Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Stormwater topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Hamilton proposes raising stormwater fee to $7 in 2025 and $9 in 2026 to fund proactive repairs

Hamilton City Council · October 23, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

City engineers recommended raising the flat monthly stormwater fee from $5 to $7 in 2025 and $9 in 2026 to fund proactive lining, upsizing and equipment purchases; staff estimated about $2.9 million annually for capital work and provided a first/second‑reading schedule in November.

Alan Messer, director of engineering, and Christine Carr, director of business services, told council the city needs a higher, proactive stormwater fee to address aging infrastructure and meet state and federal permit obligations.

Messer noted the system includes over 100 miles of storm pipe—some dating to the 1800s—and described failures in corrugated metal pipes and collapsed sections that have damaged sidewalks and created sinkholes. He urged a proactive approach: lining and upsizing pipes now to avoid far greater replacement costs later.

Carr said the recommended rate plan would raise the residential equivalent residential unit (ERU) charge by $2 in 2025 (to $7) and by $2 more in 2026 (to $9). She told council the plan aims to support increased operating and maintenance costs and deliver, on average, $2.9 million in capital improvements annually for lining, replacement and equipment.

Staff described the billing structure (a flat monthly fee per ERU), estimated customer impacts and compared Hamilton’s utility bills to peer communities. They also proposed a timeline for the ordinance: first reading Nov. 6, second reading Nov. 13 and a subsequent vote and waiting period preceding implementation Jan. 1 following adoption.

Council did not take the final vote during this meeting; staff said the PUC had previously voted to support the recommendation.