e
all right so I'm going to call the
Wednesday February 5th Board Of Control
meeting to order uh it is 8:15 a.m and
we'll start with a roll call uh Matt mCP
present Monique Lamy and Ben Kessler
present we also have with
us Megan Meer Taylor Sammons Andy and
um the the agenda for this morning is to
discuss the sewer study proposal that we
first discussed at our last Board Of
Control meeting on January 28th I get
that right um and sort of uh put a hold
on that conversation for more discussion
and before we start I just want to kind
of clear the air about this conversation
which is to say you know we first sent
out this RFP in May May okay of 2024
yeah uh and staff has spent a whole lot
of time digging deep into the different
proposals and options and even before
the RP was circulated that was true
because we had solicited some quotes um
and Concepts prior so there's been a lot
of work leading up to this conversation
um a lot of uh the same questions that
were asked at a last border control were
asked by us very early on in the process
um so we are going to do our best to try
to walk through the history of that and
where we are with this and try to
explain it we don't expect that we're
going to have a vote today we expect
this is going to be informational and
that we follow up with a future board of
control meeting and also I want to say
like if the conclusion of the board of
control is that we need
to reopen the process and do something
differently we're prepared for that you
know there's been a lot of work going
into it to date so we don't love it but
we're prepared for it it's not going to
be like a fight if that if that of
course um so I just wanted you know
hopefully this can just be a productive
conversation and we'll figure out the
best path forward collectively
afterwards so with that Megan yeah I
think is gonna walk us through history
history um so all the way back to 2009
the Ohio EPA issued they have they have
this all the time they're called dfos
director's findings of fact and orders
it's essentially their way of telling um
both state and federal I'm sorry not
federal state and local jurisdictions
what they have to do to stay in line
with the EPA right and some of them do
pertain of course to water um that one
was memorialized and is probably burnt
into a lot of people's heads in the
Columbus region because it's said that
any sister city to Columbus that is
using their system really needs to
change the game in regards to what's
called inflow and infiltration which I
did whenever I put an acronym on this
page I try to Define it at the bottom so
essentially it's just unwanted water um
either from the ground or storm that
gets into the sanitary system and Taylor
what does that
cause um flooding flooding yeah and the
water in basements and so like what
happened in May and March or March in
May in 2020 was exactly that there was
unwanted water that got into the
sanitary system and backed up into homes
it's probably the most prevalent that
we're aware of um so that's one big
downside the the game really changed at
that time because Columbus was also
making changes the way that they were
getting rid of their um overc capacity
flow if that makes any sense so it was
impacting the system all the way to us
all the way out to whiteall whatever
feeding into Columbus so at that time in
response to that um order we contracted
with EMH andt which like Burgess and N
is a very qualified firm to do sewer
engineering studies they did what we
thought at that time was a fairly
comprehensive study um of inii and of
something called length of service for
various basin
um throughout the community um the issue
that we have found since this time and I
think that Andy and Taylor way more um
able to talk about the the failings of
that study for our system we we have
found it to be incomplete some of the
recommendations made by mh& to be um
pretty not feasible for us to actually
Implement whether cost wise or like just
generally what we Now understand about
the system um and now pretty outdated do
you want to add anything to why we don't
really trust that study anymore um the
main reason I think we don't trust that
is they had a subb basin I think it was
sub Bas 8 in that study that was most
likely to flood um when we experienced
The Rains in 2020 in March May um there
was no water in basement in any of that
area so it kind of raised some red flags
for us that and we've had a lot of
lining going on in that area um and
nothing has changed from that
study yeah so I think I had added
inaccurate to incomplete and I think I
also remember vaguely this is the the
study was wrapped
up during the Brennan
Administration
think well they'd done all the work and
then yeah but I think they had curtailed
scope or something I think they didn't
finish it all the way or something
decision was made at some point I'm not
sure uh 2014 is when we finalized
our recommendations that came out of the
study but I think most of the work had
wrapped right years before
that just trying to because like these
yeah I
know it was my
recollection my recollection is that it
was in the $600,000 to a million dollar
range but I we would have to I was just
looking for that information I don't
have on my email because again I think
it predates my time um and something
that um we can follow up with if you'd
like we do have quotes for similar
studies not quotes but like actual cost
paid for similar studies in other
municipalities and this is not out of
line whatsoever and is definitely scaled
with the size of our jurisdiction and
the the amount of linear feet of sewer
that we
have um and it's not so it's it's a
combination of like there's engineering
work happening in an office but there's
a ton of field work going on there's you
know camera work um
surveying testing of various connections
it's it's an intensive process so it's
expensive for a reason it's not um now
some of the proposals really don't Focus
as much on field work one of the things
we know from our experience is that
there's a whole lot of funky stuff
happening in the field and it needs to
be considered whenever we're modeling
Solutions um for our system there any of
data that's part study that is still
useful to us absolutely and so part of
the scope when we issued the RFP and may
was to um review all of that data and to
determine you know as the new firm what
was usable and what needed updated and
filled in and that is the point of this
study um so it's not to say that you've
been throw it all out but it is that you
need to reinvestigate it and confirm
what it was Finding and then move
forward um there have been a number of
infrastructure projects lining manhole
inspections manhole cover Replacements
what else that we've been doing I mean
we've done a couple line Replacements
things of that nature since that time so
our projects have also impacted the
level of service at the same time we
have new data um so flow monitoring this
Probably sounds a little obscure but
