Manuals on Utility Creation Sub-Topics:

Fort Wayne Stormwater Task Force.  (1993). City of Fort Wayne Stormwater Utility Cost of Service Rate Study. Fort Wayne, Indiana: Author.  (Rate Structure Analysis only- 2,637 KB)

This study was prepared by the Fort Wayne Stormwater Task Force to determine what type of rate structure to use, how to deal with the combined sewer overflow problem, and how to resolve certain billing issues related to condominiums, agricultural properties, shopping malls, apartment complexes, and other special utility customers.  The study evaluates several different options for each question and would be a valuable resource for another community facing similar issues.  

Gray, N.E.  (1995). Lessons Learned:  Implementing a Storm Water Public Education Program. Virginia Town and City 30(5), 15-18. (603 KB)

This article discusses Norfolk, Virginia’s public information program and provides suggestions to other communities on how to design a successful program.  The article reports on the achievements of Norfolk’s program, how the program is organized, how much the program costs, and how public education can reduce opposition to stormwater utility fees. 

Luken, K.M. & Swenson, S. (2001).  A Stormwater Management Plan Your Communities, Businesses, and Residents Will Support.  Stormwater 2(2) [Online] Available: http://www.forester.net/sw_0103_plan.html.

This article addresses three important questions that planners must answer to make stormwater management programs a reality in their communities:  how much will it cost; who will pay for it; and will the public support it?  

Municipal Research and Services Center.  (1998). Sample Provisions for Storm Drainage Utility. Seattle, Washington: Author. [Online]  Available:  http://www.mrsc.org/library/compil/cpstorm.htm. 

This compilation includes stormwater utility ordinances from cities in Washington, a listing of magazine articles about stormwater utilities, a list of agency contacts, and a list of firms that do sewer and stormwater management studies.  The compilation is partially available online at http://www.mrsc.org/library/compil/cpstorm.htm and the entire compilation can be obtained by interlibrary loan to Washington state employees and officials. 

Scholl, J.E.  (1991, January). Stormwater Management Utility Billing Structure. Water Environment and Technology, 47-49.

This article discusses how to develop the utility’s rate structure and provides guidelines on how to decide what types of properties to include in the rate base, the calculation of an equivalent residential unit, and how to choose a billing system. 

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water.  Building Support for Increasing User Fees.  EPA publication 430/09-89-006. Washington, DC.: Author. (58 KB)

This manual discusses how to structure public education programs in order to gain public support for user fee increases.  The guidelines in this manual would also be helpful to stormwater managers designing a public education program to build support for the establishment of a stormwater utility. 

URS Corporation.  (1987).  Drainage Utility Service Charge Customer Account Development Process.  San Francisco, California: Author..

This manual concentrates specifically on the details of how to set up a customer account system for a stormwater utility.  This manual covers determining the service area boundaries, what types of properties should be exempt from the charges, how to construct the rate structure, what data to use for the rate determinations, who will hold the billing data, and who should be responsible for the billing system. 

Other Topics Concerning Stormwater Utilities

The papers and articles in this section examine specific topics concerning stormwater utilities.  They would be very helpful to stormwater managers that are looking for information about a specific aspect of the stormwater utility creation process.  They are usually academic or professional papers that provide a detailed analysis of the subject.

Center for Watershed Protection.  (2000).  The Economics of Stormwater Treatment:  An Update.  Watershed Protection Techniques 2(4), 395-499. [Online]. Available:  http://www.stormwatercenter.net.

This article discusses a study undertaken in 1996 by the Center for Watershed Protection to update cost data for stormwater management practices.  The study looked at several different pond designs, bioretention areas, sand filters, and infiltration trenches to see if the costs of constructing stormwater management facilities increased over the last decade and find the causes of the cost increases, if any.  The study also looked at economies of scale in stormwater practices and determined typical design and engineering costs as a percentage of basic construction costs.   

Doll, A. & Lindsey, G.  (1999). Credits Bring Economic Incentives for Onsite Stormwater Management. Watershed and Wet Weather Technical Bulletin 4(1), 12-15. (28 KB)

Doll and Lindsey discuss the economic efficiency of allowing property owners to choose to pay the stormwater utility charge that would be applicable to their property or implement on-site stormwater management controls to be eligible for reduced charges.  The authors cite the experiences of several communities and note that many of the credits have never been used, typically due to standards that are difficult to achieve with inexpensive technology.  The authors also point out that credits would be more efficient if they were based on runoff quality instead of quantity but the data needed to implement such a credit system is difficult and expensive to collect. 

Doll, A., Scodari, P. & Lindsey, G.  (1998). Credits as Economic Incentives for On-Site Stormwater Management:  Issues and Examples.  EPA National Conference on Retrofit Opportunities for Water Resource Protection in Urban Environments in Chicago, Illinois, February 9-12, 1998. (822 KB)

This presentation discusses the effectiveness of stormwater utility credits for onsite stormwater control systems.  The presentation compares the credit systems of thirteen communities and discusses the impact the credits have had on stormwater utility revenues and water quality.  

