Table of Contents

Introduction #

The Issue #

In 2020, it was revealed that Maumee has been illegally dumping sewage in the Maumee River. Under findings and orders from the EPA, the City has been required to complete a Sewer System Evaluation Study (SSES), a Capacity, Management, Operation, and Maintenance Program (CMOM), a Public Notification Program, and an Emergency Response Program.

Maumee has been aggressive in proactively addressing inflow and infiltration (I&I) on public and commercial property in an attempt to reduce the amount of stormwater going into the sanitary sewer system. However, the smoke studies and SSES reports show that residential areas are causing a bulk of the I&I, leading to the emergency passage of Ordinance 020-2024, a Real Property Conveyance Ordinance requiring the inspection and remediation of clean water connections into the sanitary system, and complete replacement or rehabilitation of clay footer tiles and clay sewer laterals from the residence to the City main.

Citizen Reaction #

At first, the passage of 020-2024 on June 17^th, 2024, received little public attention. It was not until a Maumee homeowner, acting in compliance with this ordinance, received a quote to repair in excess of $45,000, and appeared on the news explaining the issue a few weeks later on July 12^th.

This homeowner organized a public meeting to discuss this issue and its ramifications for July 16^th, 7 pm at the Elks Club. When it was clear that there was quite a bit of public interest, the City announced its own meeting on the same date and time to be held at the city building. The citizens quickly pivoted and moved their meeting to Monday, July 15^th.

By 6:45 p.m. on Monday, the Elks facility had reached its maximum occupancy capacity of 500 people and approximately 75 to 100 residents were turned away at the door.

The tone of the meeting was concerned yet fairly positive. Citizens were coming together to list concerns and devise solutions. It was made clear that while residents acknowledged an issue that needed to be fixed, they saw it as a community issue, not an individual homeowner issue.

After the citizens’ initiative effort garnered nearly three times the minimum number of signatures within 24 hours in an effort to give voters the opportunity to repeal the unpopular ordinance this upcoming November, the City council repealed 020-2024 at a special city council meeting on July 31^st, 2024.

City and Citizen Collaboration #

In August 2024, a series of City-hosted roundtables, council member-hosted information-gathering sessions, and citizen-led meetings attempted to untangle this complicated problem. Through these events, much information has been shared about the state of our sewer system, what steps have been taken so far, and what needs to happen next.

Citizens understand that residential inflow and infiltration (I&I) is a large contributor to the cause of the sanitary sewer overflows in the Maumee River. Early investigation of the SSES reports, smoke-testing reports, and inspections completed during the time that 020-2024 was in effect show that a large majority of homes in Maumee require I&I remediation, either through the removal of clean water connections into sanitary sewers and/or rehabilitation or replacement of private sewer laterals, so we see this as a problem that needs to be solved collectively. Additionally, knowing that the Average Median Household Income is below $80,000 per year, repairs potentially in the tens of thousands is a hefty bill to pay. While we await the results of the financial impact assessment being completed by Stantec, we decided to complete some research on how other communities fund and legally justify their homeowner assistance programs.

The crux of the matter seems to be using public funding for repairs made on private property. Though many other communities have grant programs, low- or no-interest loan programs, assessments, etc., the City of Maumee has repeatedly stated that it is hesitant to use any public funds to fund repairs on private property until it can establish legal precedent that these types of programs are an acceptable use of funds in the State of Ohio.

Additionally, citizens are upset that the passing of Ordinance 050-2022 shifted the responsibility of maintaining and repairing sewer laterals within the right-of-way from the city to the residents, significantly increasing the potential cost of replacing or rehabilitating sewer laterals. The justification for this is that many or most local communities have similar legislation and that 050-2022 brought the city in line with the surrounding area. Some citizens have an issue with this ordinance’s timing, considering that 050-2022 was passed just after receiving the EPA’s findings and orders, the July 2022 CMOM plan, and the smoke testing results. Others take issue with the justification; they had no knowledge of whether this is true, and if it is, why the city could also not follow other community examples of enacting homeowner assistance programs for I&I remediation.

Our mayor directed the citizens to devise solutions and conduct their own research.

Here are our findings.

Research #

As citizens, we do not fully grasp every technical aspect of correcting all the sewer issues in Maumee, nor would we purport to. Our research focuses on finding the most cost-effective and efficient ways to address residential I&I remediation, analyzing other Ohio community programs, finding legal precedents for public funds for private property in Ohio, and exploring the feasibility of government grant and low-interest loan programs.

Community Case Studies #

Though many of these communities do not share the same circumstances as Maumee, they all have one thing in common: They use public funds to assist homeowners in financing or funding the repair or rehabilitation of private property sewer issues. With an estimated 60-80% of homes in Maumee contributing to the I&I problem, we view this as a community issue, not a private issue.

To use a colloquial phrase, we don’t need to reinvent the wheel. Many Ohio communities, through a combination of federal and state grants, loans, assessments, and sewer rate increases, use public funds to repair or rehabilitate clean water infiltration into sanitary sewers through a variety of homeowner assistance programs. While some or all of these may not be perfect fits or even feasible for our beloved city, learning about what other communities have achieved is nothing short of inspirational.

Perrysburg, Ohio #

Case Study: Perrysburg

https://www.ci.perrysburg.oh.us/news_detail_T5_R82.php

2024 Population: 25,301 | 2024 Median Household Income: $138,236

Perrysburg Public Utility Committee Meeting Minutes, December 10, 2020:

12-10-2020 Public Utilities Committee Minutes (Jonathan Smith).pdf (revize.com)

LEGISLATION TO REVISE HOMEOWNER GRANTS

Mr. Smith stated that the Committee has discussed the grant program that encourages homeowners to remove clean water connections from the sanitary sewer system. Ms. Sandretto stated that the current language allows for the City to reimburse homeowners 2/3 of the construction costs up to $6,000 maximum. Because the cost of construction has increased and to encourage more participation in the program, the Administration is recommending that the amounts be changed to allow for reimbursement of 80% of the construction costs up to $12,000. Mr. Smith asked about the fines from the EPA for overflows. Ms. Godsey said that the fees are discretionary, but it can be up to $25,000 per day for a violation. Mr. Smith said that he is okay with the change to avoid costs and to help with our EPA permit in the future. Mr. VanHoozen said that he has no problem with the change, and he wishes we could find some way to encourage homeowners to participate. Ms. Sandretto said if this is approved by City Council, the Administration can work with the PIO to get the information out. Mr. Smith suggested a press release to local plumbing companies. Ms. Kabat said that the Administration will discuss that internally. She said that they have to be careful because they cannot show preferential treatment. Ms. Godsey reminded the committee that a clean water connection to the sanitary sewer is illegal, and that resolving these connections is voluntary at this point, but in the future it may become mandatory. The Committee agreed 3-0 to recommend approval of the increased amount for the homeowners grant program.