essentially the engineers take um
measures of dry weather flow and then
wet weather flow and they compare it and
that gives you some inclination of how
much unwanted inii and flow infiltration
is getting into the sewer system so we
now have since
2014 over 10 years data um and that can
be very useful for modeling and we've
not done that comprehensive remodel that
I'm aware of and so that would be part
of this as well um so so when we were
trying to at the beginning of the year
um some of my marching orders were to
work with the service department and
David K on having David put together
some kind of proposal for filling in
those gaps and helping us plan for the
next 10 years out we see that we're at a
crossroads right now in part because of
the state of the sewer and water fund um
we recognize that we need to ensure um
because right now the amount of um funds
that we needed to service these projects
is quickly outpacing the revenue that
we're getting in that fund so we need to
know exactly how we're going to continue
to fund these projects and we want to
make sure we have the best possible data
to select those projects we just don't
want to throw things at the wall and see
what we want to make sure we're being as
um strategic as possible with our
funding especially because it will
likely mean and I don't want to speak
for anybody but maybe an increase in our
Capital fee um paid by end users
potentially loans of various sorts I we
don't know how we want to finance it yet
but we're at that phase one where we
want to know what are the projects
before we figure out how to find so um
um so with all of that um we had some
concerns with some of the proposals that
David Co came back with David has been
with the city for 25 years he sered just
insanely well but he is essentially a
oneman shop who's subbing out to other
Specialties um and he's done a really
really nice job he gets us quite a bit
of um state and federal funding for our
Ro projects things and that nature we
just felt after reviewing his proposal
that this was out of his whe house and
that we weren't w't going to get the
type of data that we wanted out of his
proposal um at that time we worked and
uh spoke with EMH andt The Firm that had
done our previous survey and asked them
how they would approach it and frankly
it got to the point where um I think
there were some back and forth
conversations where they were willing to
do the work but that they felt we should
really just return to the
recommendations they had previously made
we didn't find that to be a valuable
suggestion
um based on what Taylor and Andy have
seen in the
field um so at that point we decided to
RFP it out um working with David coko of
course um the scope it had a number of
things updating the findings from that
dffo report the one that was issued in
2014 um and then conducting a thorough
analysis of sources of infl and
infiltration
um through whatever method The Firm
thought was best we didn't say you had
to go out and do smoke testing die
testing CCTV we let them tell us how
they would determine the best way to
find the
inii um and then to help us develop a
comprehensive 10-year plan for what
we're doing next um so you see at the
bottom seom um you could also think of
that as kind of like a CIP oh maybe I
didn't put down there I'm so sorry
um so seom is referred to a couple
different places that essentially is a
CIP for storm sewer system so it's
capacity maintenance operation and one
other thing that I can't remember at the
top had um but it's the plan for
ensuring that the level of service or
the system
ised um so with that um through the RP
process we did even though it's a
Professional Services agreement posted
in line with State guidelines um which
was not required um we also reached out
to qualified firms including &t to
respond to this version of the RP they
opted not to obviously um and so we
landed with EP Ferris arcus and bries
and
La um so and it gets us through the
history before we dive into these you
guys have any questions about kind of
why I would add one thing to that as I'm
I'm going through some really old emails
and presentations and so back in
2013 uh as emht was kind of finalizing
all this and we're going back to council
to talk about the capital fee that was
necessary the estimate at the time so
this is over 10 years ago the estimate
of the cost to to make the improvements
that emht had recommended at the time
was
20 around $28 million and in sewer work
water had a separate replacement cost so
about 28 million recommended um in
repairs and I don't think that included
the capacity increase that they had
recommended right that was not in that
number so
2013
um and it also looks like they didn't
complete south of fair is that right is
it south of fair yeah I mean they didn't
they didn't through the whole city I
think the sou is kind of where it
stopped and that's where like May
Madison was leaving and John was coming
in and right I had seen a South Affair
study okay well they didn't think there
would be any flooding South Affair maybe
that's their modeling shows everything
no it's their modeling I was looking
back at their modeling it's all like
North Beckley which we know is not the
case so so
um the point being as we Circle back and
think where do we put our next dollars
into sewer and we've all put a big
emphasis on we got to work you know
solve the sewer problem we don't want to
throw good money after bad you know we
improvements we've made to date have
been important we know that there were
issues in those areas but we want to
make the most effective improvements and
if if our budget is in this you know
tens of millions of dollars range it's
foolish to go in essentially blindfolded
without an intelligent approach we need
an intelligent approach so while while
it sucks to spend this money into to
need to spend the money it's it's really
necessary when we're talking about the
volume of of funding that is NE is going
to be required to to comply with EPA
orders much less help solve the problem
of water and basements in the
community that's a great question so we
met the initial requirement with the
2014 study um we are supposed to be
giving regular updates although I don't
think that they have been hunting us
down as long as we're filing our
annual
report and we gave them a 40 sorry we
gave him a
40-year project proposal right 40 I
think 30 40 it was bar extended so comp
still so the way the EPA works you file
them you file your plan and if they
respond they respond negatively if they
don't respond it's like uh silence means
consent kind
of so that's kind of where we're at and
then just one piece can in the sewer
fund just want to make sure I
understand how will recognizing expenses
or ongoing improvements okay so like
when I see the sewer fund I see sewer
Administration I see sewer sewer Serv
so what I know
is chunk of that is
your mostly it's all
Taylor
hug okay so where under public service
