Liberals now taxing you for rainfall thanks to the EPA

[Mr. H.]

Moved To Environment Forum.

You've finally made yourself useful around here.

 

[Katzndogz]

Actually, the main source of pollution in our waters is runoff from chemicals used in residential yards. Second source is farm chemicals.

Look it up for yourself.

Every structure that is built and any/all solid surfaces that don't allow water to perk down cause changes to water routes both above & below ground.

This "tax" is already in place in many areas.

Just exactly WHERE is it still illegal to have rain barrels? Colorado changed/amended that law a few years back....is there another place?
I have 5 rain barrels and use them!

Try liberal Oregon

Man Sentenced to 30 Days for Catching Rain Water on Own Property Enters Jail | CNS News

 

[mamooth]

Try liberal Oregon

Try "you're lying about the story."

The guy didn't just use a rain barrel. He made several large ponds on his property, and refused to remove them. Every state in the west has water laws going back over a century that say you don't get to just grab all the water flowing through your property. If you think that's a liberal conspiracy, you're more ignorant of history than anyone imagined.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Being fined or whatever for how you handle RAIN on your own property is beyond stupid.

 

[PredFan]

Okay, people can't even set a barrel or two in their yards to catch rain water so they can water their garden later. The reason this was changed to a crime is because the government says we don't own the water and have no right to keep it. So, how in the hell can people be taxed for something that the government says they don't own?

The EPA is nothing more than a political machine trying to find more money for the government to waste.

Fine, then I'll call their asses when it snows 2 feet next time and tell them to get their property off my sidewalk and driveway! lol

Now THERE is a great idea!

 

[PredFan]

Maryland to Impose 'Rain Tax' on Property Owners

Unreal

I don't live in Maryland. Nice try, gramps. Next.

And anything that doesn't immediately affect you, you don't care about. Nice, fuckface.

 

[rightwinger]

Being fined or whatever for how you handle RAIN on your own property is beyond stupid.

Not if your yard has runoff into the Chesapeake Bay

 

[mamooth]

Being fined or whatever for how you handle RAIN on your own property is beyond stupid.

Make sure you tell that to every western state, given they've been doing it since the first white settlers arrived. Good of y'all to finally notice.

 

[gslack]

Hoarding water beyond what you will use in a reasonable amount of time is ignorant and wrong. Ignorant because screwing others eventually screws yourself, and wrong because it's not yours its everyones..

That being said the same thing applies to governments as well. They can bill you for cleaning, transport, and maintenance of the facilities its use requires, but they should not be able to bill you extra for natural occurrences like rainfall. If their current service rates are not enough to cover the costs, they should raise the rates but not add a new and separate charge...

Now did anybody read the linked article?So far I noticed only a few did.. I hope so because the reason they are adding this new "tax" is to pay for the new mandate by the EPA to clean up the Chesapeake bay by 2017..

Meaning the EPA caused property owners to pay for their mandate. Showing once again that when they pass these things it is paid for by the average citizen and NOT the wealthy alone.. Remember when you were told this before and you greenies went nuts calling it hogwash?

There it is...

 

[Grandma]

You "rainfallers" can try your damndest to spin it, but that's not going to work.

We have that tax here. It's not on rain, but on solid surfaces on the property that produce runoff.

Look at what's in the runoff from a typical paved driveway: motor oil, antifreeze, transmission fluid, gasoline, cleaning products (mainly soaps), and weedkiller. Most of those things are difficult, if not impossible to filter - meaning they can get into the drinking water.

Then there's the mattter of flood control. Heavy rains are assumed to be absorbed into the ground. But in the case of solid surfaces, the water runs into the storm drains, increasing the potential for flooding.

And then there's cleaning and flushing the drains. The driveway runoff sends extra debris into the drains, clogging them more often than if the water were absorbed into the ground.
City crews have to come out and clean all the drains.

Now if you have french drains sending the runoff into your back yard or septic system (if you have one), you MIGHT be able to get an exemption in NON-drought-prone states.

 

[gslack]

You "rainfallers" can try your damndest to spin it, but that's not going to work.

We have that tax here. It's not on rain, but on solid surfaces on the property that produce runoff.

Look at what's in the runoff from a typical paved driveway: motor oil, antifreeze, transmission fluid, gasoline, cleaning products (mainly soaps), and weedkiller. Most of those things are difficult, if not impossible to filter - meaning they can get into the drinking water.

Then there's the mattter of flood control. Heavy rains are assumed to be absorbed into the ground. But in the case of solid surfaces, the water runs into the storm drains, increasing the potential for flooding.

And then there's cleaning and flushing the drains. The driveway runoff sends extra debris into the drains, clogging them more often than if the water were absorbed into the ground.
City crews have to come out and clean all the drains.

Now if you have french drains sending the runoff into your back yard or septic system (if you have one), you MIGHT be able to get an exemption in NON-drought-prone states.

First the OP link stated where it applies and what it is for and from where it came. There is no "spin"on it.

The EPA is making the states clean up the Chesapeake Bay area and that cost is being transferred to the citizenry in the form of this new bill or tax... It's not a rate increase to cover cost of usual maintenance or natural occurrences, it's a separate charge added to it.

If it were to cover rising costs of filtration or regular maintenance and natural wear, it would be a rate increase. it's not...

I agree with cleaning our environment, I disagree with an extra, separate charge for something they cannot control. If they can't do it at the rate they charge, raise the rate. Don't do the wussy move and make a new tax and blame the EPA. That's a political move not an environmental one. All it does is piss off the people and cause ever more bickering. bickering that will end up stopping any progress at all...