Major communications breakdown blamed for mess
Lazaro Aleman
ECB Publishing, Inc.
Barely more than a month since the governor presented city officials with a $4.2 million check for the extension of sewer service to the Lloyd interchange, and local officials now find themselves unable to proceed with the project and faced with the possibility of having to forego the money.
Or more precisely, city and county officials hope to convince the state to allow them to shift the funding from the I-10 and SR-59 interchange at Lloyd to the I-10 and U.S. 19 interchange in
See WALK page 3
Monticello.
The unexpected development surfaced at the Monticello City Council meeting on Tuesday evening, May 3.
Mayor Julie Conley set the stage for the announcement, choosing her words very carefully.
She noted that efforts to extend sewer service to the Lloyd interchange had been ongoing for at least two decades and had involved innumerable discussions with area landowners, county officials, engineers and others.
Conley conceded that the early applications to the state to fund the project had been long shots at best and had failed to produce results. In recent years, however, due to new developments at the interchange – including the purchase of a large parcel by a developer and the nearness of the Amazon facility – the chances for funding had greatly improved, she said.
But in submitting the last application to the state in conjunction with the county, Conley said the city had relied on the expressed agreement of county officials to provide an engineering report that would determine the project’s feasibility and answer city officials’ many questions about the enterprise.
“Why we never received the report is not clear to anyone I’ve spoken with, but I believe it is the result of a massive communication breakdown,” Conley said. “I began voicing my concerns about the lack of any movement on the county’s part to provide a report because what I most feared would happen is exactly what has happened.”
“And that,” she added, “is that we’ve been awarded over $4 million for a project and we don’t have the information we need to take any action.”
Among the several stumbling blocks that Conley noted was the county’s consultant engineer’s recent remarks that, in his opinion, a force main to the Lloyd interchange was not the most effective way to get a central sewer system there.
“Where we are now, as far as the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (FDEO) is concerned, is that we’re supposed to be working with them to develop a scope of work, a budget and a timeframe for the project,” Conley said. “Obviously, we can’t do that because of a lack of information.”
All, however, was not lost, Conley added, putting the situation in the best possible light. There might, she offered, still be a silver lining moving forward.
Conley identified that silver lining as the possibility of being able to shift the focus of the funding from the I-10 and SR-59 interchange to the I-10 and US 19 interchange. Provided, she said, that economic development and job creation remained the ultimate goals of the FDEO and if the shift came with a reduced grant amount.
Conley then turned the presentation to Property Appraiser Angela Gray, a volunteer member of the Jefferson County Economic Development Committee (EDC), which has taken the lead in the sewer extension project as part of its overall mission.
In April, as part of the EDC’s efforts to keep city officials abreast of developments with the joint sewer project and in the interest of promoting better communications between the two government bodies, Gray reported to the council that the feasibility study would be done with the utmost expediency to satisfy city officials’ concerns.
When Gray returned to the council on May 3, however, she said the EDC had since learned that the engineering study would not be able to be done within the 60-day window required by the FDEO.
It was instead the EDC’s proposal, Gray said – if it was acceptable to the city and county – to approach the FDEO and see if the $4.2 million could be redirected to the US 19 and I-10 corridor and other possible economic development projects.
The council ultimately agreed to the EDC proposal, but not without some members expressing frustration over the county’s alleged foot-dragging on the engineering study and the untenable position that it was putting the city in, having to backtrack on the funding.
“How are we going to make a decision when we don’t ever know the goals of the county for economic development,” said Councilman George Evans, reiterating his complaint that county officials repeatedly came before the council with requests for participation in major projects based on oral presentations and without written documentation.
Councilman Troy Avera was equally critical. The county, he said, was often reactive rather than proactive. Had the county proceeded with the engineering study when the city had first requested it, the two entities wouldn’t be in the present situation, he said. He also thought it made the two governments look foolish, to return after the money was awarded and admit that they had lacked a viable plan. Even now, he said, there was no real plan.
“You can’t just go to the governor without a plan and ask to switch the money,” Avera said.
Even so, the council agreed that it was best to try and save the funding if possible, even if in the process the state decided to reduce the grant amount.
Nothing was said about the separate $3-plus million that the Florida Department of Environmental Protection awarded separately to the county late last year for the same purpose of extending city sewer service to Lloyd.
Questioned about the latter issue by the News via email, Gray responded that the city and county group going to the FDEO would only be addressing the $4.2 million.
She did, however, add that no more monies would be spent to extend city sewer lines to Lloyd or other outlying areas until county officials answered several key overarching questions.
Gray listed these questions as follows:
• Would connection to the system be mandatory for residents living along the route of any newly installed sewer line, given that city officials insist this is a condition for a joint project?
• What metering mechanisms would be employed to measure use and enforce payments if city water was not part of a city-connected sewer system?
• What are county officials’ thoughts on increasing the Future Land Use designation to increase densities and create a customer base to justify an extension?
Who would supplement the additional operational and maintenance costs of the extension until such a time as the system had sufficient customers to be self-sustaining?