Creation of a Stormwater Utility in the City of Thornton. Brett Edward Henry. University of Colorado Denver. PUAD 5361, Christine Martell

Running Head: CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON Creation of a Stormwater Utility in the City of Thornton Brett Edward Henry University of Colorado Denver PUAD 5361, Christine Martell March 27, 2012

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary... 3 Introduction...5 Review of Scholarly Literature.. 8 Purpose & Methodology...14 Results & Discussion..... 16 Policy Recommendations...... 25 References..28 Appendix A: Definitions....32 Appendix B: Disc...34 Appendix C: Course Competencies... 35

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Thornton, like most Colorado Front Range municipalities, is grappling with the effects of an economy struggling to recover from a recession and looming unfunded mandates by the federal government. Although revenues are not increasing, citizens expect the city to still provide the same levels of service that were provided before the recession. In order to continue to provide these same levels of service as they relate to stormwater management, the city is investigating the creation of a stormwater utility. A stormwater utility is very similar to a water or sewer utility in that citizens are charged a fee for a specific service provided by the city. Instead of paying a fee for the delivery of potable water or for the acceptance of wastewater into the sanitary sewer, citizens pay for the stormwater contributed by their specific property into the public stormwater system. Relevant literature was reviewed to determine the guiding principles and elements for creating a stormwater utility. For the utility to be legally defensible, the most important thing is keep the service fees fair and equitable. A parcel-based fee, a fee influenced by property characteristics, is the most equitable fee structure. However, if set up properly a flat-fee structure can be equitable and more cost efficient than a parcel-based structure. To win public support, publically visible, high-interest projects should immediately be constructed to show the direct benefits of the utility. There should be very few exemptions or exclusions to the fee since the utility charges for a direct service. To learn from other municipalities who have already created a stormwater utility, 23 Colorado Front Range municipalities were examined to determine how their utilities are structured for funding operations, maintenance, and capital project costs associated with

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 4 stormwater management. The 23 municipalities utilize a variety of organizational structures and methods to administer the stormwater utility. Most municipalities use flat-fees for residential properties and parcel-based fees for non-residential properties. The majority of municipalities send their stormwater fees as part of the utility bill, which typically occurs monthly. There are few exemptions to the fee, which mostly include stormwater facilities, rights-of-way, and open space. Using liens, law, or turning off water service are the most common types of enforcement actions. The City of Thornton has decided to create a utility with the following characteristics: a. A flat-rate structure for residential properties. b. A parcel-based structure for non-residential properties. c. Undeveloped land, right-of-way, and properties not receiving potable water from a utility will be excluded from the stormwater utility fee. d. Stormwater utility fees will be enforced by lien, law, or by turning off the water service. e. Stormwater utility fees will be billed monthly in combination with the water and sewer bills. The next step is to analyze and provide several levels of a stormwater program based on various rates to present to City Council. If City Council reacts favorably to the stormwater utility fee, the city will hire a rate consultant to analyze the impacts of different fee distributions.

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 5 INTRODUCTION The City of Thornton is located in the north-denver metro area. Thornton has a population of approximately 120,000 people and is the sixth largest city in Colorado (U.S. Census Bureau, 2011). Thornton, like many municipalities in the Colorado Front Range and across the nation, is grappling with flat-lined revenues and unfunded federal mandates, while attempting to maintain current levels of service. One of these unfunded federal mandates has been issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. All municipalities are required to obtain an NPDES permit for their stormwater discharges into waters of the United States. The purpose of the NPDES permit is to prevent harmful pollutants from being washed or dumped into a municipality s separate storm sewer system (MS4) (EPA, 2011). The EPA began Phase I of the program for all municipalities with a population greater than 100,000 people in 1990 (EPA, 2011). Phase II of the program began in 1999 for all municipalities less than 100,000 people in urbanized areas (EPA, 2011). The program requires municipalities to adopt six minimum control measures in order to improve water quality in the MS4 (EPA, 2011). The six minimum control measures include: 1) Public Education and Outreach, 2) Public Participation and Involvement, 3) Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination, 4) Construction Site Runoff Control, 5) Post-Construction Site Runoff Control, and 6) Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping. The EPA (2011) believes that implementing these six minimum control measures should result in a significant reduction in pollutants discharged into receiving waters. Specific examples of the program include: mailing educational materials to residents and businesses to explain how their actions can impact stormwater quality; requiring all contractors to install best management practices (BMPs) to limit the amount of sediment washing off a

