As a 95-Acre Waterford Deed Hits the Books, County Records Point to a State Body Created with Help from the Same People We’ve Been Asking for Answers

Washington County | November 11, 2026

The Southeastern Ohio Port Authority has been involved in land deals connected to proposed data-center and high-power computing developments in Waterford Township. This includes the former AEP generating site at the Muskingum River Industrial Park, as well as surrounding farmland associated with HashWorks, Continuum Partners, Muskingum Land Holdco, and related entities.

Officials initially stated they first learned the Waterford project involved a data center in March 2025. However, documents and correspondence already in the public record show activity, site layouts, and land discussions connected to the same corridor from 2022 up until the present.

The local community has raised questions regarding these deals and transactions — along with concerns over secrecy and dishonesty — since before May 2026, when MASH Focus began documenting the meetings. Known as the $4 million question, we still don’t have the requested information on the $1.5 million in payments to our Port Authority from Bit56, the $1.5 million loan from Washington County, or the $1 million grant awarded to clean the ash ponds on the old AEP property.

A formal public records request was filed on July 31, followed by multiple follow-ups and a detailed clarification sent on September 5. Despite those unanswered requests, the deal continued moving forward.

On November 4, 2026 — the day after the general election — two public documents were officially recorded in Washington County transferring 94.983 acres of the former power plant site to Powered Land CMH Holdings, LLC — tied to ACS Infrastructure and its data-center division, ACS Digital & Energy — alongside a 50-foot access and utility easement for the Port Authority (Instruments 202600006692 and 202600006693).

The deed, effective September 28 and acknowledged September 16, was signed by Jesse Roush and Matt Edgell. MASH Focus has since filed additional public records requests for the purchase agreement, sale price, appraisals, communications, and authorizing board resolutions behind that transfer.

As of November 11 — more than 100 days after our initial formal request and 173 days after public press questioning began — key public records remain unproduced, including related board minutes. The Port Authority’s new director, Eric Wade, is currently working with us to fulfill these outstanding requests as quickly as he can. However, our request was sitting around day 87 when he took office.

Uncovering the State Level: The Ohio River Commission

County records obtained through parallel public records channels have recently pointed us to a statewide body who’s function was never disclosed to us or to the landowners asking questions: The Ohio River Commission.

This is not an informal volunteer committee. The Ohio General Assembly passed Senate Bill 54 to establish the body, which was signed into law on January 2, 2025. Housed inside the Ohio Department of Development, the commission covers Ohio’s 14 Ohio River counties, encompassing more than 70 ports along roughly 451 miles of waterway.

By law, its purpose is to serve as the state’s clearinghouse for river economic development, marine cargo, workforce tracking, and tourism — explicitly aiming to reduce agency silos and duplication by collecting data and plans directly from local port authorities, metropolitan planning organizations, and development districts.

The commission consists of three state agency directors — Development, Transportation, and Natural Resources — alongside six public members. Those six seats are four-year legislative appointments — three selected by the House Speaker and three by the Senate President — running through December 2028. These members are not elected by voters, nor are their seats legally tied to holding a specific local job.

Connected Leadership and Capital Funds

• The Executive Leadership: Taylor Abbott, who served as Monroe County Treasurer for eight years and president of that county’s land bank, was named executive director of the commission in January 2026. In his Senate testimony advocating for Senate Bill 54, Abbott specifically cited the AMP-Ohio property in Washington County as a premier riverfront redevelopment example. This is the exact site the Southeastern Ohio Port Authority acquired using $1.5 million in county funds.
• The Local Connection: Jesse Roush was part of the initial working group that drafted and campaigned for Senate Bill 54. He remains listed as an active commissioner on the state’s official roster, affiliated with the Southeastern Ohio Port Authority, months after publicly tendering his resignation, on August 27. His resignation was effective September 18th. Because Roush’s seat is a legislative appointment extending through 2028 and is not legally contingent upon maintaining his local port authority position, his resignation did not vacate his state commission seat.

A Thin Public Record

Despite its statutory authority, the Ohio River Commission’s public record after nearly two years remains thin:

• Events: Its singular major public event was the inaugural Ohio River Summit in Cincinnati on June 10–11, 2026.
• Documentation: No master plan has been published, despite legislative authorization. Meeting minutes are not archived; the commission’s public portal notes they will be posted “once available.”
• Status of Programs: The Terminal Readiness program and a full river-asset inventory remain described purely as concepts or works in progress.
• Funding: The commission’s competitive grant program — allotting approximately $500,000 total, with up to $100,000 per project — accepted applications from August 12 through September 11, 2026. Awards were anticipated by early October, but as of November 11, no recipients have been publicly announced.

The Oversight Closed Loop

When we repeatedly asked Washington County Commissioner Charlie Schilling across multiple public meetings who holds the oversight information or who answers questions on these developments, he consistently stated that the Port Authority board oversees the Port Authority. When pressed on who oversees them, he maintained that the board does.

Despite multiple attempts to establish a clear avenue for answers, the Ohio River Commission was never identified to us. This state board was built in conjunction with the exact individuals we were questioning, yet they did not direct the public or journalists to it.

The community has questioned repeatedly why multiple separate agencies and lobbying entities consistently overlap on identical riverfront projects, creating a public perception of an insular network where the same individuals sit across multiple interconnected boards. Reducing that exact duplication is the commission’s legally stated purpose. If it is functioning as intended, it should currently be collecting the exact data the community has been seeking. Because it is a state body created by statute with legislative appointees, it holds a distinct layer of authority separate from a local port authority.

What This Actually Means for Us

If your head is spinning trying to keep track of all these boards, agencies, and overlapping titles, you aren’t alone. Here is the plain-English bottom line of where things stand right now.

For months, regular people and local landowners have been asking basic questions about massive data-center deals happening right in our backyard. When we asked local leaders who is actually keeping an eye on these projects and who holds the records, we were basically told the local Port Authority polices itself.

The county records show there is an entire state-level commission — built by the very same people involved in these local deals — that was legally created to collect this exact information and cut down on all the overlapping red tape. Yet almost two years in, there are no public minutes, no master plan, and nobody pointed us toward it when we asked for answers. Had we known this state board existed for that purpose, we would have been filing our public records requests with them from day one instead of being stuck of spinning our wheels locally.

Now that we know, we are submitting formal public records requests directly to the Ohio River Commission, while continuing to work with the Port Authority’s new director, Eric Wade, to get the local records into the public’s hands. Until we have those documents, we will keep pulling the threads, following the paper trail, and sharing what we find so everyone in this community can see how these decisions were made, who made them, who is making them now, where the public money went, and who benefited from the deals — as well as who was and wasn’t included in decisions that changed a whole township and will change our entire county.

