Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents urge commissioners to return $67.4M application and oppose sewer/mega‑site plans

Lorain County Board of Commissioners · April 7, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Public commenters and township representatives urged the county to return a $67.4 million funding application tied to a proposed mega‑site and sewer infrastructure, citing lack of community support, township denials and concerns about farmland preservation and transparency.

Multiple residents and local leaders used public comment to oppose the county's application and planning around a proposed mega‑site (and related sewer infrastructure) and asked commissioners to return an awarded $67.4 million grant. Samuel Menges said the application overstated community support and land availability and noted that New Russia Township and several other local jurisdictions have passed resolutions against the project; he urged the county to "give back the $67.4 million as the money was awarded on false information."

Stephanie Jacovetti, who obtained the county strategic plan through a public records request, criticized the plan's survey methodology and questioned whether mailed inserts and an electronic survey produced representative results. She noted the county spent about $123,000 on consultant surveys and that the return per completed survey (approximately $65 per completed response) raised concerns about outreach and representation of older residents. Other public commenters reiterated that townships and villages (New Russia, Vermilion, Henrietta, South Amherst, Brownhelm and others) had objected to sewer extensions and rezoning connected to the proposed development. Speakers requested transparency, clearer public engagement and that the county reconsider pursuing the grant in light of local opposition.

No formal board action to return funds or rescind the application was recorded at the meeting; commissioners heard the comments and provided historical context about prior site discussions but did not announce a change in position during this session.