Hamilton County public hearing spotlights health risks and resident cost concerns on Kenwood Hills sewer plan

Hamilton County Commission Board President Alicia Reese opened a public hearing in Madeira on the proposed Kenwood Hills local sewer project and asked the Metropolitan Sewer District (MSD) and Hamilton County Public Health to present the plan and answer homeowner questions.

MSD project representative Lauren DeGarcia summarized the scope and finances of the petition-driven project, saying the district would build roughly 9,500 feet of 8-inch gravity sewer and about 3,300 feet of low-pressure force main, install 160 laterals and that an estimated 59 properties would likely need grinder pumps. She told residents the total estimated project cost is "approximately $12,400,000," with MSD funding about 85% (about $10.5 million) and the benefited property owners assessed no more than $12,000 each for public improvements.

Hamilton County Public Health Commissioner Greg Kesterman said the district considers Kenwood Hills a top priority because of the neighborhood’s density of failing home sewage treatment systems (HSTS). "This is one of the most important projects that we are working on," Kesterman said, and Felicia Erwin, the health district’s director of water quality, told the board about the neighborhood’s systems: "98% of these systems are discharging," she said, and many of those connections run into stormwater infrastructure. Erwin described sampling and photographs showing effluent reaching creeks and said the systems often cannot meet Clean Water Act-era water quality standards.

That public-health framing drove both support and concern in the public comment period. Residents who favor the sewer said it would address persistent odors, reduce exposure to untreated wastewater and improve quality of life and property values. "We are dumping raw untreated human waste into our storm sewers," resident John Moose said, urging the board to move forward. Longtime resident Mike Mauck said his Cavitec system requires repeated repairs and welcomed the proposed replacement.

Other residents urged caution or opposed the current plan. A speaker who stated she serves on the Madera City Council but was not speaking for the council said the original petition’s margin of support was narrow and noted costs and construction disruption. Multiple residents and commissioners pressed MSD on the project’s design because about half the parcels would require homeowner-installed grinder pumps rather than gravity hookups; resident Kevin Creek said a contractor had estimated $35,000 to reach his rear-yard unit, adding substantial private-side cost to the $12,000 assessment.

MSD and the health district acknowledged the distinction between the public-improvement assessment and private-side connection costs. DeGarcia said the $12,000 cap applies to public improvements only and "is not all that's going to be coming out of your pockets" for private plumbing, abandonment of HSTS, permits and possible interest if paid through property taxes. Kesterman and MSD staff said private-side costs vary widely by property and recommended homeowners consider coordinated bids to reduce contractor costs; the health department estimated private connection work often ranges between $15,000 and $30,000 in today’s market, but stressed that exact costs are property-specific.

On design choices, MSD engineer Matt Spadary explained that extending gravity sewer lines to serve every home would require much deeper excavation in parts of the neighborhood; to balance construction cost and public funding stewardship, MSD’s design includes grinder pumps for some parcels. Spadary offered to meet residents after the hearing to review site-specific plans.

Several residents raised process questions: whether properties not connected to the storm sewer would be required to join (MSD said Ohio law requires connection if a public sewer is within 200 feet), whether the original petition could be re-polled (MSD staff said rules provide for an initial petition but boards have repulled owners previously to inform decisions) and how long owners would have to connect (the health district said discharging systems would have two years to connect; non-discharging systems would have five years; properties in failure could have 90-day orders).

The board also discussed funding options and next steps. MSD staff said some programs may be available to assist low-income homeowners, including county home-improvement loans, state revolving funds and Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) allocations where feasible. MSD noted approximately $600,000 has already been spent on design and easement acquisition. DeGarcia said the final assessment would occur after construction (MSD’s schedule estimates construction October 2025–February 2027 and a final assessment in May or June 2028, if the project proceeds as planned) and that an appropriation action in court may be required to obtain remaining easements.

After public comment and questions, Board President Alicia Reese moved to keep the public hearing open to allow for additional information and written input; the motion was seconded. The board approved keeping the hearing open and adjourned the meeting. Reese said the board will consider repulling property owners and will schedule further deliberation once updated household-cost averages, alternative-design options and potential funding sources are assembled.

What happens next: there is a five-day window after the hearing’s formal close for written objections or endorsements; if objections are filed, the board will set a later date to consider whether to proceed. Following a board decision, a 10-day appeal period applies. MSD warned that a court appropriation process to secure final easements could take roughly six months and may affect project timing.

The hearing presented a clear public-health rationale for sewering Kenwood Hills, but also highlighted homeowner concerns about private-side costs and the equity of a design that would require grinder pumps for many parcels. The commission left the record open for additional input and directed staff to assemble more detailed cost estimates, alternate design scenarios and potential funding options before making a final decision.