Poulsbo residents press council to limit out-of-pocket costs for Eleventh Avenue sewer hookup

Leanne Troyer, a resident of Eleventh Avenue, told the Poulsbo City Council on Oct. 1 that seven households on her street want the city to cover the cost of bringing a sewer main to their block. “We would like to make a plea to the city to, cover the cost of running the sewer up our street,” Troyer said during public comment, adding that residents would still pay connection fees and hire contractors for service lines from houses to the street.

Public Works Director Diane Linnaeus told the council staff have met with property owners and that the city has not completed designs or a formal estimate. “We haven't done any designs, so we don't have a formal cost estimate for the project,” Linnaeus said. She described the typical approach: property owners pay a proportionate share of the sewer line down the roadway, the restoration and connection fees, and the city’s proposed option is to pay construction up front and let owners pay when they hook up.

Linnaeus said state law affects the calculation of connection fees and cited the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) as driving the formula for the portion that goes to the county treatment plant and the portion that goes to the city for the connection system. She estimated the connection fee component that goes to treatment is “about almost $17,000” and said that front-footage fees in the Poulsbo Municipal Code also apply but that there is “discrepancy in the code” over how to interpret a provision that references a 50% share.

Linnaeus described alternatives and next steps: the city plans a survey and preliminary design to refine cost estimates; the attorney is reviewing code language; and staff will return to property owners with clarification. She also explained a financing option sometimes used, a utility local improvement district (ULID), which spreads assessment over 20 years but can be costly to set up for a very small group of properties. “This is a pretty small area to have 7 or 8 property owners use that method, because the attorney costs to set it up are actually pretty expensive,” Linnaeus said.

Charlie Roberts, identified by Linnaeus as the project lead, was named as the main staff contact for residents seeking more information.

Why this matters: the council and public works are weighing how to implement a sewer extension where a small group of properties lacks connection, balancing city code, state statutes, up-front city financing and long-term assessments. Residents said they have been paying sewer penalties without access to city sewer and want the city’s help to avoid a large, immediate outlay.

Council follow-up: Linnaeus said staff will complete a survey and preliminary design, consult the city attorney about code interpretation, and return with cost estimates and options. Roberts is the primary contact for property owners.

Clarifying details and context: estimates are not yet available; about seven residences were identified by staff as affected; typical connection fees include a county treatment-plant component and a city component; one staff estimate of the treatment-related connection portion was described as “about almost $17,000”; options discussed were (a) city-fronted construction with owner repayment at hookup, (b) owner up-front payment, and (c) a ULID spread over 20 years (noted as expensive to create for so few properties).