HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-05-10 - AGENDA REPORTS - STORM WATER UTILITYAGENDA REPORT
City Manag
Item to be
Anthony J. Nisich�(S�
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
DATE: May 10, 1994
SUBJECT: STORM WATER UTILITY FEASIBILITY STUDY FINDINGS FOR THE
FEDERALLY -MANDATED NPDES PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
BACKGROUND
In August 1993, the City entered into a contract with the firm of Kato & Warren, Inc. to perform a
study to determine the City's resource needs for complying with the Federally -mandated National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System's (NPDES) permit requirements and to analyze alternative
funding sources.
We have met with the consultant on several occasions, and a draft of their findings was submitted
and circulated to Public Works, Parks and Recreation, Finance, and within Community Development
for review and comment. Based on this review, a second draft of the consultant's findings has
been prepared and accompanies this report.
To facilitate your review, the following is a summary of the Consultant's findings:
While the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, a division of the County Public Works
Department, owns and is responsible for the operation and maintenance of most of the storm
drainage system in Santa Clarita, as far as runoff quantity Is concerned. The City is
responsible for the quality of the runoff that reaches the system under the NPDES permit.
2. Under the NPDES permit, the City is responsible for Implementing as a minimum 13 actions,
called Best Management Practices or BMP's, as outlined in a letter from the California Regional
Water Quality Board. Essentially, the City is held responsible for all activities, up to the point
of runoff entry to the District's system, that could result in pollutants entering the Santa Clara
River or the groundwater.
3. To satisfy the known, NPDES requirements will require a significant increase in the level of
activity in Community Development and Public Works. Some of the identifiable actions include
the following:
Improved catch basin cleaning.
Increased street sweeping and litter control.
Inspection of all commercial properties.
Adoption and enforcement of more stringent regulations for new and existing
developments.
Development of a master drainage and water quality plan.
APPROVED
STORMWATER UTILITY FEASIBILITY STUDY FINDINGS
May 10, 1994 - Page 2
Development of an electronic mapping and data management and reporting system.
Increased recycling efforts for all types of commercial and residential hazardous
materials.
Implementation of an extensive public education program for homes and businesses to
reduce the entry of pollutants Into the runoff.
We expect additional requirements as the NPDES permit comes up for renewal In two to
three years.
4. As detailed by the Consultant, the basic program Is projected to cost $2,170,000 per year, on
average, over the next three years. The program will be phased In somewhat In the
1993-94 budget period but will need to be essentially In place by the end of the 1994-95 budget
year.
5. The use of the stormwater utility approach is recommended as the most flexible and effective
for the City's purposes. Implementation is a Council decision, and requirements for expensive
noticing, as required for an assessment district, can be avoided.
6. Based on an analysis of the billable property in the City, a stormwater utility service charge
of between $22 and $28 per year for a single-family dwelling would be required to raise the
needed revenue projected by the study. Commercial properties would pay a multiple of the
single-family rate. An exact service charge rate will be established, following adoption of the
Stormwater Utility Ordinance, using data from the L.A. County Assessor's files. We propose
to use the County system for computing Individual bills. At this time, the L.A. County Flood
Control District assesses all private property In the City at a rate comparable to the proposed
City stormwater charge.
7. We have two viable choices for billing the stormwater service charges:
Place the charge on the County tax statement. This is the easiest and least costly
approach because the system is already in place.
Creation of a City utility billing system. The problem is the only item on such a bill would
be the stormwater charge. This option could create confusion in the public's perception.
8. Given timely Council action, the stormwater utility charges could be on the County's
1994-95 tax statement.
9. There will be a need for a one-time expenditure of approximately $200,000 to Implement a
billing on the County tax statement. We will need to fund this up front but will be able to repay
the general fund within a few months of the 1994.95 tax statement mailing.
A proposal to raise new monies from the public is never popular, but we are under a mandate to
comply with the NPDES permit and there are some real benefits of such a program.
Our streets will be even cleaner, and we will have an Increased maintenance capability.
We will be protecting the Santa Clara River, the ground water, and the environment.
STORMWATER UTILITY FEASIBILITY STUDY FINDINGS
May 10, 1994 - Page 3
Our recycling program will be enhanced through the increased public education efforts
aimed at keeping toxic materials out of the drainage system.
Our public outreach will be Increased through the Increase of public education efforts.
The stormwater fund could participate in the Santa Clara River project, City parks, and a
number of other City activities now exclusively funded by the General Fund.
The City Image will be enhanced through the public education program and the fact that
we will be doing things to improve environmental quality.
We will probably avoid future claims for stormwater damage by making needed
Improvements and exerting better control over new development.
Implementation of a stormwater utility requires Council approval of an ordinance. The proposed
Ordinance is attached for your consideration.
Staff has presented preliminary findings at a Public Information Group Meeting on March 28, 1994
and at a Council Study Session on March 30, 1994. The comments from the public generally
supported many of the requirements of the program such as increased household hazardous waste
round -ups, public education, monitoring enforcement and clean groundwater.
The Ordinance is being Introduced at this meeting and will continue to be heard as part of the City's
'94-'95 budget review and approval process because of the fiscal Impacts of complying with the
NPDES Federal mandate.
RECOMMENDATION
Introduce Ordinance, waive further reading and continue as part of the '94-'95 budget adoption
process.
ATTACHMENT
Ordinance No. 94.7
Study and Findings
NED:hds
coundnatmm.ned
ORDINANCE No. 94-7
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE SANTA CLARITA MUNICIPAL CODE BY
ADDING CHAPTER 15.50 TO TITLE 15 ESTABLISHING STORM DRAINAGE
SERVICES AS AN UTILITY ENTERPRISE OF THE CITY.
The City Council of the City of Santa Clarita does hereby ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. Chapter 15.50 of Title 15 of the City of Santa Clarita Municipal Code is
hereby added to read as follows:
CHAPTER 15.50
STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY ENTERPRISE FUND
SECTIONS
15.50,01 Findings and Intent
15.50.020 Definition of Terms
15.50.030 Storm Drainage Utility Enterprise Fund Created
15.50.040 Setting of Fees and Charges
15.50.050 Billing of User Charges
15,50.060 Collection of User Charges
15.50.070 Statutory Public Meeting
15.50.080 Provision of Data
15.50.090 Appeal to City Council
Section 15 50 010 Findings and Intent
(a) The City of Santa Clarita is faced with increasing costs for the operation,
maintenance, and improvement of water quality related to its storm drainage facilities.
LAX:890982 1
STORMWATER UTILITY FEASIBILITY STUDY FINDINGS
May 10, 1994 - Page 3
Our recycling program will be enhanced through the increased public education efforts
aimed at keeping toxic materials out of the drainage system.
Our public outreach ill be Increased through the Increase of public education efforts.
The stormwater fund co d participate in th/Santa a River project, City parks, and a
number of other Cityactl 'ties now exclusiby the General Fund.
The City Image will be enhan ed through tucation program and the fact that
we will be doing things to Imp ve environity.
We will probably avoid future laims fter damage by making needed
improvements and exerting better ntrol ovelopment.
Implementation of a stormwater utility requires ncil approval of an ordinance. The proposed
Ordinance is attached for your consideration. x
Staff has presented preliminary findings at a
and at a Council Study Session on March
supported many of the requirements of the p
round -ups, public education, monitoring eq
The Ordinance is being Introduced at
'94-'95 budget review and approval 1
NPDES Federal mandate.
RECOMMENDATION
Introduce Ordinance, waive
process.
ATTACHMENT
Ordinance No. 94-7
Study and Findings
NED:hds
council ato mxwd
PJ b1 c formation Group Meeting on March 28, 1994
994. The comments from the public generally
:)gram su as increased household hazardous waste
)rcement a clean groundwater.
Ming and will ntinue to be heard as part of the City's
because of the fiscal impacts of complying with the
reading and continue as part\of the '94-'95 budget adoption
(b) The City is required to undertake an extensive program to improve the water
�4 quality of its runoff in the near future under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System permitting process (NPDES).
LuC:89098.2
(c) The City Council finds that current economic conditions will reduce funding for
storm drain maintenance, thereby subjecting property within the City to damage from the
storm and surface water runoff.
(d) An improperly maintained storm drainage system can create problems such as
increased risk of flooding, personal injury and property damage.
(e) All developed real property and, to a lesser extent, undeveloped property, benefits
from the existence of the City's storm drainage system because these categories of
property contribute storm and surface water runoff to the City's storm drainage system
as a result of the impervious and semi -impervious nature of the property.
(f) Existing City funds and funding sources are insufficient to fund the identified
needs for operation and maintenance of the storm drainage system.
(g) Municipalities are authorized under California Government Code SECT ION54300
-q aq, . (the State Revenue Bond Law of 1941) to establish fees and charges for funding
storm drainage improvements and the operation and maintenance thereof. Fees for storm
drainage maintenance and improvement are also authorized under the California Health
and Safety Code, SECTION 5471.
(h) The City Council finds that a need exists for additional funding for the storm and
surface water management program of the City and that the establishment of a storm
drainage utility enterprise with user fees and charges is the most equitable method of
providing this funding.
(i) The amount of the proposed storm drainage utility enterprise user fees shall not
exceed the reasonable cost of providing the services, facilities or regulatory activity for
which the fee is charged.
0) In order to provide for the safety of the residents of the City and protect property
in the City from the damage associated with flooding and to meet the water quality
requirements of the NPDES permit issued to the City by the California Water Quality
Control Board, it is necessary to design, construct, operate, maintain, improve and
replace storm drainage facilities which collect storm and surface water runoff and convey
and treat such runoff in a safe manner to an acceptable point of discharge. In order to
properly fund such facilities and activities, the City Council has determined that it is
necessary to impose on all properties in the City a user charge for storm drainage
service.
2
Section 15.50,020. Definition of Terms
For purposes of this ordinance, the following terms shall have the ascribed meanings:
(a) "User" shall mean the person obligated to pay the Storm Drainage User Charge
or other fees.
