Tampa residents need to pay more to address chronic flooding problems that routinely threaten public health and safety. But exactly how much — somewhere between the $36 currently levied annually and an upper limit that could reach $180 — is not yet clear. Whatever the figure, the city should pair any increase with new planning and mass transit measures that will curb the impact of flooding on the much cheaper front end.
A proposal unveiled last week to the Tampa City Council could mean a five-fold increase in the city's stormwater assessment. Since 2003, the city has charged property owners an annual fee based on how much of their site is covered by impervious matter, such as buildings or driveways, which forces water to pool when it rains and ultimately causes more runoff. The owner of a medium-sized house pays $36 per year.
Under the proposal, the city could increase the assessment to $82 per year, roughly doubling the monthly fee to $6.83, which is in line with St. Petersburg. The extra money would allow the city to sweep streets more regularly and keep ditches, ponds, pipes and pumps in better condition. A second piece calls for assessing a new fee on most properties in the city limits, at $98 per year, or $8.17 per month. The city would use those funds for major new drainage projects across town, focusing on flood areas that have been around for decades.
This two-pronged approach for addressing maintenance and big-ticket capital projects makes sense, and it lays the foundation for establishing a fair process for charging residents to pay for the fixes in their neighborhoods. But increasing these fees fivefold overnight would be too heavy a burden for residents. A more gradual approach to increasing money for maintenance would give the city greater ability to control flooding while sparing residents from an unreasonable immediate price surge. The same caution should apply with a new funding fee. Tampa will never address its systemic drainage problems without a new funding source, but the projects need to be targeted and fairly funded by those who stand to benefit.
The council will debate these proposals over the summer, which provides plenty of time to reach the right decision. But it also needs to fold other factors into this strategy, from creating new incentives for residents to protect wetlands and limit the use of impervious materials on their property to assessing how mass transit can reduce the need for new road capacity. There are other arms of local government that can help, from Hillsborough County's mass transit agency to its Environmental Protection Commission. The city should bring them to the table and look for comprehensive ways to get ahead of the flooding problem.