and we talked about rearranging this for
next year because of
it's and even as you're looking at that
can give you a little bit
more one of so
here what page are you on on that
PDF okay
so this on the budget it's page 70 okay
so okay so we TR SE admin SE admin is
where the bulk of the expenses sit for
monies being paid to the city of
Columbus for the contract
with sewer next SE next page sewer
service is
where um our kind of annual Improvement
schedule has has lived and if you see
the way that we budgeted for this year
we kind of we pulled back on sewer
improvements
expenditures so like okay so and added
funding into study and inspections but
sorry and I'm just I'm saying this like
when I'm looking at this on average
we're probably spending $400,000 a year
on improvements no this is what's
happening within the fund but then we've
got the debt so I wna so opwc opwc parts
of that are kind of where we show up as
future either future debt or as part of
the grant okay so we are
sensing and this like in our in our
budget about 4 $1,000 of expenses a year
to to repair but then we are taking on
opwc dead in isolated cases to make
improvements and I was just looking at
that a recent example of that would be
Drexel project where we had capacity
increase as part of our scope so it was
folded into the opwc project same with
uh Chelsea we put in a new San line that
had capacity
increase that's an example of Chelsea is
an example of an an improvement that we
put in place that was not recommended by
&t but our field intelligence said it
was necessary which I
love that's great
but it would be way better in my opinion
to have a comprehensive study that gave
these recommendations in a Playbook that
we're following Chelsea is a classic
example of an expenditure that occurred
outside of the recommendations that we
knew was necessary so if I'm looking at
so we've got expenses that we we spend
to folks to cot repair break fixes I
assume that is our line projects yeah
number you referenced okay that's yeah
it's not day-to-day repairs the
improvements is a new it's new capital
it's it's a new capital
expenditure so 400k of expenses and then
when I see the sewer debt fun we had
not really taken on any new debt in the
super debt
fund yeah and that's the way that beer
parsed debt was not always accurate to
the
project okay so to TI tie to that I was
actually just explaining this to my son
last night that my son was informing me
that we needed to resurface Ron Road and
I said there was a you plan we like to
try and bundle does he have like a new
let me guess does he have a new electric
scooter or
something will
never but okay but but like so I think
what you're saying and I want to make is
that when we make when we do under you
know we repare the sewer or make more
significant fixes we tend to fund that
with odwc
dollar It's Tricky yeah go either way we
we have been doing an annual Ling
project where we just Taylor will go out
I mean so Taylor screw is doing a lot of
this work and then might be video line
where there's backup when he drops the
camera in there you might see a c in so
that would be a candidate you know to
have line after point and that would be
expense the
opw just like ouring project which we've
been
doing for a while and that's helping I
mean so I guess what we're by the EPA we
are in Spec but what we're not getting
is we know what we're doing is working
but we're not getting like the whole
city yeah and I was just trying to like
take a step back and say how much money
are we putting into it every year right
now and then the bigger question which
is if we have repaired and I mean these
are just questions that come when I see
more information so I'm trying to Burse
it all but it's like if we know that we
spend $10 a mile making all this Stu you
do the lineing you do the
repairs like what what what would that
mean from an investment because I tend
when I think about this this is where I
wanted to talk about my cost
Effectiveness to me it's like if we're
going to spend a million one on a study
and we have potentially aund Million
worth of sewer infrastructure repairs
well that seems like a really good R but
if like it's probably in the range I
mean it's hard to know but if you
inflate emt's cost estimate of $28
million to current costs you know what
is it 35 or 40 million so it is not we
should be spending about a million a
year on sewer work and it's one of the
reasons we set aside additional
infrastructure funds we need to come up
with a debt strategy I mean we need to
come up with a capital fund strategy all
the stuff you and I have been talking
about yeah but again I don't feel
comfortable giving you a number or
Council a number until we have a right
until we have a good
plan like to me the cost Effectiveness
and I don't need to cut but it's like
like it's really hard to understand am I
spending a million dollars 10 million in
repairs that that might need be made
that's a terrible investment but if it's
if it's again I don't know the algorithm
that one should be using but a million
so it's it's way more than 10 but
unfortunately but honestly and you know
I I was we were talking we were trying
to think of analogies for this and one
of the analoges we came up with is when
you pay an
architect and Professional Services to
design a project the rule of thumb is
it's about 10% of cost this is not dis
similar to that it's going to be less
than 10% of cost unfortunately it's
probably be more like two and a half to
5% of cost but it's not to similar that
like you do that due diligence to know
how you're designing the project before
you do the project project and
unfortunately it really sucks that we
have an old study that we spent a lot of
time and money and political capital on
that we're not able to rely on that's
awful and that's one of the
reasons I don't want to disparage The
Firm because frankly I don't know how
they were hampered or not hampered
previously but they were one of the
quotes that we got early on um it was
almost like a nuisance number that they
threw at us and and and and so we we and
we opened up the RFP of them but they're
not one of the respondents the two firms
that are most capable in our region of
handling this are EMH andt who did the
old study and and Burgess and nle who
were
recommended I I do want to add so you're
asking you know so we do this lining
we're kind of putting out fires in some
instances you're you know down there
you're seeing it you fix it you spot
repair you line um part of the modeling
which might you all three firms have
suggested is ensuring that that is
making any kind of reasonable impact on
that Basin and the overall system that's
the whole point and the modeling is an
iterative process it's not like we're
going to get this model in two years and
we're going to let it be it's going to
continually feed we're going to continue
ongoing flow monitoring to test what
we're doing to ensure that the money
continues to be spent as well as it can
