John Clarke column: When it rains, it does more than pour

John Clarke photo

John Clarke

Date: July 03, 2023

It seems that the subject of Stormwater fees comes floating to the top every time there is a heavy rainfall in Augusta.

Whenever the Stormwater Program is questioned, the walls of Jericho seem to be rebuilt, and the gates are triple bolted so no Philistine may enter. The Philistines are anyone that dares ask a question.

All should know that the government’s stated reason for the Stormwater fees which came into being in 2016, according to an Engineering Department budget report, was to provide supplemental funding to support county-wide roadway and drainage infrastructure. The fee was never intended to fully fund the county-wide Stormwater program. 

The Stormwater program is under the direction of the Engineering Department. That in itself does not lend itself to being very auspicious. 

The director of the Augusta Engineering Department is Hameed Malik, Ph.D., P.E., who also acts as director of the Environmental Services Department. But not to worry that he is underpaid. In 2021, his Engineering department position pay was listed as $159,462 a year. For taking over the environmental leadership, he also received a hefty increase in pay.

The Stormwater services manager is listed as Oscar P. Flite lll, Ph.D. In 2021, his salary was listed as $95,026 a year. 

Now, remember that the American Rescue funds gave everyone a raise and many received bonuses. So, these 2021 salaries listed are larger now in 2023.

The Stormwater program has been scheduled to receive $15.3 million a year since beginning in 2016. So that means from 2016 to 2021, the program was scheduled to receive $91.6 million total revenue. 

The claim now is that there was a shortfall of $14.5 million. How about true accountability? How and where was the remaining $77 million dollars spent ?

That pesky shortfall must be the reason the grass can’t receive the six cuts a year that are scheduled. Must also be why the infrastructure can’t be maintained as well, not to mention upgraded. 

The program supposedly has a staff of approximately 117 people on payroll. Only 58 are considered full time while 69 are considered part time. 

The pay structure is quite unique. While some employees’ pay is 100% Stormwater Fee funded, 69 are funded by only a percentage of the fund. The rest comes from other departments it seems. It’s really not that clear, but it is a numbers game almost meant to be confusing. 

The Stormwater Program and design makeup seems to be put together to resemble the House of Mirrors Funhouse at the carnival. Just when you think you have it figured out, you run face first into a solid wall. You then have to turn and follow another direction where another wall awaits. 

It appears that four projects are being paid for by using “Fiscal Recovery Funds,” American Rescue Plan Act: 

1.  Morningside Drive Streambank rehab and restoration project $1.5 million

2. Sandpiper Lane Streambank rehab and restoration project $1.3 million

3. Overton Road flood risk reduction $2 million

4. Wilkerson Garden Drainage improvements $3 million

These four projects total $7 million dollars not coming from city stormwater fee monies.

The recent rainfalls dredged up decades long issues. Streets flooded and raw sewage floated on top of inches deep water in yards and even into dwellings. Toilets began overflowing freely because of the city infrastructure’s inability to handle the excess run off water. 

This is not only devastating but also a dangerous health hazard and risk.

The heavy rains have caused in the past and continue to cause devastating problems for the citizens with the inside of homes flooded and carpets, walls, furniture and electronics ruined. 

A homeowner that resides in the East Boundary neighborhood, the only name she would give was Stephanie, stated that she and others called Augusta’s Risk Management Office. When she inquired how to go about applying for some help she was told that this was an “Act of God” and the government was not liable.

Folks, that’s what you call really passing the buck.

Is it not the responsibility of the elected official to be good honest stewards of the taxpayer’s money?

Is it not the responsibility of the well paid department directors to find solutions to correct these issues?

Augusta’s engineering department has an office full of degreed engineers that seem not to be able to design or build anything. They are all highly skilled in two things, how to hire consultants to do the job and to repeatedly say, “we don’t have the money.”

The funds have been there. Collected many times over. Where did they go? How were they spent? Who was paid? Where’s the true transparency? 

In fairness, there have been some large scale projects completed: 

  1. Skyview Drive $1.9 million
  2. 12th Street brick storm sewer replacement $1.02 million
  3. Lake Aumond/Heirs Ponds dredging $3.3 million
  4. Wakefield drainage improvements $225,624

Also listed are four Drainage Basin Improvements for a combined total of $640,814. Those projects were Forest Hills, National Hills, Turpin Hills-Laney Walker and Goshen.

However, if you are adding up the numbers, you are correct. That does not add up to $77 million. 

Please go to the program on the government web site and look at the contracted services money spent and on what. You will truly be amazed or outraged. 

As always, You just can’t make this stuff up.

Have a happy and safe July 4th! 

What to Read Next

The Author

Comment Policy

The Augusta Press encourages and welcomes reader comments; however, we request this be done in a respectful manner, and we retain the discretion to determine which comments violate our comment policy. We also reserve the right to hide, remove and/or not allow your comments to be posted.

The types of comments not allowed on our site include:

  • Threats of harm or violence
  • Profanity, obscenity, or vulgarity, including images of or links to such material
  • Racist comments
  • Victim shaming and/or blaming
  • Name calling and/or personal attacks;
  • Comments whose main purpose are to sell a product or promote commercial websites or services;
  • Comments that infringe on copyrights;
  • Spam comments, such as the same comment posted repeatedly on a profile.