2003 Senate Bill 510 (Senate Roll Call 252)
Passed in the Senate (37 to 1) on June 18, 2003, to levy new stormwater discharge fees on private and public wastewater treatment and other systems which discharge wastewater. The annual fees increases range from $60 to $7,000 depending on the size and type of the system. The bill would impose approximately $1.2 million in additional costs on operators of these systems. It is one of many bill authorizing fee increases which Gov. Jennifer Granholm proposed to close a gap between state spending and expected revenue in the Fiscal Year 2003-2004 budget. [History, Amendments & Comments]
The vote was 37 in favor, 1 opposed, and 0 not voting
(Senate Roll Call 252 at Senate Journal 60)
[Comment on this vote | View others' comments]
|
|
|
Support
Oppose
Not Voting
Undecided
The following legislators supported 2003 Senate Bill 510:
The following legislators opposed 2003 Senate Bill 510:
| Sanborn (R) |
The following legislators did not vote on 2003 Senate Bill 510:
Most Recent Comments
1) Consumers will pay [by Ann Rock on May 23, 2003]Every time you raise fees they will get passed on to the consumer so the cost of living goes up. Have you done the budget-slashing worked out by the Mackinac Center at mackinac.org?
Reply
The storm water fees are passing the MDEQ budget cuts to the municipalities. The revenue sharing cuts have already made the cities and villages cut common services.
Its time for the state and MDEQ to take a serious look at effeciency, make adjustments, and live within their budget.
Reply
Introduced in the Senate on May 21, 2003, to levy new stormwater discharge fees on private and public wastewater treatment and other systems which discharge wastewater. The annual fees increases range from $60 to $7,000 depending on the size and type of the system. The bill would impose approximately $1.2 million in additional costs on operators of these systems. It is one of many bill authorizing fee increases which Gov. Jennifer Granholm proposed to close a gap between state spending and expected revenue in the Fiscal Year 2003-2004 budget
The vote was 37 in favor, 1 opposed and 0 not voting
(Senate Roll Call 252 at Senate Journal 60)
Click here to view bill details.
Reply
View Full Conversation