Let’s be clear so we aren’t having two different conversations here. We are not saying a crime has been committed or accusing anyone of wrongdoing. We are saying the public was not given the records, and their questions about ethics are valid and should be handled by the appropriate chain. The public records law exists so that people can see how public money moves and how public decisions get made without having to take anyone’s word for it. The ethics board exists so that questions about process and overlapping roles can be examined by the body set up for that purpose. Asking for the documents and asking the ethics board to look at the questions is not an accusation. It is the ordinary use of the tools that were put in place precisely because no single board or official is supposed to hold the only set of keys.

Written by Holly Kellums | MASH Focus Publication and Network | November 11, 2026

Ohio River Commission | State Board for Port Authority Records Not Pointed to During Waterford Data was originally published in MASH Focus on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Natosha Lashunta Courtney, a 29-year-old U.S. Army veteran and commercial truck driver from Jackson, Mississippi, was traveling through Ohio for work when she was stopped by the Ohio State Highway Patrol and booked into the Washington County Jail on June 3. Ten days later, on June 13, she was found deceased in Duck Creek. The Marietta Police Department is investigating her death.

Her family and supporters have raised questions about the nature of her arrest, including whether a DUI was issued when it shouldn’t have been, her tox screen or lack of, and about alleged reports of force during detention.

Online advocates say they received department reports describing her placement in a restraint chair, her being tasered, her striking her head, and her hospitalization.

Natosha’s family says they’ve had trouble getting answers from the Marietta Police Department, and that local media wouldn’t run the story, after interviewing them. WTAP publicly said it didn’t report on the case because it couldn’t get comment from local law enforcement.

Those calling for support online state that reports raise questions of whether staff took her medical conditions seriously— with allegations that the reports indicate her conditions were dismissed and her medical distress was treated as a behavioral problem.

Additional concerns involve the handling of her body and the autopsy. Reports say family was told she was found in wet clothes, yet received her body with no clothes. They question the drowning conclusion from Dr. Roxanne Cech, given bruises and other marks they say were present when they received the body. They also say the body was already en route to Parkersburg, West Virginia for cremation before they intervened to stop it.

Natosha was found deceased in Duck Creek on June thirteenth. The Marietta Police Department is investigating her death.

Washington County Sheriff Mark Warden issued a news release today extending condolences to the family of Natosha Lashunta Courtney.

The release, dated November 10th says

“On behalf of myself and staff, the Washington County Sheriff’s Office extends its deepest condolences to the family and loved ones of Natosha Lashunta Courtney during this difficult time.”

It continues:

Out of respect for the Courtney family, the Sheriff’s Office recognizes the importance of addressing questions regarding Ms. Courtney’s time in the custody of the Washington County Jail while remaining mindful of privacy protections and the legal responsibilities of the Sheriff’s Office.”

MASH Focus has received multiple requests from the community to cover this case, and we have agreed to take it on. As with all our investigations, we begin with the people living it, and then we work our way up. We have reached out to the Courtney family and have secured contact with the Sheriff’s Department regarding the case. We will report any verified information as it’s obtained.

This is a serious matter involving someone’s death, following time in local custody. It calls for serious coverage grounded in records, direct sourcing, community member accounts, and respect for everyone affected. We will continue to follow it as information develops.

Written by Holly Kellums

Full release text

11–10–2026

Washington County Sheriff’s Office

Sheriff’s Office Extends Condolences to the Family of Natosha Lashunta Courtney

On behalf of myself and staff, the Washington County Sheriff’s Office, extends its deepest condolences to the family and loved ones of Natosha Lashunta Courtney during this difficult time.

Out of respect for the Courtney family, the Sheriff’s Office recognizes the importance of addressing questions regarding Ms. Courtney’s time in the custody of the Washington County Jail while remaining mindful of privacy protections and the legal responsibilities of the Sheriff’s Office.

According to Washington County Jail records, on June 3, 2026, shortly after 5:00 a.m., Ms. Courtney was brought safely to the Washington County Jail by the Ohio State Highway Patrol and was booked in on multiple charges.

On June 3, 2026, the Marietta Municipal Court set Ms. Courtney’s bond at $5,000.

During her time in the custody of the Washington County Jail, appropriate care and attention were provided, including access to healthcare services and appropriate assessments. The Sheriff’s Office takes seriously its responsibility to ensure individuals in its custody receive appropriate care and remain safe. Ms. Courtney was not placed in general population and remained under close supervision by staff.

On June 9, 2026, the Marietta Municipal Court modified Ms. Courtney’s bond to a Personal Recognizance (PR) bond. Following the court’s order, Ms. Courtney was released safely from the custody of the Washington County Jail into the care of a local health care facility for additional assessments.

The Washington County Sheriff’s Office had no further contact with Ms. Courtney after her release from custody.

On June 13th, 2026 Ms. Courtney was found deceased and The Marietta Police Department began an investigation into her death. The Washington County Sheriff’s Office is not involved in the active investigation.

It is the practice of the Washington County Sheriff’s Office not to comment on open and active investigations of other agencies. The Washington County Sheriff’s Office has provided any and all requested information for the investigation.

The Sheriff’s Office understands that this is an extremely difficult time for the Courtney family. We recognize that no statement can ease the pain of losing a loved one.

The Washington County Sheriff’s Office remains committed to the safety, well-being, and appropriate treatment of every individual entrusted to its care and custody.

Sheriff Mark Warden

Ohio Sheriff Releases Statement on Natosha Courtney After her Death was originally published in MASH Focus on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Washington County Ohio — November 3, 2026, written by Holly Kellums — November 9, 2026

Washington County residents and volunteers with Conserve Ohio spent election day and the final stretch of early voting gathering signatures for a proposed statewide constitutional amendment that would ban large-scale data centers.

Volunteers were stationed at major polling locations including Belpre High School and the Washington County Fairgrounds, with additional collection at the Board of Elections in Marietta during the last week of early voting. According to Lynn Cady, who helps coordinate the effort in the county, the group collected more than 800 signatures during that period alone. Many voters asked detailed questions, and some conversations with people who were initially skeptical went well. Overall, Cady reported strong enthusiasm from the people they met.

The proposed amendment would prohibit construction of data centers with an aggregate monthly demand or peak load greater than 25 megawatts. Conserve Ohio is aiming to place the measure on the November 2027 ballot so that all Ohio voters can decide. To qualify, organizers need valid signatures equal to 10 percent of the votes cast for governor in the most recent gubernatorial election, plus a distribution requirement of at least 5 percent from at least 44 of Ohio’s 88 counties. Those thresholds are currently calculated from the 2022 election totals. Cady said Washington County has already surpassed its 5 percent figure and is moving toward 10 percent.

Statewide, the campaign has been underway since the Ohio Ballot Board approved the language earlier this year. Organizers missed the July 1 deadline for the 2026 ballot but have continued collecting; recent updates from the group have put the statewide total above 150,000 signatures across all 88 counties. Signatures collected so far do not expire if the petitions are not submitted.

