Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Works Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultant outlines OPWC scoring, urges narrower request to boost Sunbury's chance
Summary
Verdantas consultant Mike Miller reviewed the Ohio Public Works Commission scoring criteria used by District 17, said Sunbury missed funding last year by two points and recommended smaller, higher‑scoring project requests and early traffic/accident documentation.
Mike Miller, a Verdantas consultant and former Ohio Public Works Commission staff member, told the City of Sunbury Services Committee on May 7 that the city’s past OPWC application missed funding by two points and recommended changes to improve competitiveness.
Miller said District 17 uses 10 statutory criteria and that communities can increase competitiveness by tailoring requests to what the district emphasizes, such as average daily traffic and documented safety incidents. "If paving transportation projects are the direction that you choose to go, the higher average daily traffic street is going to score much higher than the lower average daily traffic street," Miller said.
Why it matters: OPWC grants and loans are a major source for local roadway and environmental infrastructure. Miller said Sunbury’s prior request (a $300,000 grant and $100,000 loan) scored 29 while the funding cutoff was 31. He said the district maintains a contingency list and that Sunbury’s project was sixth on that list.
Miller reviewed key scoring details the committee can influence: average daily traffic (ADT) and documented accidents; age and condition of pavement; the financing mix (grant vs. loan); leveraging percentage; readiness to proceed; and an item he labeled "project sound." He said loan‑only requests receive 16 points under the financial criterion while grant‑only receives 10, and that readiness to proceed is an all‑or‑nothing five‑point item.
Miller advised the city to run scoring models once it narrows its priorities and to arrange a review with Rob Platt, the district liaison, to verify posture before submission. "He's agreed to sit down with us and walk through to make sure we have a posture to be as competitive as possible," Miller said.
Discussion: Committee members asked whether safety and traffic points could overlap; Miller said accident reports can support health and safety points but that ADT is the primary metric for the district. He also cautioned that the program is oriented to repair and replacement rather than expansion, and that expansion projects are rarely funded at the district level.
Next steps: Miller encouraged the committee to identify top priorities by August so his team can run models ahead of the expected early‑November application close. He reiterated that the timing of applications and readiness documentation is critical to capture the five readiness points.
