HomeMy WebLinkAboutWRITTEN RESPONSE - Annexation of 10 propertiesJanuary 6, 2003
Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council,
On December 18 at the Rexburg City Council meeting, I stated that I was opposed to the
possiblity of our neighborhood being annexed to the City of Rexburg.
hi this letter we will not belabor the past; except to say that there are people in our
neighborhoods, who are frustrated. We hope the relationship between our neighborhoods and the
City Council will improve and there will be cooperation.
We realize that things need to be done according to the law. But, we do not think the intent
of the state law on annexation was to place an unreasonable burden on its citizens.
If the city does annex our neighborhoods, here are some concerns and suggestions .
1) Concern: We have been informed that the city will charge us $ 10 per foot on
frontage on the water and the sewer lines which run down our street. Since we have
about 172 feet in our frontage, the cost would be $ 1,720 for the water line and another
$ 1,720 for the sewer line.
Suggestion: The City of Rexburg and Madison Country establish a plan to ease the
the financial burden caused by annexation. Both the city and the county could set aside
funds for current and future annexations. This money could come from developers,
businesses, and others who profit from annexation and/or desired city services such
as water and sewer. These funds could be used to pay for such things as the water and
the sewer lines running down streets and connections to such services.
2) Concern: The homes on the westside of the county have their own wells and septic
systems, which have cost thousands of dollars per home. We have been informed that the
city will give us 18 months to hook up to the city sewer system. Our current septic system
is only five years old and we estimated that it well cost us $ 4,520 to hook up to the city
sewer system.
Also, we have been informed that hooking up to the city water system is optional. If we
did hook up to the city water system, we estimated that the cost would be $ 3,407.
Further more, the information we are able to find concerning the problems of ground
water and nitrates in our area does not seem to warrant immediate concern. A couple
wells in our neighborhoods have recently been tasted and the results were good. One
of these wells is tested periodically for more than just nitrates and has not failed the test
for three years.
Suggestion: There could be a gradual switch over to the city water and sewer system.
This would allow individuals in the neighborhoods to hook up to the services on an
"as needed basis, " if such services are warranted.
3) Concern: According to the 21 October 2002 public notice from the City of Rexburg
and accompanied information "What does annexation do for you?," our taxes would
increase 22.9 %. At the 21 November 2002 planning and zoning meeting, we were told
that our taxes might increase 30 %. Since then there is a rumor that the taxes may
increase 40 %.
One reasons for this increase may be that our lots appear bigger than most current city
lots, since the impact zone currently requires each new house be on one acre lots.
Suggestion: The city taxes could be deferred for a few years to give the annexed citizens
an opportunity to budget for the increase in their taxes.
The monthly cost for city water, sewer and garbage services of $45 - $50 is another expense.
If we were to set aside $45 per month for ten years, we would have $5,400. This amount would
go a long ways to repair a pump, drill a new well or replace a septic system. This was our plan
to cover future cost when we moved to the Rexburg area.
We would like to invite each one of you to visit with us and discuss our concerns. .
We, too, are concerned about Rexburg and our neighborhood twenty years from now. We hope
an agreement, which is fair and reasonable, can be reached.
Thank you,
P 5
Russ and Shana Van Allen
932 South 1560 West
Rexburg, Idaho 83440
Phone: 656-9021
Dear Mayor Sutherland and City Counsel Members, January 7, 2003
Before you make the final decision on whether to annex the north side of W 7'b S, aka W 1000
S, please take into consideration the feelings of all residents there. I do not want to be annexed
for the plane and simple fact that I can't afford to live in the city. The cost to hook up to your
sewer and water if it runs down the middle of the road will cost me approximately $11,000 and at
least triple that if it runs thru Mr. Forbush's property as I have two acres of pasture behind me
that I would have to come thru. Also the cost of monthly city services are an extra possible
$200.00 plus a month that I, as a single mom already pushed to limit financially and can't afford
any more bills. I honestly feel that if it's the developers that have pushed for this annexation, they
should pay for all expenses as they are the ones to profit from all this. Even though we've heard
that financial hardship is not an issue it seems to be that this is the #1 issue.
