During a four-hour meeting, the Port Orchard City Council decided to increase stormwater rates to $9.70 per month beginning Jan. 1 while the city reviews language in the city’s code and addresses other concerns by residents.

Councilman Rob Putaansuu presented the motion and Councilman John Clauson amended Putaansuu’s motion to increase the stormwater rate from $9.70 to $14 on June 1 while the city resolves questions that were brought up before the council.

The council approved each motion, 4-3.

Councilwoman Bek Ashby said she voted against Clauson’s motion because it set a $14 per month rate.

“We may find once we get through resolving these issues and getting through what mitigation may look like, that $14 may be a different number,” she said.

“You can change that number anytime between here and June 1,” Clauson said. “This body sets that number and this body can change that number. We may find it needs to be something different.”

Councilmembers Cindy Lucarelli and Fred Chang also voted against the motions.

Before council discussion, several residents addressed the council during the second public hearing on the rate increase. Most residents opposed the rate increase and language in the proposed ordinance. Rates are based on per impervious surface unit (ISU), which is based on 3,000 square feet. Impervious surfaces are roofs, driveways (gravel, paved or concrete), patios and sidewalks.

Clauson said the supports the increase and the city doesn’t have many options — based on upcoming federal regulations — plus projects the city needs to get completed.

“We still need to do some work based on what I heard tonight,” Clauson said. “We have issues that are related to the rate increase.”

Clauson said that some people made investments on their property to deal with stormwater.

“I need to better understand how that relates to our requirement under the stormwater utility,” he said.

Assistant City Engineer Andrea Archer-Parsons told the council she was keeping the city in compliance with federal requirements and noted she was the only person working on the compliances for the city.

“2015 will bring some new regulations,” she said.

Archer-Parson said technically she was supposed to have a work plan in place and to look at options.

“Basically, it’s a 2015 budget issue,” said Public Works Director Mark Dorsey.

Clauson said the workload on Archer-Parsons is to develop a work plan that it is in the budget.

Putaansuu said the city may need to take what it needs to stay in compliance instead of the proposed $14 per month rate.

Dorsey told the council there are four separate issues that have come from discussion and from public comments. He said the rates for the stormwater utility has nothing to do with residential or commercial systems.

“The stormwater utility is an EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) mandate that comes from the Clean Water Act that has to do with cleaning catch basins, sweeping streets and maintaining facilities that we picked up through annexation,” Dorsey. said “It’s an impact to the Puget Sound. That is the program.”

He said another issue mentioned during the public hearing was mitigation for individuals who have installed a stormwater system on their property.

“That’s a whole new conversation if you want to look at onsite mitigation versus the program,” Dorsey said.

He said another issue concerns billing for the three bed-and-breakfast businesses located in the city.

“Two of them are 3,000-square-foot houses and the other is a much larger facility,” he said.

He said the final issue is the city code that addresses home occupation and home businesses.

“There are four different conversations that are separate from the rate increase,” Dorsey said.

“They are separate, but they are related,” Clauson said.

Ashby said she feels some of the issues are easy to resolve, but mitigation would be more difficult.

Putaansuu said the mitigation is a “big gorilla” that cannot be solved in a week or a month.

Ashby noted that the ordinance states “commercial” and doesn’t have anything in it about “business license.”

“I’m not sure where that language originated,” she said. “It doesn’t say anything about home businesses, which are clearly defined by the RCW (Revised Code of Washington). No home business would qualify as commercial under the RCW.”

Councilman Jeff Cartwright said there is language in the city code that needs to be “cleaned up.”

Putaansuu said changing the rate is dealing with the rate structure and nothing else.

“We’re not changing anything else that is already in place,” he said.

Clauson suggested that the city looks at what Kitsap County and Bremerton are doing concerning stormwater rates and federal mandates.

“I’m not saying we need to reinvent the wheel,” he said. “Let’s take a look how others have dealt with this issue.”

Clauson said the city needs to set a rate to remain in compliance and complete some of its capital projects.

Public concerns

Evergreen Lumber owner Jerry Swan said he has a large parcel for his business and was required by the city to install a stormwater system in 1995. He said the $100,000 system included retention ponds, culverts, underground storage and water-cleansing system.

“Your proposed stormwater fee is going to have a tremendous impact on my business,” Swan said.

He said this year his stormwater fees were $5,712 and another $952 for the city to clean and check the stormwater system.

“If your proposed fee is doubling my cost goes through, I’m going to be spending close to $12,500 a year,” Swan said. “My request would be that you find some way to mitigate the fact that I have spent a substantial amount of money or funds upfront for stormwater system.”

Attorney Gary Chrey, representing Gil and Kathy Michael, said that an increase in the rate — per ISU — is needed.

“However, we feel that taking it from $7 to $14 … is too much, too soon,” Chrey said.

The attorney noted his clients are concerned about the specifics of the proposed code. He said the requirements to have a business license to operate a home business should not be used as the basis to require residents to be reclassified as commercial and to increase the number of ISUs as a result of the reclassification to more than one.

“The presence of a business license has caused the property to be reclassified from residential to commercial, and the number of ISUs increased from 1 to 4,” Chrey said.

According to a June 10 notice from the city, the Michaels were charged a commercial rate because they have a business license.

Dorsey said city staff needs to look at the language in the proposed ordinance concerning “home business.”

“We have the rate discussion, that is separate from the bed-and-breakfast discussion, which is separate from changing language in our code because there is some vagueness and unintended consequences that we need to look at home-based businesses,” Dorsey said. “It has never been the intention of the Utility Committee, council or city to have a home-based business — just because they have a business license — to be treated as commercial.”

Putaansuu said the Utility Committee can look at the other separate issues, but the ordinance is dealing with rates only.

“There are other issues we need to resolve with the code and the discussion with had at a work study separately,” Putaansuu said. “They are separate issues and what we are intending to deal with here which is the rate discussion.”