YOUNGSTOWN The federal government has requested that a judge order the city of Youngstown to pay $739,500 in penalties for allegedly failing to comply with a court-ordered plan to reduce water pollution.

The request was filed in federal court in Youngstown by the U.S. Department of Justice on behalf of the United States and the state of Ohio. The case, which dates back to 1998, involves a consent decree requiring the city to implement a Long-Term Control Plan (LTCP) to address sewage overflows.

According to the court document, the city stopped working on the project just three years after agreeing to it, then waited another three years to request modifications. The government's brief argues that Youngstown's delays on key projects, including the Mill Creek and Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrades, violated the consent decree and that the stipulated penalties are a necessary tool to ensure future compliance.

Councilwoman Anita Davis said she supports negotiating the penalty down, adding that “that full amount… would hurt us a lot, and I’d much rather see those dollars actually go towards the actual project, rather than towards an EPA fine.” She noted that much of the case dates back to before her time on council, but said the city has made system upgrades and continues to work toward compliance.

In a written statement to 21 News, Mayor Tito Brown said: “We can’t comment on ongoing litigation, however our goal remains to work with the US EPA to reduce the amount of the penalty due to the changing need of the city, as we have did with the overall cost of the mandated project.”

The city has argued that the penalties are unreasonable and that its revised plan will ultimately lead to greater pollution reduction. However, the government's brief refutes this, stating that the new plan was only developed after the city had already missed deadlines and the government had initiated legal action.

The Department of Justice argues in a brief filed Thursday that the consent decree functions as a contract and that the city knowingly risked the penalties by delaying work. The brief also cites previous court rulings that have rejected similar defenses of other communities, emphasizing that parties who negotiate and agree to penalty provisions must adhere to them.