- It is 5 30 p.m. On October 7 2025 and I call to order this regular meeting of the Board of Public Works
- First on the agenda. We have messages from board members. Are there any messages from the board? None.
- All right before we begin I will just say if there is anyone joining us in person when it is your time
- to speak we'll ask you to come to the podium for anyone joining the meeting on zoom you can use the
- raised hand and
- Function or the chat function and we will ask you to unmute and speak at that time So first we will
- start with appeals. The first noise appeal is at 519 West Hoosier Court Avenue Hello and Adina from
- city legal Can we push this one to and go to the next one? Missouri
- Because the officers on their way Sure, okay, so we will pause that and we will go on to the next noise
- appeal which is 710 East 1st Street All right Almost Hello, I'm officer high tank with Bloomington Police
- Department
- Let me just get to the right spot in the packet Could you tell us a little bit about what happened We
- have the staff report is there any other information that you can provide Not other than what was already
- mentioned. We received a noise complaint for that address and we received three more noise complaints
- before we responded to that address for for noise and
- We'll go ahead and do questions from the board You said three more complaints all in the same evening
- all the same night or is that over the course of time? Correct all the same night. Okay And there's
- a document in the packet that has it looks like the complaint log I'm just trying to determine the times
- That were called
- 2253 2256 2302 2303 Okay, can we have the appellant come to the oh, sorry more questions from the board
- almost I'm thinking slowly tonight So your your statement is that you personally witnessed
- Excessive noise coming from the appellant. Is that correct? Yes, sir. Okay, and what was the nature
- of the noise? I was a loud party people flowing into the street We also got a complaint that there was
- possibly firearms and drug use that did not appear to be the case No firearms or drugs, but definitely
- noise. Okay, and were there other people cited the same evening at the same address? I don't believe
- so. Okay was there something specific about the
- the appellants Noise that came to your attention that others were not cited He lives there. We cite
- the resident that lives there. That's responsible for the party. Can you say that again? He lived there
- He said he lived there and we cited we cite the resident that lives at the address of the complaint.
- Okay so just as a matter of course and just for kind of our knowledge do you cite the the leaseholder
- essentially or the sublease holder or any resident of the apartment of
- It's whoever lives there. So basically anybody that's on a lease there or claims that they're a resident
- there. Yes Okay, but again, there was just the noise Complaint filed against the one person right now.
- Yes, ma'am Okay now if we can ask The appellant to come if you could please state your name and then
- Provide us with your information
- Alright, my name is Carter Clay Smith. I'm the resident at 710. This is Anthony Escobedo He's the one
- who the complaint was filed to and our appeal was grounded in the fact that this was a private event
- for my club I hope I founded a professional development club last year called black in business and
- it was for members only but because of Bloomington it's a party school people like to have fun and so
- it got out of hand due to getting out of control people were spreading the word without our permission and
- They were coming to the residents without our permission the doors were locked so we wouldn't let other
- people were not invited in Because of that there were a lot of people out on the streets that we tried
- to get to leave I believe I don't know if I remember correctly I believe he said that the officer tried
- to get the people leave and they also wouldn't leave you tried to get them leave ourselves before the
- complaints came they could also be fair to mention that it should be on the record that all those complaints
- that were just mentioned all happened within the span of ten minutes and it was because that there are
- these like
- These random people who just showed up on our lawn. It was like a surge of people in like a 10 minute
- span We couldn't control it. I know there was like so the police came twice the first time they gave
- us the ticket We completely understood like we're gonna quiet it down lock the doors did whatever we
- could and yet there was still like a surge of people Where I'm kind of confused is that they they told
- us noise wasn't an issue like that That was what one of the police officers told me he said They walked
- up to the house and it wasn't it wasn't loud like everything was
- Noise wise was contained in the house. I thought it was quiet, but it was just it was the people so
- I'm confused as to why is it a noise citation wouldn't It's it's these other people that we don't have
