By: Rebecca Miller
The Thursday morning, February 25, 2021 Williams County Commissioners meeting began with the approval of resolutions, before holding an Executive Session with Sheriff Tom Kochert to discuss details relative to security arrangements and emergency response protocols, with no action taken. Items given approval were:
•Resolution 80 Supplemental Appropriations on behalf of Coroner, Common Pleas court, Engineer, Hillside, IT, Juvenile Court and Sheriff’s office
•Resolution 81 entering into an agreement with Active 911 on behalf of EMA for paging, dispatch, mapping, response coordination, data logging, proximity information, 911 dispatch data and other services, and MOUs for alerting system
•Resolution 82 Entering into an agreement/proposal with New Era Technology for IT Department
•Also signed – Special Hauling Permit #21-008 for Mike Elser; Notice to Proceed for Project #2 Williams County Tower; Permit for use of county property for WC Farmers’ Market May through October 2021; Credit Card Appropriations for March for Sheriff’s office; Application for permit to construct dam or levy in the State of Ohio; Permits for use of County Property for Chamber of Commerce Spring Fling on May 22, 2021; Fall Fest September 25, 2021; Christmas Decorating Blitz November 7, 2021; Santa Arrival Parade November 26, 2021
•Minutes for February 22, 2021 meeting and payment of bills
Some discussion was held on the timing of the placement of consoles for the new MARCs system, with the agreement that the project is moving forward. The Commissioners went into a second Executive Session with Todd Roth, County Engineer, to consider compensation of employees.
There was no action taken and following a short recess they began the Ditch Review for Ditch 741. There were a number of people present via Zoom for this review including Ditch Engineer Brian Fritsch, Adam Perry, WC SWCD, Hugh Perry, Patti Rockey, Chad Everetts, Cheryl Silvers for Donald Weber Farms, and an unidentified person. Todd Roth was in person with the Commissioners.
Commissioner Brian Davis read Ditch Petition 741 filed by John Altman on January 15, 2021, which is in St. Joseph Township and begins “at the Northwest corner of parcel 061-20-0-018.000 and traveling in a southerly direction along the existing tile line to a point ending at Township Road A.”
Mr. Fritsch reported that there are three land owners, including the petitioner, which comprise 90.74% of the total watershed acres for the project.
Following his description of the tile repairs needed, and potential cost to the county, he recommended that the “hearing be extended to give the three principle land owners time to come to an agreement to replace the tile themselves without going through the petition process.”
Mr. Roth added that he had had a conversation with a landowner who has a few acres in that watershed, who is concerned over costs versus benefits to him.
The floor was opened to those on Zoom and after some comments by Silvers for Weber, and Hugh Perry for his father in law, John Altman, it appeared that there was an agreement amongst the land owners that it would be best to do the repairs themselves.
A motion was made and approved “to deny this petition under the terms that the local landowners all got together.” Commissioner Davis added, “It sounds like everybody is pretty much in agreement and we know that you folks can get together and do it a lot cheaper than what the government can, with everything that we have to do.”
After another short recess, the Commissioners reconvened for an update from Brian Fritsch on House Bill 340. “House Bill 340 started two years ago and it was designed to update the drainage laws, or the petition process, the petition laws within the State of Ohio,” Fritsch said.
Continuing, “It was a multi-agency effort and in the end, when it was passed, it has the blessing of County Engineer’s Association, the Auditor’s Association and the Ohio Farm Bureau.”
He explained that it was new for the Farm Bureau to be involved, but it was involved, so any changes that might take effect next month, in March 2021, to 6131 and 6137 of the Revised Code, have approval by the Farm Bureau.
He highlighted what affect it will have on the way they will be handling petitions in the future. It is now written into the law that “prior to filing a petition, the petitioner shall consult with the county engineer …to discuss the proposed drainage improvement and to determine the proper forms and procedures for filing the petition.”
Fritsch said that this is something that he had already been trying to do in the past, but that now it is required. He stated that this should help gauge whether the petition will be successful or not, or if it is even necessary.
The biggest change to the petition process will be (with 6131.06) that “the petitioner shall file with the petition a bond in the sum of $1500 plus the sum of $5 for each parcel in excess of 200.
So the bond is going up from $500 to $1500 and the additional cost per parcel is going from $2 to $5, so it is going to be quite a bit more expensive to even file a petition in the future.”
He continued that two things within 6137, the maintenance part of the Revised Code, have been changed. One is that the required six year reviews for all the ditches, will no longer be required.
The wording has been changed from “shall conduct a six year review” to “may conduct a six year review” so if conditions warrant a review, then they can hold one. This relieves the department of needing to write a new schedule of six year reviews for all of the ditches.
The second item in 6137 that has changed is that “the thresholds for tile repairs is going to change from $4000 to $24,000 which is a significant increase.” He said that he can’t force a lot of repairs that would cost that much.
Also in that section, it had been set up as “no more than four semi annual installments for the taxes, but with it moving up to $24,000 it is now changed to no more than ten semi-annual payments.”
“So it is going from two years to pay off that assessment to as much as five. So that is a significant change also.”
He also mentioned that Ditch 742 petitioned by Fenicle “being a tile of record, would be eligible in March if they wanted to file a repair under the new rules, that we could spend that $24,000 in that case.”
“I think it that case it would be worthwhile, but I don’t see the #24,000 being the norm on tile repairs.”
With no further questions, comments or updates, the meeting adjourned.
Rebecca can be reached at publisher@thevillagereporter.com