A conversation with the Deputy Director of Public Utilities: The Perrysburg grant comes from sewer rates and has been around for years. The grant does not cover the relining or replacement of private laterals but covers the separation of clean water connections into sanitary connections.

Most residents apply for the grant when they have other sanitary sewer issues, such as water backing up in basements. Area plumbers have been made aware of these grants being offered and suggest that homeowners investigate them so they can get their issues fixed. With everything happening here in Maumee, there’s been a monumental increase in residents proactively trying to fix their connections, knowing that Perrysburg could be the next EPA target.

Another way the city of Perrysburg maintains the grant fund is by applying for Federal or State grants to fund public infrastructure. This frees up money initially earmarked for other projects in the budget, which can then be reallocated to the grant program, ensuring continued access to residents.

Residents are responsible for maintaining and repairing sewer laterals to the main in the City of Perrysburg. However, when the city relines public mains, such as the recent Grassy Creek main sewer line project, the city also relines the laterals within the right-of-way.

Additionally, when the city of Perrysburg relines mains and ROW laterals on residential streets, they occasionally reline the private lateral up to the residence, then assess the homeowner over time for the cost. While this still incurs costs to homeowners, the ability to spread it out over time is advantageous.

Lastly, I asked if the city administrator or law director has ever expressed any misgivings about the grant funds being used on private property. He chuckled and said never – we’re not doing anything wrong. He mentioned that they work within the law and the parameters of the program(s), and that using sewer income is not illegal to for sewer repairs.

He also went on to tell me that their administrator and public information officer strongly believe in the power of communication and are constantly sending out letters, posting on social media, and doing as much public outreach as possible to engage the residents. I apologized for the influx of calls they must be receiving due to Maumee’s current issues, and he said that he loves that so many people are calling and asking for info and thanked us(!) since now more people are aware and working towards solutions.

Defiance, Ohio #

2024 Population 17,042 | 2024 Median Household Income $79,851

https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/defiance/latest/defiance_oh/0-0-0-23614

925.27 PRIVATE INFLOW REMOVAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.

(a) The “Private Inflow Removal Assistance Program” is hereby established to provide financial and technical assistance to owners of private property who are required to:

(1) Remove existing clean water connections from sanitary sewers;

(2) Redirect storm water from existing sewer to designated storm sewers, ditches, natural water courses or other designated drainage outlets;

(3) Redirect sanitary waste waters to newly designated sanitary sewers; or

(4) Repair, replace or seal an existing lateral connection to a sanitary sewer to reduce infiltration of surface or ground water in furtherance of municipal implementation of the Combined Sewer Overflow Long Term Control Plan.

A conversation with the Wastewater Superintendent: Defiance stated the lining of the lateral and sump pump installation to remove I&I is going “WAY” better than planned and has made a huge difference in addressing SSO.

Defiance City Council passed an ordinance allocating funds from the sewer budget to provide homeowners a maximum of $3,500 to repair their lateral and sump pump installation.

Defiance then grouped homes into blocks and had plumbers and landscape companies (local and outside of Defiance) bid on each group. Once the work was completed, the homeowner paid the bill and was reimbursed by the city, again up to $3,500. The homeowner was responsible for any amount over $3,500.

Defiance takes responsibility for any repair work on the right-of-way (ROW).

Bowling Green, Ohio #

https://www.nwwsd.org/sewer/inflow-infiltration/inflow-infiltration-homeowner-assistance-program/

2024 Population: 30,247 | 2024 Median Household Income $66,105

Background: The Northwestern Water and Sewer District recently began televising the sanitary sewer collection system, discovering these connections. With the help of the Ohio EPA, The District began to implement a public/private Inflow and Infiltration program that will help reimburse homeowners with a portion of the construction costs.

Our team of inspectors will evaluate the exterior and lowest level of each home or building for potential sources of inflow that may be connected to the sanitary sewer system.

A conversation with the Utilities Director: Repair and fixes to the clean water sewer/sanitary sewer is funded through their general budget.

They have a grant problem with a maximum award of $2,000. If the resident is a low-income earner, we send them to our Grants Department.

In Bowling Green, the city retains the right-of-way, and residents are responsible for maintaining the lateral. If the line needs to be replaced, the city does the work from the property line to the tap, even if it is on the other side of the street. Residents are responsible from the home to the property line.

The Utilities Director also stated, Maumee is one of a very small few that changed the ROW to the resident.

A conversation with the Housing Program Administrator

BG is considered an Entitlement Zone and receives money from the HUDs Community Housing Impact and Preservation Program (CHIP), addressing the needs of low-income families, mainly for home repairs that are considered “health and safety.”

Wood County also uses block grants through HUD’s Community Housing Impact and Preservation Program (CHIP), which is based on 80% of AMI. Awards go for anything considered ‘health or safety. ‘ They have money for lead-based issues as well as pipes or paint.

Cleveland, Ohio #

https://www.neorsd.org/stormwater-2/stormwater-management-program/

Case Study: Cleveland Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Control Program

Background: Cleveland, like many older cities, has a combined sewer system where both sewage and stormwater are collected in the same pipes. During heavy rainfalls, these systems can become overwhelmed, leading to overflows that discharge untreated sewage into waterways.

Objective: The goal of the CSO Control Program was to reduce the frequency and volume of these overflows by upgrading and expanding sewer infrastructure. This included significant upgrades on private properties to ensure a comprehensive solution to the problem.

Scope: The program involved a multi-faceted approach, including:

Upgrading and Expanding Sewer Infrastructure: Work on private properties was necessary to ensure that the improvements to the public sewer system would be effective.
Constructing New Infrastructure: This included the installation of new pipes, rain gardens, and green infrastructure to manage stormwater.

