Foremost on the agenda was the debate over the fair calculation of stormwater utility fees, which centered around the need to update data on impervious surfaces using modern techniques. This data, crucial for accurate billing, is expected to be processed and available by late February. The task force acknowledged the outdated nature of the current data, last updated in 2016, and stressed the importance of incorporating the latest information to ensure equity in fee assessments. The conversation highlighted potential issues with the existing fee structures, particularly for large commercial entities and large residential properties, urging for a tiered approach to reflect the actual impervious surface area contributed by these properties. The task force recognized that the success of the stormwater utility largely hinges on ensuring that fees are perceived as fair and justified, given the infrastructure’s shared benefits.

A significant portion of the discussion revolved around community education and engagement, seen as critical to gaining public support for the stormwater initiatives. Members emphasized the necessity of developing comprehensive educational materials and presentations tailored to various community stakeholders, including the finance committee. The task force acknowledged previous shortcomings in public engagement, which resulted in low attendance at meetings and subsequent confusion during town meetings. There was consensus on the need for proactive communication strategies, such as informational sessions and the use of visual aids, to clarify the financial and environmental benefits of the stormwater utility. A proposal to hold public information sessions in late February or early March, both in-person and via Zoom, was floated to ensure widespread participation ahead of the town meeting scheduled for May 2nd.

The task force also confronted the regulatory landscape, with discussions on the implications of updated stormwater bylaws and Massachusetts stormwater management policies. Members highlighted the urgency communicated by the EPA to comply with the MS4 permit requirements, even as the Massachusetts stormwater handbook undergoes updates. There was concern about the capacity of the town to review permit applications for projects disturbing over 40,000 square feet, which may necessitate hiring additional engineering staff. The task force examined how these updated requirements would impact both existing and new developments, emphasizing the need for clarity on operational and maintenance plans.

Further complicating the task force’s efforts are the financial mechanics of stormwater funding. The group explored potential funding sources, including Chapter 90 funds, while acknowledging their unpredictability and the risk of budget cuts impacting stormwater management. The task force considered regional collaborations as a way to share resources and equipment, though such practices are not yet widespread. There were also discussions about the potential of a credit system to incentivize stormwater mitigation measures by property owners, though this was deemed challenging to implement in the first year.

The logistics of establishing a stormwater utility framework were also debated. The task force weighed the merits of introducing the utility framework gradually versus all at once, reflecting on past experiences with other budgetary initiatives. The conversation touched on the procedural requirements for passing related bylaws, including voting thresholds and the necessity of securing endorsements from the select board and finance committee. The task force members were cautious about the timing of these initiatives, considering the potential impact on resident and business engagement.