so it is an ongoing commitment to ensure
that we're being strategic as possible
now mind you all three firms do have
that um quoted at this point um so keep
that in mind
so do we want to get into these okay I'm
say I can just
imagine took for you to do this it's all
good thank you um like I mentioned I did
not get a chance to look at it as
thoroughly as I would like but I wanted
to recognize how much time I know and
Ben done to put this
together good good this is like insanely
helpful because like when I look at this
now I know that two things that are
driving this are the field workor and
ultimately how someone determines this
storm SE model it's like that's if we
look at what is driving the waterfall
increases
between two to this I now know and
frankly from my
standpoint like I just really want to
understand why do why do you think that
we need to spend $250,000 more to do
field work and $200,000 more to have
being at to the SE so I don't want to
derail it but to me it's like if if if
you can speak to that you've spoken to
unless I'm missing something the big
increases in these models so let me
start with one of
the you're totally right
I expense changes in Falls so what's
causing the difference I'm just looking
atage number one and when I look at
model updates in calibration you know
there there is a difference there but it
all really sits within this you know
everything
else model yeah that that line item
alone seems to be what's driving a huge
increase now there's good guys and bad
guys within that that that seems to be
the big one and then the second one
would be and the mayor spoke to this
it's the field work it's you know
there's a 200 plus or so thousand
difference within the fieldwork
component the other areas are pretty
similar but to me that's that feels like
like as a nonexpert and and again no one
I'm not questioning any of your
expertise in this because I don't
understand this at all but from a
foundational level it's like those those
are the things it seem to be driving the
increase I don't understand page
three uh has the modeling comparison so
this is where we like take those numbers
and you can really see why they're
different
and what's going to be true on this page
is also true of the other thing you
mentioned which is some of the fieldwork
stuff um in this
instance we feel that a a thorough
investigation of the syst system is
going to be necessary to have an
accurate
model I think some of these proposals
were kind of like well let's learn the
spec so if you have you know 2,000 feet
of six foot pipe and this many
connections what's actually going to
happen in your system well that's not
super relevant when you find out that
you know there's a crack a major break
in a sanitary line that's running right
next to a storm line and you haven't
really captured that because you haven't
been out to look at what's happening
and so whatever you model is not going
to actually show what the priorities are
for uh making the system work properly
so that let me restate yeah in a simpler
way than what I think you said is that
the difference between even feris or
previous
inverted night sorry is
that it appears that
BNN is physically going to many more
structures right
they can in fact like whereas the other
two are
simply again I'm assuming saying hey if
I go to a sample size of 50 versus
2500 that's going be indicative of the
others okay so this is just
literally shifting from a sample size
analysis to extrapolate what our needs
are to a more physical High touch
approach to looking at the super stres
yeah and I think that's really well
reflected reflected too in the number of
hours that bmm is proposing so that's
kind of the
second indicator of why why is that work
so much more expensive it's just more
work um it's it's more field workor all
again all three of them suggest the
modeling and they have various means and
methods which requir VAR software for
doing that um but but BG and I B would
actually be out in the field doing
inspections and surveys whereas that's
not recommended for EP FES and it's
limited for
arcadas a question that I did notice the
totals
estimate
is are rates simar I know obviously man
hours is going to be more because the
scope and the complexity is different
but are the rates that they're
recharging I mean we could do like a
quick you know analysis and you would
see that purchas and Ms looks lower
however um if if you're looking at their
overall proposals they have like 10
different team members with various
rates and various hours assigned so czy
one is the catac of R and the other one
is yeah I will tell you like regionally
Brig the nle is not known for being
cheap but it is also known for
being um so there's a value comp by the
way they were the jerks I was telling
this to Megan Ver just that when we had
them test fero Mayfield they were like
you gota you got to fix the fields you
can't just put kids on the fields they
were the first people to actually tell
us that like no one else has said that
they've they've got to be they've got to
not know what they're talking about and
so we kept like digging and digging and
I was like they do know what they're
talking
about separate separate
story like did they provide us and I
really rate by resource doing the work
um I don't have the rate that I have
hours work by resource and it's
extrapolated into the rate the overall
okay just because and I talked to people
because I this is all do to me but like
when I look at the rates based upon
their estimated hours of total cost EP
feris is like 285 arcadius is 370 and
then D is
251 and again that that's based on
what's here so I I'm assuming you
captured all the out so
um you know one that feels like a really
high hour
well the first two are doing a lot more
modeling engineer desk work PhD whereas
a lot of the hours in burges in this
instance are field workor which is a
different class
of yeah those rates still seem high well
that's that's not so when you go out in
the field you're sending like a a a
camera truck you're sending equipment
you're doing died testing well that's a
separate page you're you're not just
paying for a person you're paying for
equipment like our hourly rate on our
equipment
is hundreds of
dollars okay okay so that so it's not
like a typical okay that makes sense
yeah you're not looking at labor costs
like Taylor and Taylor's truck and yeah
all appreciation all that stuff that
goes with it okay okay all right good
question though okay
whereas it is a really good question
arcadis in this instance
is not doing is doing a lot of desk work
they do SUB out some of this field work
so you see like they're looking at 500
super structures and 50 manholes but
they're doing a lot more a lot of their
hours are tied up in a engineer at a
desk with
software would they would would do they
provide us the hours worked when they
invoice us would
they
isy like I don't I mean I guess
ask for
that I think we could ask for that yeah
