Findlay council debates executing FEMA-backed MOA and whether to hire independent environmental reviewer

Findlay City Council members spent large portions of the May 20 meeting discussing a memorandum of agreement (MOA) between the city and the Maumee Watershed Conservancy District tied to a pending FEMA grant for flood mitigation projects.

Councilors were told the MOA would not be executed until the city received a signed grant agreement and that the project had moved past the NEPA environmental review phase. Staff said a cost‑benefit analysis had been submitted on a 3:1 basis and that, if the analysis met FEMA thresholds, the city could expect award notification within about 60 days.

The MOA covers multiple pieces of work described in the meeting as: phase‑2 benching, a storm basin on Main Street, and benching related to the Norfolk Southern rail corridor. City staff said the Maumee Watershed Conservancy District would receive contractor invoices, submit them under the grant, and—after reimbursement—pay contractors, rather than the city fronting project costs.

A separate and sustained discussion focused on whether the city should hire a distinct, independent third‑party environmental reviewer to represent Findlay’s interests during cleanup and benching. Supporters said prior on‑site surprises and earlier testing that uncovered additional contaminant “hot spots” justified an independent review to ensure residential or park standards are met and to protect taxpayers. Opponents argued that the county’s contracted firm holds the required licensure and that oversight will be conducted jointly by the county, the conservancy district and city engineering staff, and that hiring a second firm would duplicate work and add cost.

Law Director Rob Feiner advised that his legal review did not identify a need to hire another firm solely to supervise the county‑hired consultant and characterized his written opinion as advisory. City staff and several council members said the MOA expressly states it will not be signed until a grant award is in hand.

Council referred the MOA to staff for continued coordination with the county and conservancy district; the MOA was on the agenda as a second reading (ordinance 20‑25‑56) and was not adopted that night. Councilmembers also discussed bringing a formal motion to hire a third‑party reviewer if a majority wants to authorize staff to solicit proposals and cost estimates.

The council did not approve an independent‑review contract during the meeting; members asked staff to clarify how the county’s contract would assign responsibilities, what standards (park vs. residential) would be used for cleanup, and how sampling and load manifests would be tracked during excavation and soil movement.

Next steps identified at the meeting: staff will confirm contract language indicating the MOA is contingent on the executed FEMA grant agreement; the city engineer said city staff will participate in project progress meetings; and council may be asked to consider separate legislation should members want the city to retain its own independent reviewer.