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 6 construction site; and having standard operating procedures in place in case a municipality s snow plow begins leaking diesel fuel into a storm drain inlet. All of the minimum control measures guide municipalities into practicing better procedures to limit the amount of polluted runoff entering receiving waters. In many cases, the NPDES permit requires municipalities to adopt new programs in order to satisfy the requirements in the six minimum control measures (White & Boswell, 2007). New stormwater programs cost money which is a reason some municipalities have adopted stormwater utilities (Atherton & Kutz, 1995). In the Colorado Front Range, 23 of the 30 largest municipalities have adopted stormwater utilities in order to fund their stormwater programs and flood control projects. The design of a stormwater utility is very similar to a water or sewer utility; citizens are charged a fee for their use of a service provided by the city. Instead of paying a fee for the delivery of potable water or for the acceptance of wastewater into the sanitary sewer, citizens pay for the conveyance of stormwater contributed by their property into the public stormwater system. Stormwater utilities collect fees based on use and not taxes since taxes would be against state statutes (England, 2001). Nearly all developed properties contain impervious surfaces that create more stormwater runoff than the original undeveloped property. The additional stormwater runoff flows off the property and into the city s stormwater system. The stormwater system is designed to safely convey stormwater runoff to a receiving water body while ideally maintaining the original water quality. The 23 Colorado Front Range municipalities that currently operate a stormwater utility are widely varied in their structures and methods for administering the utility. The 23

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 7 stormwater utilities were examined by reviewing their establishing ordinances, annual budgets, and organizational structures to identify the available options for the creation of Thornton s stormwater utility.

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 8 REVIEW OF SCHOLARLY LITERATURE The creation of a stormwater utility to fund stormwater maintenance and capital improvements is not a groundbreaking new idea, which is a great opportunity for the city because scholarly literature exists on the subject. The literature produces guiding principles and lessons to utilize when creating a stormwater utility. New stormwater utilities should borrow successful policies from municipalities that have already adopted stormwater utilities. Subsequent adopters can benefit from existing information, such as code language and stormwater management manuals, to review options and provide guidance during their respective innovative processes (Bollig, 2006, Pg. 67). Future adopters can also benefit by reviewing past successes, potential failures, and practices to incorporate into a new stormwater program (Bollig, 2006). The guiding principles of a stormwater utility should be to create a legally-defensible and publically acceptable utility. The fee structure should be based on the actual costs of service required to maintain the stormwater system while anticipating future needs. The fee should be sufficient to cover the expenditures needed for maintenance of the stormwater system while being fair and equitable to the users. A legally-defensible utility will place proportional burdens on the property as the property contributes to the stormwater problem (Callies, 1998). In 1991, Fort Wayne, Indiana established a stormwater utility as a solution to the city s stormwater funding problems from the NPDES permit requirements (Atherton & Kutz, 1995). City staff prepared a cost-of-service analysis and rate study that allowed the development of a rate structure and schedule that is revenue-sufficient, fair, equitable, legally-defensible and publicly acceptable (Atherton & Kutz, 1995, p. 38).