- control over and to follow up on that We've also done extensive work with our neighbors We've talked
- to all of them to make sure that it's okay because we know that we're in their community We don't impose
- ourselves and so we want to make sure that everybody says, you know everybody we want to have fun, but
- we also don't want to
- Ruined other people's day and so we tested the noise. We've talked to all of our neighbors who are like
- in close proximity to us We tested it before the party We tested it before the party actually started
- the same night of the party and they also all confirmed that the noise was not an issue Halfway are
- about 30 ish minutes into the party We texted Jeff who has he has a sensitivity to like hearing issue
- that we talked about and so we were like, hey Jeff How's the noise the party starting to pick up? So
- we want to make sure like if you should adjust or not
- Jeff said everything was fine. It wasn't until the people came, and then specifically a certain, I don't
- know who it was, certain group of individuals, they came in a black suburban, and they were blasting
- music outside of their car. So the noise wasn't even coming from our residents. It was coming from this
- mystery vehicle that decided it was appropriate to pull up in front of our house and just blast music,
- just bothering everybody. And so that's really the extent of our appeal, is that we feel like it was
- not on us, but on residents. And especially since we didn't invite them,
- Completely just like word of mouth that these other people invited these people it was a private event
- for my members and his members and I feel like Really the noise complaint came from that black suburban
- that was blasting the music Because that's the only possible source of the noise besides the people
- chattering which isn't enough to get a noise complaint So that's pretty much the extent of our appeal
- Can I ask which of you resides in the apartment or is on the lease? I was the one who spoke to the police
- officers. Yeah Let's start with I just have a follow-up question. Can the officer come back and just
- speak to the issue of the the one officer said there wasn't a
- Enough noise something you said something about noise and it doesn't necessarily match what was in the
- call log Sorry, I didn't hear the first part of what you said. Can you repeat that for me? You said
- that One of the officers said that there wasn't noise There was two other Officers there at the scene
- and he specifically told me that it was like yeah noise isn't the issue. It's because of these people
- So that's why I'm just confused as to why it
- Is a noise citation when the police officer told me it wasn't the noise. So is that referring to the
- same? Call I wonder or is that are we considering this if I was if they're saying that I was there that
- would be the same call I only responded to that residents once When I arrived I did hear loud amplified
- noise coming from the residents not a car outside Okay, thank you Questions from the board
- Some questions for me and this I think is directed at staff Is there a are there statutory Findings
- or is there a burden of proof that we need to find in order to approve something like this? From City
- of Bloomington legal department
- Casamanian so under fourteen point oh nine oh three oh noises prohibited It's Any unreasonable noise
- shall mean sound sound that is volume frequency or pattern that prevents disrupts injures or endangers
- the health safety welfare prosperity comfort comfort or repose of reasonable persons of ordinary
- sensitivities, so
- I would ask that you look to that statute fourteen point oh nine zero three zero and the Bloomington
- municipal code You get two attorneys here today one more thing I'd like to add is in fourteen point
- oh nine oh three OB it's unlawful for any person to cause or make any unreasonable noise or to allow
- any unreasonable noise to be caused or made in
- Or on any real or personal property occupied or controlled by the person So I think the residents said
- it was their house. They did have an event that drew people to it Maybe more people than they wanted
- But they failed to control the environment It resulted in noise that the officer said she heard coming
- from the house and she issued a ticket I think the finding that the board can make is based on those
- facts. We do have the owners here admitted they had an event and
- Caused a crowd to come for whatever reason whether it was social media or I don't know how the people
- knew about it, but they were there acknowledged by the owners and The officer said I heard noise when
- I was coming up to the house And so I think it was a failure to control the environment that resulted
- in the unreasonable noise I think that's the finding that the board can make if if you so wanted before
- you go so, you know, I I come from the board from a
- Planning and zoning and BZ background was very specific findings yet But yeah, what I'm hearing you
