Stormwater
Fees
Many
North
Carolinians
began
paying
stormwater
fees
during
the
past
decade.
Their
numbers
will
grow
with
time.
Stormwater
is
not
new,
but
charging
management
fees
as
a
separate
line
item
is
a
recent
development.
More
than
36
cities,
ranging
from
those
the
size
of
Charlotte
and
Raleigh,
to
smaller
cities
like
Mount
Holly
and
Oxford,
currently
charge
fees.
Residents
pay
tipping
fees
for
sending
garbage
to
landfills.
But
because
few
people
understand
stormwater,
many
folks
are
unsure
what,
exactly,
their
fees
pay
for.
Here
are
a
few
examples:
Stormwater
runoff
happens
when
rain
or
snowmelt
runs
over
land,
roads,
roofs,
parking
lots
and
other
hard
surfaces.
Some
rain
sinks
into
land,
replenishing
groundwater.
What
doesn’t
sink
in
joins
runoff
from
roads,
roofs,
and
parking
lots,
and
flows
untreated
to
the
closest
creek,
stream,
or
river.
It
accumulates
oil,
fertilizer,
pet
waste,
herbicides,
litter,
and
eroding
soil
on
the
way.
The
more
paved
surfaces,
like
those
you
find
in
neighborhoods
and
industrial
areas,
the
more
runoff
occurs.
Places
that
did
not
flood
before,
now
do.
Algae
booms,
fish
kills,
higher
water
treatment
costs,
and
revised
flood
plain
maps
are
some
unsavory
results.
Cities
and
counties
have
a
host
of
solutions
available,
but
none
are
free.
That’s
where
the
fee
comes
in.
Most
stormwater
systems
date
from
the
1950s,
but
did
not
grow
along
with
new
development.
Pipes
designed
to
carry
a
certain
amount
of
water
are
now
forced
to
carry
much
more.
Mapping,
repairing
and
replacing
this
infrastructure—much
of
it
below
paved
roadways—is
neither
easy
nor
cheap.
On
the
other
hand,
floods
are
expensive,
too.
Given
a
choice,
do
you
want
a
bigger
pipe,
or
flooded
roads
and
homes?
Stormwater
management
also
requires
land,
but
easements
are
expensive,
as
are
higher
insurance
rates,
dangerous
travel,
and
rising
water
treatment
costs.
Strategically
placed
easements
allow
constructed
wetlands,
detention
basins
and
rain
gardens
to
slow
and
clean
polluted
runoff.
Compensating
for
human
behavior
increases
the
price
we
pay
for
stormwater
management.
Street
sweepers,
sediment
and
erosion
inspectors,
leaf
collectors,
and
pet
waste
stations
keep
water
cleaner.
Excess
or
poorly
applied
pesticides,
herbicides
and
fertilizers,
as
well
as
oil
that
drip
from
poorly
maintained
vehicles,
enter
storm
drainsand
eventually
make
their
way
into
drinking
water
supplies.
Keeping
polluted
stormwater
out
of
our
drinking
water
supplies
requires
machinery
as
well
as
regular
maintenance.
It
makes
sense
if
you
consider
the
cost
to
pay
someone
to
monitor
streams
for
illegal
discharges
and
map
stormwater
systems
or
engineer,
install
and
maintain
existing
stormwater
systems.
With
recent
national
and
state
surveys
showing
most
fees
are
too
low
to
pay
for
these
things,
many
municipalities
find
themselves
in
a
bind.
Development
increases
land
values,
which
is
good.
But
the
same
growth
causes
more
polluted
runoff,
which
is
bad.
Faced
with
fierce
opposition
to
so-called
“rain
taxes,”
it’s
easy
to
see
the
dilemma
of
many
municipalities.
Some
towns
and
cities
increase
general
taxes.
Some
municipalities
charge
fees.
Others
do
nothing.
Fees
may
be
based
on
commercial
or
residential
status
or
the
amount
of
hardened
surfaces
per
lot.
Some
municipalities
that
ignore
stormwater
problems
now
face
fines
because
their
failing
systems
pollute
state
waters.
Where
stormwater
utilities
offer
fee-reducing
credits,
developers
respond
with
cluster
housing,
green
roofs,
cisterns,
local
retention
ponds,
stream
buffers,
and
reduced
curb
and
gutter.
Reducing
fees
for
towns
that
reduce
their
demand
on
the
collective
infrastructure
makes
sense.
Legislators
in
North
Carolina
know
how
important
it
is
to
manage
stormwater
runoff.
In
fact,
members
of
North
Carolina’s
own
General
Assembly
are
constructing
a
cistern
outside
the
legislative
building
so
stormwater
from
the
building
can
be
used
later
to
irrigate
nearby
landscaping.
Managing
stormwater
requires
funds,
so
fees
are
one
way
residents
take
responsibility
for
the
amount
and
quality
of
water
they
send
to
stormwater
systems.
Perhaps
a
little
knowledge
can
reduce
the
resistance.
Would
we
respond
differently
if
our
bills
were
labeled
the
“freedom
from
flooding,
clean
water
to
drink,
swimmable,
fishable
lakes
and
streams
for
our
kids
fee?”
I’d
like
to
think
so;
wouldn’t
you?