The local effort comes as proposals for large data center projects continue to move in Washington County, including activity in Waterford Township. Across Ohio in the November 2026 election, voters in communities that had local measures on the ballot related to data center restrictions or bans approved those measures in large numbers. Conserve Ohio and other groups have pointed to those results as evidence of broad public interest in having a direct say.

For Washington County residents who want more information or to sign, Cady and other local volunteers continue the work. The Conserve Ohio website (conserveohio.com) has the full amendment text and additional details on the statewide petition process.

MASH Focus will continue to follow developments on the signature drive and related local data center proposals.

Washington County Volunteers Collect Hundreds of Signatures for Statewide Data Center Ballot Effort was originally published in MASH Focus on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Same Developer, Same Commissioner, Same Township, Different Company Name

Washington County | November 7, 2026 | written by Holly Kellums

Thursday night at the Waterford Township Trustee meeting, Commissioner President Charlie Schilling presented a second hyperscale data center to residents who are still waiting for answers on the first one, which they recently named, Riverbend. Continuum has named it Project Crystal.

The first project is near the old AEP plant that has been purchased by Continuum. It has not broken ground. The sale on the old AEP site went through, per public statements from the developers and commissioners, but until a corrected survey is submitted to the county and filed, there is no official updated deed on public record. Surrounding farmland has already transferred to companies including Muskingum Land Hold Co., HashWorks, and Continuum.

Waterford residents and trustees have been asking since June 2025 for real information and for the chance to put safeguards in place on water, power, infrastructure costs, noise, and community impacts. Those details still have not been produced.

In 2021, the Southeastern Ohio Port Authority, in partnership with the Belpre Industrial Parkersburg Railroad, purchased the former AEP Muskingum River Plant site. Neighbors have said that those overseeing the site told them that, based on something with the county, they would have to pay a lot of money to keep that old site. In 2022, Charlie Schilling and the Port Authority were already receiving materials about what was called “the digital gold rush,” referring to the power, water, and land resources under and on the ground in Waterford. In 2024, the Port Authority accepted $1.5 million from BIT56 for a ground lease and option on the old AEP property. When BIT56 later decided to go to Morgan County, the lease was transferred to Muskingum Land Hold Co., a company associated with Todd Esse along with HashWorks and Continuum. Around the same time, the Port Authority used a $1.5 million county loan to acquire the former AMP-Ohio Gorsuch site on State Route 7. Former Port Authority director Jesse Roush said the acquisition was meant to connect the Muskingum River Industrial Park in Waterford to the Ohio River, calling the Gorsuch site a multimodal hub that would enhance projects at the Waterford site.

2024 and 2025 brought deals, talks, and land acquisition along with assurances from people the community trusted. Residents have said they do not believe those assurances have been met. On June 7, 2025, a leak first told Waterford property owners that something big was coming — people said it was “something Washington County’s never seen before.” It was not until January 2026 that the broader public was officially informed. Meetings filled with questions. Some officials criticized residents for asking them.

County-level NDAs were signed. Land deals moved. Checks were written and large bonuses were issued. Concrete details and accountability did not move at the same pace.

When MASH Focus asked Cipher Digital representatives at their own public meeting in Hackney why they did not build on this side of the river, they offered no explanation. Since then, multiple residents have said they wish BIT56 and Cipher Digital had been the ones to move forward here. As far as public information shows, those companies have operated differently on their Hackney project in Morgan County — without county-level NDAs and with fewer restrictions on information.

Residents first heard about Project Crystal at the polls on November 3. People were talking about it while they voted. On Thursday, November 5, Commissioner Charlie Schilling confirmed it publicly. He presented a press release at the commissioners’ meeting, then went to the Waterford Township Trustee meeting that same night and announced it there. MASH Focus was there, along with many Waterford community members.

According to what Schilling said, the developer seeking land for Project Crystal is the same individual behind the first project at Riverbend. The company name is different. The people are not. Those individuals have operated through multiple entities, including Muskingum Land Hold Co., HashWorks, and Continuum, and have now started another company for this second project.

At the trustee meeting, a trustee asked whether the project was set in stone. Schilling said it was not. Commissioner Eddie Place stated that county officials do not currently know whether any land has been purchased. What we have been told is that several property owners have been approached, and some parcels are already under option. We have not obtained written verification of those options. We will update maps as deeds are recorded.

Residents have been asking what experience the landowners dealing with the first project have had. Some landowners are surrounded and not receiving what they see as fair offers. Multiple have not received any offers for months, while others have been dragged from one option extension to another. One surrounded landowner described it this way:

“We’ve been strung along for over a year. Our attorney initially advised us to accept the first offer, claiming it was likely the best we’d get. When we chose to communicate directly with the broker, she dropped us as clients. Since then, we’ve dealt with poor communication, misleading statements, and feeling completely disregarded. We were even told construction would begin in March 2026, with or without us. We’ve heard rumors that they brag about holding out because they believe we’ll eventually give in. This is just a business deal & a waiting game to them. To us, it’s our home, our family, and our entire future.”

Residents also asked specific questions about tax revenue. They wanted to know whether the township would receive 67 percent or what the actual breakdown would be. Under state rules, any tax abatements or baseline financial incentives require the school district board and the township trustees to enter into a formal agreement with the developer.

How close the project would sit to homes was another concern. Residents said that under current proposals, the computing infrastructure could be as close as 300 feet from residential property lines. People at the meeting said that is closer than anyone would want to live next to a large industrial operation.

Many residents were present Thursday night. They asked why they were not informed the first time and raised questions about where the tax money would go and how the scale of the project could change the township. Some expressed concern that it could dominate the rural layout without giving residents a real say in the process or the benefits.

A second hyperscale project is now being introduced while the first one remains unresolved. The community that will live with both is still waiting for clear information.

MASH Focus will continue to track the deeds, the ground, the money, and the public records.

Click Image Below to Watch Charlie’s Waterford Township Presentation on Facebook

Introducing the Second Hyperscale Data Center in Waterford, Project Crystal — by the Same Developer Group as the other Waterford Data Center Project, Riverbend

Project Crystal | Two Announcements of Hyperscaler Number Two, in Waterford Ohio, Two Days After… was originally published in MASH Focus on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Hey everyone. Holly here.

We’ve received a lot of calls and emails from community members concerned about recent posts circulating from others. I wanted you to hear from us directly.

We are community-led, with contributors from across Washington County and the MOV, but the publication side has grown faster than the team behind it. We have been bringing in other journalists and setting up editors to train, and that work is underway. The election brought an influx of information and a time crunch that no single person could fully absorb, which is why not everything made it out before November 3 — mine included.