Funding: The CSO Control Program utilized various sources of funding:

Federal Funding: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provided substantial grants and loans through programs like the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF).
State Funding: Ohio provided state-level support through grants and loans.
Local Funding: The City of Cleveland contributed local funds and issued municipal bonds to finance the project.

Implementation:

Assessment and Planning: Detailed studies and planning were conducted to identify areas needing upgrades, including private properties.
Coordination with Property Owners: Cleveland worked with private property owners to address the necessary upgrades on their properties, which included installing new sewer connections and managing stormwater runoff.
Construction and Upgrades: The construction involved both public and private areas, including the installation of green infrastructure and the upgrading of sewer lines.
Inspection and Maintenance: Post-construction, the new systems were inspected and maintained to ensure they met regulatory standards and functioned as intended.

Outcomes:

Reduced Overflows: The program successfully reduced the number and volume of combined sewer overflows, leading to improved water quality in local rivers and lakes.
Enhanced Public Health: By reducing overflows, the program contributed to better public health and environmental quality.
Improved Infrastructure: Upgrades to both public and private sewer systems improved overall infrastructure resilience and efficiency.

Challenges:

Coordination with Private Property Owners: Managing construction on private properties and ensuring cooperation was a complex task.
Cost Management: Balancing the budget and ensuring efficient use of funds were critical to the project’s success.

Conclusion: The Cleveland Combined Sewer Overflow Control Program exemplifies how public funds can be used effectively to upgrade sewer systems on private property as part of a larger initiative to improve urban infrastructure and environmental health. This program highlights the importance of comprehensive planning, funding, and collaboration between public agencies and private property owners to address complex infrastructure challenges.

This case study demonstrates the significant impact that well-managed public investments can have on both public health and environmental quality, particularly in dealing with legacy infrastructure issues in older cities.

Stow, Ohio #

https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/stow/latest/stow_oh/0-0-0-29742

2024 Population: 34,459 | 2024 Median Household Income: $89,805

927.12 STORMWATER INFLOW AND INFILTRATION ELIMINATION PROGRAM.

(a) There is hereby established a STORMWATER INFLOW AND INFILTRATION ELIMINATION PROGRAM (the Program) for the purpose of aiding property owners in the City of Stow to decrease the amounts of inflow and infiltration into the County’s sanitary sewer system (the System) to levels consistent with requirements of the United States and State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agencies, and as necessary to improve a substandard sewer system through assessments, payment of certain grants and waiver of local fees. Assessments and Grants under the Program shall be for the purpose of (i) rehabilitating and reconstructing deteriorated private lateral sewers which are tributary to the System, (ii) disconnecting roof downspouts, exterior foundation drains and/or other collectors of storm water, surface runoff or ground water which are connected to lateral sewers tributary to the System causing the inflow and infiltration of stormwater into the System, (iii) replacing related inadequate or poorly functioning sump pumps as necessary and appropriate and/or (iv) other remedies as to correct substandard stormwater conditions throughout the City.

(b) Grants and other aid made under the Program shall be payable by the City from moneys available in the Stormwater Management Enterprise Fund and shall be limited in amount as follows:

(1) Where the resident and property owner in the areas described in this section have constructed said improvements at any time, in anticipation of an assessment from Summit County or the City of Stow, and based on an order from Summit County, the resident shall be eligible to apply for reimbursement or credit from the City of Stow in an amount that is the lesser of (i) twenty percent (20%) of the amount of the final assessment to be levied from Summit County or the City of Stow for the cost of the improvements described in (a) of this section, and excluding personnel labor or (ii) one thousand dollars ($1,000) excluding personnel labor. Residents who have completed construction of said improvements without mandate from the City or County at any time after January 1, 2023 shall also be eligible to apply for reimbursement or credit from the City of Stow in the amounts described above. The Director of Public Service is hereby authorized to set forth regulations for the resident/property owner to submit application to the City for reimbursement described in this section. Upon submission of proper documentation as set forth by the Service Director, the application for reimbursement shall be referred to the Board of Control for consideration of reimbursement. Final regulations for implementation of this program shall be approved by City Council.

(2) Through the Stormwater Inflow and Infiltration Elimination Program, a resident/property owner in the City may request the City of Stow to eliminate inflow and infiltration through an assessment program whereby the City of Stow, through its open bidding ordinances, will make the necessary corrections as necessary when requested by a residential property owner, through an independent contractor hired by the City of Stow at prevailing wage rates when applicable. The Director of Public Service is hereby directed to set forth regulations for implementation of the program. Said regulations shall set forth all necessary aspects of the City of Stow assessment option or a direct payment option, including interest rates, waiver of local fees and the duration of assessment. A copy of said regulations shall be given to each applicant herein. The Director of Public Service shall have authority to make final determinations regarding the implementation of this program. When funds are used pursuant to the Stormwater Management Enterprise Fund, the City of Stow shall regulate the program pursuant to the terms and conditions adopted by the Board of Control. Final regulations for implementation of this program shall be approved by City Council.

(d) Said regulations as promulgated by the Director of Public Service and as contained in subsections(b), (c) and (d) above, shall at a minimum, provide for:

(1) The City shall waive any Stow permit, inspection and license fees for persons participating in the City of Stow Stormwater Inflow and Infiltration Elimination Program assessments.

(2) Fiscal oversight of the Program by the Board of Control, as applicable.

(e) The authority for grants and certified assessments made available in subsection (b) above shall be retroactive city-wide from January 1, 2023, and shall continue until this Program is eliminated by official action by City Council and no such grant or assessment shall be authorized or initiated after that date without further approval of City Council. The total amount expended and/or advanced by the City, including grants, shall not exceed the cumulative total of seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000) per individual year for each calendar years after which the authority for expending funds for the purpose of providing grants and/or advancing funds for future assessment pursuant to this section shall no longer be authorized without further approval of City Council.

(f) The Finance Director is hereby directed to determine and recommend to City Council the most appropriate method(s) to pay for the Inflow and Infiltration Elimination Program and may utilize funds from the Stormwater Management Enterprise Fund as needed pursuant to the limits stated herein.

