County officials and highway staff at a special meeting Aug. 26, 2025 directed staff to prepare multiple applications for the state's LEHI flex funds and related prairie-dog grant awards, with an application deadline of Sept. 19.

The county's highway staff outlined a plan to package priority minor-structure projects (non-federally inspected bridges and larger culverts) into roughly five applications, divided geographically to spread potential awards across the county. Staff emphasized that applications should include maps, cost estimates and township letters acknowledging county awareness because reimbursement will be on a reimbursement basis and funds are routed through counties rather than directly to townships.

Why it matters: The state shifted much of what used to be direct prairie-dog distributions into competitive LEHI flex grants this biennium, reducing some counties' direct, guaranteed payouts and creating a one-application process that will be used both for flex-grant awards and to stage projects for later prairie-dog funding cycles.

Staff said the county previously received a direct prairie-dog distribution of about $1.65 million in the last biennium and that the county's anticipated direct distribution this cycle would be roughly $555,000 if state buckets fill. That change, staff said, is the main reason the county should pursue competitive LEHI flex-grant applications as well as preserve applications for the prairie-dog set-aside.

Key details and direction
- Deadline and application process: Staff repeated the state deadline, Sept. 19, and said applicants must submit one application pool; the state will award some projects from that pool and hold others in reserve pending prairie-dog money availability. Townships that apply must provide a letter acknowledging the county is aware of the township's submission because reimbursement flows through the county.
- Minimum project and typical costs: Staff said the legislature set a $250,000 minimum-project figure in statute intent; state program staff told county staff the figure was a legislative intent number and is not a strict disqualifier. Project-level cost estimates in the discussion treated a single minor structure or culvert replacement as commonly approximating $100,000, so bundling several structures into one application is common practice to reach typical grant thresholds.
- Prioritization approach: Staff recommended structuring roughly five applications by geography: everything south of County Road 11 as one application and two or three additional applications dividing the northern half by an extension of County Road 6. The group discussed including the county's highest-priority ("red") structures in those applications to improve ranking.
- Scoring and cost share: Staff described state scoring criteria that reward projects with local cost share or outside funding. The county discussed several cost-share options (examples discussed included 90/10 on culverts and 80/20 or a fixed dollar-per-structure approach for other projects) and agreed to include some local match in applications to increase competitiveness.
- Project phasing and engineering: For large paving projects, staff outlined a multi-biennium phasing strategy: preliminary engineering/permitting in one biennium, grading and utility work in a subsequent biennium, and paving construction in a later biennium. Staff warned that full roadway paving projects could span multiple biennia and cost millions of dollars.
- Township projects: Staff summarized preliminary township proposals from Easton, Hugo, Edendale, Melrose and Beavercreek/Westfield line. Examples included regrading two miles where a bridge was removed (Easton), replacing an undersized culvert with a properly sized structure (Hugo), bank stabilization near a bridge (Edendale), and railroad-crossing improvements and gravel-surfacing requests (Melrose). Staff encouraged townships to prepare cost estimates and letters so the county can include their projects where appropriate.
- Inventory cleanup: Staff noted the county's minor-structure inventory contains historic bridge numbers that should be updated as culverts replace older structures; staff requested an updated inventory so applications accurately reflect county responsibility for each structure.

What staff will do next: Highway staff were directed to assemble draft applications, maps and cost estimates and share them in the commission packet before the next meeting so commissioners can review and finalize submissions ahead of the Sept. 19 deadline. Staff also said they will contact townships to secure required acknowledgement letters and will refine the inventory of which structures remain county responsibility.

Context and constraints: Staff said the total LEHI/related appropriation is large at the program level but will be spread across many priorities, so not every county application will be funded. They also noted a state ranking committee will score applications and the Department of Transportation management team has discretion to adjust rankings. Staff described the program as reimbursement-based: work is completed, receipts are submitted, then the state reimburses the recipient, so counties or townships may need to front costs temporarily.

Forward look: Commissioners and staff agreed to pursue multiple targeted applications (bridges, culverts and selected smaller paving or site-improvement projects) and to use remaining direct prairie-dog funds as a possible follow-up funding source if the county does not receive all desired awards in the first flex-grant round.

Ending note: County staff said they will bring draft applications and supporting materials to the commission packet before the next regular meeting so commissioners can review and provide final approval prior to submission.