(b) "City„ shall mean the City of Santa Clarita.
(c) "Engineer" shall mean the City Engineer of the City of Santa Clarita or his or her
designee.
(d) "Develolmd Parcel" shall mean any
from its natural state by the construction,
except public streets and highways.
lot or parcel of land which has been altered
creation, or addition of Impervious Area,
(e) "Equivalent Drainage Residential Unit (DRU)" shall mean the basic unit for the
computation of the Fee, and is based upon the average amount of Impervious Area of a
Single Family Residential Parcel.
(f) "Impervious Area" shall mean any part of any Parcel that has been modified by
the action of any person in a manner which reduces the land's natural ability to absorb
and hold Storm and Surface Water. This includes the grading of the property and/or
creation of any hard surface area which either prevents or retards the entry of water into
the soil mantle, and/or the hardening of an existing surface which causes water to flow
at an increased rate. By way of example, common Impervious Areas include, but are
not limited to, roof tops, walk -ways, patios, driveways, parking lots or storage areas,
concrete or asphalt paving, gravel roads, or any cleared, graded, paved, graveled, or
compacted surface or paved earthen materials used for, vehicular travel, or areas covered
with surfaces which similarly impede the natural infiltration of surface water into soil
mantle.
(g) "Multi -Family Residential ProMM" shall mean all residentially zoned, Developed
Parcels contained two (2) or more dwelling units. This includes apartments,
condominiums, timeshares, hotels and motels.
(h) "Non -Residential Property" shall mean all Developed Parcels zoned or used for
commercial, industrial, retail, governmental or institutional uses.
(i) "Parcel" shall mean the smallest separately segregated lot, unit, or plot of land
having an identified owner, boundaries, and surface area which is documented for
property tax purposes and given an Assessors' parcel number by the Los Angeles County
Assessor.
(j) "Land Use Code" shall mean the land use code utilized by the Los Angeles
County Assessor for the purpose of identifying the existing land use for each "Parcel"
of land identified in the Assessor's property records.
(k) "Single -Family Residential Prooerty: shall include all Developed Parcels
developed with one single-family detached housing unit.
(1) "Storm and Surface Water" shall mean water occurring on the surface of the land
from natural conditions such as rainfall, regardless of whether such water is falling or
flowing onto the land in question.
(m) "Storm and Surface Water Control Facilities- shall mean all manmade structures or
natural watercourse facility improvements, developments, properties or interest therein,
which are or have been made, constructed or acquired for the conveyance of Storm and
Surface Water runoff to improve the quality of controlling, or protecting life or property
from any storm, flood, or surplus waters.
(n) "Storm Drainage Facilities" shall mean the Storm and Surface Water drainage
systems comprised of Storm and Surface Water Control Facilities and any other natural
features which store, control, treat, and/or convey Storm and Surface Water. Storm
Drainage Facilities shall include all natural and manmade elements used to convey storm
water from the first point of impact with the surface of the earth to a suitable receiving
body of water or location internal or external to the boundaries of the City. Storm
Drainage Facilities include all pipes, appurtenant features, culverts, streets, curbs,
gutters, pumping stations, channels, streams, ditches, wetlands, detention/retention
basins, ponds and other Storm and Surface Water conveyance and treatment facilities,
whether public or private.
(o) "Runoff Factor" shall mean the factor identified for each "Parcel" of land by the
Los Angeles County Flood Control District for purposes of assigning a degree of
imperviousness to said parcel.
Section 15.50 030 Storm Drainage Utility Enterprise Fund Created
(a) Pursuant to State law the City hereby declares its intention to designate the City's
storm drainage system as a utility, enterprise activity of the City to be supported all or
in part by the imposition of user charges on all parcels of property within the City which
discharge storm water to the City's storm drainage facilities or are otherwise served by
the City's storm drainage facilities.
(b) The City hereby establishes a special fund within the City's fiscal system to be
known as "The Storm Drainage Utility Enterprise Fund," herein after referred to as the
Fund.
l , 19098.2 4
(c) All revenues from storm drainage user charges and other storm drainage related
fees and charges as may be adopted by Resolution shall be deposited to the Fund.
(d) Expenditures .from the Fund shall be limited to those expenditures for the
improvement, repair, operation, maintenance and administration of the storm drainage
facility as defined by the City Engineer and pursuant to the terms of the City's NPDES
permit. Provided that, the Fund may transfer to the General Fund of the City, the cost
of the Storm Drainage Utility's reasonable and proportionate share of the cost of general
city government support of the utility not covered by direct payments from the Fund.
Section 15 50 040 Setting of Fees and Charges
(a) The City Council shall by resolution establish a system of user charges for all
parcels in the City.
(b) To the extent practicable, user charges shall be based on each parcel's expected
rate and volume of storm water runoff. The runoff factors established by the Los
Angeles County Flood Control District shall be an acceptable measure of the expected
rate and volume of storm water runoff from a parcel. Said fees shall not exceed the
reasonable cost of providing the services, facilities or regulatory activity for which the
fee is charged.
(c) The City Council may by resolution establish a charge for the connection of any
parcel to the City's storm drainage facilities to reflect that parcel's fair share of the cost
of the existing City storm drainage facilities serving the parcel.
(d) The City Manager shall establish, in accordance with Chapter 3.32 of the Santa
Clarita Municipal Code, appropriate fees for the review and inspection of storm drainage
facilities proposed and constructed by private development.
(e) The City Council may by resolution establish a system of charges and fees for the
inspection of non-residential parcels for purposes of establishing compliance with the City
Code and NPDES requirements related to the protection of storm water quality and may
also establish a system of fines and/or penalties for the violation of the City's storm
water quality standards.
Section 15,50,050 Billing of User Charges
(a) The initial billing of storm drainage utility user charges shall be by means of the
Los Angeles County Treasurer -Tax Collector tax statement and shall be a single annual
charge based on the user charge for each parcel.
Lux:99W8,2 5
(b) The City Council may at any time elect to bill all or part of the parcels in the City
on a City utility billing statement at such time and frequency as the City Council may
deem appropriate.
Section 15.50.060 Collection of User Charges
(a) The storm drainage user charge shall be an obligation of the record owner of each
parcel billed for storm drainage service. The charges shall be due and payable on the
date the bill is issued, and shall be considered delinquent if payment is not received
within thirty (30) days of the date, the payment is due and payable. The City shall
impose a ten percent (10%) non-payment penalty on all delinquent accounts. An
additional one percent (l %) penalty shall be imposed for each additional thirty (30) day
period the amount remains unpaid. If the bill is not paid within sixty (60) days of the
date the payment is deemed delinquent, the amount owning shall constitute a lien against
the Parcel receiving the service, and the City shall include a statement on the bill
notifying the.Assessee of the lien as provided for in Health and Safety Code Section
5473.11, The lien shall remain in effect for three (3) years unless extended, and shall
be released upon payment of the delinquent amount plus all penalties associated
therewith.
Provided that, so long as the City shall bill the storm drainage user charges on
the Los Angeles County tax statement the date when payment is due shall correspond to
the due date of County tax payments.
Section 15 50 070 Statutory Public Meeting,
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66018, the City Clerk shall
cause notice to be provided as set out in Government Code Section 6062a, and the City
Council periodically, at least annually, shall receive at a regularly scheduled meeting oral
and written presentations concerning fees and charges proposed to be increased or added.
Such notice, oral and written presentation, and public meeting shall be provided prior to
the City Council taking any action on any new or increased fees or charges. At least one
such public hearing shall be held annually, in conjunction with the City annual budget
process and hearing.
089098.2 6
Section 15.50,080. Provision of Data.
Pursuant to the California Government Code, at least ten (10) days prior to the
required public hearing set out "herein, the City Manager shall make available to the
public appropriate data indicating the cost, or estimated cost required to support the fees
and charges for which changes are proposed to be made or fees or charges imposed. The
City Manager also shall provide a summary of the present fee and charge schedules and
those proposed at such annual public hearing. A general explanation of such changes
also shall be published per the requirements of Government Code Section 6062a.
Section 15,50,090, Anneal to City Council
(a) Any person who feels that any fee or charge determined and set is in excess of
the costs reasonably to be borne by their property, or that such fee or charge has been
reviewed prior to or has not been reviewed within the review schedule as set out herein,
may appeal in writing to the City Council.
(b) Such appeal shall be placed on the agenda of the next available Council meeting
after receipt of such appeal and heard at the next regularly scheduled Council meeting.
Any changes to any fees or charges approved by the City Council shall take effect
immediately upon hearing by the City Council unless ordered otherwise by the City
Council.
SECTION 2. SEVERABIIITY. If any portion of this Chapter is found to be
unconstitutional or invalid, the City Council hereby declares that it would have enacted
the remainder of this Chapter regardless of the absence of any such invalid part.
SECTION 3. FEES AND CHARGES SUPERSEDED. The fees and charges established
by this Chapter shall supersede all previously established fees or charges for the same
regulation, product or service, and all such previous fees and charges are superseded on
the effective date of the adoption of the Resolution of Fees and charges as provided in
Section 15.50.040 hereof.
SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force
thirty (30) days after its passage.
SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Ordinance and shall
cause the same to be published in the same manner prescribed by law.
LAx:89098.2 7
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
CITY OF LOS ANGELES
1994.
I, , City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. = was regularly introduced and placed upon its first
reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of 19 . That
thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council
on the day of , 19_, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
Q'E--, '.89098.2
CITY CLERK
CITY OF SANTA LLARITA
STORMWATER UTILITYFEASIBILITY STUDY
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NOA
STORMWATER PROGRAM FUNDING
Prepared By:
KATO & WARREN, INC.
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
In Association With:
WILLDAN ASSOCIATES
VENTURA, CALIFORNIA
April 4, 1994
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
STORMWATER UTILITY FEASIBILITY STUDY
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NO. I — STORMWATER PROGRAM FUNDING
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 fNTRODUCTION.... ............................... _ ..
1
2.0 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND FUNDING REQUIREMENTS .........