We welcome disagreement and different viewpoints. What we don’t allow is harassment, doxxing, or baseless attacks presented as fact — in our groups or aimed at this publication. Those aren’t matters of opinion. They are lines we’ve been holding for years, for everyone.

The reason is simple. When those lines get crossed, conversation breaks down, opposing voices get shut out, and people stop talking to each other. That’s the opposite of what MASH Focus is for.

To everyone who’s reached out, thank you. Your support helps immensely in the face of adversity. The plan doesn’t change. We’ve already reached out to the appropriate parties on our end. Sometimes this is what the work looks like when it gets hard.

See you at the next meeting.

In community,

Holly Kellums, Founder
MASH Focus — Publication and Network
MASH — Mid-Ohio Valley and Surrounding Hub

MASH Focus | Where We Draw the Line was originally published in MASH Focus on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Washington County voters went to the polls on November 3. About 23,000 of the county’s roughly 41,300 registered voters cast a ballot — a turnout just under 56 percent, meaning nearly 18,000 registered voters stayed home.

The Outcomes

• Stephanie Lang won the full-term county commission seat beginning January 1, 2027, defeating Brian Whalin with about 66 percent of the vote.
• Greg Nohe held the unexpired term with just over 50 percent of the vote against challengers John Rauch and Justin Harris.
• Kevin Ritter kept his seat for Ohio House District 94.
• Countywide Levies: Voters passed three countywide levies — behavioral health, the public library, and the 911 system — along with several township fire and EMS levies.

Every candidate who ran this cycle deserves congratulations for a hard-fought race. Brian Whalin, John Rauch, Justin Harris, and Wenda Sheard put their names on the ballot, made their case, and engaged the community. The connections they built and the growth that happened along the way do not disappear just because they didn’t finish with the most votes. That effort stays with the community.

MASH Focus will be following up with the candidates who did not win. We plan to continue working with, and seeking help and guidance from, anyone whose work lines up with the community’s efforts on transparency and accountability.

On the Ground: Election Night

MASH Focus watched the results roll in at Wilky’s Market on Front Street, where Stephanie Lang’s watch party was held. The room was packed with a diverse crowd from different groups across Washington County — it wasn’t limited to just one circle. Community members were locked into all the races, not just one. The food was good, the space accommodating, and the room was full of familiar faces.

We interviewed Stephanie first. She shared that she is honored and excited to serve as the new Washington County commissioner, expressing deep pride and gratitude for the large number of votes she received. She had previously promised to help with community efforts, and she reaffirmed that commitment on election night.

Once the results were clear, Joe Derkin stopped by Wilky’s Market to congratulate Stephanie. He had been around the corner at Republican headquarters and let us know Greg Nohe was there, so we headed over.

As we were heading toward Putnam, Wenda Sheard was heading to Wilky’s Market from the Democratic headquarters. Because we missed each other, we didn’t get to see her in person, but she released a statement right away thanking her supporters and noting that the campaign had built a network of volunteers who will remain involved. MASH Focus still plans to sit down with her for an interview.

At Republican headquarters, Greg and his wife, Kim, were incredibly welcoming. We chatted about the work moving forward, and Greg expressed the same willingness to work with us that he had shown on the campaign trail. He expressed pride and gratitude for his votes and is enthusiastic about continuing his work for the community

Stephanie arrived a short time later to congratulate Greg, and the two shook hands. While we were there, we captured a few photos of them together. Greg, who is already on the commission, will be in a perfect position to show Stephanie the ropes as she takes her new seat. How the two of them will work together once she is sworn in is still ahead of us.

The Work Ahead

Voting gets people into the seats. It does not run the county.

The meetings, the budgets, the public records, the development deals, the injection wells, and the land and water decisions still require people to show up between elections.

MASH Focus will keep showing up for that work. We will keep working with whoever is willing to do the same.

— Holly Kellums, MASH Focus

What the Votes Decided — and the Work That Remains for Washington County was originally published in MASH Focus on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

A last-minute $1.5 million payment does not erase a $4 million question. While officials spent the day before the election celebrating the early return of county loan funds, they completely ignored the broader network of public money residents have been tracking since before day one. They want the public to look at one single transaction. We are looking at the whole puzzle.

We are not opposed to a Port Authority that operates the way it was designed to, or a board of commissioners that benefits from it appropriately and within Ohio Law. We are opposed to public money that is not a public record.

Yesterday, the day before Election Day, the Southeastern Ohio Port Authority and the Washington County Commission announced that SeOPA had repaid more than $1.5 million on the county loan used to buy the former AMP-Ohio Gorsuch site. Officials called it eight years early.

MASH Focus was not invited or informed of the press conference, despite requesting equal press access. While a press conference itself is not automatically a meeting under Ohio’s Open Meetings Act, the records at issue are subject to the Ohio Public Records Act (R.C. 149.43). Port authorities are public offices under that law, and the contracts, ledgers, and related documents requested since May remain unreleased. Selective access to an announcement about public money does not satisfy the Act’s requirement that those records be promptly made available.

They accounted for the money well enough to move it and announce the repayment.

They have not accounted for it well enough to answer the questions the public has been asking since May.

The Port Authority’s own financial statements show that Bit56 paid SeOPA $1.5 million in 2024 under a ground lease — around the same time the county finalized its own $1.5 million transfer for the Gorsuch site. Both were part of the same set of initiatives.

The county has told us it does not have the records because they belong to the Port Authority’s private board. The Port Authority has not produced a single email or a single financial report in response to formal public records requests. The county has said it cannot make the Port Authority produce them.

A community petition seeking basic financial transparency as a condition of Port Authority funding was kept off the agenda. Officials continue to answer other questions about the money while declining to answer the specific ones the public has been asking or produce the records that have been requested.

Emails obtained from Washington County show Commissioner Charlie Schilling was copied on a June 2024 message from the former Port Authority director discussing site layout, megawatt capacity, and an introduction to AEP. When asked why the interest on the county loan had been paid early, former Port Authority director Jesse Roush said it was because of the Bit56 money.

SeOPA receives a $175,000 annual appropriation from the county and is one of only two Ohio port authorities that routinely relies on private donor contributions. If money is not an obstacle, why is the county still subsidizing them?

We still have not received any financial information on the related Gorsuch site loan either. A written and specific request — sent to new director, Eric Wade, on October 28 — for the complete 1.5 million dollar Bit56 records still has not been fulfilled. Compensation information on the prior director took 88 days.

Election Day will pass without those records.

This repayment does not make up for the records that remain closed.

The books still have not been opened.

This brings us to the four million dollar question.

Let us pull the math together so it cannot be ignored. There is the 1.5 million dollar county loan. There is the 1.5 million dollar Bit56 revenue. There is the 1 million dollar Appalachian Commission grant. These are not separate coincidences. They are connected pieces of the same set of public funds and private-board decisions residents have been asking about since MASH Focus Day One on this case.

