by Annie Wooden

After more than 90 minutes of discussion with about 25 residents on Monday evening, the Thompson Falls City Council voted in favor of two resolutions expressing the intent to create Special Improvement Districts (SIDs) and move forward with a wastewater treatment system plan for properties above the railroad tracks. However, council members expressed to residents in attendance that this did not commit them to the project.

On Jan. 7, the city held a public meeting to inform residents of the proposed project and the proposed funding package. In order to receive the Rural Development (RD) funding package from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the council had to vote to move forward at this Monday’s meeting.

Council member Tom Eggensperger made the motions to approve the resolutions (one for each of the first two phases of the four-phase sewer project), but amended the resolutions in order to give residents more time for the protest period of forming the SIDs.

“We need to give residents a fair chance to express their opinions,” Eggensperger said. He asked Mayor Jerry Lacy to continue reviewing additional funding options for the project, including help for seniors and low-income property owners. “I’m not going to approve the project unless we have more money. It’s my opinion that this is too expensive.”

Many of the residents and property owners in attendance Monday stated their objection to the wastewater project, primarily due to the cost. A group of residents gathered signatures of parcel owners who oppose continuing with the wastewater project. On Monday, resident Ron Clark presented the Thompson Falls City Council with more than 150 signatures, which he said were gathered in a three-day period. Clark noted that the majority of the signatures were from parcel owners in phases 1 and 2 of the project, which includes residences west of Grove Street.

The sewer project plan includes a monthly rate of $55 (down $10 from the original plan) and an assessment of $4665 per property, which is to be collected on property taxes over 20 years. On Tuesday, the city said that they have offered to help qualifying individuals apply for the USDA grant for low-income seniors over the age of 62 to cover their special assessment cost. The city also said that they are seeking a Community Development Block Grant to cover the assessments of the low- and moderate-income property owners regardless of age.

With the resolutions passed, property owners with parcels in the first two phases of the sewer project will have until Feb. 8 to protest, in writing. If at least 51 percent of the property owners submit letters protesting the creation of the SIDs, the project will not move forward. If fewer than 50 percent of property owners protest the SIDs, then the council can decide whether or not to continue with the project and the proposed RD funding package.

City Clerk Chelsea Peterson said that notices would be mailed to property owners in the proposed SIDs this week. Protest or support from those property owners must be submitted in writing, and can be mailed back to City Hall or can be dropped off. If a property owner does not respond, state law considers that support for the project, Mayor Jerry Lacy said.

Sanders County Sanitarian Shawn Sorenson attended the public meeting on Jan. 7, as well as the Monday council meeting. “I believe a community system is the right thing to do,” he said in support of the project.

“This is an issue that’s been kicked down the road. It’s always going to be a burden on people,” former Mayor Mark Sheets told the council, encouraging them to pass the resolutions and move forward with the sewer project. “You need to look at the long-term effects. The price is going to go up the next time this comes up.”

Mayor Lacy explained that along with connecting properties north of the railroad tracks to a city sewer system, the project includes necessary improvements to the failing existing city sewer system. Residents at the meeting asked why the improvements and repairs to the existing sewer system weren’t considered for a separate funding package or a separate phase for the project, arguing that the burden of those costs should not be placed on property owners on the hill.

Notices to property owners will be mailed this week. The council will review those responses and vote whether or not to establish the SIDs at its Feb. 11 meeting.