and that's again like when I'm looking
at this I I live in a world where we
Bild hourly rates and I know that it's
2,60 hours a year that like this
everybody's targeting so I mean when I
look at this it's you know basically two
and a half people or so that are fully
dedicated now I know it takes a village
so it's all sorts of people but it's a
lot of hours that that we got to it and
I'm assuming this is is a fixed fee bit
and not
hourly yes and well at least that was my
understanding my understanding is that
we were going to be build in line with
project so if I were to we have Gant
charts for instance from vir just a nle
and they get through the first three
months of work and tasks one two three
are done we pay them for those tasks not
necessarily like an hourly rate but for
the task to be completed I think it is
yeah I mean they're quoting the fixed
fee right
which is there's you know the positive
to that is there's predictability
so an example Columbus does not do fixed
fees so uh this Livingston project which
was quoted for engineering at
1.8 million is now looking at like 2.6
million this is Livingston engineering
um
because they the engineering firm is
like ah we're just spending more time
than we thought like uh Columbus like
this is just how we do it and we're like
okay so that's the that's the that's the
downside to a non-fixed fee contract is
the unpredictability of risk the risk of
of unknown you know they could come
across a real gnarly situation where
they're like ah we got to look a lot
deeper at this and and then we're you
know shelling out a lot more now that
could that be true acoss that could
still happen because they could still
say we weren't expecting this and it
wasn't part of our scope so we got to
but at least it's communicated and I do
think to I want to get on to your kind
of second overall question you pointed
out the differences in the storm Steward
modeling so we've looked at the modeling
and the man differences and all of that
the differences for the fieldwork too I
do think that if you were to go with
theep fairs let's just say that's what
we decide to do they're going to then
bring back proposals for field work in a
future phase or they're going to suggest
so much field work in relation to an
investigation each year in relation to
how much lining we're doing so they
might say you should do $50,000 each
year for the next 10 years in this die
testing of this one limited area and you
should be lining this area
simultaneously so just because we're
doing suggesting Burg and Nel and doing
the field work up front does not mean
that that cost is not going to be
incurred later with the other firms it
it's still work you have to do right
regardless well an example of that is
the other question that you asked if you
turn back to page one and you look at
field workor
yeah okay yeah go ahead okay which is
detailed on page four I think the line
um this is a really important
distinction between the studies
because like what Columbus has concluded
from a lot of the studies they've done
and we're not exactly the same as
Columbus in our infrastructure but we're
pretty similar especially in
Clintonville is that almost they think
almost all of their influent
infiltration is coming from homes it's
private side homes and private
properties whereas so if you look at the
field work the first two
ignore private properties essentially
they're looking mostly just at at our at
our own
infrastructure um they're looking at
public Source inii okay whereas this
when you look at not only is it a better
public Source because you talk about die
testing and smoke testing which is
important to understanding connections
from private side but also like die Tes
and is showing like is there cross
connection between storm and sanitary
and our main infrastructure so it's a
better it's a better field test they
also are getting into a sample set of
homes throughout the community so that
the model is accurate to that that's
really important and we know from a lot
of reasons we know that that's a that
with us also is a major source of
inflowing
infiltration what let me
like try and summarize this a little bit
too because
so City colus we're doing this testing
to make sure that we're comping with our
partner or provider in so many words and
and so we're not flooding and we're not
flooding and doing our
infrastructure
what
the there was and then when it comes to
the field work
comparison there are EP Faris said we're
not going know look at public sources or
private sources to understand what's
causing what's the root cause issue
of what the degreg of our sewer system
right not in this proposal um but it was
specifically stated that it would be
likely um recommended
okay okay that's
helpful but then in arcadius came in it
said we're going to do we'll do the
public source so that's just looking at
I'm like roads and just be the C just
the city stuff structures okay and then
BNN came back and said we're going to do
holistically we're not only going to
look at the public influences to to the
degradation of the sewer system we're
going to look at all the private house
right
okay I agree with that I think
get yeah yeah well and this is again
this is really helpful because it it it
was it's really hard to understand how
all of these are different until we see
it broken out this way and I mean like
why would you do a study with basically
you know I don't know if it's 50% of the
influence to our sewer infrastructure
and exclude all the
private so there they would say uh we
know that the homes are a big source of
I I we're just going to put that in our
model we don't have to investigate it
we're going to just put it in our model
and then when we our recommendations are
going to say well fix all the
residential stuff and the model is going
to show X Y or
z um that that is fine except we're
going to have a we're going to have a
policy side of this there's no way
around it where we're going to have to
require more active intervention from
private property owners and so we're
gonna have to have evidence yeah which
we have some evidence we have our own
studies and we have some of emht stuff
but we're going to need a lot of it's
old you know a lot of it's peace mail we
need something more authoritative I
think explain what you just said so one
of the major questions that multiple
administrations have punted on starting
with Madison was okay we just did the
study and we did a smoke test and that's
where like you know they put smoke in
the pressured smoke in the sanitary line
and it's coming up through gutters which
says gutters are going into the sanitary
line which is a big big note know and a
huge problem for flooding technically an
illegal tie in we have
like of The Limited testing that was
done by you I think 130 examples of
that what do we go back to those
property owners and say you've got to
fix the problem you must fix the
problem in the past we haven't wanted to
take that tactic because so the SE
