By Anna Herod
Kyle residents may need to expect the possible addition of another bill to their monthly expenses as city officials consider the implementation of a stormwater utility fee.
District 1 council member Diane Hervol first brought the proposal forward to council in March.
“With the recent flood – the Halloween flood – we had serious (problems),” Hervol said. “Many of the ditches were overflowing beyond capacity. I think that the drainage ditches within the city limits of Kyle are in serious need of repair. And, quite frankly, according to city staff, landowners and or (Home Owner’s Associations) are responsible for maintaining drainage ditches.”
Since the initial introduction of the proposal, city staff began investigating what start-up costs may be to create a stormwater utility.
“I just felt it is necessary to do something regarding the drainage ditches,” Hervol said. “And, I felt instead of homeowners, landowners and/or HOAs experiencing the cost, I was trying to create some sort of mechanism that would be less costly for them.”
Proper maintenance of stormwater drainage is important when trying to prevent adverse affects of stormwater runoff, said Kathy Roecker, stormwater management plan administrator, during a March meeting.
Runoff occurs when precipitation flows over roads, cement, rooftops and other surfaces, stopping it from soaking into the ground.
A lack of proper stormwater drainage allows the volume of runoff to increase during storms, carrying it into local bodies of water. The end result causes flooding, erosion and the decimation of important habitat for wildlife in streams, Roecker said during her presentation.
Although paying more bills is not normally an ideal situation, a stormwater utility may better the community and decrease flood risk.
“Well, I think that if we’re creating a transparent process, and are getting feedback from our constituents and citizens, I think that (the decision) will be fair,” Hervol said. “I invite everyone’s opinion. I’d like to hear it and see if this is something they’re willing to do.”
The next steps to creating a stormwater utility fee require distribution of three public notices within 30 days before a public hearing, optional public meetings to welcome citizen comment, as well as a public hearing and city council vote.
If the council approved the proposal after those steps, city staff would officially begin to work toward the implementation of the utility fee.
New Braunfels, Georgetown, San Marcos, Round Rock and Austin are among the 92 cities in Texas that already have a stormwater utility, according to Roecker’s presentation. Buda, along with Kyle, is still considering the possibility of implementing one.
San Marcos collects its drainage fees on a tiered system of small lots, medium lots and large lots, which are charged $5.20, $8.32 and $9.53 per month, respectively.
How the possible fee in Kyle would be structured has yet to be determined. Hervol said she doesn’t expect the city to look at the way surrounding municipalities structure their fees to come up with their own.
Rather, the city will assess start-up fees and how much funding it would take to maintain the utility. Hervol said projected growth and a decades-old system presents “new challenges” and needs to flood control.
“We have to ensure, in my opinion, that everyone who contributes to Kyle’s stormwater drainage pays for the services they use.”
She said Kyle has many commercial businesses that have no responsibility to maintenance of the drainage system whatsoever. She said the fee would ensure those who use the system pay for its maintenance.
“I want to be perfectly clear that I intend to reach out to my constituents and business owners for feedback to ensure that this is something they’d be interested in doing,” Hervol said.