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 9 Charges may be based on several factors, but flat-rate fees will be the least labor intensive option for municipalities (Busco and Lindsey, 2001). A flat-rate fee assesses the same charge to each property regardless of parcel size or contribution to the stormwater system. This type of fee structure requires an initial calculation of the overall average contribution to the stormwater system for each property in order to determine the flat-rate fee. There are no continued calculations needed unless the zoning and standard building practices change greatly from when the original calculation was determined. A flat-rate fee should not be used if the property characteristics are not relatively homogeneous in nature because this will result in an inequitable distribution of cost. Stormwater utilities that utilize a parcel-based structure are preferred over a flat-fee structure in a non-homogeneous utility because the fee being charged is more proportionate to the benefit received (Sharples, 2006). Parcel-based fees use a specific characteristic of the property, such as the parcel size, impervious area, or runoff coefficient. The parcel-based structure accounts for variations in property types and how much stormwater is produced, therefore assessing fees more equitably to each property in a non- homogeneous group. In a parcel-based system, the data must not only be calculated initially, but the data must also be continually updated to reflect modifications to the property. A parcel-based fee may be more equitable, but is not as cost efficient to administer as a flat-rate fee (Busco and Lindsey, 2001). Charges may be distributed to everyone within the community or separated by watershed (Busco and Lindsey, 2001). A stormwater utility can be separated by watershed if, for example, watershed A has already been upgraded per national standards and watershed B is in dire need of multiple improvements. It would not be equitable to charge everyone in watershed A and B a fee if only watershed B will be receiving improvements from the fee. A consistent fee across the

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 10 entire community is more equitable if the revenues generated from the fee benefit all those across the community. Rate modifiers may be used to increase the equitability across the user fees (Debo & Reese, 2003). Modifiers may include basin-specific surcharges for needed capital improvement projects, surcharges for properties located in the floodplain, or discounts for properties that take a proactive approach to reducing their stormwater runoff (Debo & Reese, 2003). A stormwater utility can be structured so incentives are provided for users to reduce their stormwater runoff and reliance on the stormwater system (Sharples, 2006). Stormwater fees should be consolidated with other utility bills that are already mailed monthly to water and sewer users. Fort Wayne discovered by piggy-backing bills, the city reduced postage and other associated charges (Atherton & Kutz, 1995, p. 38). Combining stormwater utility fees with other utility bills eliminates duplication and overhead required to administer the fee. Alternative rates and a five-year cash flow analysis should be prepared as options to the stormwater utility to support rate selection (Atherton & Kutz, 1995). Options for the utility may range from the bare minimum levels of service needed to maintain and operate the stormwater system to a more proactive program designed to enhance water quality and reduce flooding hazards to the public. Caution should be exercised in determining what activities to fund out of the stormwater utility. Many utilities fail by not emphasizing that a stormwater utility is a dedicated source of funding that can only be used for stormwater projects and maintenance (Kaspersen, 2000). Revenues generated by the stormwater utility fee must be kept separately and spent specifically

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 11 on capital projects and maintenance programs that directly benefit the utility to avoid accusations the fee is simply a veiled attempt at taxation something a city cannot do without a vote of the people (Callies, 1998). High priority stormwater projects should be immediately constructed by the stormwater utility to gain public support for the new user fee. Brevard County, Florida, had enough stormwater projects to keep the utility busy for 20 years, but realized the importance of selecting and immediately building projects that would win public support for the program (England, 2001). Projects that show a direct improvement to the community will help correlate the necessity of a stormwater utility. Brevard County also realized that many small, simple projects could be designed in-house and constructed quickly to obtain positive public support of the new fee (England, 2001). Utilization of in-house resources will save time and money while further demonstrating the benefit of a stormwater utility. Since a stormwater utility is a fee and not a tax, there should be very few, if any, exclusions to the fee unless those properties do not contribute to stormwater runoff. Many communities exempt roads, railroad rights-of-way, undeveloped properties, and government property from stormwater charges (Busco and Lindsey, 2001). Whichever exclusions are chosen, the impact of exemptions should be evaluated to not only identify if the funding can still be realistically distributed across the users, but also to make sure unnecessary burdens are not placed on a specific user group such as residential, commercial, or industrial customers (Busco & Lindsey, 2001). The fee should be dispersed to the users in the most equitable and cost effective manner possible.

