CANTON CITY COUNCIL, CANTON RESIDENTS CAUGHT BETWEEN A P0LITICIAN'S "PROMISES" AND ENGINEERING "REALITIES" ON CONDITION OF CANTON'S STREETS & ROADWAYS?

 

UPDATED:  4:45 PM

The following chart (modified for blog viewability) on Canton paving projects was provided by Engineer Dan Moeglin's office.

"Click" on projects graphic to enlarge.

VIDEOS

MAYOR WILLIAM J. HEALY

"I PROMISE ... "

======================

CANTON CITY COUNCIL

DISCUSSES

"REALITIES"

OF

CANTON'S ASPHALTING PROGRAM

======================

Of late, the condition of Canton's streets and roadways has become a "hot potato" political issue.

Canton residents have been weighing in on their respective councilpersons, who - in turn - have landed upon the mayor and indirectly on the city engineer:  Dan Moeglin.

The dissatisfaction with the quality of Canton's asphalt (for the most part) arteries surfaced Monday night at the regular weekly (mostly) meeting of Canton City Council, to wit:

And, of course, the only Stark County media source for "the complete story" presents council's discussion of the "withdrawn" resolution for Canton resident consumption.

Stark Countians at large have an interest in this issue inasmuch as Stark County outside-the-city residents frequent (i.e. use Canton's streets and roadways) Canton to do government business (federal, state and county [Stark County's county seat]).

Here is the video of council's discussion.



Interestingly, near the end of the discussion seven-year mayor William J. Healy, II chimed in to make a promise:



As you have now seen, his promise is to abide by the wishes of  Canton City Council members and only lay asphalt within date parameters of May 1st through October 1st of each and every calendar year.

The question that The Stark County Political Report has is whether or not putting a time stricture on the laying of asphalt is:

• practical, and
• wise

One of the best sources for determining the answer to the SCPR question posed is, of course, Canton City Engineer (for the last 9-1/2 years) Dan Moeglin.

The Report today (12/02/2014) had an approximately 30 minute telephone conversation with Engineer Moeglin which developed the following information that Cantonians and their councilpersons might want to mull over before hamstringing the mayor, the engineer and Streets Department superintendent Michael Rorar.

WHAT THE ASPHALT BUDGET SHOULD BE?

• Canton is about $9 million in arrears in its re-asphalting periodically the city's streets and roadways,
• Note:  the arrears as developed since the recession onset of 2007/2008,
• Note:  Moeglin says Canton needs to have an asphalting budget of about $2 million annually "to keep up, once it 'catches' up,"
• Canton's 2014 asphalting budget was $800,000,
• To get up-to-date over the next few years, Canton would need to have a $3.5 million to $4 million annual asphalting budget,

IS "TOO COLD" TO ASPHALT A CANTON PROBLEM?

• Not in the perception of Engineer Moeglin, to wit:
• Only once in the 9-1/2 years that Moeglin has been engineer does he recall the surfacing of any differences with a contractor (about 5 years ago) on whether or not the temperature was warm enough to effectively (i.e. to achieve a "normal" life span [e.g. 10 years]) asphalt,
• Note:  Moeglin says that Streets Department Head Rorar has come up with a sealing process that might extend the life of this type of asphalting some 3 to 4 years,
• It is in the interests of the city administration and city asphalt contractors to only lay asphalt according to Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) temperature standards of 35 degrees, 40 degrees or 60 to 70 degrees depending on whether the asphalting is:
• base, (35)
• surface,  (40) or 
• a highest standard surface asphalt, rubber mix (60/70),
• there could be days before October 1 that do not meet the ODOT standards, and
• there have been and continue to be many days after October 1st which meet or exceed the standards

DOES COUNCIL NEED TO BACK OFF ON THIS ISSUE?

No, according to Engineer Dan Moeglin.

Yes, so the SCPR thinks, with the proviso that it is productive for council to have had this discussion and exercise continuing oversight of the effectiveness of Canton's asphalting and road repair program.

But, council cannot have it both ways.

On the one hand, it appears to the SCPR that Canton City Council members want more asphalting but - on the other hand - have it done in a compressed period of time.

WHY CAN'T COUNCIL HAVE IT "EVERY WHICH WAY?"

• There are (according to Moeglin) various types of asphalting that the city takes on:
• there is the program in which every 10 years or so the city resurfaces city streets to take care of the ravage that nature imposes on city streets and roadways and there is no more patching that can be done to keep them in navigable condition,
• This part of Canton's asphalting program the SCPR thinks can be preplanned to occur only within a specified time range,
• there are those those which are part of an overall construction project (e.g. the 12 Street Corridor Project, the Mahoning Road Corridor Project and the 37th Street Project) on which the laying of asphalt is the last of many aspects (the date a given contract was entered into, relocating sewer lines, water lines, et cetera) to the project.
• This part of Canton's asphalting as far as the SCPR is concerned is not amenable to a restrictive time period

IS COUNCIL MAKING A POLITICAL FOOTBALL OUT OF THIS ISSUE?

Engineer Moeglin does not think so.

He tells the SCPR that:

• Though he was not present at Monday night's meeting, he thinks that the resolution was borne of frustration with Canton falling behind on keeping up with the condition of its streets and roadways generally and that he does not take personal offense at their expressing concerns,
• In short, Moeglin thinks that council as whole has the highest motivation and may not have a full appreciation of "the realities" of the asphalting processes and that he has worked with various councilmembers to better equip council to better understand the intricacies of asphalting,

While Mayor Healy did make a promise on Monday night to - with/without an informal resolution or ordinance - to comply with council's wishes, it might be a promise that council ought think about once, twice, and maybe even three times of holding his administration (i.e. the engineering and streets departments)accountable.

The interplay between the legislative and executive branches is a dynamic process of government balancing act.

It could be that with the proposed legislation will do more harm than good.

With Mayor Healy promising to respect council's wishes, such should be enough.

The SCPR is amazed to have to say this.

But it appears to The Report that council has made itself heard (reference:  Healy - "The message has been heard") and for now "council needs to 'trust' (i.e. "trust but verify) the Healy administration which is to say the mayor and his promise.

But the "reality" is that what council needs to do more than anything else is to pressure the administration to find ways and means to find that $3.5 to $4.0 million for Canton to catch up on it backlog.

Coming full cycle from yesterday's SCPR blog:

• While Mayor Healy makes a strong case for Canton putting $5 million in seed money into the Pro Football Hall of Fame Village Project,
• if it means that the city falls further behind in its asphalting backlog in terms of:
• making up for prior years shortfalls, and
• not getting up to the $2 million a year Canton needs to be doing annually to keep up once it catches up, 
• then maybe the administration needs to lean on others within the Stark County industrial/commercial community to pick up the city of Canton's commitment?