Stormwater Utility Model

I’ve really appreciated the many conversations I’ve been having with residents about stormwater. Thank you to everyone who is taking the time to ask questions and share your thoughts. Especially if you have been willing to do so in person at the Open House or by meeting for coffee.

An observation: most of the concerns I’m hearing aren’t necessarily about the specifics on how we finance the expenses for stormwater. Instead, objections to a Stormwater Utility Model are often (but not always!) ACTUALLY about wider concerns with the City’s budget in general. Which is fair! I think more can be done to communicate it well. And there will always be lots of debate about where the right balance is between keeping things affordable and maintaining the levels of service residents need and expect.

Next week, I’m hoping to make a post with some thoughts on the City’s overall budget and approach to spending. I look forward to more conversation about that.

But here, I’m going to focus on stormwater alone. Because no matter what happens with the wider City Budget: stormwater is a vital municipal service. When a big storm happens, it is vital that water be moved away before it damages property, wrecks infrastructure, and threatens people.

The stormwater system is a current and ongoing expense. All of us taxpayers are already contributing money towards it. And I don’t think anyone seriously believes the City should stop maintaining the stormwater system. Which means we are going to continue to pay for it.

The decision point for Council is NOT “should we tax people to generate revenue to run the stormwater system?” Instead, it is “how should the money people pay for stormwater be calculated?”

Should we continue with the current system where the amount of money each property contributes is based on its assessed value? Or does it make more sense to have a system where how much each property pays is based on how much stormwater it sheds?

---

My thoughts:

I think that a Stormwater Utility Model has merit. There are lots of flaws with our property tax system: moving a service from being based on the value of a property to more of a “user pay” model seems fairer to me. I’d like our overall budget to be easier to understand and for Council to have a more intentional Capital Plan for stormwater: segmenting this service into a Utility Model accomplishes both of those. And residents expect our property taxes to be roughly equivalent to other cities without our services being dramatically less: that is hard to achieve when many other cities collect a Stormwater Utility Fee but Grande Prairie does not.

At the same time:

I get the trust issues some residents are having. Including concerns with how a potential change has been communicated. I also get the emotional impact of this. Even if someone will be paying less towards stormwater under a Utility Model than under the current system: it just feels like one more bill. And there has been a lot thrown at residents over the last couple of years. Based on this: maybe there is merit to either parking the conversation for a couple of years or killing it all together. 

And if (that is still an “if”) Council moves forward with a Stormwater Utility Model: there are four potential models to calculate it (you can see them all at https://engage.cityofgp.com/stormwaterutility). I tend to think the Bracket Model is the most fair, but it is relatively new: I haven’t had a chance to really dig into it yet. So I don’t currently have a preferred model.

I’m still wrestling with where I will go with this. As I do: I’d love to hear from you.

I’m happy to continue hearing general concerns about the City’s budget. As I said above: I also hope to post more about that next week. But what is particularly helpful to me on this particular decision:

If you oppose a Stormwater Utility Model: why do you think the current approach of charging people for stormwater services based on the value of their property is more fair or better than a model that is “user pay” based on amount of hard surface?

Whether you oppose or support it: if Council does choose to move forward with a Utility Model, which one of the four models to calculate fees do you support?

I do my best to read social media comments, but can’t keep up with them all. If you email me your thoughts (dbressey@cityofgp.com), I will read and respond. Or better yet: I’d love to meet for a coffee (or other beverage of your choice) to chat. Please email me if you are interested in meeting up.

~~~~~~~

Some important information relating to this conversation:

• Council will be discussing this again at its March 11 and March 25 meetings. No decisions are made yet: I’m confident that every member of Council is still putting a lot of thought and listening into this to figure out what path forward best responds to both what residents are telling us right now, and what they tell us other times about their priorities for the community.

• The stormwater system needs to be maintained every year, regardless of if there is a lot of rain or just a little. Expenses include: replacing ageing pipes/culverts/catch basins/etc…, removing debris from the roads before it gets into the stormwater system, flushing the debris that still inevitably gets into the system, monitoring and responding to contaminants that get into the system, and vegetation control alongside storm ponds and ditches. These are not new costs. In past years, they have been wrapped into property taxes.

• Every year, this work on the stormwater system costs ~$8,000,000. That is equivalent to ~6% of property tax revenue. Right now, half of that in 2024 and all of that in 2025 forward is budgeted to be collected through a Stormwater Utility Fee instead of taxes. So if Council doesn’t implement a Stormwater Utility System, that leaves a $4,000,000 hole in the budget this year and an additional $4,000,000 hole in future years. To make up for that, Council will either need to make large service reductions or increase taxes more than is currently budgeted.

• This conversation has been going on for years. Here is a news article from 2019: https://www.dailyheraldtribune.com/news/local-news/city-exploring-user-pay-model-for-storm-drainage. Here is where I discussed it in my 2021 Election Campaign: www.bressey.ca/cityplatform. Last year, the City hosted several months of engagement opportunities about a potential Stormwater Utility. These were advertised on radio, in written media, on social media, at community events, and on City billboards.

• In the last 7 years, an average residential tax bill has gone up by ~5%. This is despite inflation of ~20% driving up City costs and many other upward pressures on the budget.

• In 2022, an average City of Grande Prairie home paid $3,933 in taxes. The average tax bill of Grande Prairie, St Albert, Red Deer, Airdrie, Lethbridge, Edmonton and Calgary was $3,727. I don’t have exact numbers yet, but that gap is closing: in both 2023 and 2024, these communities have higher tax increases than we saw in Grande Prairie.

• Again: I hope to post more thoughts on the City’s overall budget next week. Which is why this post is focused JUST on stormwater, not wider questions about spending and taxes.