Repaying a 1.5 million dollar loan does not answer a 4 million dollar question.

They have not refuted a single line, date, or number in our reports. Instead, the responses have followed a familiar pattern. They point to press releases about a 900,000 dollar current line item in incomplete, partial-year numbers. Now they have rolled out a timed announcement about a loan repayment the day before an election.

They will talk about those items. After four months of sustained public inquiry, the detailed contracts, full ledgers, and related board records remain unreleased.

True freedom depends on the public’s right to know. We are handed a ballot and told to exercise our power as citizens, but voting without the records is not a complete choice. When public officials keep public money behind private boards, voters do not have the information required to hold that power accountable.

This repayment does not change the facts. The books remain closed. The public records remain relentlessly sought by Washington County Residents. No amount of last-minute announcements moves the information that belongs to the people.

That is the record as of Election Day.

Written by Holly Kellums

$1.5 Million Payment vs. $4 Million Question was originally published in MASH Focus on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Washington County | November 1, 2026 | written by Holly Kellums

Yesterday afternoon I attended the Washington County Veterans Hall of Fame induction and awards ceremony at the Tower Event and Conference Center in Marietta. The event was hosted by the Washington County Veterans Service Commission.

The food was provided by Wilky’s Sports Bar, and it was delicious. Beef, pork, hors d’oeuvres, dips, cake, drinks, fruit, wings — so much good food shared among so many good people. Wilky’s received the Veterans Partner of the Year award. This recognition goes to those who consistently show up for veterans in the community, and Wilky’s has done exactly that.

Surrounded by familiar faces, those present shared an important moment together.

David Brown served as an exemplary master of ceremonies, as always. The afternoon was also supported by Veterans Service Commissioner Jared Smith and his dog, who added a quiet, steady presence that felt right for the day.

A decorated four-star Army general, retired Gen. Robert Brooks Brown, delivered the keynote address. Brown was invited to speak by state Rep. Kevin Ritter, whose father, Ray Ritter, was Brown’s high school basketball coach and mentor before Brown went on to play for the Army under Mike Krzyzewski. General Brown helped present awards alongside Representative Ritter. General Brown’s speech carried real weight. His earnestness, his own pain, pride, and honor could be felt by everyone there. He spoke simply and directly about selfless service and about America. He told stories about his youth and his life of service. People listened intently.

Local government recognition followed the keynote address. Washington County Commissioner Greg Nohe took the stage to read an official resolution from the Board of Commissioners honoring the 2026 inductees. Marietta Mayor Josh Schlicher also presented an official proclamation from the city, formally declaring November 1 as Washington County Veterans Hall of Fame Day. These formal presentations marked history and concluded the official business portion of the afternoon. Then the ceremony transitioned into individual awards.

One moment that garnered a standing ovation, of which there were many, came with the induction of Staff Sgt. Francis M. Sampson. Francis will turn 101 on November 20. He was born November 20, 1925. He served in the Army Medical Corps in the Pacific Theater during World War II. When General Brown presented the award, he pointed out something that had caught his attention: the same patch on their uniforms — the U.S. Army Pacific patch. General Brown noted that there are thousands of different patches across the Army, and this was the first time he had ever met someone wearing the same one. It was a unique and powerful connection between a 101-year-old World War II medic from the Beverly-Waterford area and a four-star general who once commanded the entire Pacific theater.

When MASH Focus first met Francis at the Grange Hall back in June, his dedication to his neighbors was already clear. A Waterford Grange Hall Member since 1941, he has long been one of the quiet advocates pushing for Washington County to get vital information into the hands of elderly residents in Waterford. He emphasizes that access to information for the elderly generation is a major priority for his community — an issue that intensified during COVID and remains critical with new community developments. Meeting and listening to him had been a privilege. Seeing him honored yesterday was full circle.

Several families stood in for loved ones who have passed. Among them, the family of Sgt. John R. Brant accepted his posthumous induction. Mike Brant spoke on behalf of his father. The family of Technician 5th Grade James E. Hanna also accepted his posthumous recognition. These moments were handled with dignity and respect.

The final award of the day went to Petty Officer 1st Class Larry B. Woods, commander of AMVETS Post 1788, who received the Chad D. Wright Memorial Award as Washington County Veteran of the Year. It was a true grand finale. Grown men cried. It was an unfiltered demonstration of the American spirit that still breathes, under the chaos and pain of both wars gone past and the societal battles we all face today.

A photographer was present documenting the day, and the event was live-streamed on the Washington County Veterans Service Commission facebook page. We will be posting clips in the coming days, including General Brown’s keynote address regarding service and Washington County, and his special thank-you to his high school basketball coach — Ray Ritter.

Thank you to everyone who put this event together — the Washington County Veterans Service Commission, the staff at the Tower Event and Conference Center, the volunteers, David Brown, Jared Smith, Wilky’s, and all the organizers who made the room feel so welcoming and intentional.

The 2026 Washington County Veterans Hall of Fame Inductees:

• Sgt. John R. Brant (Navy, World War II / Army, Korean War — Posthumous)
• Technician 5th Grade James E. Hanna (Posthumous)
• Staff Sgt. Francis M. Sampson (Army Medical Corps, World War II)
• Christian A. Bauman (Space Force)
• Staff Sgt. Ronald G. Dye (Army, Vietnam)
• Cpl. Roger A. Miller (Marine Corps, Vietnam)
• Cpl. George C. Nelson (Marine Corps, Vietnam)
• Capt. James C. Wilson (Air Force) [1, 2]

The awards honored a lifetime of sacrifice, and for the families standing in for those who have passed, the moment carried a profound weight. It served as a reminder that the spirit of selfless service hasn’t faded in our area. These veterans bore the heaviest burdens of history and still returned home to spend their lives lifting up their neighborhoods. That level of service doesn’t just matter here — it is what this community is built on.

MASH Focus Notes & Updates:

• Upcoming Video Coverage: The event was live-streamed on the Washington County Veterans Service Commission Facebook page. We will be posting video clips in the coming days, including General Brown’s keynote address regarding service and Washington County, and the short speech where he called out his high school basketball coach and mentor, Ray Ritter, who was watching from the audience.
• Our Commitment: We have already attended one Veterans Service Commission meeting and will continue attending weekly indefinitely to ensure consistent coverage of our local veterans.
• Veterans Bus Trip: On a related note, the free veterans bus trip to Columbus still has a few open seats. Anyone interested can contact Brad Webb for details.