Hoag, Grant. (2004). Developing Equitable Stormwater Fees. Stormwater 5(1) [Online] Available: http://www.forester.net/sw_0401_developing.html

This article focuses on the issue of equity in implementing a stormwater utility. More specifically, the evaluation process used to calculate pollutant-based fees for stormwater programs is discussed. The author also talks about what the customers perceive as fair, and how to set stormwater rates that reflect the cost of providing services.

Indiana Department of Natural Resources.  (1995).  The Indiana Conservancy Act.  Indiana Code 14-33. http://www.state.in.us/legislative/ic/code/title14/ar33/

This document is the section of the Indiana Code that provides the legal authority necessary to implement a stormwater utility in Indiana.  The Indiana Conservancy Act outlines when a conservancy district can be established, how it may be established, what areas may be included in the district, and information concerning how to organize and manage the district.  This would be a useful resource for someone who is researching how to establish the legal authority needed to start a stormwater utility program.

Jorgensen, B.S. & Syme, G.J. (2000).  Protest Responses and Willingness to Pay:  Attitude Toward Paying for Stormwater Pollution Abatement.  Ecological Economics 33(10), 251-265. 

This journal article discusses a contingent valuation study that was conducted in four Australian cities to examine the public’s willingness to pay for stormwater pollution abatement. 

Lindsey, G. & Doll, A.  (1998).  Financing Retrofit Projects:  The Role of Stormwater Utilities.  EPA National Conference on Retrofit Opportunities for Water Resource Protection in Urban Environments, Chicago, Illinois, February 9-12, 1998. (863 KB)

This paper evaluates stormwater utilities as a possible funding source for stormwater retrofit projects.  The authors discuss the implications of the EPA’s stormwater regulations and discuss the utility concept’s advantages and disadvantages as compared to a property tax assessment.   Finally the authors point out the political challenges involved in implementing user charge systems for stormwater using Vincennes and Indianapolis, Indiana as examples.

Lindsey, G.  (1990).  Charges for Urban Runoff:  Issues in Implementation. Water Resources Bulletin 26(1), 117-125. (1,289 KB)

This article compares stormwater funding from property taxes to funding from user charges to evaluate the equity, efficiency, and acceptability of each system using Maryland’s Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Reduction Plan as an example.  To evaluate equity, three types of charge systems were compared to see which types of property owners would bear the largest burdens under each.  To evaluate efficiency, four different charge systems were compared to determine how high user charges would have to be in order to induce property owners to construct on-site stormwater controls.  Finally, to evaluate acceptability, assumptions about the behavior of elected officials were compared to the benefits of each charge system to determine which payment options would be the most politically feasible. 

Meyer, S.P., Salem, T.H., & Labadie, J.W.  (1993).  Geographic Information Systems in Urban Storm-Water Management.  Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management.  119(2), 206-227.

This journal article discusses using GIS systems to prepare, store, update, analyze, and display urban storm water modeling data.  The article concludes with a case study of the Greenbriar subdivision located in Fort Collins, Colorado. 

Minner, M. et.al.  (1998). Cost Apportionment for a Storm-Water Management System:  Differential Burdens on Landowners from Hydrologic and Area-Based Approaches.  Applied Geographic Studies 2(4),  247-260. 

This research compares five different cost apportionment methods to find the most equitable cost distribution method to use for the funding of a stormwater management system.  The research was done using data from the Cuppy-McClure watershed near West Lafayette, Indiana where land use is changing from agricultural to commercial and residential with the expansion of the city of West Lafayette.  The researchers compared per-acre charges with charge systems based on runoff coefficients, the rational method, the TR-55 method, and the L-THIA method to find out which landowners would bear the heaviest cost burden in each scenario. 

Palmer, C.D.  (1993).  Development and Implementation of Stormwater Utilities in Texas Cities.  Water Management in the 90’s- A Time for Innovation.  Proceedings of the 20th Anniversary Conference of the Water Resources Planning and Management Division of the ASCE, New York,. pp. 809-812. 

This presentation discusses stormwater utility enabling legislation in Texas and the legal constraints that Texas communities should be aware of when designing a stormwater utility ordinance.  The presentation also provides very general information on how most cities in Texas have chosen to design their utility programs.

Water Resources Institute.  (1999).  State Supreme Court Reverses Durham Stormwater Fee Decision.  [Online].  Available:  http://www2.ncsu.edu/ncsu/CIL/WRRI/news/nd99stormfees.html.

This article discusses the North Carolina State Supreme Court's decision in August of 1999 that concludes that North Carolina law limits the amount that can be charged by a stormwater utility to the amount of money necessary to maintain the storm drain system and that fees charged by a stormwater utility cannot be used for water quality programs related to stormwater.  

Wilson, L. & Lindsey, G. (1995).  Authority for Local Stormwater Fees in Indiana.  Indianapolis, Indiana:  Center for Urban Policy and the Environment, Indiana University- Purdue University Indianapolis.  (23 KB)

This publication explains the stormwater utility concept and discusses the statutory authority for the creation of stormwater utility fees under Indiana law. 

                             Previous         Next        Home