The second issue I think is sidewalks. Why do we need them out here? Have you been to our
neighborhood to see what will happen if we are forced to put in sidewalks? I get to fill in half my
front yard to make it level enough for sidewalks and create a great "jump" into my driveway. At
almost $3,000 for just sidewalks, no fill and leveling, what do I benefit???? If the apartment
development wants sidewalks, let them have them. If Mr. Forbush wants sidewalks in his new
development, let him have them. I don't think we need to be punished for wanting to live in a
rural setting. The unreasonable restrictions that the city would impose on what we can and do
with our own property that we all are and will be paying on for many years would not only be
extremely costly but ruin the rural effect. Please every one of you come out and take a look at
what is going on here. Trade us places, financially and domestically and see how you would feel
if all of a sudden the city wants to come in and dictate what will happen if you want to add a
garage or and extra room to accommodate your families growth. The extra cost is ridiculous.
Don't annex us. We don't want it. If Mr Forbush and you have a deal that was made prior to
the big push to annex us in, so be it. Annex his land, Lameroux's land and Valleywide and give
the rest of 20 years to get the use out of our existing systems. If we are annexed, why not Grand
father clause us into not having to hook on to sewer or water until our existing systems fail, no
sidewalks until we sell, don't penalize us for improvements. No one likes to be told what to do
especially if it hits their pocket book to the tune of 15 to 20 thousand or more to conform. We
are not "fat cats" out here, just the working class trying to give our kids a roof over their heads.
I was born and raised here and kind of like this valley, but to think we have no "plan" for 20
years down the road let alone next week really bothers me. Blackfoot announced a
comprehensive 20 year plan this morning on the news and has made it very public and accessible
for the public to review. Where's ours.??? Your going to fast and not really thinking a lot about
the people here, only the developers. Please stop and reconsider not annexing us. We don't want
it.
Sorry this is so long ,but there is a lot of things to be said and a lot of research to do on our
part and the Citys part before we should be annexed.
Thank you for your time
Lisa Ellis
1042 w 7' s, aka 1778 w 1000 s
Rexburg, Idaho
208-351-3233
January 8, 2003
Dear Mayor and City Council,
I write this letter asking you to put on hold the proposed annexation. My reason is that we are
not prepared with a plan for handling annexation. I would ask you to consider the following key
points in the development of a plan.
1. Impact fees for commercial developments that are imposing expansion costs on a
community.
2. Development of a plan for the expansion of services through a cooperation of city and
county.
3. Decision on what type of zones will apply to annexed property.
4. Continued policy that has been used in other areas of the city that has not required the
resident to connect to sewer and water as it passes in front.
5. Consistent policy of squaring up and including all areas to the west and south - rather
than selecting only developing parcels.
Exemptions for developed subdivisions and properties - this would not require the
destruction of trees, etc. which exist as part of developed landscaping.
7. Distinguishing between commercial developments that generate revenue (businesses
and housing developments) and residential (owner occupied). The cost is totally
different for a resident versus a commercial project or business.
I ask for your consideration in putting things on hold until we have plans and have answered
these questions. I would like to discuss the annexation and items presented in the letter with you
in a positive manner. I would be willing as an economist to donate my service in helping
develop a plan for the city.
We are not answering any improvement on planning and zoning by simply annexing a big chunk
of property. What we need is a comprehensive guide for development and annexation. The
guide would provide the guiding principles for the future. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Fenton L. Broadhead
mailbox:///C l/Documents%20and%20Settings/blairk/AppReation%2oDa...
Mayor Bruce Sutherland
Councilman Nyle Fullmer
Councilman Shawn Larsen
Councilman Glen Pond
Councilman Paul Pugmire
Councilman Donna Benfield
Councilman Marsha Bjornn
City Attorney Stephen Zollinger
City Clerk Blair Kay
First of all, let me say that I am not one to put my name to a letter and
have it published in the paper, unless I feel very strongly about an issue.
That said, I am writing the letter.
Some months ago, Valley Wide Co-op submitted a site plan to the Rexburg City
Council for approval of their plans to build a new facility west of Rexburg.
At that time they also requested annexation to the city. They desired and
needed access to city sewer and water facilities. The annexation took place
along with the site plan approval. That approval set in motion a series of
events and decisions that have culminated in an oxymoron of huge
proportions. It is amazing how quickly shortsighted individuals can
suddenly profess a great deal of foresight and planning ability when
confronted with the enormous expense of providing services to one single,
isolated entity.
