The Sanitary District has entered into negotiations with Ellman Cos. for possible annexation of the developer’s land in northern Fountain Hills.

The district is a separate government entity from the Town of Fountain Hills and is governed by a five-man publicly elected board.

Ellman had requested annexation by the district of its 1,276 acres earlier this year and hopes to break ground on the parcel by 2010.

The Sanitary Board simply needs to vote up or down on the annexation issue – there is no public election by voters required.

Before that happens, however, Ellman will likely need to meet a long list of criteria as outlined by the district in an April letter.

The board has publicly stated in the past that the district – consequently the existing taxpayers in Fountain Hills – won’t be held responsible for any sewage-related costs tied to the Ellman project.

That would include effluent disposal as well, one of the by-products of the sewage treatment process.

“The board has expressed a desire to negotiate a pre-annexation agreement,” said Sanitary District Manager Ron Huber.

“We would like to have them subject to certain criteria.”

One meeting so far has been held between Ellman Cos. and district officials, and Huber said it was a good start to what could be a protracted process.

Developer representative Don Kile could not be reached for immediate comment on his viewpoints on the annexation process.

Although the Sanitary District is currently embarking on a $9 million treatment plant improvement project (see separate story), those enhancements are not tied to the possible Ellman property annexation.

A maximum of 1,350 homes can be built on the parcel.

In a letter outlining some of their wishes, Sanitary directors said they would like the developer to pay an unspecified “buy-in fee” to enter into the pre-annexation agreement and for access to the district’s existing facilities.

In addition, the Sanitary District said the developer would have to fund all study, design, permitting, installation, construction, testing and connection of all sewer infrastructure related to the new development.

The developer would also have to pay for improvements needed to the district’s effluent disposal system to accommodate the increased flows from the project.

The district also would like the developer to provide turfed areas for effluent disposal.

The district also is seeking a provision that the sewage facilities not be financed through a community facilities district or similar financing mechanism, as was done for Eagle Mountain years ago by a different developer.