More from MASH Focus

• The $956k margin | What’s Really Going On with the Washington County Budget Numbers
• Where the River Feeds The Rail | Private Deals. Public Money. Family Farmland.
• A Look Inside The Washington County Home | A First Tour of This 1840 Institution
• The Information Exposure Timeline: Jesse Roush, Bit56, Land Aquisition, and How Waterford Found Out

Honoring Service | Washington County Welcomes Veterans Hall of Fame Inductees was originally published in MASH Focus on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Washington County | November 2026 | written by Holly Kellums

Voters in Ohio’s 94th House District decide November 3 between Republican incumbent Kevin Ritter and Democratic challenger Wenda Sheard. The district covers all of Washington and Meigs counties plus the more rural portions of Athens County. Issues raised repeatedly at local meetings include injection wells and drinking-water protection, the Waterford data-center land assembly and related Port Authority actions, school funding and property taxes, and questions of transparency and accessibility.

This summary draws from commission minutes, Port Authority records, land documents, candidate statements, and reports from community members and local meetings. It is not an endorsement. For election dates, candidate information, and voting details, consult the Ohio Secretary of State or local county boards of elections.

The district map changed before the 2024 election. Lines adopted by the Ohio Redistricting Commission in 2023 moved the city of Athens and several townships out of District 94 and into District 95. The remaining Athens County portion consists of more rural townships. Sheard lives in Ames Township, which stayed in the district. In 2024 she received a higher share of the vote in the remaining Athens County portion than in the district overall.

The combination of drinking-water concerns, large-scale land assembly for data infrastructure, and questions about public process and private involvement has drawn more sustained local attention than usual. How those questions are answered — or left unanswered — will shape what the next generation inherits in water, land use, and electricity costs.

The Candidates

Kevin Ritter of Marietta is the incumbent. He served as Washington County commissioner from 2018 through the end of 2024, then won the House seat. He taught history and government for about twenty years, previously ran a baseball training business, and is a co-founder of Veritas Classical Academy in Marietta, Ohio. In the House he is vice chair of Workforce and Higher Education and sits on Education, Energy, and Finance. He has highlighted more than $11 million in state investment for 27 district projects and bills he sponsored or co-sponsored.

Representative Kevin Ritter - District 94

Wenda Sheard of Ames Township in Athens County is the challenger. She is an attorney, trained mediator, and former teacher with a Ph.D. in political science. She has practiced in Ohio courts, served as a Hocking County domestic-relations magistrate, previously led the Athens County Bar Association, taught at Ohio University of Business for over ten years, and served as vice president of the county League of Women Voters. She ran against Ritter in 2024 and received about 30.6 percent of the vote. She won her 2026 primary unopposed. She has said she will approach the work more as a mediator than as a partisan and that she will help residents who want to testify in Columbus. She also intends to create pathways for direct community involvement in Columbus whether or not she is elected.

Wenda Sheard for Ohio House District 94

Local perspectives vary regarding Representative Kevin Ritter’s tenure and his family’s role in county development. While some constituents emphasize his long-standing roots and ability to navigate state-level politics, others raise concerns about transparency and the intersection of local governance with private interests. Public records, including county commission minutes and internal correspondence, outline a complex timeline regarding his actions on regional data infrastructure projects.

When a smaller, initial data center was proposed in the region, archived emails demonstrate that Ritter actively followed up on community inquiries and sought answers on behalf of residents. Furthermore, during the initial planning stages of the Waterford data center facility, records indicate that then-Commission President Charlie Schilling and the Port Authority were the primary figures advancing the development.

Commission minutes show that Ritter voted against Schilling on key development matters during that period on at least one occasion. However, the records also reveal a consistent pattern of correspondence where Schilling participated in official email threads concerning major infrastructure projects without including the other sitting commissioners. MASH Focus has tracked this communication pattern through public records requests spanning the tenures of commissioners Ritter, James Booth, and their successors.

Campaign finance disclosures show the ordinary state-level PAC and financial connections that accompany an incumbent House seat. Some local Republicans who are cynical about the traditional party establishment still view Ritter as an outsider willing to push past the local political club. These are the conversations neighbors are having as the county faces some of the largest infrastructure decisions in its history.

Injection Wells and Drinking Water

Both candidates identify Class II injection wells as a significant local issue. Multiple local governments, water boards, township trustees, and the City of Marietta have passed resolutions calling for a three-year moratorium. Residents and groups including Washington County for Safe Drinking Water have cited documented brine migration and proximity to Marietta’s aquifer.

Ritter has said a de-facto pause on new permits has existed since 2022 ODNR rule changes, though already-permitted wells continue. He has stated that he has pressed ODNR and Ohio EPA for meetings and helped local advocates meet with ODNR Director Mary Mertz. He does not support a legislative moratorium and has described the issue as technical.

Sheard endorsed a three-year moratorium in October and has made safe drinking water a central theme. She has outlined a five-point approach: strengthen statutes governing ODNR and the Division of Oil and Gas, require suspension of leaking wells, mandate monitoring wells near injection sites, increase bonding requirements, and expand inspector staffing. She has noted existing local resolutions and pointed to reported service interruptions attributed to brine migration.

In June, three members of Washington County for Safe Drinking Water met with Ritter after more than a year and a half of requests. The meeting lasted about two hours.

Dee Arnold told MASH Focus that she was unaware the meeting was being recorded until the clips appeared on social media. In written statements, Arnold noted that Ritter has not attended local meetings, press conferences, town halls, or the December expert session at Washington State College of Ohio that drew roughly 300 people, arguing that a single meeting does not constitute sustained advocacy on the issue. Challenger Wenda Sheard has attended the majority of those same local public meetings.

Data Centers, Land Assembly, and Conflict Questions

The Waterford Township corridor involves roughly 1,000 acres under option or sold, mainly through HashWorks Powered Land Waterford LLC and related entities, plus an earlier SeOPA ground lease with Bit56 LLC. Community concerns have centered on secrecy, NDAs, water and power impacts, inability to obtain public records, tax policy, and process.

While still a commissioner, Ritter voted on or moved several 2024 actions tied to the corridor.

The March 28 $1.5 million allocation and acceptance of SeOPA’s AMP-Gorsuch site proposal; the May–June Port Authority loan process; the July 25 motion appointing a SeOPA board member (effective the day before the Bit56 lease); and the August 8 seconding of Community Development Fund 100–0123.

No recusal appears in the minutes reviewed and none provided by the county clerk.

Community members have said they are not aware of Ritter offering a specific proposal to help Waterford residents navigate the land assembly or of him addressing the community on the sequence of votes and family representation. They have also said they are not aware of assistance he provided to the commissioners who succeeded him in obtaining answers on the related records or tools for advocacy.

Ohio law does not require an official or their spouse to resign from every position simply because a potential conflict may exist. In rural areas this allows people to continue serving in multiple roles. What the law does require is recusal from specific matters when official action could definitely and directly affect the official’s own or a family member’s financial interests, along with appropriate disclosure.