- say is that we're simply weighing the facts and whether the facts of the testimony Correspond to our
- understanding and reading of the city statute. Yes, right. So obviously to support a code violation
- there have to be facts to support it and The officer has said she personally heard
- Noise coming from the house loud enough that it was it was in her professional opinion unreasonable
- noise we did get verification from the occupants of the home that they also knew there was noise now
- it was they said outside of The residents but it was I think per the code on their property and it was
- it was it wasn't they weren't able to control it so
- It's a violation to allow any unreasonable noise to be caused or made in or on real or personal property
- occupied or controlled by that person and so As long as you have that finding in the record those facts
- in the record It would support this if should it get appealed to the next level and one sorry one final
- question This is the first one of these I've seen since I've been on the board
- Recourse for the appellants if we were to deny the appeal could make an appeal to circuit court and
- then we would Again why this has been put in the record why the officer was here was to say I had personal
- knowledge of this, you know The comment about the other officer what he said Is here say he's not here
- to testify it We don't know whether in fact that officer said that or not not saying that the occupants
- aren't telling the truth We just don't have actual proof of that and so if they chose to
- Appeal to the circuit court and then we would we would prosecute that at that level and then see what
- the trial court did One additional question and then we'll give you a chance to come back up I'm sorry
- the appellants mentioned a black suburban with a lot of noise emanating from it And I just want to confirm
- that you said when you heard noise you identified it is coming out of the house Not the street in front
- of the house. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Thank you. I
- Give you another chance to speak I'd like to follow up first on the facts that were mentioned for speaking
- about the facts I don't know if the officer can testify to this as well But the majority of the people
- were not on our property but on the sidewalk and under my understanding I'm pretty sure that's public
- property and not under us One inability to control and like manage the people it was not under us We
- we control the people that we had under our supervision
- These other people are not under our supervision. They were not inside our property. And we kicked them
- off our property onto the street. That's where this whole debacle happened. Also, speaking towards even
- the rule of recognition, I feel like the whole point of this is to kind of like, the purpose of that
- tort is to make sure that the entity or the people who are actually causing the noise are held liable.
- And I feel like it'd be almost unjust to find us liable if we're not the parties responsible for the noise.
- Also One of the attorneys mentioned something about Like the source of the noise and who is responsible
- for it and I feel like that's a key key thing that we should harp on and how that The source of the
- noise we will continue to state that
- As it's our fact of the matter that the noise was not coming from our house We did multiple checks to
- make sure our noise would not be above like any limit any limit that would disturb bother the peace
- prevent anybody from sleeping There's a family next to us the guy who has the the ear problem next to
- us We did our due diligence to make sure would not bother them during the party unless the door was
- open at the time I'm sure that's why it was loud because once the door opens
- the music is able to transcend a lot farther. But once the doors are closed, we've tested multiple times.
- We tested it after the appeal and after we got the citation. Everybody that we've talked to, all four
- of our neighbors, the ones at seven, I don't know, but the Jeff, Anka, they're all professors, River
- and Rowan, all these people, they all attested to us and said that the noise wasn't a problem. Actually,
- one of our neighbors made a joke and said, did we still throw the party? Because they didn't even hear
- the noise. I understand that maybe hearsay, but going back to the facts of the matter,
- It was under our control and what was on our control was kept underneath the legal limit What wasn't
- outside of our control we kicked them off the property So it was no longer our responsibility and what
- they chose to do on public property I feel like has nothing to do with us and last going back to the
- intention of the ordinance in the first place is to hold those accountable liable and our engagement
- in the fact
- We have done our best to hold ourselves liable beyond that and I feel like it would just be unfair to
- blame Stuff that is outside of our circumstances when we did our due diligence. We control the situation.
- We got the people off our property To still say it's our fault. But that's what I would say and the
- key facts are we kicked them off our property We did our due diligence and the noise is only loud the
- doors open So, of course the officer would say the noise is loud, but that's that's what we would say
- Thank you Any other questions from the board Any questions from the public or on zoom All right hearing
- none do we have a motion I
- I'll move that the board of public works deny the appeal from the noise violation at 710 East first
- streets with the finding that's the appellants My phrase that Margie do I need a specific finding or
- is the the
- in the record enough So there's case law that says boards and commissions speak through their minutes
- I think that I Will give you the language of the code then again though if you'd like to think about
- your motion again unreasonable noise means sound that is a volume frequency or pattern that
- Sort of disrupts the the repose of reasonable persons and I can tell you that I wrote this noise ordinance
- back in the day and Reasonableness standard is required. So it's because it's the courts have said it's
- hard to Sometimes hard to define but everybody knows it when they see it, you know, you kind of know
- what's reasonable What's unreasonable noise that you can hear outside of a house from outside of houses,
- you know considered unreasonable so
- Was the one that you mentioned earlier about? Allowing yeah, yeah, and that's subsection B except as
- otherwise Provided it shall be unlawful for any person to cause or make any unreasonable noise or To
- allow any unreasonable noise to be caused or made in Or on any real or personal property occupied or
- controlled by that person. So allowing the unreasonable noise That
- Their property or property that they control. I will just again reiterate that the officer said she
- heard the noise coming from the house Okay, so let me let me rephrase this I moved that the board denied
- the noise appeal at 710 East first Street finding that the appellants Did allow for unreasonable noise
- to be caused or made and
- or on their real estate And I will second with a motion a second I will call the roll This is a motion
- to deny the noise appeal Roach I Korone I Motion passes to deny the appeal at 710 East 1st Street Thank
- you both for coming
- Automatically provide information about appealing if desired Okay All right, so now we will move on
- to the other noise appeal which is 519 West Hoosier Court Avenue and
- This one we have looks like just the officer. I'm sorry. The officer is here. Okay Can you tell us your
- version of what happened please or connecting to the staff report So on the night of the noise call
- it appended for approximately 27 minutes or more before we went to respond to it by time we respond
- I believe I'll have my notes in front of me, but it's like 43 minutes before we arrived and
- Parked roughly 50 to 100 yards away could hear the music for my vehicle approached the apartment. There
- was three people standing outside My approach to the apartment I asked who lived there you still hear
- the noise from inside the apartment doors and windows were all closed Young lady said that she lived
- there. I informed her why I was there for noise ordinance everything else violation and complaint When
- I did such she asked if I could give her a warning I said no and
- At this point in time, I believe, I don't know the exact time it was, but it was after midnight. And
- being the distance where I was while I parked, I could still hear it from my vehicle and while I exited
- the vehicle, I went and requested her ID and issued her a noise ordinance. I explained to her what the
- ordinance was, how to appeal the ordinance, and the steps she needed to go through. Thank you. Questions
- from the board? Is the appellant here with us?
- So similar to the last the last appeal just want to make sure I understand your testimony correctly
- you personally witnessed Excessive noise coming from this address. Yes, okay April could we hear from
- the appellant, please?
- Hi. So my name is Surya Tejamodkuri and I'm a graduate student here at IU. This is my first time dealing
- with any kind of citation, so I really appreciate the chance to explain what happened. So on the night
- of the incident of September 14, 2025, we had a small gathering at our house that involves roughly around
- eight to nine people. It was a birthday party. I was not the host of the gathering. I live in that house.
- I live in that house very separately, not so involved with my roommate.
- And because it was the birthday party of my roommate, I was just invited to the party. I had no control.
- I didn't organize any of the event. The actual host name was Lokesh Reddy Elluri. And in the packet
- submitted with me as additional information, he has provided a signed statement accepting full responsibility
- for the noise that night. So let me, I just want to clear some facts mentioned by the officer.
- So when the officer came, there were three people outside standing. It was me, my friend, and my another
- friend who was a female. So I want to mention that my female friend never talked to the officer. He
- always talked to me. And he did not issue the citation to a she. He issued the citation on my name.
- So I'm a male. So the citation was issued against my name. I was the only person talking to the officer.
- I was honestly nervous about that situation. And since I had my ID back on my phone, I didn't want to
- escalate this issue. So I handed it over when he asked, I was just cooperating with him. So that is
- the reason I believe the ticket ended up being issued in my name, just because I was the first person
- he interacted with. Not because I was the one hosting the party, not because I was the one managing
- the party or not because I had any control over the party. I had no authority over the music or the
- number of guests. I was just cooperating with the officer trying not to escalate this issue.
