Why Stormwater Utilities Succeed
and Fail: A “Top Ten” List
“Paying for Municipal Stormwater Programs: Confronting Challenges,
Recognizing Opportunities and Building Community Consensus”
The Hugh Gregg Coastal Conservation Center, Greenland, NH
October 18, 2012
AMEC Environment
& Infrastructure, Inc.
Rich Niles, Water
Resources Project
Manager
Overview . . .
National Perspective
Stormwater Utilities in New England
Misconceptions of Failure and Success
A Framework for Success – Utility or Not
Overcoming Hurdles
Addressing the “Public” Factor
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
2
Existing Stormwater Utilities
Source: Stormwater Utility Survey 2012,
Figure 1, Warren Campbell, Western
Kentucky University
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
3
Stormwater Utilities by Year
Hurricane Andrew &
Midwest flooding
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
Source: Stormwater Utility Survey 2010, Figure 7,
Warren Campbell, Western Kentucky University
NPDES
Phase II Rule
4
New England
Utility Established
Implementation Underway
Feasibility Study
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
5
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
Bristol, RI
Cranston, RI
Westerly, RI
Middletown, RI
New London, CT
Stonington, CT
New Haven, CT
Norwalk, CT
Salem, MA
Northampton, MA
Auburn, MA
Yarmouth, MA
Bellingham, MA
Ayer, MA
Franklin, MA
Milford, MA
Fall River, MA
Gloucester, MA
Chicopee, MA
Westfield, MA
Reading, MA
Newton, MA
100,000
South Burlington, VT
Burlington, VT
120,000
Nashua, NH
Franklin, NH
Portsmouth, NH
Dover, NH
Portland, ME
Manchester, NH
Bangor, ME
Augusta, ME
Orono, ME
Wells, ME
Lewiston, ME
Kittery, ME
York, ME
South Berwick, ME
Elliot, ME
Berwick, ME
New England SW Utilities & Studies
Population (2010 census)
140,000
Utility Established
Implementation Underway
Feasibility or Other Study
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
6
Small New England Communities
Populations <20,000 (2010 census)
20,000
18,000
Utility Established
16,000
Implementation Underway
14,000
Feasibility or Other Study
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
National Statistics*
Avg. Population = 79,000
Median Population = 20,000
Smallest = 33 Indian Creek Village, FL
4,000
2,000
*Source: Stormwater Utility Survey 2010, Warren Campbell, Western
Kentucky University
0
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
7
AMEC Stormwater Funding Experience
. . . and Lessons Learned
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
8
Defining What Appears to
be “Failure”
What failure is not:
Not going forward with
the utility
Not achieving a mature
program in the first few
years – but knowing the
program path
Not having 100%
approval or a unanimous
vote
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
What failure is:
Having an uncontrolled
and unplanned crash
Not being able to meet the
expectations you created
(not a program driven
rate)
Having a generally
ignorant or unsupportive
public and stakeholders
9
Failure Mode #1:
not getting off the ground…badly
The
passengers
seem nervous
Ok we
better head
back to the
gate
The Stormwater Utility Express
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
10
Failure Mode #2:
flying…badly
You bet
Cap’n
what’s so
hard about
this
anyway?
Hey we’re
off and its
smooth
flying- isn’t
it grand?
11
Top 10 Reasons for
“Failure” . . .
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
We did it the convenient and inexpensive way.
We didn’t make a true compelling case.
We didn’t understand the process.
It was not legal.
We didn’t involve the public early enough or in the right ways.
Couldn’t explain our program and funding strategy or rates.
Didn’t prepare our elected officials for vocal complaints.
Our revenue and rate structure limited our ability to do our
program.
9. Our database was messed up without ability to easily fix.
10. Our program or performance did not meet community
expectations.
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
12
10. Our program or performance did
not meet community expectations
The revenue comes pretty fast when
you’re used to a trickle!!
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
13
9. Our database was messed up
without ability to easily fix
$1.2 M recovery
Retroactive,
inaccurate billing
with little recourse
for help.
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
14
8. Our revenue and rate structure
limited our ability to do our program
Indiana city lost 48% of its revenue through capping commercial –
thus its program lost public confidence and support after four years.
Other
Residential
Lost Revenue
Commercial
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
15
7. Didn’t prepare our elected
officials for vocal complaints.
Political Leaders:
Do not want to “fall on
the knife” for stormwater
Need to be given good
answers and accurate
information
If not…they might eject
and leave you to crash.
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
16
6. Couldn’t explain our program
and funding strategy or rates
It was so complex
even the
consultant could
not explain it
publicly
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
The “Rube Goldberg” rate structure:
four pollutants + multiple credits + three
surcharges + little actual data = one big failure
17
5. We didn’t involve the public
early enough or in the right ways
The Two Basic Rules of
Stormwater Survival:
Bring me in early I’m your
partner.
Bring me in late I’m your
judge.
Insert a group of citizens
between yourself and every
hard decision you must
make.
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
18
Never underestimate the ability of
political leaders to get it wrong or . . . .
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
19
…the media to send a wrong
message to the public …or
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
20
…your “supporters” to have second thoughts
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
21
No surprises !!
Public Information Plan
• Who is the public ?
• What is the message ?
• When is the message ?
• How is the message sent ?
• Emergency response
22
4. It was not legal
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
23
3. We didn’t understand the process
Five key areas:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Governance and inter-municipal
consensus
Program concept and the
compelling case
Public and political education
and support
Financial policies and
documents
Database development &
accuracy and customer service
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
A matter of “due
diligence” and
knowing that
stormwater is not
wastewater
24
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
25
2. We didn’t make a true
compelling case
There are lots of
drivers for action
… but are they
compelling?
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
26
1. We did it the convenient
and inexpensive way
Even a beginner
skier…
makes it down the
black diamond slope
sometimes…
but the risks are
great…
the odds are poor…
and the result of a fall
is very bad.
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
27
Don’t try this
at home !!
28
Success or Failure – It’s All
in the Process . . .
6 Follow an effective process and get good advice.
6 Involve the community early enough and in the right
ways – GET PUBLIC SUPPORT.
6 Make your program and user fee easy to understand.
6 Prepare your elected officials for negative feedback –
give them solutions.
6 Think of the long-term benefits and recognize the pain
is worth the gain.
6 Spend the money it takes – you get what you pay for.
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
29
The Other List . . .
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
We did it the right way – we followed due diligence in all aspects.
We made a strong compelling case.
We followed a carefully laid out process.
It was legal and well documented.
We involved the community early enough and in the right ways.
Our program and funding strategy and rates were simple and
rational.
7. Our elected officials were supportive and knowledgeable in
answering complaints.
8. Our revenue and rate structure fully supported our agreed to
program plan.
9. Our database was nearly flawless and our customer service
effective.
10. Our program or performance met community expectations.
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
30
Questions and Comments?
Rich Niles
[email protected]
978-392-5355 Direct
2 Robbins Road
Westford, MA 01886
These slides are copyright protected and cannot be duplicated without
the express and written permission of AMEC.
© 2012 AMEC, all rights reserved
31