(g) City Council finds that implementation of the Program is a proper public purpose as the improvements contemplated by the Program serve to abate public nuisances and to further housing assistance and rehabilitation within the above described areas of the City of Stow.

(h) City Council further finds that implementation of the Program constitutes a stormwater management program as defined in Section 927.03(j), and all costs relating to the implementation of the Program are specifically found to be proper expenditures from the Stormwater Management Enterprise Fund pursuant to Section 927.09.

(Ord. 2023-103. Passed 7-13-23.)

Elyria, Ohio #

https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/elyria/latest/elyria_oh/0-0-0-79968

2022 Population: 52,800 | 2022 Median Household Income: $49,569

932.31 SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER LATERAL REHABILITATION LOAN PROGRAM REGULATIONS.

(a) Purpose. The ultimate goal of the Sanitary Sewer and Storm Sewer Lateral Rehabilitation Loan Program is to reduce the quantity of storm water that reaches the sanitary sewer system by providing for the rehabilitation and reconstruction of deteriorated private sanitary sewer and storm sewer laterals. The funds available through the Program may also be used for the disconnection of roof downspouts, exterior foundation drains, yard drains, stairwell drains and any other sources of clean water (storm water inflow or ground water infiltration). This program is necessary in order to abate the public nuisances and the consequent threat to the public health, safety and welfare that they present. This Program is also necessary to comply with EPA requirements relating to the inflow and infiltration of storm water into the sanitary sewer system and to promote the effective and efficient operation of the City water pollution control plant.

In support of these goals, the City offers a zero percent loan for the cost of needed repair or replacement. In effect, a lien is filed against the property in the amount of the loan, with no interest. The property owner shall enter into an agreement with the City acknowledging that the property owner agrees to pay the costs for said installation and the actual costs paid by the City for such services and shall be placed as a lien/assessment against said property to be paid with real property estate taxes, over ten years or up to twenty years, based on income eligibility. The amount certified to the County Auditor shall be the actual costs paid by the City, plus any charges by the County Auditor to process said lien/assessment.

(b) Deferred-Payment Loans. Deferred-payment loans are available for the following work:

(1) Sanitary sewer lateral (owner’s portion). Correction as determined necessary by, and with work approved by, the Engineering Division. The method of repair or replacement is determined by the owner, provided that the materials and standards followed comply with code requirements.

(2) Storm sewer lateral. New construction or repairs where the owner desires to improve the property drainage, and the City of Elyria Engineering Division determines that the owner’s request will reduce inflow and/or infiltration of clean water into the sanitary sewer system.

(3) Downspouts. All building roof drains are to be disconnected from the sanitary sewer system, as ordered and approved by the City of Elyria Engineering Division. (Work within five feet of the building foundation wall is to be performed under permits issued by, and with work inspected and approved by, the City of Elyria Building Department.)

(4) Exterior foundation drains (footer tile). Modification, replacement or repair, as determined necessary by the City of Elyria Engineering Division. (Work within five feet of the building foundation wall is to be performed under permits issued by, and with work inspected and approved by, the City of Elyria Building Department.)

(5) Yard drains, stairwell drains, driveway drains and other collectors of storm water. Modification, repair or replacement, when determined necessary by the City of Elyria Engineering Division.

(1) Maximum loan available. The maximum loan available is ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per dwelling unit, including emergency repairs and any other previous repairs paid for by the Loan Program on this specific property and on any adjoining vacant lot owned by the same property owner.

(2) First come, first served basis. Because City funds available for the Program are limited, applications will be accepted, reviewed and approved only on a first come, first served basis.

Avon Lake, Ohio #

https://avonlakewater.org/wp-content/uploads/SewerLateralPrgm2013.pdf

Avon Lake Regional Water’s Lateral Loan Program Nominated for National Award – Avon Lake Regional Water (avonlakewater.org)

The City of Avon Lake Lateral Loan Program: Helping Homeowners Finance Sewer Repairs

2024 Population: 26,163 | 2024 Median Household Income $103,946

About the Program: To assist the city with achieving its goal, Ohio EPA provided a $5 million capitalization loan at zero percent interest to Avon Lake through its Water Pollution Control Loan Fund (WPCLF) program. The city, in turn, will offer qualifying residents loans up to $4,000 at a two percent interest rate. This loan will be added to residents’ sewer bills to be paid back over a 10-year period. The residents will pay back the city, and the city will repay the loan from Ohio EPA.

This program is innovative and differs from a conventional WPCLF loan in that it allows the borrower to create its own revolving funding program, enabling Avon Lake to re-loan the money to private individuals who need financial assistance. Loan repayments, along with the nominal two percent interest rate, will be placed into a revolving fund to be used for future, local wastewater funding needs. Since Avon Lake is the first Lateral Loan Program to be implemented through the WPCLF, a new loan agreement and modified program structure was put into place. Ohio EPA worked in partnership with the Ohio Water Development Authority (OWDA) and the city while developing a new loan agreement. Although the process was challenging, the interagency coordination allowed it to proceed relatively smoothly.

Outcome: The Avon Lake Lateral Loan Program allows for the successful repair or replacement of residential laterals, which helps keep rain water out of sanitary sewers. In addition, the program’s low-interest financing provides significant financial relief to the residents and thus makes it more affordable.

Columbus, Ohio #

https://blueprintneighborhoods.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/30-DesignPresentation.pdf

https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2021-07/rtc-profile-columbus.pdf

Blueprint Columbus is an innovative way of eliminating sanitary sewer overflows while also investing in our neighborhoods and our local economy. Blueprint solves the problem of sanitary sewer overflows at the source by fixing damaged and deteriorating pipes, and redirecting storm water to the street where pollutants can be filtered out by green infrastructure before flowing to our rivers and streams.

A crew installs a liner inside your lateral pipe and connects it to the City sewer line. If the basement cleanout is used, the City will contact the resident to arrange a convenient time to access it. Residents will be asked to suspend water use for approximately four hours on the day their liner material is installed to allow time for it to harden.

There are no direct costs to the homeowner. Blueprint Columbus is a solution to a problem that affects the entire community and is being paid for with revenue from City sewer bills and government grants.

