MOUNT VERNON — The city’s Storm Water Advisory Committee held the third of four meetings to develop a recommendation for City Council on the adoption of a storm water utility in the city.
The plan is that at the next meeting, at 2 p.m. May 20, the committee will come to a consensus that will be presented to council in June. If approved by council, the utility would go into effect in January of 2020.
Much of the meeting was spent reviewing the need for a funding system to pay for storm water project, then looking at how much revenue would be generated at various fee levels, and whether large payers, like some businesses, schools, churches and other institutions with large areas of impervious surface should be able to earn credits.
It was hard to see the committee reaching a consensus on all the questions, but consultant Lisa Jeffrey is confident they’ll be able to reach a consensus at the next meeting and the present amorphous state of affairs is normal at this point in the process.
She did concede, however, that the process sometimes feels like trying to herd cats.
Most of those who spoke up at the meeting seemed to agree that the need for the utility is there, but the devil, they say, is in the details.
The state has been encouraging the creation of stormwater utilities to help control the amount of harmful pollutants that run off, untreated, into local streams from roads, parking lots, lawns and gardens and golf courses.
Currently, storm water projects are paid for out of Street Department funding. City officials have said that storm water projects, such as catch basin cleaning and repair, can eat up almost half the department budget. City Engineer Brian Ball explained that in the Parrott Street project, the water and wastewater line replacements were paid for by Water and Wastewater, but there was no outside source of funding (other than the overall project grants) for storm sewer installation. Similarly, he said, almost half the cost of a brick street reconstruction is for utility replacement.
The city is also unable to keep up with state-required inspections of construction sites for storm water control, both during construction and afterward, as well as inspections of retention ponds, required under the city's storm water permit from the state EPA.
The consultants have projected the most likely level of funding to be between $4 and $6 per month per “equivalent residential unit.” That won’t pay all the costs of storm water control and projects, but would provide a reliable funding source for at least basic programs and project planning, as well as matching funds for obtaining grants.
A $6 per month fee, for example, would bring in $1,439,352. Five dollars seems to be about average in cities which charge a stormwater utility fee; Newark, for example, charges $6.50.
In most cases, each resident pays for one ERU, which is based on the average amount of impervious surface on a residential lot. Customers who pay for multiples of that amount could possibly earn credits to reduce their bill. Examples of credits would be for building and maintaining their own retention ponds, education programs about controlling storm water (schools), or participating in things like the Kokosing River cleanup.
Several questions were posted for committee member to comment on. A look at some of the answers indicated the range of opinions.
On the cost, four said $5 or $6, one said $4 and one $2.
The maximum amount of credits that could be earned ranged from 20 percent to 80 percent, with several at 50 percent. Several expressed support for credits for water quality improvement or building their own detention ponds and for education.
One person wrote: “I don’t support credits. Schools teach to standards and they don’t need more piled on,” while another said “schools only.”
