COLUMBUS — A resolution that would allow Ohio voters to decide whether to extend the state’s capital improvement program could come to a vote in May.

The measure, currently under consideration by the Ohio Legislature, has passed the state Senate and is set for a second hearing – and possible vote – at the Chamber of Finance today.

If both chambers approve, it would be up to voters to decide whether they want to renew the program and issue an additional $2.5 billion in general obligation bonds to fund infrastructure projects across the state.

Supporters say the program, administered by the Ohio Public Works Commission, has pumped millions of dollars into road, bridge, water and wastewater upgrades and emergency repairs to slides throughout Jefferson County since its inception in 1987.

“If the funding disappears, it will affect the number of projects we can do each year. » said Steubenville City Engineer Mike Dolak. “We are counting on this funding. It is crucial that it is adopted (and) funds the municipalities.”

Dolak said OPWC funding came into play “on just about every major project I’ve had over the years.”

“Over the last 19 or 20 years, we’ve received about $6 million from OPWC. » he said. “Last year we received $330,000 for Lovers Lane and $250,000 for asphalt resurfacing in 2024 at Brady Estates. We also used $100,000 for the resurfacing of Johnson Road.

Next year, I hope to secure an additional $250,000 for our 2025 hot resurfacing project, as well as approximately $70,000 for the resurfacing of County Road 43 within the city limits (the Lovers Lane Connector towards Powell’s Lane Bridge).

OPWC Director Linda Bailiff said bond proceeds are distributed on a per capita basis to the 19 District Public Works Integration Committees responsible for selecting projects for funding in their areas after statutory distributions have been made two. “put aside” programs.

“Projects are selected by districts, made up of local officials from all levels of government. » she said. “Each district develops and uses a methodology using criteria established by law, including the district’s repair and replacement needs, health and safety, age and condition, willingness to proceed, and financial considerations.

The two set-aside programs, administered centrally, are the Small Government Program – a “second chance” for funding villages and rural communities of 5,000 or fewer residents – and the Emergency Program, a first-come, first-served opportunity for projects to address failing infrastructure threatening immediate health and safety.

“Once projects are selected, our organization enters into contractual agreements with grantees that provide that projects will be designed, bid, awarded and managed locally while OPWC provides financial oversight and accountability. » she said.

Mike Eroshevich, director of the Jefferson County Water and Sewer District, said there is no denying how OPWC funding has helped not only his department, but also the villages and townships as well as the town of Steubenville.

“A lot of funding has gone into road projects in the county, they are a vital asset to the region and the entire state. » he said, emphasizing that for his department alone, “Over the past several years, OPWC has assisted the district with a $50,000 emergency grant and a $30,000 low-interest loan to repair the State Route water break. 43 a few years ago; an $800,000 low-interest loan for the Area J and Bloomingdale Reservoir Project and, most recently, an $80,000 emergency grant and $30,000 low-interest loan for the Costonia water main replacement.

Since 2017, Steubenville has received millions in grants and loans, much of which is earmarked for the resurfacing of a multitude of city streets – including Lovers Lane and Johnson Road – and the replacement of the Lawson Avenue bridge as well as to improve traffic signals on State Route 7.

But over the past seven years, the funds have also helped finance, for example, slide repairs, sanitary sewer work, resurfacing, bridge replacement, water tank rehabilitation work and other big-ticket items that benefit residents of other Jefferson County communities: OPWC funding. provided a major funding increase for Wintersville’s meter replacement program, for example, as well as various street repairs, a sanitary sewer system update, slip repairs in Mount Pleasant Township, Wells , Cross Creek and Island Creek, Dillonvale, a retaining wall in Irondale, the repair of a waterslide in Amsterdam, the rehabilitation of Commercial Avenue in Mingo Junction, the improvement of the water system in Brilliant and the Walton Acres water main revetment project in Toronto.

“OPWC focuses a lot on road resurfacing, emergencies and other infrastructure projects” » said Eroshevich. “Without them, we would be forced to seek funding from other funding agencies, many of which focus on different areas. Many road projects would go unfunded and we would face greater competition for these other sources of funding. I would say that these projects would be more difficult to carry out and this would cause an additional drain on the operational funds of the various departments.

He cited a project in Costonia as an example: Without the help of the OPWC, “We should be spending $100,000 of our own repair dollars (instead of using that money) to purchase much-needed equipment and materials that we need to do our job of maintaining our system.”

Bailiff said OPWC typically pays contractors directly, but local governments also have the option of paying bills in advance and then submitting the data to OPWC for reimbursement. Eroshevich said that’s how his department handles things.

“One time we made a direct payment to the contractor and the auditor was upset because he had to account for the money coming in and going out. » he explained. “That’s why we always choose refund.

Although direct payment is the most popular, the bailiff said anyway: “We move the money quickly, usually within a week.”

However, not everyone is convinced of it as it is,

State Rep. Ronnie Ferguson, R-Wintersville, said: “Without a commitment to giving Jefferson, Belmont and Monroe their fair share, I would be a no (vote).”

“I believe there are better ways to fund our local communities than the capital budget, because history has proven that Jefferson County never gets its fair share. » » said Ferguson.

“I think the wisest thing is to get rid of the income tax and let every Ohioan keep what they earn rather than taking tax dollars from places like the Valley of Ohio and redistribute our tax dollars to big cities. If Jefferson County residents hadn’t used their tax dollars to subsidize Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati, we would be able to keep them here at home in the first place to pay for the big items and we would actually still have more money to carry out bigger projects.

But state Sen. Brian Chavez, R-Marietta, said SCIP “has proven over the decades to be a crucial resource for municipalities across the state and particularly in rural areas. »

“I have heard from many local officials whose counties have benefited from these funds for improvements to roads, bridges and more in their communities. » Chavez said. Chavez and Sen. Hearcel Craig (D-Columbus) sponsored the resolution on the Senate side.

“The necessary infrastructure projects simply could not be undertaken without this funding source. » Chavez said at the time.