Legal Precedent & Opinions #

In talks with the City, some of the largest resistance to creating homeowner assistance programs is due to the lack of legal authority opinion on the matter. Though many communities in the state of Ohio have these programs, it true that the legal questions concerning the justification of public good vs. the private interest of using public funds to assist homeowners in reducing clean water inflow and infiltration to sanitary sewers has not yet been addressed in the State of Ohio. The City has committed to asking for legal opinions on this issue from the state attorney general and auditor. While we await special dispensation from these legal authorities, we completed some research on our own.

Since this specific issue has not been addressed, our legal precedent research mainly focused on other cases which define public good, how the auditor, attorney general, and Ohio Supreme court have made rulings in the past.

Ohio Auditor of State Bulletin 2014-004 #

“This office, pursuant to its authority under Chapter 117 of the Revised Code, is responsible for ensuring public money is expended for a legal, proper public purpose… As explained in State ex rel. McClure v. Hagerman, 155 Ohio St. 320 (1951), an expenditure of public money constitutes a proper public purpose if: (1) the expenditure is required for the general good of all inhabitants; and (2) the primary objective of the expenditure is to further a public purpose, even if private ends are incidentally advanced.”

Ohio Auditor of the State Bulletin 2003-004 #

Expenditure of Public Funds/Proper “Public Purpose”

“As you may know, government entities may not make expenditures of public monies unless they are for a valid public purpose. This Bulletin addresses the requirements necessary to ensure that an entity’s expenditure of public funds is for a proper public purpose.

Ohio Attorney General Opinion 82-006, which is attached for reference, addresses the expenditure of funds for public purposes. This opinion, citing the Ohio Supreme Court case of State ex rel. McClure v. Hagerman, 155 Ohio St. 320 (1951), provides guidance as to what may be construed as a public purpose. There are two criteria that demonstrate whether an expenditure is for a public purpose. First, the expenditure is required for the general good of all inhabitants. As stated in McClure, “[g]enerally, a public purpose has for its objective the promotion of the public health, safety, morals, general welfare, security, prosperity, and contentment of all the inhabitants ….” Id. at

325. Second, the primary objective of the expenditure is to further a public purpose, even if an incidental private end is advanced. The determination of what constitutes a public purpose is primarily a legislative function. As such, the decision to expend public funds “… must be made in accordance with the procedural formalities governing the exercise of legislative power. Specifically, the decision must be memorialized by a duly enacted ordinance or resolution and may have prospective effect only.” 1982 Op. Atty. Gen. No. 82-006 (emphasis added). With due deference to local control generally, the Auditor of State’s Office will only question expenditures where the legislative determination of a public purpose is manifestly arbitrary and incorrect.”

Ohio Attorney General Opinion No. 71-044 #

“…It has been discussed extensively, however, because of the analyses contained in the various opinions. Such analyses are appropriate, also, to the restrictions on municipalities, as contained in Article VIII, Section 6, Ohio Constitution, which is as follows:

“No laws shall be passed authorizing any county, city, town or township, by vote of its citizens, or otherwise, to become a stockholder in any joint stock company, corporation, or as sociation whatever; or to raise money for, or – to loan its credit to, or in aid of, any such company, corporation, or association: provided, that nothing in this section shall prevent the insuring of public buildings or property in mutual insurance associations or companies. Laws may be passed providing for the regulation of all rates charged or to be charged by any insurance company, corporation or association organized under the laws of this state, or doing any insurance business in this state for profit. (As amended September 3, 1912.)”

That provision has also been construed to require funds to be used for a public purpose. Bazell v. Cincinnati, 13 Ohio St. 2d 63 (1968); State, ex rel. McElroy v. Baron, 169 Ohio St. 439 (1959); State, ex rel. Gordon v. Rhodes, 156 Ohio St. 81 (1951). Those cases were concerned with publicly owned property and not the OAG 71-045 ATTORNEY GENERAL 2-148 grant of funds. In light of the similar language used by the Supreme Court as to both Sections 4 and 6, supra, and the evident similarity of purpose of the two Sections, it is reasonable to conclude that the legal principles applicable to the state with respect to grants of funds are equally applicable to municipalities.

The cases cited above with respect to municipalities, accorded the legislative authorities thereof wide latitude~ in determining that the projects they desired to foster were in the public interest, latitude substantially as broad as that accorded the General Assembly in Defenbacher, supra.”

Walker v. City of Cincinnati, 21 Ohio St., 14, 41-42 (1871) #

“On this subject we cannot do better than to adopt what is so well said by Judge Cooley, in his treatise on `Constitutional Limitations,’ pages 128, 129, where, in speaking of limitations upon legislative authority, he says: `* * * But what is for the public good, and what are public purposes, and what does properly constitute a public burden, are questions which the Legislature must decide upon its own judgment, and in respect to which it is vested with a large discretion which cannot be controlled by the courts, except perhaps where its action is clearly evasive, and where, under pretense of a lawful authority, it has assumed to exercise one that is unlawful. Where the power which is exercised is legislative in its character, the courts can enforce only those limitations which the Constitution imposes, and not those implied restrictions, which, resting in theory only, the people have been satisfied to leave to the judgment, patriotism, and sense of justice of their representatives.'”

37 American Jurisprudence, 734, Section 120 #

“What is a public use is not capable of absolute definition. A public use changes with changing conditions of society, new appliances in the sciences, and other changes brought about by an increase in population and by new modes of transportation and communication. The courts as a rule have attempted no judicial definition of a public as distinguished from a private purpose, but have left each case to be determined by its own peculiar circumstances. Generally, a public purpose has for its objective the promotion of the public health, safety, morals, general welfare, security, prosperity, and contentment of all the inhabitants or residents within the municipal corporation, the sovereign powers of which are used to promote such public purpose. The phrase `municipal purpose’ used in the broader sense is generally accepted as meaning public or governmental purpose as distinguished from private. The modern trend of decision is to expand and liberally construe the term `public use’ in considering state and municipal activities sought to be brought within its meaning. The test of public use is not based upon the function or capacity in which or by which the use is furnished. The right of the public to receive and enjoy the benefit of the use determines whether the use is public or private.