Despite explicit demands from community members and local journalists — including publicly stated inquiries dating back to May and formal public records requests launched at the end of July — neither the Ritters themselves nor the county commission, Port Authority, and state House have produced any evidence that Kevin Ritter ever recused himself from votes tied to the Waterford data center. Furthermore, no documentation exists to prove that affected landowners — who were actively solicited or represented in private legal work — were ever notified of these potential conflicts of interest.

Ritter’s campaign has maintained that his legislative actions and past votes as commissioner have consistently focused on bringing state investment and economic development to the district.

Khadine Ritter, Kevin’s wife and a partner at Theisen Brock, performed legal work for Doug McCutcheon — who sold roughly 275 acres to HashWorks for about $20 million — and other Waterford landowners. Multiple landowners said they were approached by Khadine and not told of her marital relationship to the previously sitting commissioner and current State Representative.

Khadine Ritter serves on the Washington County Board of Elections. We have documented at least one recusal she has made in connection with her husband Kevin Ritter’s current campaign. We have received direct statement from members of her board confirming her recusals, as well.

As with questions surrounding Kevin’s own lack of recusals on related matters, the determination of whether those steps met ethical standards rests with the appropriate ethics bodies — not with MASH Focus. Our role is to obtain the public records, report them to the community, and refer any relevant findings to the boards charged with oversight.

In her public response, Khadine Ritter focused heavily on the dates of her private invoices and criticized both the records requests and the reporting itself. No one has claimed that her private legal work for landowners and any related public votes occurred on the same day. The requests have been for documentation of any recusals on the relevant votes and of any notice provided to the landowners with whom she worked. MASH Focus requested these specific logs to determine if formal disclosures were filed alongside the private transactions.

Both candidates have said the new massive hyperscale complexes should not raise residential electricity rates and should face stronger guardrails. Ritter has submitted recommendations that include closed-loop water systems, remediation requirements, bans on NDAs, abatements limited to brownfields, and local veto power. Sheard has said increased wholesale power demand already raises consumer costs and has called for policies that stop the transfer of those costs onto residents. She has said she plans to work on community-involvement mechanisms in Columbus on these issues whether or not she wins the seat.

Education Funding and Property Taxes

Ritter has noted that the most recent state budget increased public-school funding by nearly $700 million over prior levels and that he helped secure $200 million in bridge funding after an unintended cut affecting Southeast Ohio schools. He supports recent property-tax relief legislation.

Sheard has argued that the state has underfunded the Cupp-Patterson formula and that the burden has shifted to local levies. She has noted that Ohio leads the nation in the number of school levies on ballots. She has criticized the complexity of the property-tax system and commercial-property relief measures, stating that no one should be forced from their home by rising taxes.

Accessibility

Ritter has said his office has not turned down constituent meetings except those involving threats and has described some public forums as unproductive. He has also posted that he would not attend certain events, naming Living Democracy. Even listing their principles he vehemently disagrees with.

Kevin Ritter has never responded to any inquiry, contact, or invite from MASH Focus, dating back to before there was any such thing as a Ritter File — when we were simply contacting the next person above Charlie Schilling looking for someone at the state or local level who would assist the Waterford community.

Ritter has faced questions from some local residents regarding his public appearances and his role in the data-center land assembly and related Port Authority actions.

Sheard has held town halls in Belpre, Barlow, and New Matamoras and has pledged regular office hours plus help for residents who want to testify in Columbus. She has attended local data-center and injection-well meetings across Washington County since late June, including the first community-hosted discussion in Beverly. She has said she would help whether she was elected or not. She has outlined plans to create direct community-involvement channels in Columbus that she intends to pursue regardless of the election outcome.

District 94 has been reliably Republican. In 2024 Ritter won with roughly 69 percent. Early in-person voting continues through November 1. Election Day is November 3. Photo ID is required. Voters can examine commission minutes, Port Authority documents, land records, and candidate statements for themselves.

Official Election Logistics & Calendars

• Ohio Secretary of State Portal: Link your voting deadline and general info section to the Ohio Secretary of State Voting Schedule.
• 2026 Election Master Plan: Link any detailed calendar mentions to the official Ohio Secretary of State 2026 Elections Calendar. [1, 2]

Candidate Information & History

• Kevin Ritter (Incumbent): Ohio House of Representatives Kevin Ritter Directory. [1]
• Wenda Sheard (Challenger): Wenda Sheard for Ohio House.
• 2024 Historical Data: Ballotpedia Ohio House District 94 Profile. [1]

Related MASH Focus Coverage

The Reno School Debates:

Community Comes Together for Informative Candidate Forum at Old Reno School

The Forum Invites & Access Logs:

Living Democracy — A Mission, a Purpose, a Meet the Candidate Event, and One Missing Candidate

The Grange Event Summary:

80 people and Five Candidates at the Grange — After From Closed Doors at the Commissioners’ Table

The Ritter Files:

The Ritter Files | Public Votes, Private Representation, and the Washington County Data Center…

The Follow-Up Timeline:

Khadine Ritter | Public Power, Private Fees, and the Battle for the Records

Waterford Infrastructure Briefing:

Waterford Data Center Timeline | MASH Focus Community Briefing

Campaign Finance Tracking:

The $956k margin | What’s Really Going On with the Washington County Budget Numbers

Forbidden FOIA:

Forbidden FOIA: Waterford Hyperscale Center, SeOPA, and the Ritter Connection

Community Network Platforms

• MASH Focus Publication Hub: Link your footer or general mentions to the main MASH Focus Medium Profile.
• Social & Video Archive: Link references to filmed public comment sessions, live streams, and community responses directly to the MASH Focus Facebook Page.

Support community led journalism in the Mid Ohio Valley

Join MASH Mid-Ohio and Surrounding Hub Digital forum

Support Community Led Journalism via MASH Focus

Become a writer and submit your work

Reach out with tips, questions, notes, or corrections at MASHfocusMail@gmail.com!

What Voters Need to Know: Kevin Ritter and Wenda Sheard in Ohio House District 94 was originally published in MASH Focus on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Let’s look at the numbers. Commissioner Charlie Schilling has stated that the county will end 2026 with

“nearly a 1 million dollar budget surplus from the beginning of this year,”

meaning the county will finish the year with roughly $1 million more than it started with on January 1. This message appeared in a regular commissioner meeting, in an official board press release on October 29, and on Charlie’s Facebook page on October 31, 2026.

The figure comes from the county’s internal Statement of Cash from Revenue and Expense. For the nine months from January 1 through September 30, 2026:

• Net Revenue YTD: $19,696,332.84
• Net Expense YTD: $18,739,719.29
• In-year margin: $956,613.55

Commissioner Schilling referenced a similar figure at a regular meeting, stating that at nine months revenues exceed expenses by roughly $900,000.

