Logjam project has green light to proceed

The Mill Creek logjam project is officially moving forward.

After years of discussions and delays, the Union County Commissioners voted Wednesday to approve the project to begin essentially as soon as possible.

A decision came at the morning meeting after county officials held the second and final hearing for the project Tuesday evening where they heard from some residents in support of and opposed to the large-scale clean-out effort.

Throughout part of last year and in more recent months, officials fielded several questions and concerns over the project ranging from wildlife impacts to funding sources, however, a vast majority of resident concerns came down to two issues: permanent easements on properties for future maintenance and the fees assessed for that maintenance.

County officials explained that, once approved, a contractor would be brought on to do the actual clean-out of logjams across 33 miles of Mill Creek. Officials said temporary easements would be needed for that work though they would go away upon completion. Those would extend 75 feet from the bank for contractor access.

The creek would then be checked annually or every other year by drone and problematic logjams would then be removed on a priority basis. For that ongoing maintenance, workers would access the waterway through additional easements, these permanent, which would be measured from the bank and extend 25 feet beyond the outer tree line.

Steven Hice, a resident on Watkins Road said he worries about the use of an easement in the future.

“I understand the importance of maintaining Mill Creek. I fully support addressing any of the logjams that may be contributing to the flooding issues. However, I have serious concerns about the long-term implications of this project and the permanent easements being proposed,” he said, noting that his concern is less with the commissioners and more with future elected officials or state officials’ future plans.

Richard Stover, a Raymond resident and business owner, said he too is in favor of the clean-out but not the easement or the assessment.

“I have no issue with moving the logjams, that’s fine. But if you do force us to pay these assessment fees…it’s a new tax. You guys know that,” he said. “I adamantly oppose a permanent easement on my property.”

Sarah Phipps, who also lives in Raymond, agreed about the assessments and said the county funding from the American Rescue Plan Act should cover the whole project, not just construction as explained. Officials received more than $11 million in ARPA funds during the pandemic, used $10 million for “lost revenue” and set aside $1.5 million for the logjam, now projected to cost $3.9 million.

“I know the government is not used to using the money in their wallet before they put their hand out for more. But frankly, in my opinion, the grant money that we have available should be used for the project,” she said. “(The money) that the grant is for will take care of—in my opinion, that’s what those funds should be used for without adding additional burdens to county residents that are already taxed very heavily.”

While County Engineer Jeff Stauch led the presentation and answered the majority of the questions Tuesday night, Commissioner Dave Burke offered the final summation ahead of the board’s decision Wednesday morning.

“According to state statute, if you’re going to clean out a ditch, you have to set up a maintenance fund. There’s no arbitrary issue around that,” Burke said. “And of course if you’re going to set up a maintenance fund, you have to use it because we’re not a bank, we’re a government and that requires the engineer, who has their own section of code, providing the will of the county commissioners in maintaining a ditch once its clean, which requires access to both view and remediate future impediments to the flow of water. I just do not know of any other way where you can say I’m for cleaning out the ditch but I’m opposed to an easement or an assessment for maintaining the ditch when Ohio statute does not give you the ability to do one or the other. It is part and parcel and as much as I don’t like it either, I don’t disagree with the concerns of the constituents, if you’re going to clean out the ditch, you have to do the second half of the equation.”

He said it is impossible to have it both ways and that the board felt the benefits to residents far outweighed the detriments.

The Ohio Revised Code sections being referenced are, primarily, 6131 and 6137, the latter of which deals with maintenance funds and easements and notes, “In the cleaning, repair and other maintenance work on drainage improvements, the persons whose duty it is to perform the maintenance work may go upon the adjoining or abutting lands within the permanent easement necessary for proper operation of the required machinery, tools, motor vehicles, conveyances or other equipment.”

The county shared a projected schedule following project approval, which starts with the project going out to bid. That is set to happen soon and would stay active for three or four weeks leaving bids to come in sometime in mid-October. Construction meetings would start in November and release the contractor for work sometime in December.

Stauch said the project would be, conservatively, two years of work but could be less than that.