Northport trustees vote to put $1.5 million Mill Pond millage on ballot after extended debate

The Northport Village Council voted unanimously June 18 to place a proposed 20‑year millage, estimated to generate about $1.5 million, on the November ballot to fund repair, replacement or removal of the Mill Pond (Millhcon) dam.

The vote followed more than an hour of public comment and trustee debate about the dam’s condition, the basis for the price estimate and whether grants or phased study should precede a ballot question. The motion was made by Trustee Susan and supported by Trustee Will; the roll-call vote recorded seven yes votes and no opposing votes.

Why it matters: trustees and residents described recurring maintenance costs, sediment buildup and recent overtopping during spring rains as evidence the structure needs a final plan. Trustee Jared explained the $1.5 million figure: a 2023 GEI engineering estimate put replacement at about $911,000; the council added roughly 20% for escalation and projected costs forward while also building in allowances for bond issuance, design and permitting, producing the round $1.5M ballot figure that appears in the resolution and the capital improvement plan.

Public voices: resident Campbell Mloud urged either removal of the dam to restore a free‑flowing stream or clearer documentation for voters, saying the pond has not been dredged for more than 15 years and that sedimentation is reducing capacity and raising failure risk. “I am for removing the dam and creating a free flowing stream,” Mloud said during the public‑comment period.

Resident Elizabeth (Betsy) Malik asked the council to identify how the $1.5M figure was derived and whether it reflected an updated contractor bid or an older estimate: “I don’t know where that number came from,” she said, asking the council to publish the two numbers—estimated repair/replacement cost and demolition cost—so voters can compare options.

Inside the council debate: Trustee Laura said she supported public input but worried the council was rushing to the ballot without fully reviewing options, grant opportunities and engineering reports: “I would be a lot more comfortable if we had…mini sessions” that explained grant options, replacement versus removal and the costs for different solutions. Trustee Will countered that delaying would only increase costs and that it was time to let voters decide: “Let’s bring it to the people, man. Let’s put it on the ballot and let’s have a vote.”

On grants and alternatives, trustees disagreed about availability. Several trustees and staff identified competitive state and federal grants that can fund dam removal or fish‑passage work (examples referenced in the meeting included dam risk reduction grants, DNR fisheries habitat grants and Great Lakes programs), while others said they had not yet seen credible, guaranteed grant commitments sufficient to replace the dam without local funding.

The resolution’s effect and next steps: the adopted resolution directs staff to place the millage question on the ballot; council members noted an administrative deadline (August 11) to secure placement on the November ballot. Trustees also recorded a contingency in the resolution: if the millage fails, the village will pursue removal options. Council members agreed not to use official council meetings to advocate for or against the ballot question and said the village would post factual background materials (the 2023 GEI study and other public records) on the village website for voter reference.

What the resolution does not answer: specific contractor bids, a final design or an exact cost‑share plan if bids exceed $1.5M; several residents and trustees requested that the council or staff publish both the replacement estimate and demolition estimate and consider whether the village would cover any amount above the ballot figure.

The meeting adjourned after the council completed other agenda items; the millage question will appear to voters according to election scheduling and final ballot wording.