The $956k Snapshot vs. The Multi-Year Trend

The $956,613.55 figure is the documented nine-month cash-flow margin on the county’s internal Statement of Cash from Revenue and Expense. A September 30 report sits after the county’s second major semi-annual property tax settlement. No further property-tax settlement arrives before December 31, while ordinary end-of-year bills and operating costs continue. The nine-month margin is therefore an in-year snapshot, not a finalized year-end result.

The multi-year decline in the practical General Fund cash cushion shown below is measured on ordinary ongoing cash and is separate from ARPA funds. Federal ARPA money totaled approximately $11.6 million and consisted of restricted, one-time project allocations. Those funds were never part of the day-to-day operational cash cushion tracked in the internal cash statements. The drop in the ordinary cash position occurred because recurring operating costs and specific local spending choices ran ahead of baseline revenues over multiple years. It is not the result of ARPA funds ending.

Figures below are the practical unexpended cash balances shown on the county’s internal Statement of Cash from Revenue and Expense (different public carryover numbers can appear depending on whether encumbrances, advances, or the separate stabilization fund are included):

• Pre-2024 baseline: practical cash cushion briefly over $11 million.
• 2024: receipts $24,858,485.06, disbursements $27,943,103.32, ending unexpended balance $9,716,029.15 ($8,596,331.03 after encumbrances).
• 2025: net revenues $17,458,290.00, net expenses $22,861,799.72, ending unexpended balance $6,271,066.43 ($5,198,665.75 after encumbrances).
• 2026 starting balance on these statements: $6,271,066.43.

Commissioners publicly described a $9.3 million carryover from 2025 into 2026 (down from over $11 million the prior year), with the $1.5 million Port Authority loan cited as a major driver of the drop. The lower ending balances above reflect the unexpended cash position after encumbrances and advances on the internal cash statements.

While the active cash-flow gap shows the county is staying ahead of its expenses in the current nine-month window, the long-term pattern on these internal statements demonstrates that the multi-year starting cushion has narrowed because everyday operational obligations have historically outrun ordinary baseline revenues.

What is Driving the Shifting Ledger?

The multi-year reduction in the ordinary cash cushion is driven by a mix of rising recurring costs and specific local decisions. It is not driven by the end of ARPA funds (see note above).

• Discretionary uses of surplus cash in 2024 included capital improvements, higher Children Services placement costs, and a lawsuit settlement with the City of Marietta; in 2025 commissioners issued a $1.5 million economic development loan to the Port Authority.
• Personnel costs rose with a 5% wage adjustment in 2024 followed by 3% increases in 2025 and 2026.
• The 2026 Commissioners Department appropriation alone is just over $1 million; the Miscellaneous General Fund appropriation is $2.78 million (including $1.25 million transferred for Energy Project Bonds).
• Commissioners continue locking 30% of permissive sales tax for roads and townships (roughly $2.7–$3.1 million per year), money that cannot cushion the General Fund.

Meanwhile, massive infrastructure items like the Devola Sewer Project are slated for completion by summer 2026 with total costs expected to exceed $15 million. While this project is heavily funded by outside sources — including $10M in State funds, $3M in Congressional funding, $1M from the Army Corps of Engineers, $750,000 from H2Ohio, and $368,000 from the Appalachian Regional Commission — the county’s broader capital project funds still required $300,000 annually in 2024 and 2025 (for the WASCO Building renovations at 340 Muskingum Drive) and $150,000 in 2026 to renovate the courthouse for a new Magistrate office.

Federal ARPA funds (totaling $11.6 million) were strictly one-time project allocations and were never intended to sustain baseline day-to-day operations. The data demonstrates that the long-term cushion dropped because historical operational costs ran higher than baseline revenue.

Different Reporting Lenses: Cash vs. GAAP

Public statements can cite a healthy audited balance or a positive year-to-date cash margin while the practical multi-year cash balances on the internal statements have declined. The county uses more than one reporting method.

The practical cash balances above come from the internal Statement of Cash from Revenue and Expense. Formal audited GAAP statements include additional long-term entries and adjustments and can show higher fund balances (for example, the $21.1 million total reported for 2024).

Both the higher audited GAAP fund balances and the lower practical cash balances on the internal statements are documented figures. They measure different things. A plain-language cash roll-forward each year (starting cash + real revenue − real spending = ending cash) would show the connection between one year’s ending balance and the next year’s starting balance.

Additionally, the county’s starting cash carryover figures do not include their separate $2.2 million emergency “rainy day” savings account. That savings pool sits entirely to the side. By using this stabilization fund to handle short-term advances and paybacks for departments like OJFS, officials can factually state in public meetings that their emergency savings remain completely untouched. The $2.2 million stabilization fund is separate from the practical unexpended cash balances shown on the internal statements. Those internal-statement balances are the ones that declined over the multi-year period above.

What the State Audits Actually Show

The official reports from the Ohio Auditor of State document administrative violations of state budgetary laws. To be completely clear, these findings don’t prove criminal activity or personal corruption, but they show a documented pattern of administrative overruns and record-keeping issues that explain why the numbers frequently confuse the public:

• The 2023 State Audit: Auditors determined that the county made ARPA revenue-loss transfers into the General Fund that did not comply with Ohio Revised Code sections 5705.14, 5705.15, and 5705.16. These non-compliant moves caused the reported General Fund ending balance to be overstated by $1.29 million in 2021 and by $8.79 million in 2022. The ledger stayed distorted into 2023 until a formal restatement corrected it. On top of that, $1.21 million of revenue-loss expenditures were left off a mandatory federal report.
• The 2024 State Audit (Issued December 2025): This report documented that the Southeastern Ohio Port Authority spent $64,682 more than legally appropriated. The same report documented that appropriations in the Motor Vehicle and Gasoline Tax Fund exceeded the amount legally certified by the budget commission by more than $2.3 million.

The Bottom Line for Washington County

The $956,613.55 nine-month margin, the multi-year practical cash balances on the internal statements, the separate treatment of ARPA funds, and the findings in the Ohio Auditor of State reports are all documented. Shorter public summaries do not always show the full cash roll-forward from one year’s ending balance to the next year’s starting balance.

The documents are public record. Residents can review the numbers and decide what the pattern means for Washington County.

Written by Holly Kellums, Founder | MASH Focus — Publication and Network

Join MASH Mid-Ohio and Surrounding Hub Digital forum

Support Community Led Journalism via MASH Focus

Become a writer and submit your work

Reach out with tips, questions, notes, or corrections at MASHfocusMail@gmail.com!

More from MASH Focus

• The Ritter Files | Public Votes, Private Representation, and the Washington County Data Center…
• Eric Wade Named President and CEO of the Southeastern Ohio Port Authority
• A Look Inside The Washington County Home | A First Tour of This 1840 Institution
• Where the River Feeds The Rail | Private Deals. Public Money. Family Farmland.

The $956k margin | What’s Really Going On with the Washington County Budget Numbers was originally published in MASH Focus on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.