“The determination of what constitutes a public purpose is primarily a legislative function, subject to review by the courts when abused, and the determination of the legislative body of that matter should not be reversed except in instances where such determination is palpably and manifestly arbitrary and incorrect.”

In determining the existence of a public use or a public purpose the courts of Ohio have throughout our history been guided by definition or general understanding of the terms in harmony with the text quotations appearing above. Such decisions appear from the earliest date in condemnation proceedings, in cases testing the scope and meaning of corporation charters, and in cases involving the right of municipalities to perform certain challenged acts in the conduct of municipal government.”

State ex rel. Bruestle v. Rich, 159 Ohio St. 13, 28, 110 N.E.2d 778, 787 (1953), citing State ex rel. Gordon, City Atty., v. Rhodes, Mayor, 156 Ohio St. 81, 100 N.E.2d 225, 226 (1951). #

“It must be considered well settled that the funds of a municipality can be expended only for public purposes. The object to be achieved or promoted by the expenditure must be reasonably related to the operation of the municipal government. The rule is stated in 38 American Jurisprudence, 86, Section 395, as follows: “It is well settled that if the primary object of an expenditure of municipal funds is to subserve a public purpose, the expenditure is legal although it may also involve as an incident an expenditure which, standing alone, would not be lawful.”

State ex rel. Bruestle v. Rich, 159 Ohio St. 13, 110 N.E.2d 778, 50 O.O. 6 (1953). #

AGO 2009 No. 5 – Aug 27 2009 Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna #

SEWER DISTRICTS — PUBLIC FUNDS — GIFT OF PUBLIC FUNDS — GIFTS — LOANS — Use of public funds to repair or replace side sewers.

“By letter previously acknowledged, you have requested our opinion with respect to the following question:

May a municipal sewer district repair or replace private side sewers as part of a district-wide infiltration and inflow reduction program where (a) aging and inadequate side sewers are the most significant contributor to infiltration and inflow in the district’s entire system; (b) the purpose of the program is to benefit the district and the public through lower long-term capital and maintenance costs, not private property owners; (c) repair or replacement would be subject to a right of entry from the private property owner; and (d) the program costs will be paid back through the district’s bi-monthly sewer rates?

BRIEF ANSWER

Municipal sewer districts have statutory authority to maintain or operate the sewer system by repairing or replacing side sewers if doing so results in increased sewer capacity by reducing infiltration and inflow into the sewer system. The exercise of this statutory authority does not constitute a gift of public funds if the municipal sewer district does not have a donative intent and it is able to demonstrate that the expense will result in sufficient benefit to the public.”

***Though this is from the state of Washington, the Ohio Supreme Court often cites other state’s decisions in their rulings. ***

United States EPA Water Infrastructure Outreach on Private Sewer Laterals #

“Linked to the legal issues of ownership, who should pay, etc., are also questions of legal right of access to the private property for inspection and repair work, as well as legal liability for accidents during inspection or repair work. Some key issues/options regarding legal and liability matters are:

> Some states prohibit spending public money for private gain (i.e., improving private property by paying for rehabilitation of private laterals). This issue has been addressed successfully in the courts by arguing that the private gain is only incidental to a larger public gain, resulting from fewer sewer overflows and decreased sewage treatment costs.”

Ohio EPA on Finance Lateral Sewers to Replace Home Sewage Systems #

“Ohio EPA’s Water Pollution Control Loan Fund (WPCLF) offers a way for property owners to receive reduced interest rate loans to finance construction of lateral sewers to replace failing home systems and illegal wastewater connections to storm sewers. Lateral sewers are the pipes that extend from buildings and terminate at the edge of the rights-of-way, where they connect to adjacent collector sewers. This financing is available to connect existing buildings to existing central sewers, or to connect them during construction of central sanitary sewers.”

Ohio BUILDS Water Infrastructure Project Summaries #

The above document, obtained from the Ohio Governor’s website, details many Ohio programs, some of which help with the cost of storage tanks and others that rehabilitate private sewer laterals.

Funding Examples & Opportunities #

Many of these funding examples would not be eligible for use on public property, or even necessarily to fund sewer issues. However, obtaining or utilizing some of these programs would free up money initially earmarked for other projects, which could then be moved to fund homeowner assistance programs. We may or may not be eligible or able to utilize many of these options, but we wanted to explore what other communities have done.

Federal Loans and Federal Grants #

Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) #

Administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the CWSRF provides low-interest loans to municipalities and other entities for wastewater treatment projects, including sewer system repairs and upgrades.

Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) #

Managed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), EQIP offers financial and technical assistance for projects that improve water quality. While it primarily supports agricultural projects, it can sometimes be applicable to rural areas needing sewer improvements.

Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program #

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) oversees CDBG funds, which are used for a variety of community development activities, including infrastructure improvements like sewer system upgrades. These funds are typically distributed to local governments, which then allocate them for specific projects.

Rural Development Loans and Grants #

The USDA’s Rural Development program offers loans and grants to rural communities for infrastructure improvements, including sewer systems. The program is designed to assist small communities with funding for necessary upgrades.

Water Pollution Control Loan Program (WPCLP) #

This is often a state-managed program but is funded federally. It provides low-interest loans to support water pollution control projects, which include sewer system repairs and replacements.

State Loan and Grant Programs #

Ohio Public Works Commission (OPWC) Funding

The OPWC administers funding for infrastructure projects through the State Capital Improvement Program (SCIP) and the Local Transportation Improvement Program (LTIP). While these programs primarily focus on transportation, they sometimes offer funding for related infrastructure improvements, including sewers.

Ohio Water Development Authority (OWDA) Loans: The OWDA provides low-interest loans for water and wastewater infrastructure projects. These loans are intended to help with the construction, repair, and upgrade of sewer systems.

Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program

Administered by the Ohio Development Services Agency, the CDBG program offers funding to local governments for various community development activities, including sewer system improvements. This program supports low- and moderate-income communities.

Lucas County Resources #

Lucas County Public Utilities

Lucas County’s Department of Public Utilities may offer guidance or support for local sewer projects. They sometimes provide information on available funding or work with local municipalities on infrastructure improvements.

Lucas County Improvement and Development Funds

Lucas County might have specific development or improvement funds available for local municipalities. Checking with the County Commissioners’ office or local development agencies can provide details on any available programs or funding opportunities.