I have been involved in the meetings of Planning and Zoning, and now the
City Council, regarding the proposed annexation of large areas of property
west of Rexburg. From the outset, it has been reiterated many times that
this proposed annexation was needed for controlled growth of the city to the
west. "This has been in the works for years." "The city planners envisioned
the proposed city boundaries as far back as 1976.", "It was just a matter of
time.", were some of the remarks made by city planners in the various
meetings. These remarks, though true, glossed over the reality that perhaps
someone (or some many) might have made a serious mistake in approving a
project without a thorough analysis of the implications to the city
infrastructure. If a suggestion -was made that this latest annexation was
made necessary because of the Valley Wide development, that thought was
quickly passed over in favor of the much more cerebral idea that the city
planners had suddenly "seen the light" and that an annexation of hundreds of
acres and dozens of homes was now an immediate necessity for the City of
Rexburg.
I have a great deal of respect for those dedicated individuals who serve on
the various committees and councils charged with planning for the growth of
our city. But, somebody screwed up, and now my neighbors and I get to pay
for it. It has just now come to -our attention just how much we get to pay.
I have no problem paying the increased taxes involved with becoming a
citizen of Rexburg._ If I am to use city facilities,. I should pay just like
everyone else. In fact, I will feel it a privilege to be able to vote in
city elections and help elect responsible city officials. I will gladly pay
increased water and sewer fees. What I am concerned about is the $12000 -
$15000 it will cost me to decommission my perfectly good and functioning
septic and water systems and pay the city all the costs and fees necessary
to be able to hook up to their systems.
So, if annex we must, let's get on with it. Let's do it right; respecting
the desires and wishes of the overwhelming majority of home and property
1 of 2 12/20/2002 4:52 PM
mailbox:///C l/Documents%20and%20 Settings/blairk/Application%20Da...
owners who will be annexed against their wills. But, please, no
pats -on -the -back and atta-boys to the planners who seem to want to turn a
colossal mistake into the planning accomplishment of the century.
I have not, as yet, sent this to the papers. If the city continues to throw
up smoke screens, such as the one published in the Post Register on December
20th, implying our septic systems are the reason for your annexation
proposals, I can guarantee it will be. This attempt to divert attention
from your actual reason for annexation is simply another example of trying
to turn this into a real coup for the city planners.
I am not trying to pick a fight. I do feel that due to the miscalculations
made and the need for the city to annex our neighborhoods to cover up their
mistakes, that it is only right that the city help mitigate the impact on
those homeowners opposed to the proposal by participating financially
towards the costs we will be required to bear. Specifically, I feel it is
fair that the city (and/or the developers pushing for the annexation) waive
both the front -foot charges of $10 per running foot for both water and sewer
and the connection charges for both sewer and water. That cost is less than
half of the costs associated with sewer and water connections that we will
be required to pay.
I would also like council members to address the sidewalk issue in the
existing neighborhoods. I can't see how sidewalks will work as they have
been proposed in the new RR2 zone. I am not opposed to having sidewalks,
but I would appreciate your specifically addressing how they will be applied
to our individual neighborhoods. Certain existing features (driveways, lamp
posts, landscaping features) will be directly impacted and we need to know
specifically where sidewalks will need to be placed if required. For
example, the existing road in the Widdison Addition averages 22' wide. If
the city were to use the entire 60' right of way for pavement, collector,
and sidewalk, the sidewalks would be placed approximately 19' into our
existing yards. That seems to be an unnecessary waste of unusable property.
Due to the nature of the Widdison Addition (i.e. two dead-end, low traffic
roads) I feel that sidewalks are entirely unnecessary. If they will be
required, I would like to see the city use the existing road width with a
seven foot collector and place the sidewalks approximately 18' from the
center line of the existing road.
I would appreciate a quick response to this letter. If I am totally off
base in my contentions, I would appreciate your backing up your response
with facts, not smoke and mirrors. We are trying to be fair and responsive
to the city's needs. We would hope that the city will do everything in
their power to respond in a like manner.
