What Should Johnston Residents Pay for Storm Water Runoff?

Johnston residents who attended Monday's discussion on a proposed  were divided on whether the fee is good public policy — and the amount of the fee is still in flux.

About 40 residents were on hand at a Johnston City Council public input meeting to hear a presentation on the proposed ordinance.

While several questions were answered for residents, the most important, such as the initial rate of the fee remain up in the air.

What should Johnston residents pay for storm water runoff and where are the problem areas in the city?

The ordinance, which would create a monthly fee for each property much like the current sewer fee, is configured using an average equivalent unit or ERU. One ERU would be equivalent to 4,000 square feet of solid surface area, including driveways, sheds and other structures on a property.

Initially, the proposed fee was compiled so each unit would generate $4.90 on a monthly bill. However, after a change in the interest rate, the initial , said David Wilwerding, community development director.

That initial fee could be further lessened once the council determines a cap for commercial property, which was initially 40 ERUs, and if properties such as schools and churches should be exempt from the fee.

Wilwerding will have more information for the council on the rate changes at a future work session.

Residents Divide in Their Opinions

gave mixed reviews on the proposed fee Monday evening.
Carl Holvik, of Johnston, showed photos of a "raging river" created from water runoff at his home in the past.

"There was so much water, when Morningside Drive would flood the cops would come close the road," he said.

When Holvik contacted council on the issue, they promptly addressed the problem, he said.

"I would like to see all residents have the opportunity to get their issues fixed like we did," he said. "That costs money, that's why I support the fee."

Russ Gerke, of Johnston, questioned whether gravel driveways would be considered impervious surface and be calculated into a property's ERU.

"When we built our house we wanted to use the existing rock driveway, but city code said we to pave it. That doesn't work for this, now you want to tax more because we had to pave it."

Wilwerding said gravel driveways would be considered impervious surface.

The proposed ordinance was designed to take effect on July 1, but without a decision soon, scheduled projects could be pushed back. 

Wilwerding said a three-month preparation time would be needed to calculate ERUs for all properties, notify residents in water bills of their ERU and set up the billing unit.