Regional Planning Commission

The Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments (TMACOG) serves the Toledo area, including Lucas County. TMACOG sometimes provides or facilitates access to funding and technical assistance for regional infrastructure projects, including sewer systems.

Municipal Bonds #

Municipal bonds are debt securities issued by local governments or agencies to raise funds for public projects and services. When you purchase a municipal bond, you’re essentially lending money to the issuing entity in exchange for periodic interest payments and the return of the bond’s face value at maturity. Municipal bonds are often used to finance infrastructure projects like roads, schools, and sewer systems.

General Obligation Bonds (GO Bonds) #

Description: These bonds are backed by the full faith and credit of the issuing municipality, which means they are repaid through general taxation or other broad revenue sources.
Security: GO bonds are considered low risk because they are supported by the issuer’s ability to levy taxes or use other general revenue sources.
Usage: Typically used for essential public projects like schools, parks, and infrastructure.

Revenue Bonds #

Description: These bonds are backed by the revenue generated from a specific project or source, such as a toll road, utility system, or public transportation system.
Security: Revenue bonds are repaid from the revenue produced by the project or service they finance. If the income is insufficient, the bondholders might face a higher risk.
Usage: Commonly used for projects with identifiable revenue streams, such as water and sewer systems, airports, or stadiums.

Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Bonds #

Description: These bonds are repaid using the increased tax revenues generated by developing a specific area. The increase in property values or business activity results in higher tax revenues used to service the bonds.
Security: The repayment relies on the success of the development project and the increase in tax revenues.
Usage: Often used for urban renewal or development projects that aim to revitalize specific areas.

Special Assessment Bonds #

Description: These bonds are secured by assessments levied on properties that benefit from a specific public improvement. The bondholders are repaid through the payments collected from these assessments.
Security: The security of these bonds is tied to the improvement’s success and the ability to collect assessments from property owners.
Usage: Used for local improvements such as street paving or sewer upgrades that directly benefit the assessed properties.

Municipal Variable Rate Demand Notes (VRDNs) #

Description: These are short-term municipal bonds with interest rates adjusted periodically. They typically have a feature allowing bondholders to demand principal repayment at specific intervals.
Security: The interest rate adjustments and the demand feature provide some liquidity and can help manage interest rate risk.
Usage: Often used for short-term funding needs or projects with variable financing needs.

Build America Bonds (BABs) #

Description: Issued under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, these bonds were designed to stimulate economic growth by offering federal tax subsidies to issuers. Although they are no longer being issued, they were a significant part of the municipal bond landscape during their period.
Security: They were similar to other municipal bonds but with federal subsidies to reduce borrowing costs.
Usage: Used for various public projects to take advantage of federal subsidies.

Conduit Bonds #

Description: These are bonds issued by a municipal entity on behalf of a private organization. The private organization uses the bond proceeds for its projects, and the repayment comes from the private entity’s revenue.
Security: The bondholder’s security is based on the private entity’s financial strength and ability to meet its obligations.
Usage: Commonly used for financing private projects with public benefits, such as educational facilities or healthcare projects.

Stormwater Fees #

Many Ohio communities have stormwater usage utility fees in addition to water and sewer fees, explicitly funding the maintenance and improvement of stormwater systems. However, due to the recent and upcoming sewer and water increases, we advise against this – residents are already upset about that, and another fee would only increase the unrest.

City-Wide Service Line Warranty Program #

Forty-three communities in Ohio have enrolled in the National League of Cities (NLC) Service Line Warranty Program (SLWP). The program includes educational outreach, service delivery and program administration and is offered at no cost to the city. Repair plans cover failures due to normal wear and tear, including age, ground shifting and fluctuating temperatures, and can also cover tree root invasion and frozen lines. Participation is voluntary, plans can be cancelled at any time, and municipalities can receive royalties that can help support community programs and initiatives. Here is an article showcasing how the program has been going in Las Vegas. This program won’t be proactive in addressing residential I&I, it’s a fantastic option to reactively respond to conditions that can contribute to I&I.

While normally residents are unlikely to sign up for an extra warranty or insurance fee, the timing is perfect right now to implement this type of program.

Recommendations & Ideas #

Though we know we don’t have the knowledge or scope to solve all the City’s SSO problems, we have gathered enough research and insight to make some practical recommendations specific to reducing residential inflow and infiltration as much as possible in cost-effective, resident-friendly ways.

Residential Grant Program for Clean Water Connections #

Using Perrysburg’s Sanitary Sewer Grant program as a model, we could provide funding for an 80% grant up to $10,000 of project costs, meaning up to an $8,000 grant. If no storm sewer tap is available, a storm sewer tap must be installed as part of the project, and an 80% grant is payable up to $15,000 of project costs, meaning up to a $12,000 grant.

The purpose of the Sanitary Sewer Grant would be to assist residents within the City boundaries in removing clean water connections from the sanitary sewer system.

Since the recent grant program has already been implemented via policy change, adjusting its parameters to address clean water connections would be simple. This grant is already being funded through increased utility rates; there would not be a need to seek and/or secure additional funding sources. By creating a public education campaign highlighting the program, detailing that the City has found a way to help homeowners, and adding that this grant is only available as long as there are funds, the City will likely have more residents who will voluntarily comply. Additionally, the City could offer a credit on sewer rates to those who have completed remediation would offer an incentive to voluntarily comply, as well.

Request Integrated Planning Assistance from the US EPA #

https://www.epa.gov/npdes/integrated-planning-municipal-stormwater-and-wastewater

For over 50 years, EPA, states, and municipalities have made significant progress protecting our waters through implementation of the Clean Water Act (CWA). However, challenges remain. As the nation faces population growth, aging infrastructure, limited resources, and increasingly complex water quality issues, new approaches to address CWA requirements are being explored.

Focusing on each CWA requirement individually may constrain a municipality from addressing its most serious water quality issues first. Recognizing the limits of this approach, in 2012, EPA developed an integrated planning framework that offers a voluntary opportunity for a municipality to develop an integrated plan to meet multiple CWA requirements.

On January 14, 2019, the Water Infrastructure Improvement Act (WIIA) (H.R. 7279) became law. WIIA added a new Section 402(s) to the CWA to amend the CWA to include the 2012 Integrated Municipal Stormwater and Wastewater Planning Approach Framework. See the discussion below on WIIA for details.