Thank you for your consideration,
Eric Erickson
1573 W 190 S
Rexburg, Idaho 83440
erice@ericksonet.com <mailto:erice@ericksonet.com>
2 of 2 12/20/2002 4:52 PM
December 18, 2002
Honorable Mayor and
Rexburg City Council
12 North Center
Rexburg, ID 83440
RE: Annexation of Properties in Area 4 (1050 North 2' East)
Dear Sirs and Madams:
We the undersigned are the owners of tracts of land identified above which the City of Rexburg
desires to annex. We have not petitioned to be annexed, we don't want to be annexed at this
time, but we realize that we are commercial businesses which have operated outside of the city
limits for a number of years and it is only a matter of time until we are annexed. However,
there are a few issues we would like an understanding of before we are annexed. They are as
follows:
1. We are currently using our individual wells and septic systems. We would like to
continue to use our present utilities until such time as the septic systems or the
wells fail.
2. We would like assurances that we can continue to operate our businesses as they
are presently operated. We are concerned that our buildings my be located to
close to the property lines of one another or are setbacks from the roads may not
comply with existing city ordinances. We want to make sure are businesses are
protected by the grand father provisions of the city ordinances. We are also
concerned about being in compliance with the city's life safety ordinance.
3. All of our addresses are presently on Highway 33 or the Salem Highway. We
understand that this has changed to North Highway 20. Some of us have been
told that a new street or avenue is being created called American Avenue which is
on our property. We have granted the storage units a right-of-way ingress and
egress easement. We are opposed to this right of way being turned into a city
street or avenue, and not even being given the opportunity to have any dialog with
the city about it. Our businesses face Highway 33 and we want to keep the same
address. And if the address changes, we at least want a say in what the name is.
4. We are concerned that we will be paying for the water and sewer lines which run
through our property to that of another namely being the storage units.
5. We are opposed to paying increased taxes for which there is no benefit.
If we cannot receive written assurances from the city for items 1-4 above, we unitedly oppose the
annexation of our property at this time.
Thank you for the opportunity to express our concerns
Very truly yours,
Kent Jo son
Rexburg Plumbing and Heating, LLC
&Z' 4�L�
Chris Leishman
Leishman Electric, Inc.
Stacy Jensa, Pr6klent
Cowboy Feed and Supply, Inc.
Rexburg Plumbing and Heating
P.O. Box 759
Rexburg ID 83440
Phone 356-8770 fax 3568776
We respectfully request a copy of the city council decision for the annexation
meeting of 18 December 2002. Please fax or mail to the above address.
Thank you.
' II fl P,�.
Z, 5)C�V-3 03
mailbox:///Cl/Documents%20and%20Settings/blairk/Application%20Da...
Subject: Annexation in Widdison Addition
From: "Colin Erickson" <Ericksoc@mai1.d321.k12.id.us>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 08:56:49 -0700
To: <blairk@ci.rexburg.id us>
Dear Mayor and City Council Members:
1-21-03
This letter is in reference to the upcoming decisions you are making
regarding the annexation of the Widdison Addition into the city limits.
We are property owners in that addition and would like to voice our
opinion on the matter. We appreciate all of the time that you have put
into these matters and know that you have taken the interest of the city
as a whole into account as you make these important decisions. We feel
like it would really be best to run the sewer at the same time that the
water is done. Most of the people out there are upset because of the
high up front cost that would be coming out of their own pockets. Maybe
with figuring out a way to reduce those costs and make it comparable to
a normal city lot then it could be a win-win situation for all of those
involved. With the time and the involvement of tearing up roads, etc.
it would seem to be the most logical thing to do. Thank you again for
all that you do for the City of Rexburg. It is an exciting time with
all of the growth and changes but we love it here and think its a
wonderful place to live.
Sincerely, Colin & Jean Erickson
I of 1 1/21/2003 5:49 PM
Annexation Process
mayor
Page 1 of i
From: Harris, Brent [brent.harris@antw.anl.gov]
Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 4:10 PM
To: 'Benfield, Donna'; 'Bjorn, Marsha'; 'Fullmer, Nyle';'Larsen, Shawn';'Pond, Glen'; 'Sutherland, Bruce';
Pugmire, Paul
Subject: Annexation Process
Honorable Mayor and City Council,
I wanted to express my appreciation for your ongoing work. Although some may disagree, I feel you have
certainly given us the opportunity to express our feelings and opinions concerning annexation. Although I do not
fully agree with your final decision concerning the West Widdison Addition, I do believe you are doing what you
feel is best for the community as a whole in the long run; and that is your responsibility.
