Sacramento is facing a growing challenge beneath its streets: an aging storm drainage system that costs more to maintain than the city currently collects to support it.
City leaders approved a review of the storm drainage funds on October 27, highlighting concerns about rising maintenance expenses, aging infrastructure and a funding gap that could leave the system struggling to meet future needs.
The review estimates that Sacramento’s storm drainage funds could fall short by approximately $4.8 million annually over the next five years if current revenue levels remain unchanged. Without financial adjustments, the funds could be depleted within eight years.
The findings arrive as the region enters its wetter months, when drainage systems become essential for moving rainwater away from homes, businesses and roads. For residents who already experience water backing up near their properties, the financial outlook raises questions about how the city will keep its infrastructure working reliably.
Although officials are considering future revenue changes, residents should not interpret the review as an announcement of an immediate increase in drainage fees.
A Vast System That Is Getting More Expensive to Maintain
Sacramento’s storm drainage network is extensive. It includes more than 1,000 miles of storm drain pipes, 107 pumping stations and approximately 23 miles of levees. Some components are more than a century old.
Keeping such a large system operational requires regular inspections, maintenance, repairs and eventual replacement of aging equipment. As infrastructure gets older, the need for major repairs can grow, putting additional pressure on budgets that must also cover routine operations.
The city faces a particular challenge because it relies heavily on pumps and levees to manage stormwater rather than depending primarily on gravity to move water away.
Pumping stations help move water through the drainage network, while levees provide an important layer of protection against flooding. Both require continued investment to remain dependable.
According to the review, replacing the entire system would cost an estimated $4.3 billion. That figure illustrates why officials are concentrating on maintaining existing infrastructure and addressing the most pressing needs rather than attempting a complete replacement at once.
The funding challenge is not simply about repairing a few damaged pipes. It involves managing a large, interconnected network while balancing everyday operating expenses against expensive long-term infrastructure projects.
Why Sacramento’s Drainage Challenges Matter During the Wet Season
Rainfall can quickly test a city’s ability to move water away from streets and properties. When drains become overwhelmed or pumps cannot operate as needed, water may accumulate in low-lying areas, driveways and roadways.
Sacramento’s location near major rivers makes reliable drainage and flood management particularly important. Storm drainage infrastructure and regional flood-control systems serve different but related purposes: local drainage moves rainwater away from developed areas, while levees and other flood-control measures help manage risks from rising waterways.
The city’s aging equipment creates a long-term maintenance concern, especially as officials work to keep the system functioning during periods of heavy rain.
Parts of Sacramento’s older downtown neighborhoods also use a combined sewer system, in which stormwater and sewage travel through the same pipes. If the infrastructure fails or becomes overwhelmed, contaminated water can create additional public-health and environmental concerns.
These risks make infrastructure maintenance about more than preventing inconvenient puddles. Reliable drainage can help protect property, maintain access to streets and reduce the likelihood of harmful water exposure.
However, the funding review does not mean that a citywide drainage failure is imminent. It identifies a financial gap that could make it harder to maintain and improve the system in the years ahead.
Why Current Revenue Is Falling Behind
Sacramento City Auditor Farishta Ahrary said the city has relied on growth to generate additional revenue, but that approach has not kept pace with the cost of maintaining the drainage network.
The review identifies increasing system requirements, the need for additional capital investment and insufficient revenue to cover projected operating costs as major concerns.
Inflation also adds pressure to infrastructure budgets. Materials, equipment, labor and specialized construction work can become more expensive, meaning that the same amount of money may cover less maintenance than it once did.
The city must also account for regulatory requirements and ongoing levee maintenance, which can create additional demands on available funding.
These competing needs leave officials with a difficult choice: continue relying on existing revenue and risk falling further behind on maintenance, or develop a more sustainable funding approach that supports necessary repairs while considering what residents can afford.
Could Sacramento Residents Pay More?
The review indicates that some form of revenue adjustment will be necessary to keep the drainage funds financially stable.
Potential rate adjustments could begin in 2029 for one drainage fund and in 2031 for another, according to the report’s projections. Those dates are part of modeled scenarios, not approved implementation dates for new fees.
The eventual amounts would depend on the city’s formal rate-setting process and the level of investment officials decide is necessary.
A more limited approach could focus on maintaining the existing system, while a more ambitious plan could require greater revenue to address critical repairs, regulatory obligations and levee maintenance.
Any future rate-setting decision would need to balance those infrastructure needs against the financial impact on households and businesses.
For homeowners, even a modest monthly increase can add up over time. For the city, however, delaying necessary repairs could also create financial risks if problems become more expensive to address later.
The challenge will be determining how much investment is needed, when that investment should occur and how the cost should be distributed among customers.
One Sacramento Homeowner Says Drainage Problems Are Already Familiar
For Don Drysdale, who lives about two blocks from the Sacramento River, drainage concerns are not just a long-term budget issue.
He said water sometimes rises halfway up his driveway when drains back up, giving him a direct experience of the problems the city is trying to address.
Drysdale said he would be willing to pay more if the money helped protect residents.
“If it costs me another $10 bucks a month, so be it. We’ve gotta make sure people are safe,” he said.
His comments reflect one side of the debate surrounding infrastructure fees: some residents may accept higher costs if they believe the money will deliver meaningful improvements and reduce risks to their homes and neighborhoods.
Others may be concerned about affordability, particularly if higher fees arrive alongside increases in other household expenses.
For city officials, public confidence will depend in part on explaining how additional revenue would be used and demonstrating that investments are improving the drainage system.
What Happens Next?
The approval of the storm drainage funds review marks an early step toward deciding how Sacramento will address its projected shortfall.
The findings provide a financial picture for city leaders, but a separate process would be needed to establish any future rate increases. Officials will need to evaluate maintenance priorities, infrastructure conditions, funding scenarios and the effects on customers before implementing changes.
The report also highlights the importance of planning ahead rather than waiting for aging infrastructure to fail before addressing it.
For residents, the immediate takeaway is that no new rate hike has been approved through this review. The longer-term question is how Sacramento will fund the maintenance and improvements needed to keep water moving safely through the city.
With more than a thousand miles of drainage pipes and a network of pumps and levees to maintain, the financial decisions made in the coming years could shape how well Sacramento manages stormwater for decades to come.
