Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Budgets topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Stockton moves stormwater rate plan to Proposition 218 ballot after public hearing
Summary
City staff told council aging stormwater infrastructure requires a multi-year rate transition; council found fewer than a majority protest ballots and directed staff to proceed to a mailed election under Prop. 218, with a proposed path from $2.10 to $8.10 over five years.
City staff told the Stockton City Council March 31 that decades of underfunding have left the city’s stormwater system undersized and fragile, prompting a Proposition 218 public‑hearing process on proposed monthly rate increases.
Deputy Director Jeff Morosovich outlined system needs including 620 miles of pipe, 77 pump stations and 23,000 catch basins, and said the city identified roughly $285 million in capital projects. "Our current stormwater rate was set in 1992 at $2.10; it has never been increased," he said, adding the enterprise has a $5 million annual operation‑and‑maintenance deficit.
HDR consultant Sean Corn presented a rate‑transition plan that would raise the equivalent-unit monthly charge to $3.85 in the first year and gradually move to $8.10 by year five to sustain ongoing O&M and identified capital work. He compared Stockton’s proposed top rate with other California utilities and said the proposed five‑year target would fall within the range of recent updates elsewhere.
The council opened the Prop. 218 protest hearing required to mail ballots to affected property owners. City Clerk Catherine Roland reported the tabulation of mailed protests: 45 protests received out of 84,871 mailed (far short of a majority), so the council may proceed to the mailed election. "If 50% plus one of returned ballots are in favor, council would then adopt the rates," Corn said.
Supporters and several council members stressed public outreach. Vice Mayor Lee and others urged town halls and tours of stormwater facilities to show where money would go. Council Member Blauer and others emphasized the risk of doing nothing: FEMA remapping and mandatory flood insurance can result if internal drainage is not improved.
Council voted to move the process forward and set the next public hearing in June if no majority protest blocks the election. The mailed ballots and ballot guide will explain the proposed transition and how property owners can vote.
