The photo above, taken on April 21, 2024, was first published in the April 25, 2024, edition of The Marcellus News. It shows the beginning of the water project along the north side of Main Street between Centre and Burney Streets in Marcellus.
The photo below was published in the April 17, 2025, edition of The News. While there is a sidewalk, new lightpoles and benches, the sidewalk technically remains closed to pedestrian traffic per MDOT.
A myriad of issues pertaining to the Downtown Beautification Project have now plagued Main Street businesses and the Village for almost a year. A resolution could still be months away.
-News Photo
by Kay Schten McAdam, Editor
Village residents, business owners and visitors to Marcellus will need to apply additional patience as the community seeks to resolve the ongoing issue of Sidewalkgate.
The village sidewalks between Centre and Burney streets, north and south side, have technically been closed since April 2024. What should have been a glorious result of the multi-million-dollar water project is now a “staring contest” between the Village, Wightman and Balkema Construction, as described by Attorney Dan Hatch.
Hatch, an experienced litigator in construction law, has been retained by the Village to help resolve the ongoing issues of the Downtown Beautification Project. The project was first announced in the March 9, 2023, edition of The Marcellus News. The Village had reported it received $225,170 in grant funding through the Revitalization and Placemaking Program (RAP). The grant was issued through the American Rescue Plan to address the impact of COVID-19 on Michigan communities. The goal was to add the beautification project to the lead pipe replacement project that began in 2023. The project was designed to enhance the streetscape with striped crosswalks, trees, native plantings, new trash receptacles, bike racks, streetlights, decorative sidewalks and a pavilion.
The result of the project has not been the “big win” as reported by The News in 2023. Instead, it’s created mistrust, financial hardships, frustration, anger, and erosion of faith and credibility in village governance.
In a special meeting, Tuesday, May 6, the Village Council unanimously agreed to Hatch’s recommendation that the Village retain the services of a Forensic Engineer and Architect at a rate of $150 – $350 per hour.
“The reason I’m here tonight is because in order to come up with a large totality list of the issues between the design and the construction, we need to hire a Forensic Engineer and Architect to identify those issues,” Hatch said.
“We’re not going to trust Wightman and Balkema to identify them. I’m not an engineer; I’m a lawyer. My job is to get an expert witness or consultant to come and identify the issues. That’s what I’m proposing to the Village board tonight is to retain that expert.”
The expert the Village agreed to retain is Forensic Engineering Consultants Higgins & Associates of Denver, Colorado.
Hatch reported to the Council that Higgins & Associates will be tasked with reviewing the contract documents, reviewing the documents with Wightman, the project designer and engineer, and with Balkema Construction, and reviewing the design and project documents that occurred during the project.
Hatch says Higgins & Associates will inspect the properties and then draft an inspection report “based on their review of the design documents and inspection of the actual project.”
“Any construction dispute that deals with design issues and construction issues, you have to have an expert. That’s the way we go back to Wightman and Balkema and say, ‘this needs to be fixed.’”
Higgins & Associates are also specialists in ADA issues, which has been a primary problem for business owners. Hatch acknowledged that the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) has communicated to the Village that there are ADA violations as a result of the construction of the new sidewalks and “that needs to be fixed.”
Prior to the start of the project, there was only one step leading into a number of businesses along Main Street which enabled business owners to provide disability access to customers. During the course of the project and its supposed completion, it was evident that an additional step had been added to those businesses taking away owners’ ability to provide disability access.
This was brought to the attention of the Village Council as early as July 2024 and has been continuously brought to the Council’s attention since then.
To recap: In a formal statement from business owner Erica Watts read to the Village Council during its regular meeting of April 8, 2025, and published in the April 17, 2025, edition of The News, Watts states
It has been almost a year of business owners attending every Village council meeting to get a 3-minute public comment, to voice our concerns. People in wheelchairs can’t access our businesses, people with walkers have extreme difficulty accessing our businesses, people with poor eyesight and elderly populations have difficulty navigating the two steps that are not equal in height or depth. We have been met with hostility, disdain and defensiveness. Certainly not “support in our growth.” This is not an opinion of how we feel, but facts as shown in the videos of the public meetings, in the handwritten notes, and emails supplied in the FOIA material.
During public comment at the May 6 special meeting, business owner Tony Ruacho stated, “If we would’ve started this in July [2024] it might not have become a big problem, but now we have all kinds of people fighting about this story. If only we had done this in July [2024] when these problems were brought out, it might’ve saved us some money.”
The question of financing additional attorney fees and hiring expert consultants was also brought up by Watts, “If Higgins finds that there are flaws, which we think they will, and we find that there’s culpability with Wightman and Balkema, will we get reimbursed the additional fees, maybe not only for your cost, but also for the third party, the engineering firm that’s coming in. Will we be able to go after them for those additional costs?”
Hatch responded by saying that there are provisions in the contracts with Wightman and Balkema that protect the Village in case of defective design and/or workmanship. If the faulty workmanship/design is not fixed, then the Village can pursue recouping fees for the cost to fix the work and attorney fees.
“Before we get to the point of filing a claim or lawsuit against Balkema,” Hatch says, “there’s a performance bond on the project. This is done for municipalities that have hired contractors who then don’t step up and do the work, so you can make a claim on the performance bond. There’s a surety company that either accepts and hires a company to fix the work or denies the claim against the bond. That’s just one more layer of security.”
Ruacho also inquired during public comment, “Who’s paying for this third-party stuff? Is it coming out of the taxpayers’ money to do this?”
To which, Village President Dennis Irwin replied, that yes, initially, “it will be coming out of the taxpayers’ money.”
How long will the process take?
While Attorney Hatch says Higgins will “work as fast as we want them to,” there should be no illusions that this will be a proverbial quick fix. Business owners, residents and visitors are going to have to strap on some additional patience, perseverance and persistance. The Village is not near the finish line on this.
Sadly, the mistrust, frustration, anger, and erosion of faith and credibility in village governance are not likely to dissipate soon – if ever.
One action, one simple action could possibly help.
“This is the truth of what happened,” Ruacho stated to the Council. “It’s the accountability and the communication issue. I know that Erica [Watts] asked for an apology from you guys weeks ago and never got that. I’m asking for one now because this is a vindication that mistakes were made.”
###
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.