Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stormwater topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Town staff pitch $100,000 pilot to help homeowners fix storm‑water damage, propose advisory review panel
Summary
Town staff proposed a storm‑water grant pilot (staff suggested $100,000 start) with grant tiers (suggested $30,000 and $10,000 caps), homeowner maintenance responsibilities and an advisory panel to review applications; council asked staff to refine the draft and consult the town attorney and engineers.
Town staff presented a draft proposal for a private‑property storm‑water grant program and asked council for direction on program design, legal review and funding.
The manager summarized research on peer programs: he said the town heard back from Salisbury, Clemmons and Shelby, noting Clemmons budgets about $100,000 for a similar program and Shelby uses a storm‑water utility to fund projects. "We heard from the town of Clemens and they're a little bit uh closer in size to us and they're budgeting 100,000 to the year," staff reported.
Staff recommended a pilot budget (a $100,000 initial allocation was discussed) and proposed award tiers — including smaller awards up to $5,000 that could be approved administratively and larger awards (staff suggested $10,000 and up to $30,000 maximum) that would require council review. The draft also contemplates technical assistance for homeowners, direct contractor payments rather than reimbursement to homeowners, homeowner maintenance agreements and a multi‑step review involving town staff, an advisory panel and possibly outside civil‑engineering review for complex projects.
Council discussed whether the town or homeowners should manage bidding and construction oversight, liability and the need to have the town attorney and engineering firm review the draft. Staff recommended direct contractor payment to reduce issues where homeowners receive funds but do not complete work.
Several council members signaled support for moving forward with a revised draft and asked staff to return with refined language and legal review. Staff said they could revise the draft quickly and bring detailed language back for council consideration, and suggested starting outreach and application collection as early as this fall if the council approves an October work session.
No formal vote occurred at the meeting; council indicated preliminary support for the concept and directed staff to continue drafting program materials.
