Musky Court residents continue to fight

Musky Court residents aren’t willing to take the city’s plan to install sidewalks along their cul-de-sac lying down.

Residents unhappy with the sidewalk plan are working to mobilize their neighbors and raise awareness among other property owners who are located on cul-de-sacs around the city.

“Your turn is coming,” said resident John Lemke, warning all city residents who live on cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets that is is only a matter of time before the city forces sidewalks to be installed there also. John Lemke and other unhappy residents are urging people to attend the March 24 city council meeting to voice their opinions and make their concerns known.

Longtime residents John and his wife Ann Lemke, say there has been a lack of full disclosure with the entire project. They noted that in 1987 when Musky Lane and Court were upgraded from ditches and gravel driving surfaces, a notice was mailed before work started listing an estimated cost to homeowners.

“Fast forward to 2025, we did not receive any notice of costs or what projects are to be completed,” John Lemke said.

They questioned if when the council decided to do the project if sidewalks were on that agenda. “If it was why not let the affected property owners know?” Lemke asked, noting the property owners still have not received an estimated cost for itemized improvements.

Ann Lemke raised the question of what is a “street” under the city’s codes. She noted the city’s ordinance regarding sidewalks refers to it being on “streets,” she said the city has courts, lanes and other road designations.

“More information is needed on this subject so the city street ordinance can be fully understood,” Lemke said. “[I]f reconstructed streets are to have sidewalks, this shouldn’t concern us since our address is on a court. A court is a dead end where as a street has a connecting roadway on either side,” Lemke said.

The Lemkes noted there are 10 homes on Musky Court and only three of them will be having a sidewalk.

“This seems like a very small benefit that does not outweigh the cost. It seems the city could use the expense of a sidewalk on Musky Court for other Medford Community Projects,” the Lemkes stated.

They noted that when attending the two

See MUSKY on page 4 city council meetings, the residents of Musky Court were hurried through their statements and weren’t able to fully state their concerns.

Resident Mark Albers also raised concerns about how the city is applying the rule.

“If you claim it is a city ordinance all streets being rebuilt will get a sidewalk. Pep’s Way didn’t get one. Is it because it’s a cul-de-sac, the definition is a road that goes nowhere?” Albers stated.

“You’re not doing Musky Lane, so why are you putting a sidewalk in with no engineering? They’re going to have to tear up some of it for storm sewer,” Albers stated.

Albers questioned that if it is an ordinance, why didn’t the city enforce them like when sidewalks aren’t shoveled, lawns aren’t mowed or there are junk cars in yards.

Albers also addressed cost. “If a sidewalk is going to cost $50,000 and there’s 1,000 houses in town, everyone’s taxes could be lowered by $50. Council members told me you can’t look at it that way,” Albers stated.

“I urge everyone that lives in a cul-desac to attend meetings or call city hall because yours could be next. When the people on Musky Court voted for no sidewalk, I believe we outvoted the council,” Albers stated. “Who do you work for? Us, but you didn’t even listen.”

Unhappy residents noted that all the residents but one in the area signed a petition opposing the sidewalks and also suggested it is discriminatory to only have sidewalk impacting three residences out of 10 homes when those impacted homeowners will have to maintain the sidewalk for the benefit of all residents.