Storm-drain survey no help Storm-drain survey no help (November 03, 2004)

Only 15 residents responded

by Bill D'Agostino

When the Palo Alto City Council gave conceptual approval to a winter storm-drain fee election, officials hoped an Internet survey would help them shape the measure.

But with only 15 residents responding as of last week, council members will likely lack the kind of public opinion that could help decide how much to increase the fee.

"It's not really a survey, it's a sampling of some opinions," Public Works' senior engineer Joe Teresi admitted. "We didn't have time. We didn't want to spend a lot of money on it."

Also, he said, since "it's such a complicated issue" a survey wouldn't be "representative" without first doing outreach and education.

The small number of respondents disappointed council members who had requested the survey.

"It sounds like we could have done a much better job," Councilwoman Yoriko Kishimoto said. "It doesn't sound like it's going to be very helpful."

Currently, residents and businesses pay $4.25 a month to maintain the elaborate system of underground pipes, pumps and basins that carry the city's storm water into the creeks. The city wants to hold a special election in February to raise the storm-drain fee in one of three ways to pay for needed repairs and upgrades.

The Southgate neighborhood has no storm drains, while many others don't have adequate pipes and basins to protect streets and properties from water damage.

The Public Works' 550-word poll, which was only distributed through the Midtown and Crescent Park neighborhood groups, asked Palo Altans for their opinion on four choices: keeping the current storm-drain fee, increasing the fee to $10 a month, growing it to $11 a month, or jumping it to $12 a month.

Proposition 218, which was approved by state voters in 1996 and required cities to hold mail-based elections of property owners to raise fees for services like storm drains, dictates the terms of the unusual election. There are 19,532 Palo Alto properties, but fewer voters since some own more than one property.

Each property owner, or long-term leaseholder, gets one ballot per property he or she owns. The Stanford Land Management Company, one of the largest landowners in Palo Alto, will get 26 ballots, for instance.

The $10 fee would pay for $17 million in projects over 12 years, as well as $500,000 in annual maintenance. The seven proposed projects would span the city, including improving the Matadero Creek pump station, building a new pump station for San Francisquito Creek and repairing the storm drains along Alma Street.

An $11 increase would also pay for $500,000 a year in gutter and sidewalk repairs. A $12 increase would also put $500,000 a year into a reserve fund to pay for future upgrades.

On Monday, the City Council will choose the proposed increase that will appear on the ballot. One final council meeting will have to be held on the topic in January to officially authorize the election. Ballots, under the current timeline, would be mailed to property owners in February.

The city is holding the election during the winter rainy season, hoping the inadequacies of the system will be on full display when property owners receive their ballots.

Some in the community argue the city's general fund -- which comes from property taxes, sales taxes and other typical city revenue -- should entirely pay for the storm-drain upgrades and maintenance. City officials argue that to do so would be at the expense of other services.

Even though the city's property owners -- including many out of the city, or even out of the country -- vote on the fee increase, it is the residents and businesses that occupy the properties that pay the fee.

This will be the city's second attempt to pass an increase in the storm-drain fee. In 2000, a $9 a month fee was soundly defeated by property owners.

The new measure, however, differs from the past effort -- it has a sunset clause (in 12 years), an advisory group advocating for it, and a proposed oversight committee to make sure the repairs are made. A "blue ribbon" committee of Palo Alto residents concluded last year that the fee needed to be increased.

Staff Writer Bill D'Agostino can be e-mailed at bdagostino@paweekly.com.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.