Mayor, I especially appreciate your efforts to allow everyone to comment. Paul, thanks for taking time from your
trip to California to call in and participate. I have learned much during this process, and hopefully it has been
beneficial to all of us and will help you in the future when you face similar tasks. Thanks again.
Sincerely,
Brent G. Harris
1125 Widdison Lane
Rexburg, ID 83440
3/18/2003
AOL.COM I Message View
AOL Wail W
Page 1 of 2
Attention
Homeowners:
Subj: [Fwd: annexation of Widdison addition]
Date: 3/18/2003 12:48:18 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: EIB Kay <blairkCcDci rexburg id us>
To: Bill Hamlin <billhPci rexburg id us>, ❑Bruce Sutherland <bruces al�ci rexbur, iq d us>, Donna Benfi
<slarsen30 o.com>,
Sent from the Intemet (Details
Mayor Sutherland
Council Members
Staff
FYI
Thank you,
Blair
Dear City Council & Mayor,
When I first learned of the proposed annexation I was not
opposed. We have lived in our present location for 32 years and
anticipated that some day annexation would arrive. In fact, I was
particularly pleased when I learned that the city was going to give
sewer access. After I learned the costs of sewer and water I had some
reservations. Nevertheless, I have found the city council to be
flexible and willing to listen to our concerns. While we have not
gotten everything we have asked for, I feel that the current proposal is
an acceptable compromise and serves the greater needs of our community
as well as the city. I am in favor of the proposed annexation and hope
that the council will proceed with the planned annexation as outlined in
the written proposal. I find annexation a benefit to us and the city
for the following reasons:
1. sewer - protection of our community against sewer contamination
2. Planned growth and development - there needs to be better
control of planning and zoning than the county provides. Currently the
city has a better plan.
3. Timing - There is never a good time to spend money that has not
been budgeted, but, as with marriage, if we wait until we have enough,
we will never get married. The prices are better now than they will be
in the future. Contingencies have been made for those who don't the
financing to proceed now and it will not cost them any more in the
future than it would if you postponed the inevitable annexation.
http://webmail.aol.com/msgview.adp?folder=SU5CTIg=&uid=5320461 3/18/2003
AOL.COM I Message View
I feel that my thoughts may more accurately represent a silent
majority than a vocal minority. I encourage the council to proceed with
the planned annexation of the Widdison addition.
Thank you for the time you have taken to consider and reconsider our
concerns. It's time for the issue to be resolved.
Karl L. Edwards
XcepfisNew i=.t�elele 1 i_N_print _1
F Include original text in reply.
Page 2 of 2
http://webmail.aol.corn/msgview.adp?folder=SU5CTlg=&uid=5320461 3/18/2003
AOL.COM I Message View
Subj: Annexation
Page 1 of 1
Attention
Homeowners:
Date: 3/18/2003 12:47:12 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Q'Thompson Doug" <ThompsonDitlbyui edu>
To: <slarsen30(r7go.com> <paul.pugmire(caanlw.anl.gov>, ❑<ncfullmer(cahotmail.com>,
<srb44@iuno.com>, Ekglen.pond(rhoacificori)com>, <donna(a).rexcc.com>,
U<bruces(a)ci. rex burg.id. us>
Sent from the Intemet (Details
I wanted to let the City Council know that, under the conditions set forth, I am in favor of the
annexation. There are a majority of people on the West side of Widdison Lane that are it favor.
However, there are few very vocal people that are taking it upon themselves to say otherwise.
These few do not represent the interest of the silent majority.
Doug Thompson
:,De tti CEO
F Include original text in reply.
1 of 87 Next
Reply
0
a
Add
Address
l Help
hUp://webmail.aol.com/msgview.adp?folder=SU5CTIg—&uid=5320515 3/18/2003
AOL.COM I Message View
757 ;;
Attention
Homeowners:
Subj: Proposed Annexation of West Widdison Addition
Date: 3/18/2003 11:05:51 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: U'Harris Brent" <brent harris(a anlw and gov>
To: U'Pugmire Paul" <oaul p_ugmire anlw and gov>, D—
"Pond
pond@pacificorp com>, U"Sutherland. Bruce "<bruces(a)ci.rexburg id us>,
U"Larsen. Shawn"' <slarsen30(a�go com>, U"Fullmer. Nyle"' <ncfullmer@hotmail com>,
U"Bjorn. Pvtarsha"'<srb44�juno.com>, U"Benfield. Donna"' <donna@rexcc.com>
Sent from the Internet (Details
Honorable Mayor and City Council:
I understand there is a possiblilty that the proposal to annex the west Widdison Addition may be
withdrawn, because of some public opposition to the proposal.