1
2.1 Background ......................... ...... ... , ......
1
2.2 NPDES Requirements ................ , , ...... - ...: . . ......
... 2
2.3 Stormwater Management .............. ........................
5
23.1 Management ......:....:..............:..............
7
2.3.2 Regulation of Development .............. ...: , :::. _ .......
7
2.3.3 Operation and Maintenance . . ................ .... . .......
K
2.3.4 Capital. Improvements ....... . ... ... . ....................
y
2.3.5 Water Quality/NPDES ................... _ .
. , , IO
2.4 Stormwater Funding Requirements .................. . ... ......
.. . I 1
2.4.1 Introduction .... ................... . . ...............
1 I
2.4.2 Personnel .................... : . ....... . ...........
l t
2.4.3 NPDES Requirements .........:....... I ......... , .....
13
2.4.4 Total Funding Requirements . ............................
16
3.0 STORMWATER FUNDING OPTIONS ....:. . ..:.. .....: . ............
Iy
3.1 General Fund ..................... . — .......... — -- - - -
- - :. 19
3.2 Shared Review with the Los Angeles Flood Control District .. _ ...
.. 20
3.3 Creation of an Assessment District ............
3.4 Creation of a Stormwater Utility ............. . ...................,
. 21
4.0 STORMWATER UTILITY ANALYSIS . . ........ : : . . . .:.............
_ 22
4.1 Description --- - - - - - --- - .................... ........
, 22
4.2 Sources of Funding . ... .....................................
23
42.1 Service Charges .:. ........ .................... ......
23
4.2.2 Permitting and Inspection Fees ...........................
23
4.2.3 System Development Charges .............................
24
4.2.4 Exactions .......... _ ..................... • ........
24
4-3 Computation of Service Charges ......... ..........
25
4 3.1 Basis of Charges .........
'
4.3.2 Determining Impervious Area ............................
25
4.3.3 Estimated Service Billing Units ....... .
4.3.4 Service Charge Rates .:. , .. .
4.4 Method of Billing ........ . ................. . .............
. . 27
4.4.1 Placing Service Charge on the County Tax Statement , .. , .......
28
4.4.2 Establish a City Billing System ........ ....................
'
4.4.3 Conclusion ...... ............... . ..
. .. 31
4.5 Implementation ... , .. . .. . .. ....... ; ...... _ ...............
31
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
STORMWATER UTILITY FEASIBILITYSTUDY
'TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NO. I — STORMWATER PROGRAM FUNDING
TABLES
Table 1. Stormwater Management Work Program Assessment- Existing Level of Effort
fi
Table 2. Stormwater Capital Improvement Needs ......... ...... to
Table 3. Stormwater Management Work Program Assessment - Suggested Level of Effort
1_
Table 4. NPDES Compliance Requirements ...:....... ......... 14
Table 5. Stormwater Funding Requirements at Full Implementation .......... _ 17
Table 6. Estimated Stormwater Annual Costs ........... ...... . . . • • • .. 19
Table'7. Cost to Bill Stormwater Utility Charges on County Tax Statement 29 `.
Table K. Cost to Bill Stormwater Utility - Charges by Means of a New City Billing System30
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Thi Technical Memorandum No. I incorporates the; findings and conclusions, to date, from the
work accomplished under Task 1, Z, 3 and 4 of the. study .scope of serv'ices.,
The tudy work plan calls for a series of discussions; based on issues raised in this Technical
Memorandum No. I after which an ordinance will be prepared for Council action in
implementing the recommendations of this study and the City staff.
In this Technical Memorandum No. I three basic topics are discussed,.
Stormwater management and funding requirements
Funding; options for Stormwater
Applicability of the Stormwater utility concept..
The following discussion is intended as a summary of the findings and conclusions developed
during the study. For certain issues addressed in the memorandum, separate: issue papers have
been developed that provide additional detail.
2.0 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND FUNDING REQUIREMENTS
2.1 Background
In accordance with the Federal Clean Water Act of 1972,,the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) is required to establish regulations 'setting forth National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit standards. The enactment of 1987 amendments
to the Federal Clean Water. Act of 1972 imposes permit requirements for, discharge of storin
waters. The Act allows the EPA to delegate its NPDES permitting authority to states with an
approved environmental regulatory program. The State of California is one of the delegated
,states.
The responsibility for implementing various NPDES permits in the State of California has been
delegated to the State Department of Water Resources. The State administrates NPDES authority
through its nine Regional Boards. In anticipation of the issuance of the Federal regulations, the
Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW), together with other cities, applied
to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB) for an "early" permit. On
June 18, 1990, the NPDES Permit for Stormwater/Urban Runoff Discharge in Los Angeles
County was issued. Los Angeles County is the designated "Principal Permittee" with the cities
and other entities with large and/or significant drainage areas under their control being given the
opportunity to become Co-Perirtittees,
Kai,,& warren. Inc: .. 4/1/94, 1
k�VhnmdiniaVechni,l and
In ;May 1992, the City provided the. County with a letter of intention to participate as a Co-
Permittee with the County in the application of an NPDES permit. The City of Santa Clarita is
one of 45 other co-permittee agencies that have filed a letter of intention to participate In the:
County' NPDES Permit No. CA0001654,
The City of Santa Clarita is in omewhat of a unique situation with regard to stormwater
management: Being a relatively new city most of the street and drainage systems were developed
during the process of land development under the supervision of Los Angeles County. Both
before and after incorporation the ownership of drainage facilities, once constructed, have been
transferred to the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD). However, in the past
two years the LACFCD has not been processing title transfer requests in a timely manner. As
a result, there are 228 storm drains; in the City, which are maintained by the County and 45
storm drains that are still the responsibility of the developer for maintenance. Many of the
privately maintained storm drains will probably become the City's at some future time. The City
streets, which are a part of the primary storm drainage system, are City property. The City
contracts with Los Angeles County and private contractors for much of the maintenance of the
streets. The storm drainage catch basins in the street present a mix of ownership and
responsibility with some owned by LACFCD and others by the. City. City crews perform
maintenance on the majority of these catch basins -
The national stormwater permitting program (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System;
or NPDES) is administered by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (WQCB). I
The WQCB has issued an NPDES permit to Los Angeles County as the lead agency for the
Cities within the County. The NPDES permit provides for a phasing in of permit requirements.
Santa Clarita is in a category shown as Phase III which took effect on July 1, 1993. Concern
over the cost of compliance with the NPDES requirements prompted the City to undertake this
stormwater utility feasibility study.
2.2 NPDES Requirements
Los Angeles County and the WQCB have agreed to a five year NPDES permit and work
program. The activities to be performed by each agency within the County are as follows:
Year One - Beginning July 1, 1993
Define drainage areas and prepare mapping and database.
Determine existing best management practices (BMPs) to enhance quality
of stormwater.
Develop early action BMPs.
Plan for development of Stormwater/Urban Runoff Monitoring Program in
coordination with the County -
Year Two
Implement monitoring Program.
Implement early action BMPs
Develop additional BMPs
Km,, k wane... Inc. .-.4/IN4
h:Amntxlah[aV echno I l Po
Year 'Three
Develop procedures to detect and eliminate illegal discharges and disposal
practices to the maximum extent practicable (MEP).
Develop measures to control pollutants in runoff from construction site..
Evidence of progress in implementing early action BMPs and additional
BMPs.
Evidence of progress in detecting and eliminating illegal discharges and
illicit disposal practices.
Evidence in progress in controlling pollutants in surface runoff from
construction sites.
Compliance with these permit requirements will certainly require an expenditure of .staff and
resources on the part of the City. In certain cases additional code provisions will need to be
adopted in order to allow the: City to enforce control provisions and best management practices
(BMPs).
In order to clarify what level of effort regarding BMPs would be considered as compliance with
the NPDES permit the WQCB issued a letter of January 11, 1993 that listed 13 BMPs as a
minimum requirement for all agencies: These were:
1. Establish or improve an areawide catch basin stenciling program with a universal
stencil to discourage dumping, discarding, and/or discharge of pollutants, carrier,
and/or debris into storm drainage systems countywide. A universal stencil will be
most effective. The City of Los Angeles intends to develop a public Service
announcement with the universal stencil to be shown countywide. This would
prevent any possible confusion from seeing different stencils as one travels from
municipality to municipality within the county,
2. Develop programs to promote, publicize and facilitate public reporting of illegal
discharges and/or dumping. An (800) telephone number may be beneficial. This
telephone number should be put into operation as soon as possible.
3. Adopt a runoff control ordinance requiring the use of BMPs during and after
construction such as that of the City of Santa Monica for the reduction of runoff
and pollutants leaving a property or properties.
4. Augment public education and outreach programs with regard to catch basins and
storm drainage systems and their intended purpose.
5. Provide regular catch basin cleaning when and where needed..
6. Increase cleaning frequency of and number of roadside trash receptacles in areas
r where needed.
Kato & Warren_ Inc. - 4/1/94 3
b k:mtact:,laileehno 1:. 1 rd
7. Increase street sweeping in areas where needed_
S, Discourage the improper disposal of litter; lawn/garden clippings, and pet feces
into the street or areas where runoff may carry these pollutants to the storm
drainage system:
y. hnplement facility inspections of auto repair shops_ auto body shops, auto parts
and accessory .chops, gasoline stations, and restaurants as the accumulation of
pollutants, garbage, and/or debris tends to concentrate in these areas. These
inspections may effectively prevent the discharge of chemicals, materials, and/or
debris into the street and/or storm drainage system.
10. Encourage owners and persons in control of homes or businesses to remove dirt,
rubbish, and debris from their sidewalks and alleys which may contribute
pollutants to urban runoff..
11. Encourage recycling of oil, glass, plastic, and other materials to prevent their
improper disposal into the storm drainage system. Each municipality should
insure that receptacles are provided in strategic areas.
12. Encourage the proper disposal of Household Hazardous Wastes to prevent the
improper disposal of such materials to the storm drainage system. Each
municipality should establish disposal centers in strategic areas.
