Federal and state water cleanliness regulations have pushed James City County staff to work toward putting new practices in place by 2017, but the regulations demand more staff and funding than available.
County staff approached the Board of Supervisors at its Saturday budget retreat to request additional funding for various needs dealing with stormwater. The county drains stormwater into large bodies of water through a municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4), which is a system of roads, drains, curbs and gutters. That system requires the count to have an MS4 permit, which renews every five years.
Under the new permit regulations, the handful of staff and roughly $520,000 budget the county’s stormwater division had last year may not be sufficient.
“We know the needs are large and we know the resources are finite,” said Fran Geissler, the county’s stormwater director.
For fiscal year 2015, which begins July 1, the stormwater division is seeking new staff and nearly $2.5 million for various projects. The county will also need to spend more money in the future to continue meeting all state and federal water cleanliness mandates. The funding needed in 2015 is just for the first steps.
Under new permit regulations, James City County is required to create a cleanup plan for every body of water in its boundaries. Waterways can naturally filter a certain amount of pollutants, but once the maximum level is met cleanup efforts must be undertaken. The stormwater division hopes to add another staff member to create cleanup plans and coordinate projects to meet them.
The regulations also require the county to educate the public about pollution, detect illegal spills into storm drains, control runoff from construction sites before and after construction and prevent pollution. The division also needs a staff member to train county staff in pollution prevention. Another part-time staff member is needed to inspect all stormwater facilities in the county.
Supervisor Kevin Onizuk (Jamestown) was interested in looking for creative funding measures to meet requirements. He said the Historic Triangle localities should consider sharing an employee to perform stormwater inspections across municipal lines.
As for costs, the stormwater division is projecting a need for another $600,000 over two years to reduce pollution at county facilities, including convenience centers and fire stations, and replacing old parts on the county’s 70 stormwater storage facilities.
Additionally, the stormwater division requested $2.2 million in funding for drainage improvements in older neighborhoods. Mailing and printing costs needed to educate the public about pollution are also expected to increase over the years.
“… If progress is not made in the early years of the permit cycle, higher resources in multiple areas will be needed in later years,” reads a staff memo to the board. “With adequate resources, the stormwater program can both meet the needs of citizens and businesses and address the mandated State and Federal permit requirements.”
Acting County Administrator Doug Powell said county staff has not yet put a price tag on the cost to meet all the new state and federal mandates dealing with water cleanliness, but it is expected to cost millions of dollars over the next few years. A 2013 projection put the cost around $10.5 million. He asked the board if it wanted to consider another funding option outside of existing taxes.
The board generally did not approve of another tax or fee to cover costs.
“As we are under budget and financial constraints, so are all our citizens and businesses,” Onizuk said.
Supervisor Jim Kennedy (Stonehouse) was not convinced the county would be able to fund the stormwater projects without help. Kennedy said he and Powell discussed the cost difference in letting the county and James City Service Authority handle the regulations. If JCSA handled them, it could charge a fee for the projects rather than a tax so tax-exempt organizations could help to foot the bill.
Aside from federal and state stormwater regulations, the supervisors discussed at the budget retreat the impending costs in Williamsburg-James City County Schools to build a fourth middle school because of the growing student population.
Stormwater tops the list of necessary projects for next year from the county’s Planning Commission, but the fourth middle school was also ranked as one of the top priorities. Kennedy was concerned whether one would need to be pushed off if the county is unable to fund both.
As it stands now, the county is unsure the funding amount the school board will request for the fourth middle school. There has been a lot of back-and-forth about where the school will be located –on the James Blair Middle School site or somewhere else– and what costs will be associated with the location, which could include a property purchase as well as the cost to build.
Looking ahead to next year, the county is already anticipating allocating about $4.7 million in increased funding to the schools for operating costs, salary, benefits, technology and classroom costs.
Aside from the fourth middle school and stormwater, the commission ranked 10 other projects as high priorities for the next year; in total, the projects require $74 million in funding. While the supervisors did not take time to discuss which projects had their support for the next year, they did discuss a few not on the list.
Supervisor Michael Hipple (Powhatan) would like to see the county offices consolidate into one centrally located building at some point so people can push an elevator button to move from office to office rather than driving a car. The county’s offices are currently spread out across the county, with the highest concentration in the multi-building government complex on Mounts Bay Road.
Kennedy asked for a spreadsheet showing costs associated with schools, the retirement system, the county’s debt service and stormwater. He asked staff to look into whether it could be a benefit to close the county’s convenience centers to offer instead curbside pickup as a way to mitigate stormwater pollution issues.
The county also commissioned a study into whether the area could benefit from an aquatic facility or an indoor sport facility. The study has not yet been completed, so staff is not sure whether one of those projects is on the horizon.
As county staff moves through the process of writing next year’s budget, it will bring more information back to the board for consideration. The board may decide later to advertise a higher tax rate for the county, but did not express much interest in doing so if it could be avoided.
Supervisor Mary Jones (Berkeley) said she wanted to maintain the existing tax rate, which is 77 cents per $1,000 of property value.
If the rate is raised 1 cent, that would add $1 million to the county’s annual revenue. For a homeowner with a house valued at $300,000, the annual tax would increase about $30.
The board may opt to advertise hearings on a higher tax rate but does not have to raise it, however it cannot advertise a low rate or no rate change and then decide later to raise it.
At the board’s regularly scheduled Tuesday meeting, it will hold a public hearing on the upcoming budget, seeking citizens’ input on their priorities.
