Sharpsburg claims sewer deal with O'Hara outdated, plans to renegotiate
Sharpsburg officials want to review an agreement with O'Hara on water flow from township properties into the borough's sewer system.
The 1985 agreement calls for 151 residents from O'Hara to pay a fee for water flow into Sharpsburg's sewer system. Councilman Lou DeLuca said that number has grown greatly since that agreement was made. It now is 1,240 residents.
O'Hara currently is being billed $40 each for the 151 homes that use the sewer system and a $1,670 maintenance fee. Those fees were increased in 2007.
Borough engineer Robert Ziskhau said the need to examine the agreement came from a proposal that would add pump stations in O'Hara, which would put more flow into the borough's system.
“You're not paying for the total number of houses that are coming into the system now, and the proposal is for several hundred additional houses under the new construction, so now is the time to make it work,” Ziskhau said.
Ziskhau and borough Solicitor Mike Witherel will be in charge of renegotiating the agreement and presenting it to officials.
Ziskhau said the two will need to review information available to come up with a fair agreement to present to O'Hara officials.
Tom McGee is an associate editor for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-856-7400, ext. 1513, or firstname.lastname@example.org.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.