13. Encourage the proper use and conservation of water.
Except for items I, 5, 6, and 7, which are maintenance activities, all of the other listed BMPs
involve public education and outreach to homes and businesses in the City. Based on experience
in cities that have had active stonnwater management and water quality programs in effect for
some years, this public education and outreach program is a significant effort since it ultimately
involves direct contact with most businesses on a routine basis to insure that they,are not only
informed but also comply with BMPs and CityCodes related to stormwater quality.
One of the unknowns at this time is the degree of water quality monitoring the City will be
required to undertake beginning in Year TWO. In accordance with the NPDES permit, the County
is responsible for providing water quality monitoring for County unincorporated areas, as well
as for the various agencies. The County's approved Water Quality Monitoring Plan only
addresses the quality of runoff on a large scale. This proposed monitoring will not be sufficient
for the City to detect, identify and abate illegal and illicit discharges to the City's storm drainage
system.
In order to implement future Best Management Practices, the City will need to develop and
implement some type of monitoring system. Levels of stormwater monitoring range from
elaborate fixed location sampling facilities down to simple visual observations by existing and/or �' }
supplemental field staff. For the purposes of the City's NPDES program, it is highly '•...
Kato & Warren, Ine, - 4/1N4 4
1, \ antnc[anta\ieCh1w I:Ird
recommended that a -system of visual monitoring as well as a grab sample testing be developed
as part of the City's NPDES compliance efforts. It is hoped that the monitoring now underway
by Los Angeles County will be sufficient to satisfy current NPDES requirements. There is also
some discussion underway between EPA and the WQCB to modify and/or reduce monitoring
requiientcnts.
Much of the work involved in NPDES compliance 1s considered simply good Stormwater
management. The costs associated with good stormwater management and NPDES compliance
are detailed in the following sections.
2.3 Stormwater Management
Stormwater Management even without NPDES requirements requires a level of effort very
similar to the management of other public utilities, i.e.: water, sewers, solid waste. However.
since Santa Clarita doe's not provide utility services at this time not all of the normal utility
functions are in place in the City organization.
Stormwater management functions can be divided into five categories:
Management
Regulation of Development
Operation and Maintenance
Capital Improvements
Water Quality (NPDES)
Table I Lists some of the program elements or services provided under each category and an
estimated level of effort currently budgeted for Stormwater management including early NPDES
permit compliance efforts.
Kano& Warren., Inc. 4/1/94 5
h \.anaclanlaV echno I J rd
Table l
City of Santa Clarita - Storinwater Management Work Prograrn As esment
Existing Level of Effort
Service
Current
Staff
Program
Added
Total
f'ategnry
Activity
(FFE)
.Additions
staff (Fi E)
Sta1P(Fr Et
51.:1�A<1E'y1ES'7:
Pohcv [)"dopnlun
Pn-,ram Planning
'Coy Engr. PT
1145
}IDES (,nnpILino
Pe....nn.I Devdul+mwnt
I Staff, FT
():25
Sdwduling
_
RuJ_•6ng
(1.5
Finafin g/(1 rant,
RE(:L:LATI( )N OF DEVELOPMENT
Standards/Pnnxdares
Engincsnng Support to Maintenance
City Engr. PT"
0.25
Plan Rcvmw
Public Inedace
Comm
PCnnitnng
Development
0.5
Inspection.
Etdbrcenient
0.75
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
-
Platuling
Foretitarl:. PT
0.5
inventory
Frew, PT
1.5
Inspeetnnt
Supennteudem
0.25
Teaing
Support
0.25
.Scheduhng
Surface C7eatung
Open System
Clo,ed System
Pnvale Detention Systems
Minor C'un vucuon
Repatr/Replacemem
Training
_
Emergency Responses
2.?.
CAPITAL: IMPROVEMENTS
Comprehensive. Basin Plans
City Engr, PT
9.5
Basin Water Quality Planning
Engrs. PT
0.5
Public Involvement
Technician, PT
Engmeenng/Dexrgn
Environmental Assessment
Project Management
Construction Ridding
Cnnstmcuon Management
Right -of -Way
_
Capital Construction
LQ
WATER QUALITY/PUBLIC INFORMATION
Planning
City Engr, PT-
t1I
N'PDES Compliance
I .Staff. PT
0.15
NonitoringfTesting
Inspection
Enforcement
Public Education
Public Contact
Training
_
Emergency Response
E25.
Hazardous Material Programs
STORM WATER STAFFING (FTE)
5.0
Kai,, Fc W irren, Inc. - 7/1194
In the following pages we will address each stormwater management category in terms of
exlsting activity, desirable levels, of activity and suggested changes to existing efforts.
2.3.1 Management
Current Level of Activity
During this first year of the NPDES permit period, the City of Santa Clarita stormwater
management activity has been focused in the City Engineer's office and involves time of the city
engineer and of an associate engineer part-time. Since much of the drainage system is owned
and maintained by the LACFCD, the City has not had to exert the same level of supervision that
would normally be required. This is changing with the advent of the NPDES requirements, The
City is facing, a greatly increased need for stormwater management.
Desirable Level of Activity
If the City were to adopt a more proactive stormwater management program, it would appear to
be desirable to have someone assigned as the City's Stormwater Engineer or Manager. Such :a
person would then be able to direct and organize all planning, NPDES permit compliance and
other activities related. to the stormwater system to ensure a focused effort. For the activity
anticipated for Santa Clarita short of the City assuming the facilities currently owned by the
f' 'l LACFCD this is probably the extent of the management structure which would be necessary
together with perhaps a technician or an assistant to work on other aspects of stormwater as they
do pertain to the City. The same staff assigned to management tasks for stormwater would be
able to function to directly manage and be involved in other categories.
Suggested Activity Level
Assuming a stormwater program is to be adopted it would be our suggestion that a full-time
drainage engineer be assigned to the City Engineer's staff together with one assistant and the,
necessary, secretarial support.
2.3.2 Regulation of Development
Current Level of Activity
The review of development proposals and the work with development regarding drainage is the
responsibility of the Community Development Department, again focused in the City Engineer's
and Building and Safety offices and in Planning. No one is assigned full time as the stormwater
reviewer per :tie, but several people share the dudes depending on the workload.
Kaw A warren,. inc, - 4/1/94 %
6:\.an iaclania`acchnu 1.7 rd
Desirable Level of Activity.
One of the key areas that wilt require additional work in the future under the NPDES program
will be the control of runoff and erosion from new development. In this regard there would
certainly xeem to be a need for a full-time engineerwho could work with development on
drainage planning and for at least one and perhaps two field inspectors who could regularly
inspect work under construction, both development and general construction including streets to
inure that the water quality controls implicit in the NPDES permit are being properly enforced.
It is still possible that additional engineering support and technician support will be necessary
from time to timebut it, is assumed that: if so most of this cost would be paid for by the
development industry as part of their permitting and consequently would not be considered a cost
to the stonnwater program.
Suggested Activity Level
It would be our suggestion that the City designate an individual as the stonnwater review person
and that person would report to the stormwater program manager. In addition at least one field
inspector should be on staff and available, This person might work in both regulation of
development and in operations and maintenance.
2.3.3 Operations and Maintenance
Current Level of Activity
The City currently uses their small maintenance group to perform all services related to small
street repairs and the cleaning of catch basins and ditches as well as response to any problems
created during rainfall events. Since the City does not have motorized equipment for the cleaning
of catch basins at this time, :such as avactor, all work in this regard is done by hand which is
a time consuming process and does not meet water quality requirements.
The City contracts for street cleaning services. A new contract has recently been negotiated that
will increase street cleaning frequency to weekly in commercial areas.
Desirable Level of Activity
Together with the inspection that would be undertaken either in operation and maintenance or
under regulation of development there is also a need for someone to inspect the drainage :system
to be sure that it is fully capable of operating into its full capacity in the event of a storm
condition.. While it can be assumed that the LACFCD is doing this, the truth of the matter is that
experience has shown that more needs to be done. Within the City's current maintenance
operations it would be desirable to be able to create a drainage crew that would have the
necessary equipment to clean catch basins on a much more frequent basis and to also inspect and
clean culverts and road crossings and also pipes and ditches.
Amu & Waaen, Inc,'- 4/1/94 H
rr\ antadantaVechixr 13rd
As a part of this activity the issue of street cleaning also needs to be, considered. Surface
cleaningis one of the 13 BMP requirements of the NPDES permit. The new City street sweeping
contract improves on the frequency of sweeping but does not specify the use of vacuum ,weeping
equipment.. To achieve NPDES surface cleaning levels the contract will eventually have to be
modified to specify vacuum equipment. This will add costs to this activity.
Suggested Activity Level
It would be our suggestion that additional street sweeping be implemented and charged to the
stormwater program. Singe the City currently contracts for this service, it is assumed that this
would mean an additional cost to the contract and would involve the use of vacuum sweeping
equipment, rather than simply the broom type equipment now in use. In terms of general system
maintenance, the acquisition of a victor truck would seem to be a minimum requirement to
properly service catch basins and other drainage facilities with the 'addition of two -person crew
as a Ininimum to operate this equipment.
2.3.4 Capital Improvements
Current Level of activity
The City currently expends very little money on storm drainage capital facilities. Table 2 lists
(� the projects that are in the current City CIP. In addition to fully identified projects in the normal
City CIP there is also a need as a part of operations and maintenance to make minor
improvements and replacements from time to time and an allowance is provided for this activity.
The City does not have a storm drainage comprehensive plan at this time.
Desirable Level of Activity
Given the fact that the principal drainage system is the property of the LACFCD it might be
questioned as how much effort the City needs to make in the terms of capital improvements.
However, the City must still be concerned with the open drainage system and localized areas of
flooding and potential property damage. As a result the City needs an updated comprehensive
storm drainage plan that identifies existing problems and improvements needed to meet future
growth. Once capital needs are identified it still take staffs time to implement the capital
program, even if the design is undertaken by consultants. Certainly in any significant program
at least one engineer and a technician and perhaps a field inspector would be desirable in this
area.
