Concord Township residents press Lake County commissioners to pursue public water after repeated well failures

At a Lake County Board of Commissioners workshop, Concord Township residents asked the county to pursue a resolution of necessity and funding to extend public water to a neighborhood they say has chronic private well failures and a deteriorating aquifer. "This is a public health crisis over there," resident and public school teacher Connie Wellman said, describing houses that lose water multiple times a year, holding tanks and treatment systems that have failed, and two homes she said were abandoned because of water loss.

Why it matters: Petitioners said a 2021 engineering study identified the neighborhood as next in line for public water and that 14 households signed a petition asking the county to move the project up the priority list. Residents urged use of the water‑supply revolving loan and other grant programs that can offer principal forgiveness and reduce assessments to property owners.

County staff said the commission received a slate of projects from the Lake County Township Association during the county's allocation of limited ARPA funds; the township association recommended the west‑end waterline projects that later received ARPA support. "We received correspondence from the Lake County Township Association," Jason, a county staff member, said in response to questions about why some projects were chosen for ARPA funding.

On process and costs, county utilities staff explained the standard assessment route under Ohio law. "Ohio Revised Code 6117 lays out the procedure for an assessment project," said Randy, a county utilities staff member, describing the steps: a petition, an information meeting, hiring an engineering firm to design the project and produce tentative assessments based on frontage, a formal public hearing and—if the commission approves—placing the assessment on property tax bills for up to 20 years.

Staff and commissioners discussed the 2021 tabletop estimate, which was cited in the meeting at about $1.6 million in 2021. County staff warned that, with inflation and current material costs, that number would likely be higher today and said a full engineering design would be required to produce firm per‑property assessments. Staff said they typically look for roughly 75% property participation or support before advancing an assessed project.

Next steps and commitments: Commissioners told the petitioners the county would perform updated tabletop engineering to produce current cost estimates, explore grants (including state and federal water programs), and return to hold an informational meeting with the neighborhood. Staff also agreed to provide regular monthly updates to the petitioners while options are explored.

What residents said: In the public comment, petitioners described severe personal and household impacts: expensive treatment systems that fail quickly, holding tanks and trucked water deliveries, and difficulty bathing, laundering and maintaining fire protection. "We're not drinking it. We're not bathing it," Connie Wellman said. She urged the county to nominate the project for principal‑forgiveness programs and to use benefits‑received models that could reduce the burden on modest homeowners.

What the county said: County staff committed to use the existing 2021 study as a starting point for an information meeting and to produce an updated cost estimate. They described the options for applying for grant funding but noted principal forgiveness or grant awards are not guaranteed and must be applied for and approved.

The meeting outcome: The commissioners did not take a formal vote on funding or an assessment at the workshop; they agreed to next steps—updated tabletop engineering, a search for eligible grants and a return informational meeting—rather than immediate action. Petitioners will receive monthly status updates from the county as staff complete the preliminary work.