remediation program was like a troan
horse for that because we took
properties that were flooding which was
a good sign that they actually had some
bad
connections and we got to go in and do
like really thorough studies and then we
wouldn't give them money unless they
solved all the problems which has been
somewhat successful but we did find out
where a lot of legal connections are but
right and it'll probably that's a great
approach but having that as part of our
model and having that as part of our
official document helps us to
further develop that program or another
program that might be necessary I mean
right now we could go to you know House
on South Roosevelt we could say you have
a legal connection you need to fix it I
don't have no nothing to really stand on
you know right now I say
well policy saying you have to fix this
by so and so well that was kind of like
that's why we said like oh you don't
like the flooding at your house right
we'll be glad to help you with it but
you need to fix any problems that we
find so this is the type of stuff like
and so I don't want to diverge but I
think we're ultimately getting to the
Crux of what I was trying to understand
which is awesome but it's
like what what really is important to me
that is if we are going to invest all
this money in it that we we are holding
ourselves accountable to how we're going
to use the
information what policy changes this
slippery slope leads to because to your
Point like if we keep punting tough
decisions well then we're just throwing
good money at back so to me this is
where and again I I think that City
needs to be aware
of type of information that we're going
to get and how it's going to be used and
the pull through expenses or policy
changes that it it could lead to so to
me like to your point
what are we going to get out of this
we're going to make the city of Columbus
happy because we're kind of we have a
better idea of what our infrastructure
that is not why we're doing this study
to be clear but but we're then we're
going to have a targeted approach on how
we're going to repair infrastructure and
you know this could lead to $50 million
worth of funding requirements in the
next 10 years I'm making all this up but
like we've got I believe that this is
the beginning
of a sign you know either a significant
investment or a a more targeted
Strategic investment over a period of
time I'd say it's like season three of
that but like it's a good reminder so
it's like we've we're already way down
this path like it's not going to lead to
$50 million in improvements we already
have to do $50 million in improvements
it's going to lead to clear a better
prescription on our glasses to figure
out where we have to next move forward
on improvements we have a federally
mandated unfunded Federal mandate to fix
the issue we know there's a problem but
the data that we're working off of is is
corrupt so we
need it's been a long time it has been a
long the last the last big like here's
what our approach is going to be was
2014 Steve Ka was leading the way as
service chair so it's time for yeah a
reminder I mean I'm then the flooding
gave us another refresh moment where we
talked about the same stuff but from a
different angle so yeah Le one
incident spring of 2020 where there was
like epic I can't remember what year
that was yeah there was another one that
kind remind me um I the idea
presentation city council but I would
also think and then I'd love your
thoughts on this um got alexman on
service Justice on finance I'm wondering
if
maybe if schedules allow we set up we
meaning folks um if you want to Loop
them in to do a deeper dive and
then then maybe if they're brought in
overall to city council I think that
maybe since Alex the service chair be
helpful to to get him not not so much to
to buy in but also get up to speed
because he's gonna it's going to be on
for a while and it is service
infrastructure based totally yeah why
don't we take what we've said verbally
especially with the history and context
and create a presentation around it and
I
have I still have my slides from 2014
that we can and I we have the slides for
2020y great you got it all right
software still
exists um you think maybe a meeting in
advance with those two or just do it as
part of a future city council meeting
and then they could be our test
market and we'll we'll
rehearse you know we'll do a dry run and
then um yeah I it's a great time to talk
to council about it there's never a bad
time to to brief on this and I think
we hold off on a border control vote so
we made that
presentation
good I I do think so we we need to be
very honest with um we're just andle
they're not waiting for our phone call
you know um and so how long is the bid
good
for it's probably outdated at this point
oh yeah well outdated but I mean they
are they're well aware that we're
interested in working with them at least
from sof perspective obviously to be
formalized um and I think that they're
friendly towards us and things but I I
wouldn't want this to go months out yeah
I would it to to you and V to figure out
maybe when you want to kind of bring
city council and then you can have maybe
the meeting with two other council
members answer questions as You'
got could try to shoot for the February
25th
meeting for Council and then before that
have a meeting with Jess and Ellis yeah
yeah I think that's fair um I think that
like for any firm that we use regardless
if it's Burg just and nle we don't want
to miss the Spring season right like we
want to get the flow monitors out there
so like from an engineering perspective
there's a time in which we want to
collect this data and so we are going to
bump against that but I do not think
there's can end of the month release
that part we can release that part yeah
it sounds good and like I said um able
to meet with them I'm happy to
join
third okay and then just again like who
was Dave involved with vetting these yes
okay yes okay he did the initial
analysis that you saw that you you had a
hard time and like what what it was a
really intive process to be honest um
because they all propos such different
methods he followed up with each firm
individually through phone calls emails
and person meetings to try to help us
compare everything um so that we felt
confident in making a decision that was
in addition to our reference checks in
our one of so he's been involved the
entire
time that's more question if if we move
forward this given that it's year
2025 and given how quickly technology
and situations and other stuff
changes do we have any guess on how long
we'd be able to rely on this data I'm
sure that that came up in 2009 or 2014
but you know how how long are we
thinking that we could rely on whatever
information these analysis in this study
in this modeling is going to get us
what's the runway I I think this would
be and I'm not um the previous studies
just from what we found you know doing
