Elkader Council decision to use taxpayer money on a private repair questioned
By Willis Patenaude, Times-Register
An Elkader City Council decision earlier this year brought attention to whether or not taxpayer funds should be used to repair a private business’s sewer issue, essentially financing a private business at the expense of taxpaying residents.
The decision involved a downtown business that used their sewer clean out, an access point to the sewer line, which left raw sewage on the sidewalk and prompted a health concern.
According to Elkader City Administrator Jennifer Cowsert, immediate action was taken, since the city did not want people walking through sewage or risk it flowing into the street and storm sewer.
The first call was made to the DNR because what occurred was an “illegal discharge,” and the DNR advised the city it needed to neutralize the raw sewage by spreading lime on it, which the city did. During this process, Cowsert claimed the city was made aware that the business’s private sewer line had separated from the sewer main, which was causing it to back-up. That is why the business, according to Cowsert, used the clean out. Cowsert does not know when or how the private line disconnected from the main line and could not recall who informed the city of the issue, but at that point, it was apparent there was a problem.
Following this, Cowsert explained calls were made to the business and several voice messages were left, but to no avail. Other attempts were made as well, such as a hand delivered letter and a certified letter in the mail. By the time the council meeting occurred where the decision was made to use taxpayer money to repair the sewer line, which was over a month later, the business still had not contacted the city.
With no response from the business owner, Cowsert reviewed the city code with the city attorney to determine what could be done. While some suggested the city should close the business in question, the city has no authority to do that. Another suggestion was for the city to simply turn off water to the business, but again, the city lacks authority to so.
One thing the city had authority to do was close down the sidewalk that runs alongside the business, due to the public health concern over the raw sewage, which falls under the nuisance code and the health hazard section. The sidewalk was closed for a little over two weeks, from the middle of February to the beginning of March, to accommodate Ladies Day Out.
“We wanted it opened for Ladies Day out and there had not been a repeat of the raw sewage for a couple of weeks, so we felt comfortable opening it back up,” Cowsert explained.
However, the business still did not contact the city or repair the line, which is in violation of city code, which requires all buildings to be connected to the sewer main. The city took the next step, relying on a provision in the code that allows the city to repair something of this nature if the owner does not do so within 30 days. After repairing the problem, the city, according to code, can assess the property owner’s taxes and add that cost to the business’s future taxes. In this case, the cost to repair the sewer line will be added to the business’s September tax bill, and that’s what the city council voted to do.
“As soon as I pay the bill, I plan to send the information to the treasurer’s office and it will go on their September taxes,” Cowsert said.
According to Cowsert, this is similar to the method the city uses for nuisance abatement, though that is typically more residential than business, but Cowsert asserts it’s “the same thing.”
“We mow their grass, assess their taxes and eventually get paid. In this particular situation, other sewer customers are paying the up front cost (whereas with the lawn mowing that is a general fund budget),” Cowsert explained.
Council member Tony Hauber justified the decision to resolve the problem in the short term using taxpayer money, with knowledge that, in the long term, the city would recoup that money.
“I voted to take action to correct a public health issue and we are using a very standard city process for charging the people that are responsible for that. Assessing property tax is the tool a city uses to charge people when the city has to step in and solve a problem that has risen to public nuisance or public health issue,” Hauber said. “It is a serious tool that has teeth to back it up, and I am confident that we will collect all due property tax. But first and foremost, the city is doing its job of protecting citizens from irresponsible property owners.”
Similarly, council member Deb Schmidt justified her vote on the matter, stating, “Letting you know that the safety of our community and visitors would be of the most importance, it has occurred to me that some may not understand that this is simply the city taking care of a matter that the property owners will not or has not in a timely manner…Do I feel confident that we will recover money spent on the repair? Yes I do.”
While Hauber and Schmidt are confident in repayment at some point, Cowsert expressed concern that the business “will attempt to get out of paying it,” but added the city attorney’s view fell in line with that of the council. Cowsert added a situation like this has not occurred before, and she couldn’t recall a nuisance abetment with a business before, outside of removing ice and snow, but that is generally resolved with a quick phone call to the business.
As for the repair in question, Cowsert noted it was completed in early April, but declined to provide a cost estimate for the project, due to not wanting to add “fuel” the fire.
