Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Troy committee unanimously backs recommendation that council support renewal of Ohio Public Works Commission funding
Summary
The Troy Law and Ordinance Committee voted unanimously to forward a resolution recommending city council support a 10-year renewal of the Ohio Public Works Commission (OPWC) program, saying the city has received nearly $6 million in OPWC grants over the past decade.
The Troy Law and Ordinance Committee voted unanimously Monday to recommend that the Troy City Council adopt a resolution supporting renewal of the Ohio Public Works Commission (OPWC), a 10-year state capital improvement program that the committee said has funded local projects.
The recommendation came after Mr. Tindenton, a staff member, told the committee the program is a voter-authorized bond program that has provided grants to districts across the state. “We have greatly benefited from this program,” Mr. Tindenton said, and he noted the city has received nearly $6,000,000 in OPWC funding in the last decade for projects including work on North Market, Riverside, McKague Road, Stanfield and West Main Street. He also said the city anticipates OPWC funds could help support a Riverside Antib Street roundabout.
The committee’s action was limited to a recommendation to council; members explicitly said they were not pursuing emergency legislation. Chairman Jeffrey Wooden asked for any questions, and after a short exchange in which Miss Marshall confirmed the anticipated use of funds for the roundabout, Miss Marshall moved to forward the recommendation and Mr. Tindenton indicated the item would be moved forward to council. Chairman Wooden then said, “It is unanimous to move forward.”
The committee discussion focused on the program’s existing and anticipated benefits to local infrastructure. Mr. Tindenton described OPWC as a voter-approved mechanism in which the state issues bonds and uses revenues to repay them, then allocates grant funds to projects by district. He also said the state program has been colloquially known as “Issue 2” for several decades, though the committee did not specify the ballot number for the upcoming renewal.
No public comments or formal citizen testimony were recorded on the item during the committee session. The committee did not vote on any ordinance or appropriate funds; its action was to recommend council support the state capital improvement program renewal and forward a draft resolution for council consideration.
The council is expected to receive the committee’s recommendation; the transcript did not specify a council meeting date, ballot timing, or the precise projects that would receive future OPWC awards if the state program is renewed.