our own work we just didn't trust where
this firm is GNA have a lot more boots
on the ground a lot more inspection I
think we could lean on up for quite a
while and it would point us in the right
direction on what we need to focus with
like our crws and Future Super projects
so get us in the right direction I mean
I know what you're saying about Columbus
but Columbus has a s set of issues and I
don't care about their system I just
need I that
no no no I get it but we just need more
information on our own system and that's
what we didn't really get from the
previous studies but and that's where
like again when when we get in front of
city council what is important to me and
and
again it's just we are going to
spend million dollars plus to get
information
what what I I think we need to
understand is what is that potentially
going to because to me it it you know
scenario one might be what your team's
doing is perfect for the next 10 years
um but in 10 years we're going to have
to do another study scenario B may be
well we're going to get this Playbook
and if it says we're doing $50 million
improvements we have to figure out how
to fund $50 million recruitments within
the next five years because the
information we have with and then
something in between but I think it's
really important to talk strategy on how
this investment will be used because
there's a few things that
I don't like more in my day job than
when somebody says can we get this for
know $5,000 and then Le to $1,000
expenses that we just didn't really
understand so to me it's really
important that when we're talking to
council about this is how long is this
thing and what are we going to do with
this information like spend we got to
use it and commit to using
it some of it I mean I understand what
you're saying but I think some of it we
really can't put a number two until we
get the study I mean they might tell us
to do more lying they might tell us to
increase you know Tye capacity they
might tell us to go after more homes and
put but what we're going to do with it
is follow the recommendation right yeah
but I mean what what I'm saying is like
you know there's probably three three
cities in the state of Ohio that had
very similar things and they've had
they've taken three different approaches
so to me it's like like 600 we need to
600 cities that have taken 600
pures what what we should be expecting
from a mid to longterm standpoint from
from the outlets this like yeah what
what I wouldn't want to do is spend you
know half million to say we should have
repaired you know $28 million of repairs
and then we look back and we say within
the past four years we've spent $400,000
a years or 10 years we spent fraction of
that so that's probably what this will
tell you is that we've been heavily
under spending it's my assumption
guarantee and so I think that this is
the status quo is not good I think like
what we're concerned about is that we do
not have the correct data and that we
are putting out fires instead of cling
for the future yeah we're going to come
to a point with climate change the
amount of water that we should expect in
the system and the age of the
infrastructure where we begin to fail at
a higher rates and that's just where we
are and that's where and again what I do
not want to find ourselves in at the
city of Bexley is that we have not put
the monies in to do things and then we
need to go to the community for 120 or80
million to build a new
or you something like so to me it's like
I want to get ahead of this and make
certain that we are chipping away that's
why we're talking about
this and I know that but I think what
what I guess I'm trying to communicate
is that it is this is all about change
so what's going on in your minds needs
to be communicated to City's Council
okay so that we we can get in a scenario
standpoint versus I like we could do
this and we'll Contin do $300,000 a year
inov we could do this and like we got to
go borrow $10 million immediately
because we've got a risk of
catastrophic yeah I mean I hear you
the the most likely outcome of this I
mean is that we're going to find that we
have to spend money probably similar to
what we thought we already had to spend
but it's just more targeted and focused
and intelligent but my my expectation is
that we are also going to
that because kicking KCK I I would I
would like to modify slightly we have
been spending
it but at a fraction of what was
Rec
um you know we spent five million as
opposed to 10 in the past 10 years so
fra fraction yeah but it also I don't
want to spend 10 million when I don't
know you know when it's the path is too
dark and fuzzy so and we yeah to your
point change of management we this whole
thing started because we were saying our
funds are not right-sized how do we
rightsize them well we don't know how to
rightsize them because we don't know
where to spend the money next so we
don't have a strategic plan for them so
what is challenging about this is you're
it's a little bit of a circular question
until we have the data to support what
we have to do next and that's why I
think we do case studies all the time we
pull up real time examples of what other
cities have done or or other customers
have so again that that's just just what
I we need to be painting pictures of
what the future might look like um
because Tong expenses and tag
along you know they're significant it it
it just it doesn't go to and that's what
I'm concerned about so that's why I'm
just trying to suggest when when the
presentation occurs how are we use this
information what need to because without
that we're we're not communicating
holistically
the
potential ripple effect of this to
people that aren't experts what you guys
do so that that's where that's that's
what's the hardest part for anybody
suring the community like this is that
you guys are the experts and we are not
and trying to speak that trying to get
us on the same page to understand what
it means so hard so hard yeah we can
absolutely do that some good examples
from around the region and may some I
see too I don't think
in your current position but when we
were doing the Smooth streets ly I
remember city council and then I mean we
looked at like must have been like seven
or eight different scenarios that that
sort of discussion prior to the levy and
giving yeah an accurate assessment of
what the data was for our streets I
remember think was really helpful it was
also really very similar to what we did
in 2014 for sewer um
except streets are way more predictable
and easy to
model
like we could do it right now and like
come up with that spreadsheet pretty
quickly in the presentation sew you know
really different
but yeah I think that's where we're
that's exactly where we started when we
started doing this RFP process is we
need to update our Capital fee because
our Capital fee is not sufficiently
funding the capital needs of sewer or
water specifically I mean water is
another piece of this but you can't look
