What is WIFIA? WIFIA stands for the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act, the name of the federal act that authorized an interesting new federally managed water and wastewater infrastructure funding mechanism. WIFIA includes both direct loans and a new credit enhancement/guarantee mechanism (more on WIFIA guarantees in a future blog post). The WIFIA program was first created in 2014, but its funding appropriation and program guidance was not completed until the end of 2016. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the Notice of Funding Availability for WIFIA on January 10th, 2017. Borrowers interested in taking out a loan with this year’s funds have until April 10th, 2017 to submit letters of interest that will be considered by EPA.
Author: Jeffrey Hughes (Page 2 of 6)
SOG Environmental Finance Ctr
“To be or not to be?” This is the famous question that haunted Shakespeare’s Hamlet as he struggled with his existence. It is now also the question that may be haunting some municipal water managers throughout North Carolina after a recent North Carolina Supreme Court decision involving water impact fees. The School of Government’s Local Government Finance Attorney Kara Millonzi recently wrote an excellent blog on the case that explains the legal background and repercussions. Read it!
At the heart of the issue is the phrase “to be” that is found in the enabling statutes that authorize water fees for some types of utilities in North Carolina (Water and Sewer Authorities, County Water Districts). These words are not found in the almost identical statutes that authorize fees for other public water utilities (Counties, and Cities):
As this blog is being written, water and community managers from across the country are talking about the water crisis that is occurring in Flint, Michigan. The City made a decision several years ago to discontinue buying Lake Huron water from Detroit in favor of an alternative supplier who was planning on constructing a major new transmission line to provide a “less costly” supply of Lake Huron water. While waiting for the project to be completed, the City relied on water from the Flint River. This source of water was determined to have a different chemical composition that led to water line corrosion causing lead to enter the drinking water supply. In addition to the acute public health impacts of the crisis, the impoverished community is facing a huge price tag to address their infrastructure problems.
As often happens with a crisis, the attention on Flint’s situation is shining a light on challenges that are by no means unique to Flint. While there are many specific circumstances that contributed to the problems in Flint, many of the underlying financial issues facing Flint will have or already have had an impact on water systems across the country. Here are four financial facts that played out in Flint that every water and community manager should be thinking about:
Continue reading
Small water systems serving 10,000 people or less comprise more than 94% of our nation’s public water systems. They are a large and diverse group, and are managed by a wide variety actors – from local and tribal governments, to mobile home park owners, to homeowners associations, to shopping mall operators and hotel managers. These managers often have many other, very different responsibilities and often face challenges in running the water system. In 2011, 25 percent of the nation’s smallest systems violated health-based standards in part due to their geographic isolation, small staff size, growing infrastructure needs and small customer bases. And as we wrote about earlier this year, small water systems with financial difficulties are more likely to have violations.
Since 2012, the Environmental Finance Center at UNC and the Environmental Finance Center Network have been working to help educate and build financial and managerial capacity within small water systems. Through our work under the Smart Management for Small Water Systems Project, we’ve noticed 5 dangerous myths in financial planning. These myths can appear wherever water system planning occurs, but seem to be most prevalent among smaller communities that are considering creating a new or significantly expanded water system.
Please see this recent post on 2018 system development fee law changes for the most current look at the cost to connect to a water and wastewater system.
Post updated on September 15, 2016
“To be or not to be?” This is the famous question that haunted Shakespeare’s Hamlet as he struggled with his existence. It is now also the question that may be haunting some municipal water managers throughout North Carolina after a recent North Carolina Supreme Court decision involving water impact fees. The School of Government’s Local Government Finance Attorney Kara Millonzi recently wrote an excellent blog on the case that explains the legal background and repercussions. Read it!
- Join us for a #freewebinar on 8/30 introducing the West Virginia Water Rates dashboard! We'll discuss how to use da… https://t.co/FLJWDrDnCP
- Our amazing student Adithi Reddy wrote about her experience working at the EFC this summer for @UNC_IE 's blog -- c… https://t.co/95rgOBxHz2
- RT @DigDeepH2O: Every year the water gap stays open, $8.58 billion goes down the drain. But every dollar we invest to #CloseTheWaterGap cre…
Knapp-Sanders Building Campus Box 3330, UNC Chapel Hill Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3330 T: 919 966 5381 | F: 919 962 065
© 2022 Environmental Finance Blog
Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