I supported the creation of the stormwater utility, and I supported handing over the fee setting and the management of the stormwater utility to the Public Service Board. While it has been a bruising political battle, I still think it is the right thing to do for our community.
Here is what we were trying to accomplish in the creation of the stormwater utility:
1. One of the biggest deficiencies of the stormwater system under the City of El Paso was the regular and routine maintenance of the system. If culverts are clogged, if inlets are blocked by trash, if retention and detention basins have years and years of built up silt, the system loses its intended capacity to handle stormwater runoff. This is when flooding occurs. This is when property damage occurs. During the public hearings on the stormwater utility, the public indicated that they wanted a system that had dedicated resources to regularly maintain our existing stormwater system.
2. A second defiency of the system under the city was that there was not regular capital improvements made to the system. After the damage from Storm 2006, the City determined that at least 46% of the new projects that we had to undertake in order to fix the system had been on the books for at least 5 or more years, 20% of those (like Joyce Circle) had been on the books for 10 or more years. If we had taken on those projects when they were identified, we would not have seen the kind of damage we did in 2006 and the projects probably would not have cost us that much. During the public hearings on the stormwater utility, the public indicated that they wanted a system that had an annual amount available to begin chipping away at the millions of dollars in capital improvements needed to make the system function better.
3. The final consideration that was very important to me in representing an older area of the city that is more dense is that the system be funded based on a property's contribution to the need for stormwater management. If you own a sixteen acre asphalt car lot, you are contributing much more to the stormwater problem then if you own a a 10-story building on an acre of land. If you own a large home, you are contributing more to the stormwater problem than someone who owns a modest-sized home. Those who contribute more to the problem should pay more or find a way to offset their impact on the stormwater system.
So the stormwater utility got going in March. Since that time, we have seen more regular maintenance of the stormwater system. For example, five retention ponds up near Scenic Drive in my district have been de-silted for the first time in 15 years. The stormwater utility, under the Public Service Board, has begun a master planning process that will determine the priorities for capital improvements. Right now, the recommendations are being reviewed by a community advisory board and those final recommendations will come to the City Council for approval. Once approved, the stormwater utility will begin to make annual capital improvements to our stormwater system. The Public Service Board has responded appropriately to concerns about the fees being too high, but the fees are based on a property owner's contribution to the problem. I think there is still some work that needs to be done on fees, especially working with large property owners to find ways to reduce their impact on the system and thus their fees. I've suggested to the City Manager and will suggest the same to City Council that maybe we assign someone to work with property owners to identify ways to reduce their fees (ex. more landscaping, less asphalt).
So who knows what will happen on Tuesday, but I just wanted to refresh everyone's understanding of how we go here.
Meanwhile, Mr. Perez and the Joyce Circle neighborhood is happy. They told me that this will be the first time they will get to enjoy the rain. Mr. Perez told me once when I visited him during construction with the streets all dug up and workers everywhere and tractors moving dirt and laying pipe, "Susie, this is like Disneyland to me."
1 comment:
Hi Susie,
Hope you get to read this in time for next Tuesday's meeting. Oh Boy - one hardly knows where to begin...You obviously have realized that the deficiencies resulted from underfunding (under-mining)the Streets Dept. And from years of deplorable politics and poor leadership! The Streets Dept failed in this mission as would have any entity facing issues w/o money to employ a comprehensive plan. The Storm Water Utility is a joke & a rip off! I will never understand the insanity that resutled in the decison to "change horses in the middle of the stream" (pun intended). Why not fund the Streets Dept & let them do their job. I have personally seen Streets & Environmental Service workers doing the work that Stormwater is being paid to do - long after the Utility was formed. What's going on? That amounts to double & even triple taxation (without representation)when you consider property taxes, Env. fees, & now Storm Water fees! Jeez! THE COMMON SENSE APPROACH IS TO ALLOW EXEMPTIONS FOR PROPERTY OWNERS WILLING TO EMPLOY RAINWATER HARVESTING METHODS/LANDSCAPE DESIGNS THAT PROMOTE PROACTIVE PROPERTY OWNERSHIP & WATER CONSERVFATION!!!
Post a Comment