1. Stormwater Assessment Fees Board of Alderman Retreat May 21, 2011
Scott J. Smith, P.E.
Director of Public Works

2. History
2003 – Wentzville became regulated under Phase II of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and created a Stormwater Management Program (SMP) to comply.
As financial demands were forecasted, the City evaluated other funding options to support the Stormwater Management Plan.
2003 – New federal regulations under the Clean Water Act required a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Permit (MS4) for all operators of small stormwater systems in urbanized areas to reduce stormwater pollution. Permits are for five years and require measures for public outreach and education, public involvement and participation, stormwater pollution detection and elimination, construction site stormwater runoff control, post-construction (long term) stormwater management, and pollution prevention/good housekeeping in municipal operations. Failure to implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) would result in the City being penalized by the state and/or federal government.
2006 – At that time, the City was unable to comply with all requirements of the permit due to lack of staff and funding. The federal government had requested municipalities create a separate source of funding to pay for BMPs to reduce stream pollution and flooding.

3. History Cont’d
2007 – Presentations were provided to the Board and Alderman gave the utility and fees support. HDR inventoried properties to establish rates. Legal counsel performed a Hancock Amendment review.
Public meetings and articles highlighted the proposed utility. A policy manual, credit program, and ordinances were drafted and presented to the Board for consideration.
2007 – Legal counsel’s Hancock Amendment review found that… (closed record)
2008 – The draft Wentzville stormwater utility was set up. It included a credit program to build in flexibility and incentivize property owners to improve water quality on their own.

4. History Cont’d
MSD instituted a Stormwater User Charge based on impervious area to fund infrastructure projects. They removed a property tax (based on assessed value) for stormwater service. A lawsuit was filed against MSD. The Board tabled this topic until lawsuit resolution.
2010 – Judge invalidated the MSD stormwater fee, saying that MSD offered no new service; MSD unlawfully broadened the base of an existing tax or fee and should have gotten voters to approve the charge before instituting it.
2011 – MSD is appealing to the State Court of Appeals with arguments scheduled for late A decision is expected in early next year.
MSD instituted a stormwater user charge based on impervious area to fund stormwater infrastructure projects ($0.14/100 ft. impervious). They simultaneously removed a property tax for stormwater service ($0.10/$100 of assessed valuation). (Note: they have a combined storm and sanitary system and EPA lawsuit for excessive CSOs.) A lawsuit was filed against MSD. The Board tabled this topic until lawsuit resolution. In 2010, the judge ruled against MSD.
According to MSD’s Director of Engineering, Brian Hoescher, MSD’s appeal to the State Court of Appeals is scheduled for arguments near the end of the 2011 calendar year with a decision expected in early calendar year 2012.

5. Increasing Pressures for New Approaches
Growing Stormwater problems (nationally and locally)
Development of watersheds and suburban areas
Stream bank erosion
Increasing maintenance costs
Water quality degradation
NPDES Phase II Permit
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System—required in urban communities that operate a sewer system…
Water is getting to our creeks faster due to impervious surfaces, causing erosion. More pollutants are being carried with it instead of the water infiltrating back into the ground, filtering pollutants, and recharging our groundwater.

6. Effects of Stormwater Runoff
Water Quantity Impacts
Increased runoff, reduced infiltration
Changes in stream geomorphology
Impacts to aquatic habitat
Water Quality Impacts
Pollutant Sources
Pollutant Impairments (Peruque Creek is on the 303d List of Impaired Waters)
This translates to cost for taxpayers.
When streams degrade to the point that they are listed on the 303d, a Total Maximum Daily Load must be created to establish requirements for all users (developers, cities, etc.) to bring the creek back. This can be extremely costly to comply with ($18,000/acre for the Chesapeake Bay TMDL). Peruque Creek was listed in 2002 and is on the list for TMDL development for sediment.
As impervious area increases, so does the volume and velocity of water getting to creeks. This can cause erosion, flooding, and property damage. The City has spent $1.2 Million over the past three years funding stormwater capital improvement projects.

7. What are we trying to prevent?
Infrastructure Problems, Stream Bank Erosion and Incising (Bryan Ct.)
What is our SWMP trying to prevent?
Generally, studies show that the most effective way to prevent stormwater pollution is to prevent an increase in the volume of stormwater. This increase in volume and velocity of water getting to our creeks causes in-stream bank erosion, damaging property and infrastructure.
Explain incising.
Exposed, broken pipe caused by unstable banks and channel incising.

