SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

%001 1-01 City of Stockton and County of San Joaquin Page 25 NPDES Permit CAS0083470 Response to Comments Based on the permit conditions and requirements in other jurisdictions, the County requests that the language of the San Diego permit, as cited above,be adopted for use in the tentative permit for the City of Stockton/San Joaquin County. Response: See response to City's Comment 11. 15. Comment: "Item 2, D(16) Fiscal Analysis," County Attachment B "Each Permittee shall secure the resources necessary to meet the requirements of this Order ." This Order would impose numerous new requirements for programs, studies, testing, and maintenance related to storm sewers and pollution prevention. By law, local governments are limited in their ability to fund the increased costs without competing for the limited discretionary funding in the County General Fund against other important services such as public safety,welfare, health services, library, and park services. This provision gives the State the ability to demand spending of County funds at the level the State deems appropriate, thereby superceding the authority of the County Board of Supervisors. In 1996, California voters approved Proposition 218 which requires that any new or revised fee, tax, or assessment that is related to property ownership be approved by majority vote of the property owners that are assessed. There is an exemption in the proposition for water, sanitary sewer, and solid waste fees. San Joaquin County is actively supporting a statewide movement by cities and counties to change state law to include an exemption for stormwater utilities. Case law relating to Proposition 218 and storm drainage has favored the liberal interpretation provision of the proposition, which was written to favor property owners. On June 3, 2002 a California appellate court held that the City of Salinas' stormwater fee was in violation of Proposition 218. This decision will present a significant statewide roadblock to NPDES funding compliance. A summary of the Appellate Court's findings is attached for your reference. The policy of San Joaquin County is to establish a special district for any service that the County does not normally provide on a countywide basis. In addition to County Service Area 54, which funds the NPDES program, the County has over 100 special district that provide water, sewer, drainage, street lighting, and other enhanced levels of service. No General Fund revenues are used to fund this multitude of special services. The County recently held two Proposition 218 elections to increase the rates for lighting districts. Both fee increases were defeated giving the county no option other than shutting off over 50%of the streetlights in each district. Statewide there has been only one ballot proceeding for establishing a storm water fee and that proposal was defeated. The County could realize some additional program revenue through development and building fees. Combined with the fixed revenue of County Service Area 54 this would still not fund the expanded program requirements.