERE DO I SEND MY FEE FOR CLEANING ICE OUT THE ONE NEAR MY MOTHERS, DURING LAST YEARS SNOWFALL ....If you charge you take responsibilty for them also...... is the city ready for those lawsuits......

    -- Posted by workingbee on Thu, Jun 18, 2009, at 12:32 AM
  • There you go again, socking it to the people that their last $2 they have it going in your pocket.

    The sewers have flooded for the last 50 year's here

    and no improvement's have been made. There are wooden storm drain's in part's of the city. The wonderful underpass that was built is in a river.

    The basements in some of the store's down town are flooded every time it rains. The road in front of the Specialty Clinic has sewer water standing in it most of the year and the handicap cannot use the side walk's in this area with out walking into it.

    So you tell me where our wonderful taxes are going??

    Who's pocket are they lining that they want more from us?? Isn't it wonderful that we are out of work and on food stamp's and welfare and unemployment, and they want $2 more dollars from us?? where are we going to get it. cut out toilet paper, food for the kids, elect bill, which has all gone up?? Well there again this is Mountain Home. Our wonderful open handed system take take.

    -- Posted by Green Eyed Lady on Thu, Jun 18, 2009, at 11:57 AM
  • Funny...years ago when all of this building started we asked if all of this would be able to keep up (the sewers). Have the builders that have made HUGE amounts of money over the last several years paid into this or is this yet another example of growth NOT being able to pay for itself because nobody looked ahead? How much have the builders had to pay toward this and when did it start? If so...where is all of that money now? Forward thinking folks. Growth costs but it SHOLD cost those that are making the profit...not the taxpayers, IMHO only of course.

    -- Posted by OpinionMissy on Mon, Jun 22, 2009, at 1:40 AM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: