Crown Point council approves sewer rate increases, advances multiyear wastewater project after public hearing

Crown Point — The City Council on Monday, March 3 approved an ordinance increasing monthly sewer rates and voted to proceed with a multi‑phase wastewater plan meant to address decades‑old combined‑sewer overflows and future growth.

City Engineer Al Stong of Commonwealth Engineers told the council the plan is a four‑phase approach that includes downtown conveyance work, wet‑weather improvements at the existing plant and a new Southeast Wastewater Treatment Plant with an initial 2.4‑million‑gallons‑per‑day (MGD) module.

The action follows a formal public hearing on the sewer ordinance, during which residents raised transparency concerns about the project’s timing and potential to enable large new development outside the city’s currently mapped service area.

The council’s action

Ordinance 2025‑01‑02, amending monthly sewer rates, was adopted after public comment and staff presentations. The roll call in the record shows yes votes from Scott Ward, Zach Ryan, Andrew Terrence, Bob Clemens, Laura Sarmuth and Chad Jeffrey; the motion passed.

Why it matters

The city is under a state judicial order to reduce combined‑sewer overflows, and engineers said the package of projects is designed to meet compliance and to provide capacity for growth. Council and staff said federal and state financing deadlines — including low‑interest or 0% loans through the State Revolving Fund (SRF) — make timely approvals important.

What city staff told the council

Al Stong explained the four phases: rehabilitation and wet‑weather treatment upgrades at the existing wastewater treatment plant; a large‑diameter downtown interceptor to reduce overflows; construction of a Southeast wastewater treatment plant that is expandable from 2.4 MGD to larger capacities; and new lift stations and force mains to route flow to the new plant. Stong said the Southeast plant “shaves 25, 30% of the existing flows off of the city's existing treatment plant,” which reduces the size and cost of the downtown interceptor.

Greg (last name on file), the city’s financial adviser from FSG, told the council the SRF and other lenders require current revenue to support new debt. “In order to achieve this… we must enact a rate increase, and you must show that rate increase has been enacted before we will loan you the money,” he said on the record. Counsel and staff said the SRF’s 0% loan availability is limited and that delaying could reduce access to those funds.

Public concerns

During the hearing, multiple residents questioned whether the plan primarily serves growth outside current service limits and whether private developers stood to benefit. Michelle Kazaitis, who gave her address in the record, told the council she was “appalled” and accused city officials of not being transparent; she also read from a memorandum that referenced developers asking the city to consider a larger service area. Another speaker, who identified a summary of the 2018 wastewater master plan, cited figures in the memorandum describing a developer‑proposed service area and raised hypothetical build‑out numbers. City staff and engineers responded that the master plan and later analyses responded to compliance needs and updated growth projections.

Discussion versus decision

Council debate included technical questions from members about how the phases interact with capacity, and about rate structure. Several council members emphasized the long history of the judicial order and the need to address basement backups and other capacity issues. The ordinance vote on rates was a formal decision; staff said future adjustments could be made if development revenues materialize.

Next steps and funding

The council also approved related bond ordinances on second reading later in the meeting to authorize SRF financings for water and sewer projects; counsel and bond counsel set pre‑closing and closing dates for June. Staff said some rate increases implemented in earlier phases (2022) had been announced to customers and that the city will continue to monitor revenues and development to consider future adjustments.

What was not decided

Council action did not modify the city’s sewer service area by ordinance. Staff said developers outside the current service area may seek service in the future, but any expansion would require separate approvals. Several residents asked for further transparency about landowners and developers identified in planning memoranda; council members and staff said the project team would continue to discuss financing, timing and the system‑development‑charge structure with the council and the public.

Ending

Ordinance 2025‑01‑02 was adopted at the March 3 meeting. Engineering and finance staff said construction phasing and loan closings will follow SRF and contracting timelines; the council scheduled further planning and second readings where required.