The City .Staff is aware of certain needed storm drainage improvements that have not yet been
incorporated into the City's capital improvement program. Table 2 lists known
stormwater capital improvement needs. It can be anticipated that once a Comprehensive Plan
is completed a more extensive capital program will be identified.
Table 2
Kai. & Warren. Inc. - 4/1N4 9
h:\aniac[antaVedwo 13 rd
City of Santa Clarita
Identified Stormwater Capital Needs
Pro)cct
E\Ilmalld C'orl
I`vndmg Source IJenn Lcd.
I. I.tve Oak Slrnng., Cvn (a, Sand C'ya
$ 17i0jXal
2.,\and Cvn W.0,1ost Cyn IV. Placenta
.$I(hS0,0M
to he doer mned
5. Iron Canyon (v) land Canyon Wash
$'4J75 (IOP
I, he Jetenumod
4. NeMhill creek (a) 13thStreet
$ a ( MSow
lo. he determined
.5. 5aa (:ernurdo Road (05. Pin, Street
$'2 275,000
to he dclemuned
6_ ,Santa Clan River (a) Drayton
$.Sp(g)p00
m he rlcicmlined
7. NmLLa (lira, River (d Dougherty
$) Y25.000
to he dalennined
A_ Naha Clara River (61 Liut Canyon
$ 4(0 X)0
to be dewnnined
TOTAL
$25.775.000
Suggested Activity Level
At this time the primary activity to be considered would be the development of a Comprehensive
storm drainage plan for the City which would probably be undertaken by consultants. The
management of consultant contracts for this work could probably be accomplished using the
program manager and the engineers assigned to regulation of development and no additional staff
is shown for this staff at this time_
If a stormwater utility is adopted by the City it would be possible for the City to issue
stormwater utility revenue bonds to fund all or part of the identified Stormwater capital
improvement needs. A decision on this approach to capital funding should be deferred until a
Stormwater' Comprehensive Plan can be completed,
2.3.5 Water Quality/NPDES/Public Education
This is an area that wlll have an increasing requirement over the next several years as the City
complies with the NPDES permit. The public education and information program both for
residential and commercial properties involves a substantial effort.
Current Level of Activity
At this time the City has assigned one person part time from the City's Engineer office as the
Liaison with the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works staff regarding the NPDES
permit. It is recognized that this person will not be able to do all of the work required but would
primarily act to monitor the City's compliance efforts.
Kato &, Warren, Inc:.. - 411P)4 1 Q
h:Aoamxclania4ochno 17 rd
Desirable Level of Activity
To truly be in compliance with the NPDES program it would ,seem necessary to have a lead and
secretarial support for a general public education program and in addition to have at least one
inspector assigned to the task of monitoring water quality issues emanating from development
within the City.
Suggested Activity Level
As a minimum the City should add a full-time public information and education staff person to
the existing City information office with an assignment to contact and work with residential and
commercial properties to achieve the BMP compliance implied in the NPDES permit. An
additional support staff position will probably be needed to assist in this effort. It is assumed
that these two staff positions would replace the existing part-time position currently assigned
from City Engineers office. This public information and education effort should be coordinated
with the City's general public information efforts and with the fairly extensive effort underway
by the solid waste section of public works.
2.4 STURMWATER FUNDING REQUIREMENTS
2.4.1 Introduction
The estimate~ that follow are based on the suggested level of effort for each element of
stor nwater management. Much of the added cost over present levels of effort ane due to the
mandates of the NPDES permit the City must now satisfy. The staffing levels and expenditures
indicated are expected to be phased in over at least a three year period. The estitnates represent
the probable activity level at the end of the first three years of the NPDES permit period.
2.4.2 Personnel
Table 3 compares existing staffing commitments with the suggested level of activity, including
NPDES requirements.
Kato & Warren. [nc. - 4/1/94 1 1
IzV`anlaelariiuVadmul Ird
Table 3
City of Santa Clarita
Stormwater Management Work Program Assessment - Suggested Level of Effort
Service
Current
Staff
Program
Added
Tolal
Category
Activity
(Fr E)
Additions
.Staf(FTE)
Slafrt VTEl
MANAfiEMEN r
Poh" Dcvelulmmm
Pnrgranl
1'ro_rpm Plwom,c
Gy Eng'. PT
0,2S
Mgr
Lll
VPFiES C'cnnphan<e
Pen,mnet Devdupn,em
I �tatf, FIT
i125
Taeluunan
Ft.5
Hudgeung
Clencat
I.()
Funding,o rant..
1 5
Pu6Lc Fducauo11,9nfomtanar
ID S
PUNIC Contact
5
RE(lU'LATII N OF DEVELOPMENT
Slandards/F'rocedures
Engineering Supp.n to Mmw,nance
City Engr. Pr
0.25
Engr
1.0
Plan Review
Imp
Lo
Public Interface
pens itiIIIo
Engr
0.5
Lt'peciiot
_
Enforcement.
075
'2.0
2,75
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
Planning
Foreman. PT
0.5
Foreman
La
Inventory
Crew: FIT
I
Crew
7.0
.Inspection
Supenntcndeni
0.25
Support
.75
Te.nng
Support
0.25
ticheduhng
.surface Cleaning
Open System
Closed System
Pnvate Detention Systems
Minor Con.,inscim.
Repatr/Replacemem
Trmsuog
Emerges y Reslxmse
2 5
475
7.25
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
C'umprehensrve Basin Plans
City "Engr. FIT
0,25
Engr
o.5
Basin Water Quality Plazuling.
Engrs.. PT
0.5
Tech
Lo
Public Involvement
'recltniclan. PT
0,25
Englneenng,Design
Environmental Assessment
Projea Management
Construction Bidding '
Construction Management•
Right-of-way
Capital Construction
Lt1
1.5.
2.5
WATER QUALITY
Planning
City Engr; PT
(1.1
Tech
IA
NPDES Compliance
I Support, PT
OA5
Insp.
1.0
Moutoring(Testing
Inspection
Enforcement
Trauung
Emergency Response
Hazardous Waste Programs
_
0.2i
2.D
1.25
STORM WADER STAFFING (FTE)
5..o
13.25
18.25
Kato & Warren. lire.- 411/94 _ 12
Some of the -staff time includes the time of existing City personnel, i.e.: the City Engineer,
However, assuming stormwater is a City Utility and separate fund the charges for certain existing
city staff performing service for the stormwater utility would be charged to the stormwater utility
fund. The estimatesare budget estimates for this fund.
2.4.3 NPDES Requirements
The basic management requirements of NPDES compliance are included in the personnel
estimates indicated in Table 3. Responding to the 13 minimum NPDES requirements in the
previously referenced WQCB letter will result in added efforts and costs as detailed in Table 4.
Some of the.NPDES requirements are being partially met by current City activities using existing
staff. However, the actual total FTE's expended probably is no more than two or three at the
most, Most of the staffing shown in Table 4 will be new staff added to perform both the NPDES
requirements as well as enhanced stor nwater management (Table 3). The resultant total staff
requirements will not be the sum of Tables 3 and 4 but a composite of the two.
Kat, & Warren. tnc. -4JIN4 13
h \euundanmVedmnl.ird
Table 4
City of Santa Clarita
NPDES Compliance Requirements
Proy,ram Element
vrE'.
Added Activity
Annual Ci,,t
One Time C."(
I,, t',I�h Ha.�n'Strnallna
1 11
Ttchn ¢mn.
Sn.IIIKLIHI
Vnlunieers
.---
Pick. L p
10,()0[I-(KI
25OINI H
Stenals
I.tKNI_(%)
1.000.191
Paint.
50011(I
.Safety
LOINLt%I
I M0(Xl
Subtotal
62,500.00
28,000.01)
'_ Program for (flint Di%chan•e.
1). $.
Public hid.
'36O(X)(H)
Inspection
25,M)AXI
Pick rp
I(),O(M),(N)
25,(IIN IUII
I&1RI i'ucu,i
I,O( AXI
II11kI,IMI
subtotal
72,000.00
'.26,000A0
t_ Runoff( irdinvree
LLi.
Engmter
`i6,(NF).(Nt
Con su lard
subtotal
36,000.00
10,000.00
4. Public Information and
Education
05
Publc Info
36.0(X).00
Printing
I0.()CX).()()
5,0(N).(Y)
Mmlmg
30,000,00
Advemsmg
I0.000.00
subtotal
86,000-00
5,000-W
5. Catch Basim (leaning
1,0
TMVCrtw
150SICK O
a 0.5
Supervmvor
'30,0(M).(N)
Vactor Truck
25,(W,OO
I50SM.00
Pick -Up
I(1,(&xl.lx)
ZS IAMI,i)0
VaCEor recant System
2.0()()AX)
10.(KKWO
tiafety
5,(H)(1,IX)
'_.l8)f),1N7
subtotal
222,000.00
207,000.04)
Kates A Warren. Inc[ - 4/1/04 14'
h \santadantaV tchno Ia N
Program Element
Fr
Added Activity
Annual t'ost
Onp-'Time 1'ua
6, Traxh C,UC000O
(Aunlract C..Hy
ItN((NNLtNI
Hi
Crew
itl(1(100
Pick UP
IO(It Nl.1)p
IN furl uu
lubtotal
160,000.00
25,11(N)3)(I
Iti �ic_ueJ Slrrel Sue lnig
Cunl tactCo+w
d(1(I-(NN).(10
11,1
SulxrvL.or
1011(N)I0I
1Jt
Tev'h/Crew
i011(xugl
subtotal
480,000.00
%. Litter. 101nr Jumplitg, dc_
S,,4
Sre 4
subtntai
9. ludpeci10(i of C'onitnerciai .4cttvuv
Aetrvuv
11)
Inspeclor
500)(119)
Pick UI+
I(I0N).q!
