SHELBY — The city of Shelby is moving forward with a sanitary sewer project despite resistance from the affected residents.
In a special meeting of Shelby City Council on Monday, council passed the first reading of an ordinance to proceed with the improvement of a portion of W. Main Street with a sanitary sewer. The project would include the construction and installation of sanitary sewer lines, a force main and lift station, as well as service connections.
The ordinance passed with a 3-2 vote, with Councilmen Charlie Roub and Steve McLaughlin voting against. The ordinance will be up for its second reading during another special meeting of council on Thursday, Aug. 30 at 6:30 p.m.
The legislation was first introduced at the Aug. 20 meeting of council, written as an emergency. Councilmen Roub and McLaughlin voted against passing the ordinance as an emergency, failing the proceeding of the ordinance and essentially postponing the legislation until it could be rewritten to include three readings.
When Roub asked on Aug. 20 why the ordinance needed to be passed as an emergency, Councilman Garland Gates explained time was of the essence.
“We got some monies from the state that need to be expended, but another issue of greater concern is we know there are septic systems out there that have failed, and we have the potential for a public health nuisance,” Gates said on Aug. 20. “When projects deal with special assessments that get to this point, this is the format we use, an emergency ordinance so we can proceed and get the work done.”
City officials in Shelby have long been in talks about updating the residencies on W. Main Street from septic systems to the city’s sanitary sewer system. These talks were further validated by new state sewage rules from the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that were passed on Jan. 1, 2015 that set a minimum standard for Ohio homeowners with septic systems.
In light of this rule change, the city of Shelby began inspections of the 24 total septic systems on W. Main Street in various stages of failure that are affected by the rule changes on West Main Street. According to Project Manager Joe Gies, the entire cost of upgrading the area to a sanitary sewer system, including engineering, property acquisition and the installation of a lift station, totals $528,400.
The city will be responsible for 2 percent of the total project cost, totaling $147,600. The remainder of the cost, approximately $380,800, would be assessed upon the 24 properties affected, to be paid in 20 semi-annual installments over 10 years. The estimated cost to individual property owners is around $15,000.
Costs to homeowners will be further assisted through a grant received by Director of Environmental Health Beth Conrad. Conrad explained on Feb. 20 that the city received a $200,000 grant where $100,000 can only be used for homeowners, and the other $100,000 can be put towards the city’s costs. The $100,000 for homeowners would be distributed based on income per household, and each household would have to apply to receive assistance.
It is this cost that has divided members of council, and caused consternation in the community. Multiple times on Monday, those in the audience were reprimanded for speaking out of turn.
“I have no problem with this project, I think it’s something that needs to be done, said Roub. “What I have a problem with is the expense. I just don’t think the city is doing enough to reduce the expense to these people. I think the city needs to come up with some more money so these folks don’t have this huge expense.”
Councilman Nathan Martin stated because of state law, the responsibility falls to the property owners “unfortunately whether they like it or not.” He added the city has put more money into this project than any other project.
Roub suggested Martin might feel differently if he himself lived out on W. Main St. and would be personally affected by the legislation.
“If it were me out there, and I was in a situation of one of those in a house with a failing system, and understanding the weight of the state and what they are forcing me to do, I would welcome this,” Martin responded. “And all I would want to know from my council is if they were doing absolutely everything they could to lower my burden.
“I think we’ve gone above and beyond what we’ve set as precedent in the amount of money we’ve put into this,” Martin continued. “There does come a point where it is unfair to use tax monies that are meant for the whole for a select few.”
Shelby City Council passed a resolution declaring the necessity of the sanitary sewer project on March 19 with a 3-2 vote. Councilmen Roub and McLaughlin voted against the measure. The next step was a meeting of the Board of Revisions and Assessments, made up of the mayor, the law director and the finance director.
“The board did meet on May 3 and reconvened on Aug. 6,” said Gates. “Their report was no written claims, complaints nor objections with respect to the project had been received, and none were raised in the meetings.”
There were objections at Monday’s meeting of council, where during a committee of the whole McLaughlin allowed for public comment despite objections from other members of council that the time for public comment was during the May 3 and Aug. 6 meetings of the Board of Revisions and Assessments.
This was also pointed out by Shelby resident Dan Crum, a supporter of the sewer project whose property at 362 W. Main Street would be affected.
“Probably most everybody out here is ignorant on how the system works,” Crum said. I was at the last committee meeting, and there were four of us that showed up. I was really disappointed; nobody seemed to realize they should’ve been at that last committee meeting.”
One of the fiercest objections came from Shelby resident Shannon Friebel, who complained that the proposed lift station would be constructed on his property at 324 W. Main Street.
“Thirty years I’ve lived out there, heard all about how the city is going to put a sewer out there,” Friebel said. “I find it lackadaisical that the city of Shelby has waited this long. I promote the idea of doing it. But if you put a pump station on my property, my house value goes down half and you’re going to charge me an exuberant amount of money to hook up to this thing.
“If it happens, I’ll file bankruptcy, I’ll move out and let the place grow up in weeds,” Friebel said. “For 30 years I took care of that property owned by the city, and this is what I get. I just don’t understand why it has to be on my property. I’m sorry, but I’ll fight. I hope you enjoy, because I’m not going to let it happen.”