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 12 The organizational structure of a stormwater utility should be determined by the amount of resources needed to maintain the stormwater program. Two types of organizational structures are available based upon the needs of the program; a dispersed utility where the resources are distributed across several divisions or an independent division created specifically for the stormwater utility (Busco & Lindsey, 2001). In a dispersed organizational structure, only portions of existing staff positions through multiple divisions are funded by the utility. In an independent stormwater division, the stormwater utility will solely fund the division instead of the mixed funding approach used in the dispersed structure. An independent stormwater division is typically chosen if the stormwater program requires more staff time than existing divisions can provide (Busco & Lindsey, 2001). Further analysis should investigate the approximate utility rate based on operations, maintenance, and capital project costs of the stormwater utility. The analysis should determine how the burden of costs is being distributed across user groups. In other words, the analysis should determine if certain user groups are paying a greater share of the utility costs than another user group. In a study by Keller (2002), 71 percent of the 48 randomly selected stormwater utilities in the United States chose to use a consultant in formulating the stormwater utility. If existing staff does not have the capacity to analyze the utility rate, a consultant should be selected to perform the analysis. The review of scholarly literature produces a guiding framework for the research and structure in formulating a new stormwater utility. Utilizing flat-rate fees for parcels with similar property characteristics will be the most cost efficient option for the city. Parcel-based fees should be used for dissimilar properties in order to maintain equity in the fee distribution. The city should grant few exceptions from the stormwater utility fee otherwise the fee could be

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 13 challenged as a veiled attempt at taxation. Rates should be only be related to stormwater program costs in order clearly justify the stormwater utility fee.

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 14 PURPOSE & METHODOLOGY The City of Thornton currently provides maintenance for 160 miles of storm sewer and 14 different drainageways. In addition, the city s MS4 Program has supporting functions in seven different Divisions within the city in order to meet the requirements of the NPDES permit. A utility could supplement funding of these stormwater activities depending upon its structure. The purpose of this project is to determine how other Colorado Front Range municipalities have structured their stormwater utilities so the City of Thornton can choose which practices to incorporate into the new stormwater utility. A full list of the Front Range municipalities can be found in Appendix B. To aid in determining how to set up a stormwater utility, the City of Thornton generated the following list of questions concerning the 23 Colorado Front Range municipalities that already have stormwater utilities. 1. When did the 23 municipalities adopt their stormwater utilities? 2. Are the fees a flat rate or parcel based rate? 3. If the fee is a parcel based rate using impervious area, how often are the impervious areas updated or validated? 4. How do the fee structures distinguish between residential, commercial, industrial, and other properties? 5. What are common impervious area ratios for residential, commercial, industrial, and mobile homes? 6. Is the same rate charged across the entire city or are the rates separated by watershed? 7. How often are the fees billed?

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 15 8. Are the fees billed separately or with the utility bill? 9. How are the fees enforced? 10. What current stormwater activities within the city could currently be funded by a utility? 11. What are common exemptions or exclusions to the fee? 12. How are the stormwater utilities structured (dispersed or a single division)? 13. Based upon the operations, maintenance, and capital project costs, what are the approximate user costs of the stormwater utility fee? All 23 of the Colorado Front Range municipalities with stormwater utilities keep their municipal code, ordinances, and 2012 budgets online. Stormwater utility information from each municipality was obtained from the respective websites to create a worksheet summary of stormwater utilities with the exception of the City of Brighton. The City of Brighton did not have their stormwater utility information available online and repeated attempts to obtain this information from Brighton s staff were unsuccessful. A copy of the worksheet can be found in Appendix B. Question 10 required coordination with existing city personnel to compile the annual operations, maintenance, and capital costs. Any activity directly related to the city s MS4 Program, stormwater system maintenance, stormwater capital improvement program, or floodplain management and administration was included in the analysis. A spreadsheet of this information along with who contributed the information can be found in Appendix B.

