Dale and Karan Newberg attended the September 22, 2025 Shorewood City Council meeting. Here are the observations and comments of that meeting they shared in an email with the City Council.
————————————————————————–
Matters from the floor:
There were four residents who commented and expressed disapproval of the proposed 2026 utility fee, specifically the new $32.51/qtr. “where water available” fee. All residents have water in the street but have chosen not to connect and remain on private wells. All expressed the belief that this new fee is unfair and is breaking long-standing agreements from past city policy. One resident provided an opinion and data of significant excess funds (millions) and financial reserves (millions) being held by the City that could be used for reducing property taxes or other expenditures. This claim needs follow up.
General Business Items:
4C. Jake Griffiths presented info on a specific subdivision and property development variance request. It struck us as odd that he stated that even though city water was available to this property, although it would require a long connection, the developers preferred and requested a private well. The council and mayor voted unanimously to approve this variance. Here is a prime example of the inconsistent application of the city’s desire to require water connections to new developments and homes. This is another example that will come back to haunt the city when they eventually decide to retroactively mandate assessments and connections after inconsistently giving residents and developers a choice.
4D. Discussions regarding an in-house engineer were really lengthy but went around and around with the same questions asked by various council members, and with significant disagreements between members. It was obvious to us very early on that this idea is premature, poorly developed and not even supported by city staff for execution in 2026. Too much time was spent discussing, one motion and a second was ignored, and finally a second motion and a second passed with a decision to accept the lower levy but continue to pursue the idea. Note: This is not a new issue, it’s been tried before just a few years ago, and it failed for personal, personnel and financial reasons. Move on! Manage consulting expenditures more prudently in the future.
4E. – F. This was our personal “hot topic of interest”. We appreciated the efforts of DiGruttolo and Sanschagrin to discuss and explore other options beside the new water availability fee. Specifically, they appeared to grasp the idea which I proposed in my comments which was to collect the needed $52,000 by raising the base fee to the 1600 actual water subscribers by $8.13/qtr. (a 25% increase). We found it interesting but not surprising that the Finance Director repeatedly stated that it was only “right” that everyone share equally in the base fee whether connected or not. And she stated that several connected residents had complained to her about “subsidizing” the 400 residents not connected. And she warned that 1600 residents would be very unhappy about any increase in this perceived subsidy. She completely ignored and deflected any consideration of any alternative fund-raising ideas. The Finance Director “tail” wagged the Council and Mayor “dogs” of their obligation and power to direct policy. In our opinion, the staff is unduly influencing and directing the Council and Mayor in their decision-making, rather than executing their wishes and intent.
She effectively shut down the governing body by repeating the previous sessions and documents which she agreed had never been voted on. And the Council and Mayor admitted that this was the first time any serious discussion of alternatives was happening. Why was there no such discussion earlier? Why did you not take my and other resident’s previous comments and disapproval seriously enough to demand for discussion alternative scenarios by your staff employee? You waited until ordinance approval night and then couldn’t take a stand and direct staff to come back with alternatives. Who is in charge?
Again, we appreciated the attempts by two council members to express support for the unfairness of this action and to try to redirect staff to explore other alternatives, even if it meant delaying approval of new utility fees until the normal October/November timeline. What was the hurry this year?
It was particularly revealing to hear Nat Gorham openly and repeatedly say that the city must move to get all residents on city water – sooner rather than later! He asserted that city connections are too few and moving too slowly. There was no real rationale behind his opinion but it is telling and scary to us that he feels that way. This sounds like closed session talk that he let slip. This city and area is historically rural and suburban. It still is. We don’t even have our own post office. We have to share resources with neighboring cities. We are not Minneapolis and never will be! The two 20-year plans Matt Morreim mentioned to achieve that goal would be interesting to read. I have – have you? The language and approach from staff is verbatim out of the 2012 Plan. The last time the city tried to force water connections resulted in serious resident uproar. Our conclusion is that Gorham, other elected representatives, or staff intend to resurrect that plan and force assessments never before required, force connections never before required, and raise connections fees even higher. The first few steps have now been approved. The rest will be coming soon, in our opinion.
Unfortunately, the end result was the motion by Maddie and seconded by Gorham to accept the ordinances as written. With only DiGruttolo and Sanschagrin voting No, ordinances for new and increased fees Passed.
The other observation we are making is that there was no discussion or disapproval of the other significant fee increases. I predict that in April 2026 when all 2000 residents get these first bills there will be a significant outcry. If not, they are not paying attention or have unlimited resources. We can’t say that.
Thank you for your attention.
Dale & Karan Newberg
