Town Invites Commissioners to Resolve $100,000 Sewer Dispute

Share

The Mayor and the Town Council have invited the Kent County Commissioners to meet face to face and resolve a dispute over $98,000 in sewer hookup fees, which the town insists it is owed for 14 properties on Lover’s Lane that were never allocated or approved for sewer hookups in any written agreement.

The town has two instruments that could settle the matter, said Town Manager Bill Ingersoll.

“The town is offering the legal remedy by our contract,” Ingersoll said, referring to arbitration. “Or an addendum to our contract.”

The town and the county have been fencing for about two years over whether 14 properties on Lover’s Lane were allocated in a 30-year-old agreement for the Quaker Neck Service Area.

Ingersoll said either avenue insists on full payment of the outstanding $98,000 in hookup fees.

“I don’t think the town would have ever sent a bill for that amount if we didn’t think it was due and owed,” Ingersoll said.

“An addendum would memorialize the expansion of the Quaker Neck Service Area to Lover’s Lane” that has already occurred, Ingersoll said on Tuesday. But he said any amendments to the current contract would not increase number of allocations agreed to previously or further expand the service area.

The current allocations are around 242.

The Commissioners are invited to the Town Hall at 8 p.m after their regularly schedule meeting on Tuesday, Oct. 9.

Related Stories

http://chestertownspy.com/2012/05/24/bitter-end-to-countytown-utility-agreement/

http://chestertownspy.com/2012/06/20/town-and-county-headed-for-arbitration-over-sewer-hookup-fees-at-lovers-lane/

http://chestertownspy.com/2011/10/06/37695/

Letters to Editor

  1. Dan,

    Kent County government has received no invitation or other communication from the town of Chestertown.

    Susie

    • Daniel Menefee says:

      Author Note:

      Susie,

      It was announced Monday that the invitation would be sent out after Monday’s Town Council meeting.

  2. Maybe the two councils could have a showdown at noon someday on High Street… and settle this issue once and for all.

    While the Chestertownies would out number the CC’s… I’d be betting on the younger guys… two pretty good hunters and a Coastie.

    But… Linda K would step in before the shooting and act as the peacemaker. 🙂

    This has got to be a humorous situation, because if it were serious, then it would have been resolved many, many months ago.

  3. Lainey Harrison says:

    How can allocations be around 242? Either there are 242 or there are not 242. It is a specific number. If we cant count the number today how are we supposed to resolve details from 30 years ago? “Any amendments to the current contract would not increase number of allocations agreed to previously or further expand the service area” so, therefore, we should start with a sound and reconciled number of allocations rather than an “around” number.

    Im a QAC resident and therefore, no dog in this fight.

    • Daniel Menefee says:

      Reporter note: the exact number will be arrived at in either scenario. This was the best/narrowest estimate the town could offer by the time this story was published. It will be precisely nailed down when this is all settled, and we will report it.

      Thanks for reading

  4. Jamie Williams says:

    A little confused was the invitation the line in this article “The Commissioners are invited to the Town Hall at 8 p.m after their regularly schedule meeting on Tuesday, Oct. 9.” OR the letter from the town attorney “RE: Demand for Arbitration” ? Dan, you wrote “It was announced Monday that the invitation would be sent out after Monday’s Town Council meeting.” Unless an invitation is LOST in the mail, the title of this article is misleading.

    P.S. “regularly scheduleD meeting”.

Write a Letter to the Editor on this Article

We encourage readers to offer their point of view on this article by submitting the following form. Editing is sometimes necessary and is done at the discretion of the editorial staff.