Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Assessment Districts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Alma City sets Oct. 8 public hearings for six sanitary‑sewer assessment districts after SRF presentation
Summary
City staff presented a multi‑street Sanitary Sewer Improvement Project funded in part by State Revolving Fund assistance; the commission set Oct. 8 public hearings on six special assessment districts, and residents raised concerns about bills, driveway impacts and tree removals.
Alma City officials set public hearings for Tuesday, Oct. 8, 2024, on six proposed Special Assessment Districts (SADs) tied to the city’s SRF‑funded Sanitary Sewer Improvement Project.
David Ringle, the city’s public service director, told the commission the project will replace sanitary mains and laterals on streets including Pine Avenue, Charles Avenue, Richnell (Richmond) Street, Moyer Avenue, Austin/South River and Rosedale. Ringle said owners pay for the footage of laterals the city replaces, with the city covering half the replacement cost for mains and a share of laterals; where existing service materials are ‘‘SDR 26’’ plastic, owners typically will not be billed. Ringle also said SRF financing, low‑interest loans and grant forgiveness substantially reduce property owners’ bills, and that the city’s water and sewer revenues help cover street replacement work.
The commission unanimously moved to set public hearings for the six SADs at 6 p.m. on Oct. 8 so residents can review detailed estimates and object or support specific parcels. Ringle said the mailed and posted SAD notices will include cost estimates by address and that once a SAD is established parcels generally cannot be added later (they can be removed after the fact).
Residents pressed for details at the meeting. Commissioners and Ringle said the city will offer installment plans (the commission decides term and interest in a later action) and will hold neighborhood meetings with drawings showing proposed road widths, driveway impacts and contractor contacts. Ringle warned that some estimates are intentionally conservative for budgeting; the final assessed amount will reflect measured footage replaced.
Staff noted technical differences among bids (for example, Pine Avenue used MDOT specifications that embed certain connection costs into the unit price) and identified instances where multiple laterals at duplexes or condominium complexes could raise an estimate. Ringle said the city would provide revised informational packets before follow‑up meetings to fix minor calculation errors noted in the presentation.
Next steps: the commission will hold the Oct. 8 public hearings where property owners can review per‑address cost tables, challenge the inclusion of a parcel or learn payment terms. The city also plans neighborhood meetings this fall to show plans and answer construction‑specific questions.
