DAPHNE—Cars with “Say No to the Rain Tax” stickers filled City Hall’s parking lot Tuesday as Baldwin County residents — those in favor and against the proposed storm-water management bill — came to express their opinion and listen to a presentation by the Baldwin County Watershed Coalition.

More than 60 people attended a public meeting about the coalition’s proposed amendment that would create a public corporation to manage storm-water problems in the county.

Coalition member Cathy Barnette — who also serves on the Daphne City Council — said the state views 29 Baldwin County water bodies as “impaired” because of bacteria, mercury and sediments. Baldwin County receives 5.5 feet of storm water annually, which is more than the amount Seattle gets per year, she said. Storm-water runoff erodes land, deposits downstream and affects water wildlife, and the proposed amendment would enable a public corporation to manage storm water in Baldwin County.

“One of the things this corporation (would do) is allows us to think pro-actively. We are wasting a lot of money responding,” Barnette said at Tuesday’s meeting. “(The Environmental Protection Agency) has called storm-water pollution the number one threat to our nation’s water quality. We are responsible for our natural resources.”

The proposed amendment states, “Relating to Baldwin County, proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to authorize the Legislature to provide by general or local law for the formation of a public corporation for the purpose of managing storm water in the county; and to authorize the levy and collection of storm water service charges on certain property containing impervious areas in the county.”

If the amendment passes Nov. 2, a local legislative delegation may move forward and set specifics for the bill, but only if they choose to.

“All this does is enables us to move forward with the next step,” State Rep. Randy Davis said. “It had to come to this point.”

One area that would need specific structure is how the public corporation would build funds for “on-the-ground projects” the coalition hopes the public corporation would do. Barnette said around $2.5 million would be needed per year for projects and general reserve funds, and there is talk of a fee structure charged on Baldwin County residents.

Coalition steering committee chair Marian Macpherson stated that while some people may be worried about the fee associated to the amendment, voting in favor does not implement any charges. It only allows authority to implement the charges if necessary, she said, and the possibility of fees will be discussed later if the amendment passes.

According to Barnette, the potential fee structure would be based on “impervious coverage,” which is the amount of land covered on someone’s property that causes storm-water runoff. If there is less than 10 percent impervious coverage, then more water absorbs into the ground and there is less impact, and the yearly charge would be lower. If there is more than 10 percent impervious coverage on a property, more water runs off and affects land, and the charge would be higher.

“This is a fee that could be changed, and the coalition would develop that fee through significant input,” Davis said.

“Is this a rain tax? No,” Barnette said. “This is a utility.”

She contended there isn’t enough money to begin fixing the problems now.

“Storm water is the last thing to get put into a city’s budget,” she said.

Public response

Some people in attendance expressed concerns with the proposed bill.

Kevin Spriggs of Daphne said he doesn’t trust government, and he feels this amendment would only create more government.

“This is definitely the creation of another agency,” he said of the proposed public corporation. “They all start out like this; nice and clean.”

Vera Landon, a Daphne resident in the Eagle Creek subdivision, showed attendees and coalition members pictures of her backyard, which has eroded because of storm-water problems.

“Nobody wants to take responsibility for this,” Landon said. “It’s completely ridiculous that they would make us pay and then decide what to fix first.

“I’ve been to every meeting. I’ve talked with everyone there is. Who’s first? Who’s a priority?”

Barnette contended that without a public corporation that could build a fee structure, Landon’s yard couldn’t possibly be fixed.

“There isn’t funding to solve your problem. The city of Daphne doesn’t have the budget to solve this problem,” Barnette said. “Nobody wants to touch it because we’re not working together because we don’t have a funding mechanism.”

Others had problems with the vagueness of the proposed amendment and the lack of strict regulations.

“You have to have a proper design and you have to have rules and regulations,” said Chester McConnell, a Daphne resident. “This bill has a major flaw because it doesn’t have any regulations. You just can’t go at this half-hearted.”

“You’re asking us to vote on something which is vague,” said Arlene DiPietro of Fairhope.

Wallace Swanson, another Fairhope resident, agreed.

“I think all of us want clean water and air,” Swanson said. “The fee is not an issue with me. The vagueness is and it is very flawed. On Nov. 3, when this thing fails, and I pray to God it does fail, call me because I want to sit in on some of those meetings.”

“You got to understand that this rate structure is not exactly what they said it is,” said James Long, a Fairhope resident.

Alabama Sen. Trip Pittman, R-Montrose, said the fee structure was “just an example” proposed by the coalition.

“This is going to have to have a fee to make this thing work,” Pittman said. “It has to have a revenue stream.”

A few people in attendance aired support for the amendment.

“This is a good step forward. A small step forward, but I don’t see anything wrong with taking this action,” said Gil Rogers, an Atlanta resident who works with the Southern Environmental Law Center, a southeast organization that works to protect natural recourses and waterways. “Setting up a mechanism like this will only put Baldwin County on competitive footing with other places in Alabama and other places in the southeast.”

“I don’t know what other option we have,” Margaret Solberger of Spanish Fort said of increasing storm-water runoff damage. “It’s going to take some money to do it.”

“We think this is an efficient way to set up what we need to do,” Pittman said. “We’ll see what happens Nov. 2.”