If the City has already pursued this or is planning to pursue it, it would be ideal to publicize it, showing that the City is committed to exploring all avenues available. Here is a 2-page profile from the EPA on Akron, OH’s plan.

Community Involvement via Commissions to City Council #

Part of the reason citizens are upset (besides the potential repair costs) is the perception that decisions that could eventually have enormous consequences for everyone are being made without the residents’ input. By creating a municipal Stormwater Commission with citizens and council members, the City could mend that fence, support the council on decision-making and potential ideas, and receive input on how the public may respond to upcoming changes.

Hotspot Sewer Relining, Including Laterals, in the ROW #

Thanks to the SSES study, we are aware of hotspots where the most inflow and infiltration is coming from. By hiring another sewer crew to focus on relining hotspot areas specifically, the City will be able to address I&I more efficiently.

However, due to Ordinance 050-2022, the citizens are responsible for maintaining, repairing, and replacing laterals in the right-of-way. We suggest either repealing the ordinance or amending section 927.35 to indicate that residents are responsible for maintenance and repairs due to non-sewage characteristics that render the repair or maintenance necessary. That way, residents would still be responsible for any maintenance and repairs of their own cause, but the city would be responsible for upgrades such as replacement or rehabilitation of laterals within the right-of-way to prevent or correct residential I&I.

By assessing and relining the laterals in the right-of-way, the city could potentially inspect private laterals simultaneously, gathering more information and knowledge about the state of sewer laterals that may be degraded or faulty. Since this would be scheduled, communicating with the public would be much simpler, letting them know what is happening and when. This would also be a much less invasive way to handle repairs, as the same areas and streets would not be hindered by construction multiple times.

Loan/Grant Program and/or Assessments for Private Lateral Rehabilitation or Replacement #

Though relining mains and reducing inflow will be helpful, the EPA says, “…after infiltration in a main sewer line has been corrected through rehabilitation, the groundwater level can rise and cause infiltration problems in adjacent sewer laterals (and can also result in water infiltration into nearby basements). This means that repairing or replacing sewer mains to remove infiltration may be less effective in reducing I&I than predicted until the laterals also are fixed.” With this being the case, residents will likely need to replace or rehabilitate their private sewer laterals to achieve the goal of 0 SSOs.

Using grant or loan options like WPCLF funds, the City of Maumee could implement a second grant fund or loan program to reline or replace faulty sewer laterals from the private residence to the right-of-way, like Avon Lake or other communities. In the event that a private lateral is found to be defective during the hotspot relining project, the City could reline the lateral and place an assessment to run with the property, similar to Perrysburg.

Installation of Storm Sewers in Hotspots #

In the 90’s, Maumee City Council authorized monies for a project to separate storm water from the sewage; residents and landowners were not responsible for any of the cost except for an assessment (circa $1,800).

The project was to be completed in phases. Phases one and two were completed, which included an underground holding tank and a lift station in Anderson Park, and the preliminary work to continue the main line down Crystal Avenue. All the streets from Michigan Avenue, the Anthony Wayne Trail and the Ohio Turnpike were to be redone in concrete to accommodate new sewer lines to be connected to the main line down Crystal Avenue in phase three, but for some reason, the project was scrapped. By continuing this project, not only would we be able to remediate much of the inflow and infiltration in this hotspot area, we’d also address the flooding that many properties in this area experience.

Intensive Public Outreach & Education Program #

In all the research we’ve completed, we have found the number one recommendation from the EPA and other governments is to include and inform citizens. While in the past, outreach efforts have not produced results, we are in a unique situation right now in that the residents of Maumee are paying attention like never seen before. By utilizing multi-channel communication, including mailed letters, call-in hotlines, social media, print media, and public forums both in-person and virtual, the city can reach and involve an enormous number of citizens. Below are some ideas to help achieve this. The EPA has also released a guide on Public Outreach for Integrated Wastewater and Stormwater Planning.

Encouraging Voluntary Compliance by Conveying a Sense of Urgency #

Though voluntary compliance is hard to achieve, the city will have a tough time achieving their goals without it. By regularly outlining the fact that grant funds are only available for a limited amount of time, reminding everyone of the looming EPA deadlines, and the implication that mandatory compliance will be sought eventually, more people will comply. Additionally, sending press releases to plumbing and sewer repair companies with details of what needs to be fixed and information on potential homeowner assistance programs would get the word out to citizens who might not have otherwise known about this.

Public Education, Sharing Goals, Community Milestones, and General Information #

Though goals and milestones are not mandated by the EPA, sharing this information in a friendlier way and outlining achievements will encourage the community to stay involved, and more importantly, feel positive about it. Simple sharable slide shows or graphics would be an easy way to disseminate this information.

Public Projects and Events #

City or commission sponsored events are another great way to keep citizens informed and create positivity in the community. While rain gardens, downspout extensions, and rain barrels will not be hugely impactful, fostering a sense of ownership in residents will keep residents informed and involved.

Surveys and Questionnaires to Assess Climate, Condense Concerns & Share Information #

Simple, easy-to-fill out questionnaires and surveys performed on a regular basis, with answers posted in an easily searchable format will keep not just the citizens informed, but will also allow a chance for city leaders to forecast citizens’ response, reactions, and knowledge surrounding these issues. This would also relieve some of the burden on city leaders to continually search and reply to the same questions.

About the Citizens of Maumee Action Committee #

As a 501(c)4 non-profit, we are not a political group but a social welfare association. Our goal is to educate, advocate for, and represent Maumee citizens. Our subcommittees include engineers, lawyers, accountants, and more. We are working towards solutions.

CMAC funding is going toward public information campaigns, including printing and/or mailing materials and public information requests, research, including access to legislative and academic libraries, public education events, neighbor assistance programs, and, on occasion, hiring experts or other subcontractors.

Our funding has come from the remainder of the citizens’ initiative GoFundMe, 50/50 raffle ticket and shirt sales, and community donations. We have no paid employees; 100% of donations further the mission of CMAC.

We hope to continue working with the city to involve citizens and instill a sense of pride and ownership in our community.