at them in a vacuum they play with each
other so there's like you know we can't
really we don't want to go make a major
overhaul of water then not know what we
need in sewer because they're drawn from
the same essential pocket right even
though there's different
funds so this data is necessary to right
siize both
funds in February
26th for presentation in coun so maybei
to then some small gr meetings with Alex
and
Jess
unless your call I mean this isn't
leading to a vote of council right now
so it's whether or not you think that
that whole the Quorum concern yeah
exists there's a lot of you're on board
of control you've already you're not
going to not be involved in this
conversation you're the only one
actually voting on anything so I'm not
sure it makes sense
for I mean again I I think this has been
insanely helpful for me this was great
because I
now for this I now know the waterf why
it's the more expensive I understand
that the previous the other two folks
might have actually come back and said
we need to spend this money to do this
test but you know fundamentally I think
it makes to
do the private side I think
that's of our community and then the
second piece is just I would much rather
have good quality information versus
using um statistical assumptions on 50
versus 350 so I get it now so it it
makes sense to me um from my standpoint
I just want to make sure because I do I
think this is a significant investment I
think if we're going to if we're going
to spend the money we've got to use it
so I it's really important to me the
city council understands the the ripple
effect that this could have in future
budgets um because that that's what this
really is about for me it it's it's not
only phase one of this inting 26 but
it's
the the potential outcomes of the spend
to improve the
infrastructure
um
so and then piece before I swear this
the last thing they do I would love to
just pressure test how this contract can
be written to minimize our risk of them
coming in over so I love fixed feeds but
I
also there's a hours here and if they
are able to do it faster than what
they've estimated I want the city to see
a benefit and for the life of me I do
not know how in these types of contracts
you just do it not to exceed and you
Bill by
function so I mean that that would be a
preferred path because I would want
trally benefit from you know work that
may your team's doing to help
them you know all that stuff versus
being logged into with speed that and
that that would be and then reviewing
hours worked you know that would be my
expectation is that somebody's reviewing
their invoices and the hours that they
work to validate that's that that makes
sense so that would be again just a
contractual piece to this that I think
is important to
address I think I'm done stay on budget
yeah good
and I know you guys talked probably
through everything that we've talked
about do not think that we no it's good
it's good to you know it's uh important
to socialize talk about
it okay sure sounds like we have a plan
but Matt are you concerned even though
Council like approved this project you
don't think they understand like way
could wead to I guess yeah and maybe so
that there's no ambiguity on where my
position is is on this like I now get it
from a board of control member and
auditor you know you know I I can
support why we're spending this money
what is concerning me is just the
subjectivity of how we use this
information and the ripple effect that
it has to the city council and future
spend so that is to me that sure what I
am worried about as auditor is making
certain that as we spend a million
dollars to do what we believe is needed
that our community and see Council
understands that we're going to spend
this money we got to use it and that
means that city council might be asked
to approve tens of millions of dollars
of infrastructure expense improvements
in the next 10 years that that to me is
that's really what it comes down to the
way I view it is that yeah that's
exactly what we've been saying is gonna
happen so I think I think
but I'm not sure that that information
gets consumed all the time I mean I
think and I think even if the
information does get out there and gets
consumed I think the repeating and the
refresh
totally you know just kind of yeah yeah
I'm just I think the oneon-one with some
other city council members will be
extremely helpful because usually when
this has come up it's in the context of
this rain event a couple days ago or
it's budget season and we need toot this
but I think maybe um doing a targeted
discussion is never going to be a bad
idea yeah really appreciate you
guys me and I
appreciate this was great I mean I this
is and again I mean I
think the end of a very long day it's
tough to look at three beds that are
very different and and also try and
process all of so I appreciate this time
which is you know we had some
foundational understanding background in
that word control that information out
last
I talk through it and then this this is
really helpful so this this is this is
great I think it's probably one of the
reasons so interestingly this sort of
contract would not have come before
Board of control until we wrote that
ordinance a couple years ago to change
the threshold we incorporated
Professional Services oh high Revised
Code doesn't require it probably because
because it's such a technical
complicated conversation so like we went
through the Columbus process with
Livingston and the way that they
analyzed it very different from the way
that a border control or the way we
would look at it frankly very different
but um you know that's looking at a$ 1.8
million contract for that one um
following oh high Revised Code not going
through border of control so part of our
learning curve I think is how do we
better present these when it's not a
simple Apples to Apples comparison yeah
that's where ultimately I like when we
first I'm like does the bo of control
have authority to do yeah and and I was
just reviewing our ordinance not a lot
of analogies we Board of control still
reviews Professional Services contract
and I wrote this it's my fault uh but I
don't disagree with myself but not under
the same standards as the lowest and
best bid it it has to review and vote
but it's standardless
you know what I mean which allows these
conversations to occur it does it but
but what this this is all about
is NI cross and
te do this but it's just that gut check
like where does this need to be
socialized how does this need to be
communicated and that's that's what
we're talking about right now is really
that that gut check rebas lining
everybody some people are new some
people have been maybe part of what we
pH one pH version one to so I'm not sure
that we have any council
members maybe
laan
maybe anyway uh anything further to come
before the board of
control with that I would entertain a
motion to
adjourn double moved so I'll take that
as a motion