Council comes to consensus on Sixth St. Ditch improvements, assessments

     The Monticello City Council came to a consensus during their Nov. 21 meeting regarding the future of the much-talked about Sixth Street Ditch. This is a decision that has been a long-time coming.

   The council, city officials, and City Engineer Patrick Schwickerath held a work session following the Oct. 24 council meeting. At that time, no public comment was allowed. However, more discussion on a potential project was needed…

   It was noted that the property owners along the ditch both benefit from and have a liability with having a ditch in their backyard.

   The ditch also drains a larger watershed area than just a few blocks of those impacted.

   “Therefore, the city should play the lead agency in rehabbing this ditch, due to the Corps of Engineers permitting requirements and the overall vision of the project becoming an improvement to the area, rather than a series of piecemeal improvements,” stated the information presented to the council.

   The city was approved for a $743,000 USDA loan for the Sixth Street Ditch Project. It was noted that a USDA is not the best use of such funds, rather GO (general obligation Bonds. The council previously approved funding any project associated with the Sixth Street Ditch with GO (general obligation) Bonds.

   The project is currently planned to focus on the length of the ditch between Chestnut Street, extending east across Cedar Street, and then north to Sixth Street. It was mentioned that the section of the ditch near Jacobs Park will need some attention in the near future, but, for now, that portion is not included in the current plans.

   The engineer’s estimate for the construction portion of the ditch rehab project is in the $700,000 range. This does not include updated engineering that needs to happen, construction inspections, and permitting. Updated engineering costs will depend on changes to the ditch over the last five years or so.

   “Conditions have changed,” noted Schwickerath. “The figures were based on plans from five years ago. There will be mitigation requirements and an updated design.” He said inflation and contingencies will also have to be considered.

   The city will also need to acquire easements in the impacted project area.

   “Easement plats have all been drafted,” said City Administrator Russ Farnum. “But they haven’t been signed by the property owners. There is no maintenance language as far as who’s responsible to maintain what.”

   Schwickerath said any additions could add over $150,000 to the project.

   During the October work session, the council directed Schwickerath to look into special assessments associated with the project.

   “Since the small portion of structural work benefits single property owners, and most of the project is grading and re-seeding, it is difficult to attribute a special assessment without spending a lot of time on individual properties,” noted the council information.

   Schwickerath used the same assessment scale the city used for the Sycamore Street Project, which is approximately 10 percent of the overall costs assessed to property owners.

   Using lineal feet, the project length is 1,740 lineal feet of the bank of the ditch. If someone owns property on one side of the ditch, they would be assessed $40.23 per lineal foot; two sides, $80.46 per lineal foot.

   It’s been these assessments that have kept the Sixth Street Ditch Project from moving forward in the past.

   Any easements the city obtains also hold value; voluntary easements are preferred for a project like this to keep the costs down.

   Easements can be beyond a piece of property, though. Language could be added to the agreements that would require the property owners to perform the day-to-day maintenance along the ditch (mowing, weeding, tree removal, etc.). The city would handle any major projects, and would have the right to enter one’s property to do so. If an owner refused to abide by the agreement, the city would assess them for any work the city had to perform.

   “This is a city project,” said Farnum. “We will pay for it and have a special assessment, if necessary, but the city needs to take responsibly.”

   The idea is for the city to construct something the owners can maintain in the future.

   Mayor Dave Goedken said whatever the council decided, whether to assessment a special assessment or have all city taxpayers foot the bill for this project, this will set a precedence for future maintenance projects.

   “The maintenance easements could be an assessment, too,” Goedken said. “I’d like to see something happen with this project; we’ve kicked the can down the road. I’m at fault, too.”

   Council member Wayne Peach said he had no problem having the property owners perform the daily maintenance once the city “corrects the problem.”

   Council member Candy Langerman agreed.

   “The city pays and with the (maintenance) agreements, they (owners) take care of it after that,” she said.

   Goedken said if any property owners at this point are not on board, it’ll cost the city more money to put off the project.

   Bill Meyer, who lives along the Sixth Street Ditch, asked why the city wasn’t tackling the entire length of the ditch; just a portion.

   “If we get this portion done,” offered Goedken, “this will set the policy for how we do the rest. It would be way too big of a project to get into.”

   Meyer recalled that 20 years ago, talks fell through when just three owners didn’t want to help with the cost of repairs.

   “I don’t want to see this end up in the situation we had 20 years ago,” he urged.

   “I hope the owners are not a problem,” remarked Goedken. “if they opposed this path, a lot of people will be upset with them.”

   Scott Chally, an owner along the ditch, said the city is finally moving in the right direction.

   “You’ve hit the spot. You’re looking out for the people of Monticello,” he said.

   “The maintenance agreement will be the key to money well spent,” said Goedken.

   After Schwickerath and city work out an updated services agreement, updated design, and begin working on the permits needed, Schwickerath said it could be the spring of 2024 at the earliest before any construction could begin. That’s if there are no snags along the way.