BY THE NUMBERS $11.7 million: Total water quality budget for the 2009-10 fiscal year $10 million: Total reserves for capital improvement projects for water quality program $5 million: Amount cityhas accumulated in reserves since the program began in 1993Source: Chattanooga
If Chattanooga’s blue-ribbon committee on water quality knew there was an unspent $5 million in the city’s budget, the recent hike in stormwater fees might have been reduced – at least for non-residential users, a committee member says.
“Having more information always allows you to make a better decision,” said Mike Price, president of MAP Engineers.
The nonresidential rate went from $9.60 a month to $6.15 per equivalent residential unit, which is based upon the size of the facility when compared with houses.
Mr. Price said there is a possibility the rate could have been placed at a lower level for non-residential users, then ramped up over time.
He did not mention the residential stormwater rates, which went from $36 a year to $115.20 a year, or $9.60 a month.
The city is considering a capital improvement budget that includes more than $11 million in stormwater projects. Daisy Madison, the city’s chief financial officer, said last week that $10 million of that money comes from reserves in the water quality program.
About $5 million comes from money the city accumulated over the last fiscal year because the budget was passed in April and all the money had not been spent, she said. The other $5 million comes from accumulation of funds since the water quality program began in 1993, she said.
But Mr. Price said members of the blue ribbon committee were never made aware there was an extra $5 million in the bank.
“I don’t know if it would change things a whole lot,” he said.
Councilman Jack Benson said the extra $5 million might have lowered the nonresidential rate somewhat. He said he did not recollect finance officials ever saying they had that much cash on hand.
“It looks like we didn’t get full disclosure,” he said.
Madison said Friday the city had the cash but, at the time, it was there to make sure the balance for the water quality program never reached zero. She said the money was to help maintain the operating budget.
“It was not our intentions to hide anything,” she said.
Benson said Friday he would still like more information on why the money was not spent and how it accumulated.
Councilwoman Pam Ladd said Friday she was shocked to hear the city had $5 million in reserves that accumulated over the last 17 years.
“It raised questions with me,” she said.
She said she thought the current stormwater rate is needed to sustain the program. But the $5 million could have been used last year for capital projects, she said, and it could have helped further the conversation about how and where to spend the money.
“There’s capital projects that sat because we were told we didn’t have the money,” she said.