25INNLINI
CU
Support
IS,IHNt(KY
Mailing
20.0W(to
eubtntal
98,000.00
25,000.00
10. C.uvrol cf Hou,ht ld PuOutmtu
Sce .4
$ee 1
I I,. Re ydmg
I-Q
Coordinator
72.(M.00
10
.Support
1(_0()0.00
Contract Costs
Public Info
See 4
subtotal
108,000.00
12. Hazardou_s Waste Disposal
See I I
See I I
I ,. Water Conservation
See J
See 4
TOTALS
12.5
1,322,500.00
(1) 326,(M)0.00
Note: (1 ) These one time costs would be incurred during the first two years of the NPDES permit
period. Some of the equipment purchase costs may be funded from other sources and repaid
from the Stortnwater Utility fund through annual lease payments.
Kato & Warren, Inc: - 4104 15
b:\.aulnclanlaVechno L7 rJ
Table 3 projected a total staffing requirement of 18.25 FTE at full operation of the stonnwater
program. Of this total, 13.25 FTE were additional staff beyond current efforts. Table 4 indicate,
a Staffing requirement, just to meet NPDES requirements, of 12.5 FTE, plus a program manager,
It is safe to assmne that over the next three to five year period an added staff commitment of 10
- 15 FTE will be necessary,
In arriving at a total stormwater utility budget the costs of existing staff and equipment efforts
must be added to the totals indicated in Table 4. This is summarized in Table 5.
In addition to the staffing and costs indicated in Tables 3 and 4 the City is required to develop
mapping of the storm drainage system that indicates all elements of the system plus points of
discharge to either surface waters or, ground water, sources of potential pollutants and land use
data. Much of the information required for this mapping already exists in City records or the
records of the LACFCD. However, no coordinated mapping exists and the City may want to
consider meeting this snapping requirement by beginning the development of an electronic
mapping system using Geographic Information System (GIS) software rather than the existing
autocad software available in Engineering. GIS mapping allows the manipulation and retrieving
of physical data that will be valuable for all City departments. Once established, each City
department will find other uses for the GIS mapping capability. GIS mapping and database
systems are becoming the standard for cities in California. The cost of purchasing a GIS system
and initial database development in is the range of $250,000-00.
The cost of preparing a Comprehensive Storm Drainage Master Plan has been estimated at
$300,000. The plan would cover all of the drainage system including the LACFCD ownership
and would address both runoff quantity and water quality issues related to the NPDES permit..
2.4.4 Total Funding Requirements
Table 5 summarizes the estimated cost of thesuggested activity level at full implementation.
Full implementation would not occur at ounce but would be, phased over at least three years as
described in Section 2.5.
Kato& Wancn, Ina.-411N4 16
b:A.:uiric la nra V eduio 11rd
C J Table 5
City of Santa Clarita
Stormwater Funding Requirements at Full Implementation
C
A4 TIS'rr1"
LA OUR
FT
RATE(1)
TOTALS
EaistinK
Cit., En¢meer
x5
01.(KI(I,nO
X6.1IM(11)
Engineer
Ll1
72A(x).(H)
721(xioo
'1'echn m�mu
0.5
50,0(KI.(0
25.oniun)
Supenntendent
0'25
60(I(KIA)
15,(KM1.(10
Forenian
(1.5
SUdH q.[NI
2i,p(Al. txI
Field Crew
,5
SII,UOfL(NI
75.(I(KI.(x)
C'I,ncal
l).4
i6,lKq.(Nl
N.O(K((Ht
subtntal
5.0
312.000.00
\PDE.ti Requirements
Pfo,ram bim)ager'
L0
870RWO
x7(xxioo
Engineer(2)
2
72,(KK).(H)
IxUCO(x)
Supzrv)xur
IA
60,00(I.(X)
a(.ow(KI
Crew
5.0
50.000(Xi
250(KHIW
Teehmeian
1.0
5(I(KK).(K)
5osiiKI (w)
Llspeaor<
1.5
5(1.".()0
75,(HK),(K)
_ P.hhclnfc/Cuordinmor (3)
2.0.
72.(XH).(M)
144,000.(9)
Clencal
15
769(K).00
54,(I(NI [HI
subtotal5
900.000.00
Direct Costs
Items
units
Unit Cost
Tout
Pick L'p.
5.0
10.000.00
5O MI-00
street Cleaning (4)
contras
400,0(K).00
4(H).(KK).0(1
Filler/rrash/Recycle _
contract
10(1.000.00
I(H).(00AXI
Truck
LO
14;0(>n.i>n
14.CKKi,(HI
Vaolor
0
1.0
25,000.0(1
25,(HKI.(H)
Vactor Decant System
1.0
10,00(1,0(t
Safety Equipment
LS
6.(").(1()
6.IXHL(K)
(M)) Phone ( ircmr
1.0
I lH)p.(K)
I IHKi.(x)
C VI1u1LAntS
LS
5(I,(K)O.(K)
5(I(M(K)
Printing
PS
Katu A Warren. Inc. - 4/IN4 17
).\"wnadanlAtechna 1.3 rd
LABOR
FrE
RATE (1)
TIITALS
VillllnlC
t1
S00(NI.IN)
Snjlt I(In
;SJccm�mi
Lti
Ia.0r10:I I0
Il!Du 1,011
.SI, "11,
Ls
1 0011.011
I UUuahl
B,B.Bg Xaarm (,,[+I I
LS
200,A10,00
2110.11(u LOP
au Atotal
1,0970ll.00
TvIal: A,mu.d C',[, whom CIP
2.309,W0.00
Allowylee Fur Capital Imprrnemems
LS
50O.W0.00 (6)
5oo.ml UNI
1,u,,,,J and Adnunis[rauve( lvernead
LS
5Y,.. (7)
IHIANXI.IXI
Thal Annual Cnst
W $ 2,925,000--04)
Notes:
Rate includes 35% salary overhead plus 10% support costs.
2. 2 FTE are added here to reflect the need for increased development regulation and
C[P support that are needed regardless of NPDES.:
3. This includes both existing and projected needs.
4. A large part of this proposed cost is already under contract but since it is a normal
stormwater.and NPDES expense the total is included here-
5. See section 4.4 for details. Assume use of County tax rolls for billing.
F. The CIP allowance will be refined once a Master Plan has been developed.
7. This charge is an offset against general support provided by the administrative
staff of the City:
K, This total does not include the one-time charges for the following:
GIS Development $ 250,000.00
Preparation of a Comprehensive Master Plan $ 300,000.00
Purchase of support equipment $ 450,000.00
$1,000,000.00
As indicated earlier, it would not be necessary to fully implement the recommended stormwater
management program in the first year after the utility is formed. For estimating purposes the
following phase -in will be assumed:
f
Ka[,, & warren, Ines, 4f 11'C1
1, f .mvacln n[aV echnu I a rJ
IK
Table 6
Estimated.Stormwater Annual Costs
,Annual ('mts
One Time Costs (1)
Total lludget
zl k.Jc¢[ }
dt{ud_c, l'cer
rnl ttudygt tcar
91 x I.fx N100
1.7()11(x)R00
i91)0ix)Si. I)(1
6110.W0 00
RMOM i)NY
- IQQ(xl(1,0(1
1,51N�(x 41.(11
'11I1p(x)11 UII
"(II)I1.f M1(11111
} Year Total
$5.500,000.00
$I,0M,000.00
$6$011,000A)
Annual Average Budget
$2,170,000.00
Notes:
I , Includes certain capital expenditures from Table 4 plus the consultant costs for the
utility billing database development, the Storm Drainage Comprehensive Plan,
development of stormwater use ordinance and development of a GIS mapping
system.
3.0 STORMWATER FUNDING OPTIONS
Given the need to provide additional funds for stormwater management the question becomes
where these funds are to come from. Four possible options have been identified:
The City General Fund
Shared revenue with the Los Angeles County Flood Control District
Creation of an assessment district
Creation of a stormwater utility
3.1 General Fund
The 1992-93 City budget projects $29,094,500 in revenue: to the General Fund with projected
expenditures of $28,638,300 leaving a reserve of .$456,200. However, these funds are not
considered an annual surplu's since in fact the general city reserves have been reduced in recent
years.
Within the Community Development and Public Works portions of the General Fund
expenditures are projected at $8,218,600, a large portion of which is allocated to contractual
services for street maintenance and solid waste collection.
It may be possible, to assign some of the additional stormwater work load to existing staff in
Engineering and Public Works maintenance. However, interviews with these groups indicate that
the current workload equals or exceeds available staffing.
Kaw & Warren. Inc_ -; 411ry4 19
Is'GimaiinntaV cchnol.Jrd
Conclusion
Over time the General Fund Would not appear to have the resources to fund the stormwater
program without a corresponding reductioli in other ,services funded by the General Fund:
3.2 Shared Revenue with the Los Angeles County Flood Control District
The LACFCD levys annual assessments on all property within the district boundaries including
all property in the City of Santa Clarita. Inquiries to the LACFCD reveal that the LACFCD
collects;S2,530,700 annually from property within the City.
The funds collected by the LACFCD are used to pay for the construction, operation, and
maintenance of all of the District's flood control and drainage: system. Since most of the
drainage systems within the City have been transferred to the LACFCD the; District is assumed
to be responsible for the maintenance, repair and replacement of thedrainage system.
While Los Angeles County is the lead agency for compliance with the regional NPDES permit,
the LACFCD has not been named as a,co-permittee and District funds are not used for NPDES
compliance. If the LACFCD were to assume some portion of the NPDES compliance costs it
would be possible that some City costs would be assumed by the District. This does not appear
to be the direction the County is taking with regard to the NPDES program,
Another possibility would be direct rebate from the LACFCD to the City with the City continuing
to be responsible for NPDES compliance and perhaps certain maintenance activities currently the
responsibility of the District. Discussions with LACFCD personnel do not lead to the conclusion
that such rebates are likely without a major change. in County policy..
Conclusion
The possibility of the City receiving funds from the LACFCD either as rebates or NPDES
services would appear to be remote. Any such funding assistance would certainly not cover all
City ;stormwater management costs.