I feel that would be a mistake. The reasons for the annexation are valid and still exist even though
some have been outspoken in their opposition. I believe the conditions agreed upon in the last
work meeting on 2/26/03 are reasonable. If you are considering not annexing our addition and not
installing the sewer line, you should definitely allow time for additonal input from the residents
before making a final decision. I believe the majority of the people in our neighborhood, including
me, feel that annexation is the best option in the long run. That is evidenced by the statement
presented by Karl Edwards at the last work meeting, which was signed by almost everyone on the
street.
Thank you for consideration of my input.
Brent G. Harris
1125 Widdison Lane (West Widdison Additon)
i
Keep MNew;i-:DLI=te ��.Print _.
r� ; j Prev 4 of 87 Next �
f— Include original text in reply.
Page 1 of 1
FOMwd
ED
Add
A dress
http://webmaii.aol.com/msgview.adp?folder=SUSCTIg=&uid=5319845 3/18/2003
mailbox: ///Cl/Documents%20and%20Settings/blairk/Application%20Da...
Subject: annexation of Widdison addition
From: "Karl Edwards" <edwkn99@msn.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 09:11:17 -0700
To: <blairk@ci.rexburg.id.us>
Dear City Council & Mayor,
When I first learned of the proposed annexation I was not opposed. We have lived in our present location for 32 years and
anticipated that some day annexation would arrive. In fact, I was particularly pleased when I learned that the city was going to
give sewer access. After I learned the costs of sewer and water I had some reservations. Nevertheless, I have found the city
council to be flexible and willing to listen to our concerns. While we have not gotten everything we have asked for, I feel that
the current proposal is an acceptable compromise and serves the greater needs of our community as well as the city. I am in
favor of the proposed annexation and hope that the council will proceed with the planned annexation as outlined in the written
proposal. I find annexation a benefit to us and the city for the following reasons:
1. sewer - protection of our community against sewer contamination
2. Planned growth and development - there needs to be better control of planning and zoning than the county provides.
Currently the city has a better plan.
3. Timing - There is never a good time to spend money that has not been budgeted, but, as with marriage, if we wait until we
have enough, we will never get married. The prices are better now than they will be in the future. Contingencies have been
made for those who don't the financing to proceed now and it will not cost them any more in the future than it would if you
postponed the inevitable annexation.
I feel that my thoughts may more accurately represent a silent majority than a vocal minority. I encourage the council to
proceed with the planned annexation of the Widdison addition.
Thank you for the time you have taken to consider and reconsider our concerns. It's time for the issue to be resolved.
Karl L. Edwards
I of 1 3/18/2003 10:44 AM
mailbox:///Cl/Documents%20and%20 Settings/blairk/Application%20Da...
Subject: annexation concerns
From: "Ferron Sonderegger" <sonderegger@emstar2.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 00:52:16 -0600
To: <blairk@ci.rexburg.id us>
Dear Mr. Kay,
Will you please forward this message on to the mayor and the city council members? I would appreciate it very much.
Sincerely,
Paula Sonderegger
Dear Mayor Sutherland and City Council members,
I wanted to tell you that after the work meeting last night I came home feeling very hopeful about this whole
procedure. I wasn't able to stay for the entire council meeting and I was disappointed today when I learned that the
plans for the second reading went ahead as usual before everything was in place. I hope that it was merely a formality
and that the topics discussed at the work meeting and the agreements will stand. I hope that my hopeful and
encouraging feelings are not in vain.
I hope that before you do the third reading that you will get all of the agreements written down, in legal form, so that
there won't be any misunderstandings in the future.
My husband and I are very interested in an incentive to hook up to city sewer. Our system is working properly now
and we don't expect any problems in the future, but if the incentive is right we will be glad to hook up to city sewer.
My understanding is that we will never be required to hook up to city water unless our well should go dry or become
contaminated. This is what we have been told all along and I would like to see this put into writing for future
reference.
I do appreciate your willingness to work with us and to take our special circumstances into consideration.
Sincerely,
Paula Sonderegger
1 of 1 1/24/2003 1:32 PM