KOKOMO — The Kokomo Common Council voted on second reading to authorize sewage works revenue bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $50,000,000 and adopted an ordinance adjusting sewage-works rates after a lengthy public hearing on a final phase of the city’s 20-year long-term control plan to eliminate sewer overflows.

John Pike, director of engineering for Kokomo City, told the council the work follows a 2007 court-ordered control plan and said the largest single contract in the package — the North Side interceptor — was bid at about $24 million. He said additional upgrades (lift station and collection-system work) and an upgrade to the wastewater plant’s disinfection system were part of the plan; Pike described a UV-disinfection retrofit as a safer alternative to chlorine and cited an engineer’s all-in estimate of roughly $52.5 million when the interceptor, an $8 million alternate and other upgrades are combined.

"This isn't a tax," Pike said, arguing the work is paid from sewer-system fees rather than general-tax revenue. He warned the council that in his reading of the court order the city must have an award and 'a shovel on the ground' to avoid noncompliance. "The fines set in 2003 ... were $27,500 a day," he said.

Why it mattered

Residents who came to the podium said they understood the compliance imperative but questioned the timing, the size of the bond package and several technical and financial choices. Richard Emery of Kent Avenue said the non-interceptor items read like estimates rather than firm contractor proposals and urged the city to obtain vendor quotes before issuing large debt.

"The optics are bad," Emery said, citing his own wastewater bill and calculating a roughly 31% increase when recent adjustments are combined. Steve Daley, another resident, questioned an $8 million contingency figure, saying contingency for sewer projects typically ranges from 5% to 15% and recommending a smaller bond now while the city secures firmer estimates for the rest of the work.

Other residents asked whether the city had sought State Revolving Fund loans, which typically carry far lower interest, and said they had not been told the SRF application was denied. Nolan Born said he had expected SRF financing and called for more transparency about the financing approach.

"This is a massive deal that everybody's hearing for the first time," Born said about the SRF denial and the choice to pursue bonds.

Engineer and council response

Pike and council members answered questions from the public: Pike said two bids were received for the interceptor (about $24 million and about $45 million) and that, apart from the interceptor, most figures remain engineer estimates. He said the city had applied for SRF funding but was not granted that loan and that the bond structure being used would permit draws from a trustee for individual projects as funds are needed.

Council members emphasized the long history of the federal mandate and the limited options available locally. One councilor said the choice to proceed with bonding was driven in part by the potential cost of fines and by prior phases that had consumed previously allocated funds because of unforeseen cleanup work.

What the council approved

- Ordinance 72-20: authorized issuance of sewage works revenue bonds and, if necessary, bond anticipation notes, with aggregate principal not to exceed $50,000,000; motion to adopt made by Councilwoman Sandberg and adopted on second reading by voice vote.

- Ordinance 72-21: amended rates and charges for the sewage-works utility based on a rate report for the 12 months ended Dec. 31, 2024; the ordinance sets flow-processing fees (the ordinance text references a fee level of $6.54 per 3,000 gallons in its statutory language) and was adopted on second reading by voice vote.

Quotes from the meeting

"This isn't a tax," John Pike said, explaining the distinction between sewer fees and general-tax revenue. "If it's not under contract, it doesn't have to be complete ... you need to have a shovel on the ground."

"The optics are bad," said Richard Emery after listing recent increases to his wastewater bill and expressing frustration with estimates that lack contractor quotes.

"This is a massive deal that everybody's hearing for the first time," Nolan Born said, urging clearer disclosure about SRF applications and the loan mix.

Next steps and context

The ordinances take effect upon passage and mayoral signature as provided in Kokomo City’s ordinance rules. Pike and staff said the bond structure includes mechanisms for draws to pay for individual projects as they are approved; engineers warned that change orders are possible when crews encounter unforeseen underground conditions.

The items discussed are the final phase of a two-decade program triggered by federal regulation and a court agreement intended to stop overflows into Wildcat Creek. Residents at the hearing urged greater transparency and more firm cost estimates for non-bid projects; council members said federal and legal timelines and prior cleanup expenses constrained the city's options.

Actions recorded

Ordinance 72-20 — motion to adopt by Councilwoman Sandberg; second not specified in the public record; voice vote 'Aye'; motion carried (approved).

Ordinance 72-21 — motion to adopt by Councilwoman Sandberg; second not specified in the public record; voice vote 'Aye'; motion carried (approved).

Ending

Council members and engineering staff said they would continue to provide updates as the bond sale and project scheduling proceed and reiterated that inaction could expose the city to large fines. The council moved on to other business after closing the public hearing.