The Washington County Board of Supervisors held a work session on Wednesday, June 26 at 10 am with Jay Richardson the State Aid and Central District Engineer.
In the session, Richardson explained in no uncertain terms the process for getting bridges programmed in Washington County.
Richardson presented a detailed presentation designed to educate new supervisors, outlining the process from project programming to construction, and stressing the importance of timely right-of-way acquisitions, utility relocation, and environmental clearances.
District Four Supervisor Mala Brooks asked Richardson about an appeal to keep $1 million in state aid funds the county lost due to inactivity on projects.
Richardson said, “You can’t appeal because you haven’t been served a notice yet.”
“Let me rephrase that, not an appeal but the statute,” Brooks said. “I requested to see the statute.”
Richardson said the statute would be referenced in the notice.
District Three Supervisor and President of the Board Carl McGee said last year the county was going to lose $1.1 million in State Aid Road Funds, so they asked for and received an extension.
Richardson said the extension was granted, but nothing was done with the money.
District One Supervisor and Vice President of the Board Lee Gordon asked Lorenzo Anderson, the County’s engineer, to list the bridges that have been programmed since 2021
Anderson listed the five bridges and said after programming you have to submit the plans.
Gordon asked what the hold-up was on those bridges.
“A lot of internal things,” Anderson said. “We work on a lot of different projects.”
Gordon asked Anderson where the problem was if it was on the county end or the state aid end.
Anderson said right-of-way access, Geo-tech, or relocating utilities, there were a lot of different things State Aid required before they would allow advertisement of the project.
McGee asked Richardson if there were emails between Anderson and the State Aid office asking questions about the process.
Instead of answering the question directly, Richardson said there are no delays on the State Aid end, “to answer your question the delays have been coming from your end.”
He described the various steps involved on the State Aid process, from programming and plan submission to environmental assessments, which have been expedited to ensure quicker turnarounds.
“The timeline from programming to advertising should be a matter of months not years,” Richardson said. “State Aid is like the Ferrari of departments. It’s designed to move quickly and efficiently."
One of the major concerns Richardson expressed was the bridges programmed in 2021, that remain unfinished, were estimated three times lower than the actual cost once inflation was factored.
Gordon said the nearly triple price tag on the currently programmed bridges is going to consume the remainder of the State Aid funds.
After hearing the new price tag on some of the programmed bridges Gordon calculated the figures against the available funds.
“It doesn’t make any sense at all to program any more bridges,” Gordon said. “We’re not going to be able to finish the five that are already programmed, or am I missing something?”
Richardson said that yes Gordon was missing something,
“There are strategies for securing additional funds by showing efficient use of current allocations and maintaining an inventory of shovel-ready projects,” Richardson said. “One problem I see is
that the board needs to provide the president or vice president with the authority to approve advertising for bids without waiting for formal board meetings, to expedite the process.”
Richardson said he plans to get the first project ready for advertisement in a month or less and then to have a new bridge project ready to advertise every month after that.
McGee opened the floor to questions and Susan Shamoon asked why the bridge in Hollandale and the one in Leland were paid for from county funds instead of State Aid funds.
No clear answer was present to her question.
Jim Avis, who had been taking notes the entire session, asked the same question but added two paving projects in District Four that were also paid for with County funds.
“When you add the $1 million to the money spent on these four projects that could have been paid for out of State Aid funds,” Avis said. “The county has wasted $5 million in taxpayer money.”
Anderson said he appreciated where Avis was coming from, but because he was looking in from the outside he couldn’t understand what was going on.
Avis stood up and said. “I know a lot more than you think,” and left the room.
Richardson said the money wasn’t wasted, because it did go toward road and bridge projects.
Barbara Williams, who ran against Tommy Benson for the District Two supervisor seat in the last election, asked Richardson if the four projects just mentioned could have been paid for by State Aid funds and Richardson reluctantly admitted that they possibly could have.
After the work session ended, Avis said the bridge in Leland was too narrow, the beams weren’t centered on the pillars, and a walkway was added to the side of the bridge that it wasn’t designed to support, he said it would eventually start to sag on the side that the walkway is attached to.
McGee has been saying similar things about the Leland bridge in board meetings for over a year.
Avis said the bridge in Hollandale was too low.
“The bottom of the bridge is supposed to be level with the road,” Avis said. “When it rains water will be in contact with the underside of the structure, and that will add a lot of stress that it isn’t rated to withstand.”
