Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water District topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Clinton County outlines plan, costs and public meeting for new Sandrove water district serving Skyler Falls area
Summary
Staff described progress toward establishing a Sandrove Water District to extend public water to part of Skyler Falls, including a July 16 informational meeting and a state grant covering capital contributions with declining county charges over five years.
County staff told the Clinton County Legislature on June 25 that engineers have a path forward to establish a new Sandrove Water District to extend public water service to a portion of Skyler Falls and that an informational meeting for residents is scheduled for July 16.
Miss Keller, who presented staff reports, said the county attorney is preparing a petition to form the water district and that engineers will present project details at the July 16 public meeting. Keller said the project was discussed for about two and a half years and that the county had received a $5,000,000 state grant to support the work.
Keller described the financial structure discussed for new customers: the county and the unnamed company will split certain operating assistance roughly 50/50 for the first five years, with payments that decline over time. Keller outlined an illustrative schedule in which the county’s share would be about $16,000–$17,000 in years 1–3, drop to about $10,000 in year 4 and about $5,000 in year 5. Keller said capital contribution requirements would be covered by the grant and that customer billing would begin in year six.
Keller emphasized the need to connect to the Morrisonville water district and noted there is a charge for that connection; the county and the company will participate in that cost on a declining basis over five years. She said the goal is to make the early years financially favorable to residents and to have the eventual ongoing per‑dwelling cost be comparable to nearby districts.
Keller asked the legislature to note the public outreach and the forthcoming engineer presentation; she also requested an executive session later in the meeting on litigation and a personnel matter. The staff report did not include a final project schedule, construction timeline or a term sheet; the July 16 meeting was presented as the next public step.
The transcript record provided the county’s stated grant amount and the described multi‑year assistance schedule but did not include a signed financing agreement or final customer rate schedule.