The issue has been raised of the City deannexing from the LACFCD. This would stop the
present assessment against property in the City and in "theory provide $2,530,700 dollars to the
City for the management and maintenance of the entire drainage system. However, the existing
cost of maintenance would reduce the net dollars availabe to zero. We can find no case of a
similar withdrawal from the LACFCD.
Another possibility might be an agreement to create a special assessment zone for Santa Clarita
whereby City stonnwatercharges could be included in the LACFCD assessments. While this
would probably be less objectionable to the`District, it may require extensive negotiations and
procedures to implement -
I
�f
Kmo , Wil ,III Im':. - 4)1r)4 20
1 ',:xntnc la n la�la Inu l 3Id
Our general conclusion is that this option would be difficult and time consuming to implement.
It may be tensible as a long term goal but would not be a viable source of revenue for the first
three yearti sit the NPDES permit process.
3.3 Creation of an Assessment District
The City has the authority to form an assessment district covering all property in the City to raise
the needed revenue for stormwater management.
The City already has three special drainage assessment districts for groundwater dewatering and
monitoring well sites. These assessment districts cover only the immediately benefited properties
and should not be a factor if a city-wide assessment district were proposed.
The stormwater assessments can be based on any rational formula that creates equity among the
assessed properties. The formulas used by the LACFCD for their assessments are reasonably
equitable and could also be used by the City with the appropriate rate factors.
Assessment district law requires certain procedures for the formation of a district including
The creation of a formal assessment roll.
At least two public hearings.
--- Mailed notice to all assessed properties.
�.. 1 City Council action.
The right of the public to remonstrate and stay City action,
Once established the stormwater assessments would continue without further City Council action.
However, if rates need to be increased in the future notices and hearings would be required just
as for formation of the District.
Collection of assessments would be performed by the County and the City would receive funds
on a semi-annual basin
Conclusion
An Assessment district would be an effective option for establishing the revenues needed for the
City`s stormwater program. This option is more feasible than the prior options but may be less
desirable than the stormwater utility option due to the somewhat cumbersome procedures
involved in assessment district law.
3.4 Creation of a Stormwater Utility
A city may establish their stormwater system as a utility. Under Califomia State Law stormwater
systems can be considered utilities the same as water and sewer service. As with other utilities
a stormwater utility can issue service charges reflecting each properties use of the storm drainage
Kato & Warren, Inc - 411/94 21
h \ amaclaniaV echno I l n1
system. This approach to stormwater management funding has been in use for only the last 20
years but it has now been recognized by the EPA as the desirable funding method to satisfy the
requirements of the NPDES permit for a reliable and permanent source of stormwater funding.
Most major cities across the country have adopted this approach.
In California,: because of the long history of specialdistricts, such as the LACFCD, and the use
of assessment districts the stormwater utility concept has been adopted by fewer cities than would
have been expected. However, this is changing rapidly and cities such as Sacramento, Palo Alto,
Los Angeles and many smaller cities now have stormwater utilities in effect.
A stormwater utility is formed by the passage. of an ordinance following standard City
procedures. Once adopted the City has a number of options for issuing service charge bills. this
is covered in more detail in Section 4 of this memorandum. stormwater Service charge rates are
calculated in much the same manner as the. LACFCD assessments. Some cities base the charges
on more complex formulas and others add a water quality charge to the formulas. In fact, iris
becoming popular to call the stormwater utility service charge a water quality or water quality
protection charge.
Once stormwater service charge rates are established they can be adjusted to meetannual budget
requirements by passage of an ordinance or resolution following standard City policy.
The stormwater utility approach is a powerful and flexible funding mechanism that has proven t
to be, well accepted and effective in cities throughout the country including in California.
Conclusion
The stormwater utility approach or the assessment district option appear to be. the only feasible
methods of raising the funds needed to effect the required level of stormwater management
dictated by the NPDES permit. Of the two options the stormwater utility's flexibility makes it
more, attractive of a city the size of Santa Clarita.
4.0 STORMWATER UTILITY ANALYSIS
4.1 Description -
Acceptance of the fact that stormwater facilities and service are a indispensable part of the urban
infrastructure has led to the concept of treating stormwater management as a municipal utility
service on a par with water, sanitary sewer and other utilities. The stormwater utility concept
has been authorized by state legislation in nearly every state in the country. The California codes
provide specific authorization for the concept including:
Kato k Warren. Inc--..4/1/9a 22
h �.mvac lanta`¢rchno I JrJ
✓ General powers of a Charter City
Specific code sections in General Law Cities
Government Code Section 54300, Revenue Bond Act
Health and Safety Code Section 5470
While the legislative authority exists for establishing fees for stormwater service through the
creation of a stormwater utility, enactment of the concept is a prerogative of local government.,
The rates to be charged for services and the organization and level of service to be provided are
all local City Council decisions.
As a utility function of the City stormwater utility fundsare subject to strict audit requirements
by State code. Stormwater utility funds can only be expended for stormwater related activity
which can include a reasonable charge for general city government overhead and support.
4.2 Sources of Funding
A stormwater utility has several potential sources of revenue that are common to all types of
municipal enterprise activities. These are charges for services, permitting and inspection fees,
system development charges and exactions from new development.
4.2.1 service Charges
Service charges are the primary source of revenue for all utilities.. Service charges are based on
the "use" a property makes of the service provided. In the case of stormwater the courts have
ruled that "use" is the same as "responsibility" for the runoff generated from a property. Section
4.3 will expand on the methods used to compute stormwater service charges.
Stormwater service charges for a specific property, once established; only change when more
impervious area is added on a property or when there is a general rate change. Consequently the
revenue collected for a stormwater utility varies little from year to year and is quite predictable.
This simplifies budgeting and fiscal management of the stormwater utility.
Service charge rates for a stormwater utility are set by the City Council by Ordinance.
4.2.2 Permitting and Inspection Fees
With the requirement of the NPDES program all cities must consider establishing special permits
for stormwater. These include permits for new development in order to more closely control and
monitor the development process and ensure runoff quantity and quality controls are provided.
It also includes annual stormwater use permits for commercial and industrial activities with
regular inspections by the City to ensure that no illicit discharges are occurring and to ensure that
materials are stored and handled in a manner that prevents the accidental discharge of pollutants
ti on to surfaces subject to rainfall or washoff,
Kato & warren. Inc. - 4i1PI4 23
1, anuclania4echn, l Ird
The administration of this important stormwater activity costs money and the City should
consider establishing separate fee, and charges for this activity that cover all costs of
adnuni,,tradon and enforcement.
4,2.3 System Development Charges
Systein development charges are common in California for a variety of public:.. services from
water: sewer and transportation to stormwater and schools.
The Basis for such charges is the "buy -in" of new development to the facilities provided by
existing properties that provide capacity enabling the new development to occur. Such charges
are well established in case law and area standard part of utility funding. System development
charges require a careful analysis of the capacity of, a particular system and the City's investment
in the system. System development charges forstonnwater systems vary widely., In California
system development charges for storm drainage vary from $400.00 to $3,000.00 for a ,single
family residence with proportional charges for other land uses.
In the case of Santa Clarita the basis for the system development charges is lessened by the fact
that most of thestormdrainage facilities have been transferred to the LACFCD. A case could
be made for some lower level of,system development charge related to the street system which
is the primary stormwater collector.
System development charges must be spent for capital improvements and 'a reasonable nexus
must be maintained between the expenditures and the new developments paying these charges.
We would not anticipate stormwater system development charges providing :significant revenues
in Santa Clarita.
4.2.4 Exactions
Most of the storm drainage facilities making up the Santa Clarita stormwater system were
constructed through exactions. The term exaction refers to the requirement by a government that
a new development construct storm drainage facilities to serve the new
development. Often the required facilities include storm drainage facilities both within the
development and downstream of the development.
Direct Cash contributions or construction by a development proponent are exactions. This
approach can be quite effective in lowering the capital facility investment of a city.
Exactions do not provide funds for the on -going maintenance and operation of the stormwater
system.
The City should continue to require exactions on a case by case basis. This source of funding
is supplemental to the use of service charges,
Kaifu & W affm, Ls, - 4/ 1 N4 24
I g�amataclxm nV ech nu7 ¢1
4.3 Computation of Service Charges
4.3.1 Basis of Charges
Stormwater service charges are most commonly based on the amount, or rate, of runoff that is
generated from a property during a rainfall :event. A standard equation for computing the rate
Of runoff is what is known as the Rational Formula:
Q = C i A
Where: Q = Rate of runoff in cubic feet per second (cfs)
C = Percentage of impervious service
i = Peak rainfall intensity (inchesthour)
A = Acres of total area of a property
Since rainfall intensity can beconsidered equal for all properties within a reasonabledistance,
what varies by property is the product of C times A, or the area of impervious surface: on a
property. This factor becomes the basis for the stormwater service charges..
4.3.2 Determining Impervious Area
Determining the impervious area (C.x A) on a specific property can be accomplished in two
ways:
1. By measurement using a field survey or by take off from aerial photos
2, By imputing the impervious area by measuring the gross area of a property (A)
and assigning a coefficient of imperviousness (C). The product of the two values
is the imputed impervious area.
The use of measured impervious area to establish service charges is the most equitable approach.
The costs of the initial data base preparation is slightly higher than the imputed method but not
prohibitively so. This method is used by more than half of all stonnwater utilities.
The imputed impervious area method is the method used by the LACFCD for computing its
assessments. It is the most common technique used by counties since the county assessor data
base can be used for the computation and for billing. Since this data base exists for all properties
in Santa Clarita this would be the easiest approach for computing stormwater service charges for
the. City.
4.3.3 Estimated Service Billing Units
Since the City does not have a billing system in place that would give an accurate count of the
total number and type of service accounts in the City, the computation of the potential stonnwater
billing units must be approximated from other data.
