Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Sewer Water topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Oshkosh resident says sewer, water notice for Claryville Road will impose costs and confusion
Summary
A Claryville Road resident told the Oshkosh common council he received a notice about a planned sewer and water extension and raised questions about timing, cost allocation and lack of details after the project schedule changed.
A resident of Claryville Road told the Oshkosh common council on Aug. 26 that a recent notice saying sewer and water lines would be extended to his street has left neighbors confused about timing, cost and who will pay. Bruce Parker said the letter indicated installation could occur in stages and questioned why the city planned to do “half the road one year, half the road the next.”
Parker said the stretch contains four houses and two large farms and asked whether the town of Algoma property owners would be allowed to connect without paying, and who would be responsible for roadway and utility costs. He also said a 2002–03 annexation agreement gave property owners five years to hook into city utilities and that the delay could force him to connect late enough that he would bear substantial expense. "It's gonna cost my brother-in-law who owns a farm... 1,200 feet of sewer and water to pay for for a cornfield," Parker said.
The concern matters because Parker said the upgrade could raise his household bills and property costs: he estimated his current gas, light and water costs at about $135 a month and said switching to city sewer and water would add roughly $100 a month. He also said his property taxes increased about $1,000 after annexation and that city trash-service container issues followed the annexation.
City staff told Parker that a change in the capital project calendar occurred after informational letters were mailed; staff said the CIP schedule originally showed the city’s planned project for the date in the mailed notice but that the calendar was later revised. Council members did not take formal action on Parker’s remarks during the public-comment period.
The council did not provide additional details such as a project start date, construction staging, the exact allocation of costs between city and town properties, or whether owners outside the city limits could connect without paying hookup fees. Parker said the town/city boundary bisects the road and asked how costs would be apportioned.
Parker’s remarks came during the citizen statements portion of the meeting and were followed by routine agenda business. Council members and staff acknowledged the change to the CIP calendar had been made after the letters were mailed and encouraged Parker to follow up with city staff for specifics on timing, cost estimates and whether the project will require ordinance or agreement updates.
The council did not schedule any vote or formal review in response to the comment; staff advised Parker to pursue follow-up with the relevant departments for clarification.
