Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Oakview Water topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lisle resident urges action on Oakview water bills, warns of possible deannexation
Summary
Resident Susan Sorrell told the Village of Lisle board that Oakview homeowners continue to face monthly water bills she described as $180—$250 and asked the village to notify affected residents; she suggested the village "profits" from billed accounts and warned she is discussing deannexation options if relief is not offered.
Susan Sorrell, a Lisle resident, urged the Village Board on Dec. 15 to take immediate steps to address what she described as persistently high water bills for Oakview residents.
"I'm here tonight to talk about Oakview again," Sorrell said, adding that residents were paying "$180 to $250 for their water bill," and that recent months represented an extra financial strain during the holidays. She asked that letters be mailed to every homeowner and business in the village who pay Illinois American Water so residents would attend the January meetings she expects to be held at the Park District.
Sorrell also gave numerical assertions about revenue flows she said come from different classes of customers, saying the village "profits $32,000 a year" from Lisle homeowners, "approximately $85,000 a year" from unincorporated residents, and "$126,000 a year" from Oakview homeowners. She said those figures excluded the school district and commercial accounts.
Sorrell criticized the board—s pacing on Oakview and suggested residents might consider deannexation if the village proceeds with tax increases without addressing the water-billing issues. "So you will think about that when you raise taxes," she said, noting she was in discussions with Downers Grove about redrawing property lines.
The board did not take formal action on Oakview during the meeting; the matter was raised as public comment. Village staff and trustees referenced an Oakview Water Assistance Program as forthcoming in 2026 during later trustee remarks, but no policy decision was recorded during the Dec. 15 meeting.
The board did not debate Sorrell—s specific numerical claims during the meeting. Officials and staff did not provide an on-the-record refutation or confirmation of the dollar figures Sorrell cited during public comment.