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 16 RESULTSS & DISCUSSION The literaturee review highlighted guiding principles and lessons for creating a stormwater utility. In addition, the literature described the importance of reviewing successful practices from municipalities that already have a stormwater utility. The Colorado Front Range municipalities with stormwater utilities weree reviewed too answer the following questions. 1. When did the 23 municipalities adopt their stormwater utilities? The first stormwater utility adoption in the area was the City of Aurora in 1974. The most recent adoption of was by the City of Brighton in 2011. Most of the adoptions occurred over the past ten years, likely due to Phase II of the NPDES permit being issued in 1999 requiring municipalities less than 100,000 in population to adopt the six minimum control measures to improve water quality (EPA 2011). A fulll list of stormwater utility adoptions can be found in Appendix B. Figure 1 Front Range Stormwater Utilities 25 20 15 10 5 0 Stormwater Utility Adoptions

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 17 2. Are the fees a flat rate or parcel-based rate? The majority of municipalities (64 percent) utilize a flat rate for residential fees while the remaining 36 percent incorporate a variation of the parcel-based rate (lot size, impervious area, or runoff coefficient). 82 percent of the Colorado Frontt Range municipalities use a version of the parcel-based fee for non-residential properties.. Non-residential fees typically do not utilize a flat rate due to the considerable variation in lot characteristics (Bucso & Lindsey, 2001) ). Figure 2 Residential Fees 9% 4% 23% 64% Flat Fee Lot Size Fee Imperviousness Fee Coefficient Fee Figure 3 Non Res idential Fees 9% 9% 41% 41% Flat Fee Lot Size Fee Imperviousness Fee Coefficient Fee

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 18 3. If the fee is a parcel-based rate using impervious area, how often are the impervious areas updated or validated? Even though 41 percent of the municipalities utilize an impervious area calculation for non-residential fees, only three stormwater ordinances define how or when the data is updated. The three utilities that did include language stated: a. Impervious areas are updated every 10-years; b. Imperviousness data is updated when 10 percent or 1,000 square feet of impervious change occurs on the property; or c. As concerns are received. 4. How do the fee structures distinguish between residential, commercial, industrial, and other properties? Despite variability in structures, in general, there were two common types of structures: a. Residential and Non-Residential, or b. Residential, Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional If a municipality chose to use flat rates, there were generally more detailed categories for the types of land use and structures in order to keep the fee equitable for the amount of runoff produced versus service fee charged. Municipalities that chose to use a parcelbased structure generally had fewer categories encompassing a broader spectrum of property types because the parcel-based system accounts for variations in property characteristics.

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 19 5. What are common impervious area ratios for commercial, industrial, and mobile homes? 66 different parcels were sampled and grouped into separate property types to generate the average impervious area as shown in Table 1. A high impervious ratio indicates a higher amount of impervious area within the property. A full detail of all sampled properties can be found in Appendix B. Table 1 Property Type Ratio Commercial 0.78 Industrial 0.65 Residential 0.28 Mobile Home Estates 0.52 Duplex/Condo/Townhome 0.56 Multi-Family (Apartments) 0.64 School 0.31 Summary Acres 0.37 Cemetery 0.11 Church 0.32 6. Do other municipalities charge the same rate for the entire city or are the rates separated by watershed? None of the Colorado Front Range municipalities charge different rates for different sections or watersheds within the city. All of the municipalities use the same fee structure in their jurisdiction. 7. How often are the fees billed? 77 percent of municipalities bill their stormwater charge monthly which is the same interval as their other utility bills. The City of Denver charges users annually and sends the stormwater charge as a separate bill.