8. Incising: the deepening of the stream channel
Over time, the channel gets deeper, going from a two-stage shape to a U or V-shaped shape.

9. What are we trying to prevent?
Again, if we can reduce the volume of water and the sediment getting to our creeks, we will be reducing the pollutants that bind to it, causing water pollution.
Sediment in runoff.
(both lead to
Peruque Creek)

10. Household Chemicals.
(Missouri River)

11. Litter.
Old appliance

12. Fertilizer. Pesticides. Yard waste.
The City has education programs and outreach materials for our permit requirement to teach people about how to prevent pollution.
Residents can request the yard waste collection service as part of our waste contract. The city also promotes the free chemical collection program available through St. Charles County Recycle Works Central. This program collects hazardous waste from Wentzville residents April through October.

13. Why? Maintenance costs Repair costs Public health Drinking water
Recreation
Property value
Top picture: Construction Debris deposited in Belleau Creek
Bottom pic: Missouri River tourism

14. Costly Solutions Loss of Riparian Corridor
McKnight Storm Channel
(St. Louis County)
Boschert Creek at Elm Street
Gabion/Riprap Protection
$94,000 in 2000

15. Funding Sources in Other Cities
(2007)
O’Fallon, St. Charles County
General Revenue
St. Peters
1/10th-cent Local Parks and Stormwater Fund sales tax
St. Charles
Casino Gaming Funds were used for street and stormwater projects
St. Louis Metropolitan Sewer District (MSD)
Stormwater User Charge:
$0.24/month for single-family & commercial accounts
$0.18/month for multi-family accounts
Property Taxes in some areas: $0.10 per $100 assessed valuation
2008 Rate increase proposed based on impervious area
St. Peters’ fund was used to enforce Phase II regulations in addition to $857,789 from general revenue to finance stormwater management. In 2010 they passed a $40M Bond Issue to reconstruct detention basins, address creek erosion, clean streams, and meet stricter federal guidelines.
O’Fallon was evaluating a ½ cent sales tax for parks and stormwater to help pay for it’s NPDES program.
MSD also increased rates to make improvements to their combined sewer system as they were in violation of the Clean Water Act
A Wentzville parks and stormwater tax failed twice in 2005 and 2006.
Many communities were evaluating funding options (i.e. special assessments, bonding, impact fees, user fees, etc.). However, only general funds and stormwater user fees were able to support funding of the entire Stormwater Management Program. Stormwater user fees existed in the City of Arnold and some municipalities around the Kansas City area. The City hired HDR Engineering to evaluate the feasibility of a stormwater utility fee in Wentzville ($20,000 cost).

16. A stormwater utility was evaluated to help Wentzville address:
Fiscal constraints:
Funding Phase II
Expanded operations and maintenance
Unique challenges faced by our growing community.
A more fair way to fund stormwater services.

17. Stormwater Utility Fee Overview
Purpose: establish a fund dedicated solely to supporting the Stormwater Management Program for MS4 Permit Compliance
Must be an equitable, stable, flexible, and enterprise source of funding
To be equitable: it was based on stormwater runoff generation and the amount of impervious area that is present (each property’s contribution ) rather than property value.

18. Proposed Stormwater Utility Fee How is it measured? How is the fee set?
Assessment method
What is impervious cover?
Why is it used a measure of stormwater customer demand?
Techniques for Determination
Aerial interpretation/GIS
Rate Structure Design
Customer class rates based on ERU (Equivalent Residential Unit=2,350 sq. ft.)
Flat fee per residential dwelling
Uniform rate per commercial per sq ft
Techniques for determination.
Existing data
Aerial Interpretation
Sample verification
ERUs for equity

19. What are the rates in other Communities?
Survey of 206 Utilities
Mean monthly rate = $4.40/ERU
Median monthly rate = $4.20/ERU
Wentzville’s Proposed Rate
Monthly Rate - $1.10/ERU

20. In the mean time… Stormwater Budget Expenses
Since then…the City has spent $1.5 Million in capital and operating for stormwater management and intends on spending an additional $583,000 in FY2011.
NOTE: This table shows expenses from the stormwater fund only. There are other fund accounts that contribute to MS4 permit compliance (GIS, street sweeping, etc.) Therefore, this table underestimates true cost.
We did a full evaluation in 2009 and found that the City used an estimated $465,472 in general revenue funds to comply with permit requirements, or $17.89 per capita (from all operating funds, excluding $304,221 in capital projects).

21. Public Works Department
A Special Thank You to
Jamie Paige
for her insight and data collection for this presentation.

22. Public Works Department
Questions / Comments