Kato & Warren, Inc. - 4/IN4 25
h\-antadantaVechno I.3 rd
A common approach to stormwaterrate making is to set a fixed rate for all single family
residential properties and to then charge all other properties on the basis of the ratio of
Impervious area on the property to a defined impervious area for a residential property. The
LACFCD ordinance calls this single family area the Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) which is
ussigned a base assessment The e assessments for all other properties are computed on the basis
of the equation;.
Assessment = (Base Rate) (Area of Parcel) (Runoff Factor)
(Average EDU Area)
This is the same approach used by other stormwater utilities and is the formula that we would
recolrurtend for Santa Clarita:
The LACFCD raises $2,530.700 from properties within the City' of Santa Clarita.. 'Their
assessments are levied against both developed and undeveloped property. The EDU rate for the
last year of record was $24.00 per year. This has recently been raised although at a lower level
than whathad been recommended by the LACFCD staff,
Using these figures the number of equivalent dwelling units, or billable units, can be computed:
EDU = $2,530,700.00 = 105,445
$24.00
This figure does not include government property or tax exempt property. Both types of property
are commonly charged stormwater service charges by cities. Cities normally do not charge
vacant property. Consequently this figure for total billable units should be close for Santa
Clarita.
Based on experience in other cities and data provided by City planning another estimate can be
computed:
Total Single Family Units =
24,668
Total Multi -Family Units =
9,168
Commercial Properties =
1,737
Using corm -non EDU factors for these types of property and an allowance for government and
other exempt properties we get:
SF - 24,668 x 1.0 = 24,668
MF - 9,168 x 0.8 = 7,334
conun- 1,737 x 15.0 = 26,055
Gov/Ex- 200 x 10.0 = 2.000
Total Billable Units = 60,057 EDU
Kara do Wimen. Inc.:-4/1194 26
h_�;uNadnn�aVrihni, Lard
This number is considerably lower than the number of EDU obtained using LACFCD data.
Another check is the experience of other stormwater utilities that for each,$L00 per month per
EDU total revenues will approximate. $K-10.00 per year per capita population Using a projected
city population of 150,000 this would indicate a billable unit count of
150,000 x X.00 = 100.000 EDU
l2
150,000 x 10.00 = 125,000 EDU
12
For purposes of this analysis we propose to use an EDU count of 80,000 for computing required
rates. Once a full billing data base can be assembled a precise EDU count will be available and
the rates and/or revenues can be adjusted accordingly.
4.3.4 Service Charge Rates
For purposes of computing a stormwater service charge rate we will assume an initial annual
budget of $2,t70,000.00 for the stormwater utility. This level of funding will permit the initial
service charge rate to be held steady until the fourth year of operation, by which time the capital
needs of the storm drainage system will be well defined and the NPDES requirements will he
more completely defined by the State.
With a total number of billing units of 80,000 and a suggested initial annual revenue requirement
of $2,170,000.00 the computation of the Equivalent Dwelling Unit Rate becomes straightforward:
EDU Rate = $2,170,000.00 = $27. l2/year
80,000
If the final database development yields an EDU count of 100,000 the annual service charge rate
could be lowered to $21.70 per year for the average household. The City could decide to set an
initial service charge rate at the: higher or lower number or the initial utility ordinance could be
adopted and the database development authorized after which a final service charge rate could
be adopted by a separate ordinance. This is our recommended approach.
For all property except single family residences the annual service charge rate would be
computed using the LACFCD formula and runoff factors as modified. Larger commercial
properties could have service charges that could be several times the basic EDU rate.
4.4 Method of Billing
Several options are available to the City for billing stormwater service charges if a decision is
-i\ made to create a stormwater utility;
t
1. Place an annual charge on the County tax statement.
KNO AZ' W,t en, Inc.-41t194 27
h'.. antxl an ia4tchno I ,? rd
2. Have the LACFCD add the Cities charge to their annual assessment that appears
on the County tax statement.
3. Contract with the Sanitation District to include the_stormwater charges with the
regular sewer service charges.
-t- Contract with the several water companies service Santa Clarita to include; the
,tormwater charges with their billings.
5. Establish a City utility billing system for stormwater with the possibility of'adding
otherbillings at a later date (re: solid waste).
Of these options only l and are truly viable, The LACFCD and the Sanitation District already
bill by means of the County tax Statement and appear to be unwilling to co -mingle their billings
with the City. Use of Water Company data and billing services would be cumbersome because
of the different service areas involved and the fact that these are private, state regulated, utilities
that appear to be unwilling to share data bases or services with a public entity.
4.4.1 Placing Service Charge on the County Tax Statement.
The County will accept stormwater charges by the City as a line item on the tax statement:. the
cost to the City would be somewhat Jess than establishing'a new City billing system but not a
great deal less since the County charges for both the billing and collection of such charges. The
estimated cost of this approach would be:
i
Kaki A Wanrn. Incl.-- a/INJ 28
h:\.antaclanta\ rdmoI-?rd
Table 7
City of Santa Clarita
Cost to. Bill Stormwater Utility Charges on County Tar Statement
Item
Start.Up
Annual
lim.IJr i'<,zt.
C ,.mv Data Fdc>
S,lH1lL[%1
i 1111(t(NI
Database Ikvelolmlent
RNI0lfl.($1
III tX1,(11
Annual County F,
i(I,M)AN)
Slt,(NYL(11)
Fac�liil ez
Office Spaca
i I11N1.(NI
Office Furniture/Supple,
i,1K70.(1l1
1 (NNI,(MI
40,1RN1.0(1
10,04KIpu
Finance Supervw(x,
I Billing Clerk. Grade 21
1.5(KI (NI
TOTALS
$200,000.00
$116,000.01)
To place the stormwater utility charge on the County tax ;statement will require an annual hearing
before the City Council.
Use of the County tax statement has several advantages:
It would be simple to establish the billing data files
The cost would be lower
The City would have less problem with collection and property owner inquiries
There are also Some disadvantages:
Changes to the billing data base are more difficult
Revenues are received only twice each year
The City would not have as direct contact with the rate payers
4.4.2 Establish a City Billing System
Since the City does not have a billing system or property owner data base in place at this time
this option would require somewhat more work to implement. Once in place the operation of
the billing system would be relatively straightforward.
Discussions with the City Finance Department have provided the following estimated costs for
creating a City billing system.
There are both start-up costs and on -going annual costs involved in a City utility billing system.
Initially, all such costs would be borne by the storm drainage utility. However, if other utility
l functions were added later the annual operating costs could be shared by the various utility funds.
Knt.i do Warren. Inc:. -. 4/1/94 29
`1
Table K -;
City of .Santa Clarita
Cnct to Bill Stormwater Utility Charges by Means of a New City Billing System
Item
:Start -Up
.Annual
I Oul.W, l'rHe.
t 5'nlpulf! _Apllw ire
�t [)(xI no
% (11)o lM I
111.�1 a U.'I' y.Wr'.0 I,
WOW M1111)
4 (11111 IMI
Add,¢C°,nyw rM .....ry:
2,()(X)(K)
Nuppoo Equlpmm'11
4.5(WUY)
Fnnnng
5.o(X).(X)
i(i,o(K l i in
Pyaazc IOuanprly billing)
7pJi(Kf1)(l
Database De,elolnnent
RHO0.)'(4)
I(1,nM10O
2. Faobuea
(Iff c, Apace
sp1Nl IMI
1 Kfice. runulurciSuppbes
I ? (N)0.(HI
_ pnq.(M)
Pere)nnel
40.CKX).00
1 [1aHR1 (N1
Finance Sup,",wn
I Caehlse ❑rade21
3A Ulxt Un
I Bilking l'lerk. Grad2 21
:S lnNl uil
TOTALS
267,500.00
246,1100.00
The advantages of a City utility billing system include:
I. Billing system is fully under City control.
2. Contact with the public is direct.
3. A mailing system to all City property would be available in-house.
4, Collection of revenues would be direct and in-house, providing better control.
5. Customers would receive more direct responses and services.
F. Maintenance'of the billing database would be easier and entirely in-house.
7,. The City would be prepared for any future utility billing needs.
The disadvantages of a City utility billing system include[
I. The City would have to add personnel and equipment.
2. The start-up and annual cost are higher than if the County tax statement is
utilized. l
3. The City would be fully responsible for billings and collection and would have to
deal directly with the public.
K.vo do Warren. h1c.- 4/1P)4 30
4.4.3 Conclusions
Ba,ed on experience in other jurisdictions it would be our conclusion that establishine a City
billing, system would be advantageous in the long term since the City may eventually provide
other ,services on an "enterprise" or utility basis. However, .since the City hoes not have, plan;
for billing additional services at this time the use of the County tax statement would be less
costly and will result in less public; concern.
The decision will depend on the willingness of the City to create the direct contact with the user
public that a new and separate City utility would imply.
4.5 Implementation
Implementing the stormwater utility concept requires the adoption of an ordinance creating
stornwater service as a utility function of the City and establishing user charge rates. Preparation
of a draft implementing ordinance is a task of this feasibility study,
The adoption of stormwater utility ordinance can be accomplished following normal City
procedures with the appropriate notices, and hearings. However, the adoption of stormwater
utility would result in a new charge to Santa Clarita citizens and they obviously must be
informed of the need for the increased revenues. This Stormwater Utility Feasibility Study is the
first step in the public information process. As the City Council reviews the findings and
recommendations of the study information will reach the public through news releases and media
coverage.
Once an ordinance is before the City Council special efforts should be made through the media
and possibly mailings to inform the public. The ordinance hearing process will offer further
opportunity for public input. If and when the Council acts by passage of the stormwater utility
ordinance theneed for public information efforts will continue. It is important to keep the public
informed prior to issuance of the first bills and to provide a ready response to calls that can be
anticipated during the first several billing cycles.
Assuming the need for stormwater funding is accurate it does not appear that the program can
be funded except by an assessment district or a utility. Whichever approach is adopted it's
implementation should be considered as a normal Council action much like the annual budget
adoption. Once a decision to proceed is made a one-time effort will be needed to develop the
property database needed for either assessments or stormwater utility charges.
Kai,- R wart,,,, Im._ . 4lIP14 11