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 20 Figure 4 Billing Practices 4% 5% 9% 5% 77% Monthly Bi Monthly Quarterly Annually Unknown 8. Are the fees billed separately or with the utility bill? 64 percent of municipalities choose to mail the stormwater charge with an existing utility bill. Combining the stormwater charge with the standard utility bill can save the municipality postage and other associated charges (Atherton & Kutz, 1995). Figure 5 Billing Practices 27% 9% 64% With Utility Bill Separate Bill Unknown

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 21 9. How are the fees enforced? 57 percent of municipalities use liens as their enforcement action with several also reserving the right to pursue law or collect payment via otherr utility collections. Several also indicate the ability to shut off potable water service as an enforcement action. Figure 6 Enforcem ment Actions 13% 7% 3% 20% Law Lien Collect via other Utility 57% Reference other Code Not Identified 10. What current stormwater activities within the cityy could currently be funded by a utility? Seven different city divisions were found to be involved in stormwater management at the current levels of service. In 20122 dollars, thiss equates to approximately $1,000,000 annually for the current stormwater program. The Engineering Services Division also made a list of upcoming, but non-budgeted capital improvement projects that should be funded by the stormwaterr utility. This list includes nine projects at an estimated $4,500,000 million dollars. Refer to Appendix B for more information.

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 22 11. What are common exemptions or exclusions to the fee? The most common exemption of the stormwater fee is undeveloped property. The rational for exempting undeveloped property is these properties do not produce any additional runoff than what was occurring in its natural state (Busco & Lindsey, 2001). Other common exemptions included: Right-of-Way, stormwater facilities, and public parks. 12. How are the stormwater utilities structured (dispersed or a single division)? In other words, does the stormwater utility solely fund an entire division or does the utility fund multiple resources dispersed in several divisions? The municipal budgets for Arvada, Aurora, Englewood, Fort Collins, Golden, Greeley, Lakewood, Littleton, Longmont, Loveland, and Westminster were examined to determine how the stormwater utility funds were distributed. Seven of the eleven cities utilized a dispersed structure funding portions of multiple divisions. The other three cities had very limited stormwater budgets which only funded one or two positions within a division. Only Greeley utilized a single stormwater division funded by the stormwater utility. 13. Based upon the operations, maintenance, and capital project costs, what are the approximate user costs of the stormwater utility fee? Three scenarios were reviewed: 1) a 50-50 percent distribution of costs between residential and non-residential properties, 2) a70-30 percent distribution of costs, and 3) a 30-70 percent distribution of costs. The proposed rates were then analyzed against the other stormwater utility fees based on the average residential lot size of 8,716 square feet, a 50,000 square foot commercial property, and a 50,000 square foot non-residential/non-

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 23 commercial property. Only the residential figuree for each scenario has been shown below; however, all figures can be found in Appendix B. Figure 7 Figure 8

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 24 Figure 9 Reviewing Colorado Front Range municipalities withh a stormwater utility provides information on whichh practices are being utilized to fundd stormwaterr programs.

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 25 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS A review of scholarly literature was conducted to determine the guiding principles and lessons for creating a stormwater utility. Next, 23 Colorado Front Range municipalities were examined to determine what principles and practices are currently being used to fund their stormwater programs. After reviewing all the information, the City of Thornton has chosen to move forward with the following stormwater utility structure. The city will take advantage of the cost efficiency of flat-rate fees on homogeneous properties and the equity of parcel-based fees on non-homogenous properties. The fees will be effective for the entire city and not broken into different rates based on location or watershed. The city determined that although some portions of the city may need more infrastructure improvements than others, the majority of the city will still benefit by these improvements and should pay an equal share. Utilizing the same rate structure for the entire city is consistent with all other stormwater utilities in the Front Range. All residential properties will be based on a flat fee. The main reason is to simplify the billing process and utilize the stormwater funds as efficiently as possible. Instead of spending stormwater funds to constantly track and update a parcel-based system for all residential properties, the flat rate system will allow the city to spend less money administering the billing process. In addition, city development code and standard building practices influence future residential properties to yield similar impervious ratios to the calculated average. All other properties will be based on a parcel-based fee to account for the variability in lot characteristics. The parcel based system will be simplified into 2 categories: Commercial and Non-Commercial/Non-Residential. The analysis section determined these categories to be

