Sagle Valley Water shuts down LID protests

SAGLE — The Sagle Valley Water & Sewer District disposed of more than 20 protests to a controversial Local Improvement District on Wednesday.

The district’s board of directors adopted the recommendations from counsel and project staff that the protests be denied because the opponents would receive fire-flow protection and a municipal water source through the LID. Some opponents also already have water meters.

The board also acknowledged that accepting one landowner’s protest would require them to accept others, which would increase the costs to landowners who consented to the LID.

The public comment period for the proceeding closed in March and district officials declined to re-open it to allow for further testimony. The board took up written protests that were already part of the hearing record.

After considering each individual protest, the board unanimously adopted a resolution disposing of them. The move clears the way for the tax assessment roll to be finalized at the district’s next regular monthly business meeting.

Those who protested the LID argued financial hardship, inadequate public notice, no desire for district services and perceived construction cost overruns. The project includes a 330,000-gallon reservoir, approximately 10 miles of water main installation and other improvements.

The district was awarded a $2.3 million low-interest loan by the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality in 2007 to expand the district’s infrastructure. The loan has a 2-percent interest rate and is payable over 20 years.

Landowners in the LID can either pay the $7,000 tax assessment in a lump sum or in monthly installments for the next 20 years.

Board chairman Mark Cherry declined a request to comment on the concerns of LID opponents, although the district’s bond counsel disputed many of their assertions on Wednesday.

Opponents contend a majority of landowners object to the LID, but Laura McAloon said the opposite was true. McAloon said the LID has the support of 90 percent of the landowners within the district.

“Only about 10 percent object to the LID,” she said.

However, LID opponents dispute the accuracy of that statement.

McAloon also disputed opponents’ assertion that everybody within the LID already has a domestic well and that commercial landowners are a driving force behind the expansion.

Unable to address the board during the proceeding, a crowd of opponents could only scoff and murmur disapprovingly during the meeting.

“Surprise!” one woman said as the board methodically rejected the protests.