2011_0620_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I C v t staff has raised concerns with the Board regarding significantly higher level of support t -7 37 through our city wide storm water fees due to competing capital and operational needs of the 3, city. There is also an equity issue within both cities regarding how watersheds are funded. Both 39 Rice Creek Watershed District and Capital Region Watershed District have taxing authority and 4 ('-) collect approximately $,20 per $,100,000 property valuation to fund their operations and capital °11 programs. They collect the taxes only from the properties within their boundaries. These same 42 properties also pay a portion of their citywide storm water fees to fund the Grass Lake WMO. If 43 significantly higher amounts of revenue are required to fund the Grass Lake WMO the Council 44 may want to consider alternative funding options to address the equity issue between properties 45 in the two watershed districts and Grass Lake WMO properties. 46 The cities could revise their storm water rates to collect the annual Grass Lake WM0 budget 47 request only in the Grass Lake WMO boundary. This would eliminate the non Grass Lake 48 WMO properties from subsidizing this WMO in addition to paying watershed district taxes. The 49 cities have contributed approximately $,20,000-$,25,000 per year over recent years for Grass Lake WMO operations. The 2011 contribution is approximately $,37,000. The new draft Plan is �'i contemplating an annual budget of $,250,000-$,300,000 to carry out its activity. 52 Staff is supportive of the WMO operating more independently of the cities. In meeting today's �` 3 water regulations it is a difficult position to be both the regulator and the responsible party for 54 meeting those regulations. The local interaction and partnership with the WMO can still be 55 achieved with the current structure if the funding needs are addressed. 56 Karen Eckman the GL WMO Board Chair is scheduled to update the council on the current activity of the board and the funding challenges the updated management plan presents. Attached 58 is copy of the PowerPoint presentation she will be speaking from. 59 POLICY OBJECTIVE 6o The City Comprehensive Plan and Comprehensive Surface Water Management Plans support 6,i environmental stewardship and compliance with current water quality regulatory goals. 62 BUDGET IMPLICATIONS 63 The City of Roseville currently funds 50% of the Grass Lake WMO budget through its Storm 64 Utility Fund which is fee supported across the entire city. 65 STAFF RECOMMENDATION 66 Staff recommends that the City Council consider funding options for the Grass Lake WMO that 67 would collect the revenue from within the boundaries of the watershed. The setting of storm utility rates within the Grass Lake WMO area to reflect the additional annual support for the 69 WMO budget over and above the citywide storm utility fee would be relatively simple to '7 0 implement. '71 REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION '72 Discuss current Grass Lake WMO issues with the Grass Lake WMO Board. Prepared by: Duane Schwartz., Public Works Director Attachments: A. Joint Powers Agreement B. Board Presentation Materials C. Map Page 2 of 2