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 26 necessary in order to equitably distribute costs to the different land uses based on their impervious ratios. Using the parcel-based structure for all non-residential properties will not be nearly as labor intensive as performing this same task for all residential properties. Using a flat rate system on the non-residential properties was determined to not be fair and equitable to account for properties of differing size and characteristics. The stormwater utility charge will be billed monthly to users as part of the existing water and sewer bill. The city chose to utilize a combined billing in order to manage the utility in the most efficient way possible. A separate billing system would consume more funds from the stormwater utility that could instead be spent on operations, maintenance, or capital projects to maintain or improve the system. The city will use a combination of enforcement actions consistent with other stormwater utilities in the area. Liens against the property, settlement through law, or turning off water service will all be utilized as methods for deterring non-payment. The exact escalation process has not been determined as of this paper. Very few properties will be excluded from the stormwater utility fee because this is a fee for service, not a tax. Only detention ponds, rights-of-way, undeveloped properties, and properties that do not receive potable water from a utility will be excluded. These exclusions are typically used for stormwater management or produce very little stormwater runoff and are therefore excluded from the fee. The city currently spends approximately one million dollars per year on stormwater operations and maintenance and four and a half million dollars will need to be spent on capital projects. Using three separate cost distribution models, the average user rates were determined

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 27 for residential properties, commercial properties, and non-residential/non-commercial properties. These average user rates were then compared with the other Front Range municipality rates for the same properties. The city intends to hire a rate consultant to further analyze the potential rates and impacts to users once approved by City Council.

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 28 REFERENCES Atherton, T., & Kutz, T. (1995). Utility Solves Stormwater Problems. American City & County, January, 38. Bollig, S. R. (2006). Diffusion of Innovations: How Local Governments Shape Public Policy to Promote Progressive Stormwater Management. Masters Terminal Project for the Department of Planning, Public Policy and Management of the University of Oregon. Retrieved from Google Books. Busco, D., & Lindsey, G. (2001). Designing Stormwater User Fees: Issues and Options, Stormwater. The Journal for Surface Water Quality Professionals, November-December. Callies, D. L. (1998). Exactions, Impact Fees And Other Land Development Conditions. Proceedings of the 1998 National Planning Conference, AICP Press. City of Arvada (2011). Stormwater Utility. Retrieved from http://arvada.org/aboutarvada/stormwater-utility/. City of Aurora (2011). Retrieved from https://www.auroragov.org/auroragov/index.htm. City of Boulder (2011). Stormwater Billing. Retrieved from http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1521 2&Itemid=5159 City of Brighton (2011). Stormwater Management Program. Retrieved from http://www.brightonco.gov/department/division.php?fdd=38-70 City of Broomfield (2004). City Council Agenda Memorandum. Retrieved from http://www.broomfield.org/council/onlineagendas/2004-11-23/items/10f%20- %20Stormwater%20Utility.pdf City of Centennial (2011). Retrieved from http://www.centennialcolorado.com/ City of Denver (2010). Storm Drainage Questions. Retrieved from http://pwwmd.denvergov.org/customerservice/stormfaq.html

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 29 City of Englewood (2011). Englewood Municipal Code. Retrieved from http://www.englewoodgov.org/index.aspx?page=123 City of Federal Heights (2007). Drainage Utility Fee. Retrieved from http://www.fedheights.org/content/view/106/138/ City of Firestone (2009). A Resolution Establishing Stormwater Utility Service Fees. Retrieved from http://www.ci.firestone.co.us/forms/pdf/resolution%20no.%2009-06.pdf City of Fort Collins (2011). Stormwater. Retrieved from http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/residential/rates/stormwater City of Greeley (2011). Stormwater FAQ s. Retrieved from http://greeleygov.com/stormwater/faqs.aspx City of Glendale (2009). Retrieved from http://www.glendale.co.us/ City of Golden (2011). Retrieved from http://www.cityofgolden.net/ City of Lafayette (2011). Code of Ordinances. Retrieved from http://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientid=10101&stateid=6&statename=colorado City of Lakewood (2011). 2010 Stormwater Management Utility Report. Retrieved from http://www.lakewood.org/ppw/engineering/engineeringutilitiesenvironservices/smur eportmar11.pdf City of Littleton (2011). 2011 Utility Billing Information. Retrieved from http://www.littletongov.org/utilitypayments/information.asp City of Longmont (2002). Storm Drainage. Retrieved from http://www.ci.longmont.co.us/pwwu/storm/index.htm City of Louisville (2011). Stormwater Program and Fees. Retrieved from http://www.louisvilleco.gov/services/publicworks/wastewatertreatmentdivision/sto rmwaterprogram/tabid/392/default.aspx City of Lone Tree (2011). Retrieved from http://www.cityoflonetree.com/

