Proposed Stormwater Utility Fee and Funding Framework

Not against a utility fee, but urged the county to properly define 'impervious surface' before using it in any revenue formula.

Criticized the county's classification of gravel as an impervious surface and questioned whether the charge is a tax requiring voter approval.

Questioned whether the utility fee is a foregone conclusion and suggested exploring alternative funding through county investment funds.

Opposed any tax increase, noting that top stormwater projects could be funded via state and federal grants using existing property tax growth.

Suggested that crushed stone and decomposed granite serve as defensible fire space and should not be penalized.

Expressed hardship as a fixed-income senior living on a dirt road where the county provides no services.

Detailed agricultural challenges on Old Foothill Road, receiving runoff from multiple sources without county assistance.

Expressed disappointment that the task force focused on fees rather than practical local flood control solutions.

Commended staff's outreach to the agricultural community and suggested implementing impact fees for new development.

Emphasized that stormwater impacts the entire valley across generations and urged finding a fair utility funding solution.