Monroeville pastor calls proposed MS4 fees unfair to houses of worship |

Monroeville pastor calls proposed MS4 fees unfair to houses of worship

Dillon Carr
Monroeville Municipal Center

A coalition of various religious sects in Monroeville complained that the municipality’s fee schedule for a proposed Municipal Storm Sewer System ordinance, also known as MS4, is unfair to houses of worship.

The proposed ordinance allows Monroeville to fee each property owner based on a property’s “equivalent residential units,” or ERUs. One ERU is equivalent to 2,385 square feet.

The money collected will be used to fund Monroeville’s five-year Pollution Reduction Plan that will cost $37.7 million, or $7.5 million per year. The plan includes improving the municipality’s aging stormwater infrastructure.

Councilman Ron Harvey, who chairs a committee dedicated to exploring the MS4 program privately, confirmed all property owners will pay $10 a month per assessed ERU. ERUs will be rounded down, he said.

Single-family homes, assessed at one ERU, will pay $120 a year.

The Rev. Bob Schaefer of Good Shepherd Lutheran Church, who also serves as the Monroeville Interfaith Ministerium treasurer, said in an article published on MIM’s website Aug. 29 that “the impact of a flat ERU will be much heavier on houses of worship than on businesses.”

Schaefer estimates that one Monroeville’s church — St. Bernadette Catholic Church — will pay around $10,500 a year based on 209,425 square feet of impermeable surface. Schaefer said he used an area calculator on to determine square footage.

He compared that to the Miracle Mile shopping plaza, which will pay $54,420 a year, according to his calculations. But, he argues, “businesses will pass the cost on to their customers through small increases in price” and “landlords will pass the cost on to their tenants.”

If the property owner of Miracle Mile shopping plaza passed the fee onto all of its 30 tenants, each would pay approximately $1,800.

Houses of worship don’t have that option, Schaefer said.

“… houses of worship are almost always standalone properties. They are not able to share their large parking lots with other businesses as a strip mall or multi-tenant business property would do,” Shaefer wrote.

In his article, Schaefer asks the municipality to slash the monthly $10 or the total amount due each year by 70 percent.

“This amount will still be a challenge for many, but it is a realistic number to meet, and in line with what commercial businesses will pay,” he wrote.

Councilman Ron Harvey said that is unlikely.

“The feds said you can charge a fee but it has to be the same for everybody,” Harvey said. “So unless we want to break a federal law, we really can’t do that.”

He said what all property owners could possibly expect, however, is an option to pay the annual fee in quarterly installments instead of all at once. Harvey also said credits could be available to property owners if they properly diminish the amount of impermeable surface their property has.

Schaefer said he was glad Harvey was considering different payment options.

“We’re trying to be understanding because we understand — it’s a chunk of change,” Harvey said.

Harvey said he and other municipal staff will attend a MIM monthly meeting in early September to answer questions about the MS4 program.

Residents will have an opportunity to learn about the minutia of the MS4 program and ask questions during a 7 p.m. meeting Sept. 6, at the municipal building.

Dillon Carr is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Dillon at 412-871-2325, [email protected] or via Twitter @dillonswriting.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.