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 30 City of Loveland (2011). Rates and Fees. Retrieved from http://cityofloveland.org/index.aspx?page=1571 City of Northglenn (2011). Stormwater. Retrieved from http://www.northglenn.org/stormwater City of Sheridan (2011). Stormwater Explanation. Retrieved from http://www.ci.sheridan.co.us/index.aspx?nid=182 City of Westminster (2006). Stormwater Management Program. Retrieved from http://www.ci.westminster.co.us/citygovernment/citycode/titleviii/13stormwaterman agementprogram.aspx City of Wheat Ridge (2011). Stormwater. Retrieved from http://www.ci.wheatridge.co.us/index.aspx?nid=107 Commerce City (2011). Retrieved from http://www.ci.commerce-city.co.us/ Debo, T. N., & Reese, A. J. (2003) Municipal Stormwater Management (2 nd ed). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, LLC. England, G. (2001). Success Stories of Brevard County, Florida Stormwater Utility, Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 127 (3), 180-185. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2011). Stormwater Discharges from Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems. Retrieved from http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/munic.cfm Kaspersen, J. (2000). The Stormwater Utility: Will It Work in Your Community? Stormwater, The Journal for Surface Water Quality Professionals, November-December. Keller, B. D., (2002). Public Involvement and Education: The Critical Elements to the Success of Stormwater Utilities. Stormwater, The Journal for Surface Water Quality Professionals, May-June. Sharples, D. (2006). Who Will Pay for the Rain? Examining the Utility Approach as a Mechanism for Funding and Maintaining Stormwater Management Practices. Masters

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 31 Thesis for Tufts University. Retrieved from Google Books. Town of Castle Rock (2011). Retrieved from http://www.crgov.com/ Town of Frederick (2011). Stormwater Utility. Retrieved from http://frederickco.gov/government/engineering-and-utilities/storm-water-utility.htm Town of Parker (2011). Stormwater Utility Fee Billing and Payment. Retrieved from http://www.parkeronline.org/faq.aspx?tid=15 U.S. Census Bureau (2011). American Fact Finder. Retrieved from http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml White, S. S., & Boswell, M. R. (2007). Stormwater Quality and Local Government Innovation, Journal of the American Planning Association, 73 (2), 185-193.

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 32 APPENDIX A: DEFINITIONS

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 33 DEFINITIONS Flat Rate: all properties are billed the same amount, regardless of size. Illicit Discharge: Any discharge into the storm sewer system that is not stormwater. Impervious Area Rate: the rate is determined based on the amount of impervious surface within the property. This method requires a detailed and comprehensive analysis of each property. Lot Size Rate: the rate is determined based on the overall lot size which is typically determined by property records. Parcel Based Rate: the rate is determined based on parcel attributes, such as parcel size, impervious area, soil type, or vegetation type. Runoff Coefficient Rate: the rate is determined by a runoff coefficient, which is typically calculated in engineering equations for determining the amount of runoff from a property. This method requires a detailed and comprehensive analysis of each property. Storm Sewer System: Any structure used to convey stormwater, which may include curb & gutter, storm pipe, catch basins, detention ponds, or drainage swales

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 34 APPENDIX B: DISC

CREATION OF A STORMWATER UTILITY IN THE CITY OF THORNTON 35 APPENDIX C: COURSE COMPETENCIES