Difficulty obtaining easements has stalled a $6.2 million watershed project that would improve drainage in major flooding areas across the city.

The city has only 20 months left to either complete the work or send back the money, but the project hasn’t gone out for bid.

So far, the city has obtained only 14 of the 84 needed easements for work on private property in the project areas.

An easement gives the right to cross or use someone else’s land for a specific purpose – in this case, drainage work.

The issue came to a head Thursday during a city council work session at City Hall, when it was unclear how to get the rest of the signatures or who was even supposed to collect them.

The city contracted with Waggoner Engineering last spring to manage the watershed project. In August, the city identified eight sites – four each on Northside and Southside – for drainage work, earmarking $6 million from American Rescue Plan Act funds and state match, as well as almost $200,000 in other federal funds to complete it. ARPA must be spent or forfeited by Sept. 26, 2026.

Getting the easements is not Waggoner’s responsibility, though, according to firm representatives on hand for the work session.

“It’s very clear in the contract that the city is supposed to handle the easements,” Waggoner project manager Josh Sansing told The Dispatch after the work session. “The design work is done. All we need are the easements.”

Waggoner is working under a lump sum contract of $925,000, meaning that is what the city will pay regardless of the number of hours the firm puts into the project. It has billed the city $572,000 since April, city Chief Financial Officer Jim Brigham told The Dispatch.

The city has paid about $498,000 of that, but Brigham said he stopped paying the invoices to force a conversation on the project’s slow progress and how to get it back on track.

“If we continue to pay these invoices, and we don’t get this work done on time, we have to send the ARPA money back and the city is on the hook for paying (Waggoner),” Brigham told The Dispatch.

‘It’s a really complicated thing’

Ayad Taofik, Waggoner’s area manager, told the council the firm didn’t include obtaining the easements in the contract because, at the time, it was unclear how many the project would need. He said the firm is trying to assist the city with that work, regardless, though it has been difficult. Some residents won’t answer the door. Other property owners are deceased, live out of state or the properties are tied up in an estate with several owners that are hard to reach.

“It’s out of our control,” Taofik said. “… We’re trying to get a solution to it. … It’s a really complicated thing.”

Taofik also recommended seeking temporary easements, which would give the city access to the property only during this particular project, rather than permanent ones, which would allow it to maintain the area in future without an additional easement. He believes those would be easier to obtain.

Ward 5 Councilman Stephen Jones said he doesn’t think that will help.

“The same people who would have to sign for the permanent easement would have to sign for the temporary, right?” he asked. “… The real problem is getting them to sign an easement at all.”

Ward 1 Councilwoman Ethel Stewart leaned into the notion the city needs to get the easements.

“I’m a city councilman. I went to some of the residents to get easements,” she said. “I looked at the paperwork. It needs to be notarized. … How am I supposed to get a person to sign something (that needs to be notarized) in front of them?”

“We’re supposed to come with you when you do that and have a notary (present),” Taofik responded. “… So when you go, you’re supposed to let us know.”

“Seems like to me, you guys should be contacting us and saying, ‘Let’s go and get this done,’” Stewart said. “… We’re going to run out of time and deadline at the speed at which you’re going. And yet, the councilmen are helping to do this work, and you’re the one billing. … There’s something about that I’m just not understanding.”

Jones asked City Attorney Jeff Turnage what liability the city would have if it completed the work without easements.

Turnage, at first, said he couldn’t answer that. Then he said, “The claim would be some kind of trespass.”

Rather than waiting for all the easements first, Brigham suggested bidding out the projects concurrently. If the bids are higher than the estimates, that would reduce the number of easements necessary to obtain and possibly expedite the process.

An apoplectic Mayor Keith Gaskin halted conversation on the matter.

“… This cannot be the first time we’ve worked on these kinds of projects,” he told Taofik. “… This area of property is going under water in most cases. People are suffering from this. This should not be this difficult to move it forward. I can’t even count on my hand how many meetings we’ve had … and we’ve walked away like this was going to be moving forward. … I don’t understand why this isn’t moving forward. It’s going to be helping citizens.”

Neel-Schaffer coming off the bench?

After the meeting, Turnage told The Dispatch the city could enter eminent domain proceedings to take the easements through court action. Even then, it would be difficult to determine who all needs to be served.

It’s more likely, Turnage said, the city will turn to Neel-Schaffer, who it contracts for general engineering services, to finish obtaining the easements.

That’s fine with Kevin Stafford, North Mississippi manager for Neel-Schaffer who serves as the city’s engineer.

“If we can bring value to the effort, we’re more than willing to do it,” he told The Dispatch.

Jones, speaking with The Dispatch on Thursday afternoon, said that may not be the city’s only option.

“It’s something to consider,” he said. “I don’t know if we need that or get a title person to go do it.”

Zack Plair is the managing editor for The Dispatch.