- I respectfully agree with all the rules of City of Bloomington and the community rules and also understand
- my responsibilities as being the resident so I have attached other supporting documentations as well
- with my appeal so I respectfully ask the board to consider this information as I was not the responsible
- party. Thank you very much. I want to clear that
- I was the one who talked to the officer. Officer didn't have any conversation or any kind of wording
- with any female that was present outside the house. I was just outside talking to my friend. Okay,
- thank you. Questions from the board? So questions for the appellant. Just to confirm, you are one of
- the leaseholders at 519 West Hoosier Court.
- And the person that you say is Responsible that took the responsibility. Are they also a leaseholder
- at that address? Yes, they are okay, and were they Were they in attendance were they there physically
- at the location at that time? Yeah, they were there physically at that location that time Okay, thank
- you Thank you is the other person
- Who's the leaseholder, the one you're referring to who did not speak with the officer, the female? No,
- she did not speak with the female. She did not speak with the officer. The female did not have
- any conversation with the officer. But the female is the other leaseholder. No, she is not a leaseholder.
- She was just an invited guest. Questions for the officer? Sorry.
- Don't remember your name. How many citations were issued that night? Residents, just one. Okay, and
- is it typically your practice that when you find someone who resides at the location, who holds the
- lease, who's the property owner,
- You issue the citation to that person or do you try to track down the person who's ultimately responsible?
- Residents are responsible what happens there? Okay. Thank you I'm trying to frame my question. I don't
- know if it's for legal but if there's two parties who live in
- residents that are both leaseholders and one Is responsible but indoors and one is not responsible but
- outdoors and the officer talks to the person outdoors Who claims not to be responsible for the noise,
- but the noise is happening indoors with the other resident I Would appreciate a little feedback maybe
- Margie rice city legal. I think it goes back to the control issue. So You know think about who what
- when we're why and how it's a party there is loud noise The you know leaseholder is in control of the
- property can ask people to leave can ask them to stop whether or not They invited the people over it
- is their house. They are paying right there they have control over it and if they choose not to stop the noise
- and it gets out of control and the officer has to be called. It's really an objective standard. Um,
- if, if, you know, if there was noise, it was heard by an officer. So, you know, there's complaints and
- they come and they hear the noise and the person who's in charge of that space, whether or not they're
- participating in the activities allows the noise to continue. That's there's culpability. And so I think
- that the owner, if you know, my apartment, my house, I can say, Hey,
- You know what you need to leave. It's this may not be my birthday party I may not be invited but it
- is my house and and you know, you need to leave because this is It's out of control. And so I think
- that's it's a really a control issue Does that answer your question or does it not answer your question?
- I Think so I think so. Thank you. Yeah, it's a little bit of you know being at the wrong place at the
- wrong time and if you allow the
- The noise to continue and don't stop it then you know, you can be liable for that Yeah, I'm just concerned
- that one resident was outside the house. The complaint was about the noise inside the house The resident
- ticketed was outside the house not inside the house with the noise sure, but
- The officer is hearing the noise approaching the house. Certainly that person can hear the noise I don't
- think I did not hear the person say they didn't hear the noise or there wasn't a party going on They
- chose not to stop it. I don't know why they chose not to stop it It resulted in a ticket if this appellant
- believes that the other Person was more responsible. They can always get reimbursed, you know for the
- ticket from that person but sometimes choosing to allow noise to continue when you had the opportunity
- to stop it and
- Happening and it bothers the neighbors such that the police get called, you know, it's it's a lesson
- learning how to control your environment Okay, thank you very much other questions from the board no
- questions from the public on this item Okay, so is there a motion I
- Move that the Board of Public Works deny the noise appeal at 519 West Hoosier Court Avenue finding that
- the appellant Did unlawfully allow unreasonable noise to be made in property that they control And I
- second with the motion in the second I will call the roll Roach. Hi Karan I
- Motion passes to deny the appeal And with that we will move along to petitions and remonstrances Are
- there any comments or questions actually comments about any item that is not on tonight's agenda? Anyone
- in person in council chambers or online if you would use the chat function or raise your hand and
- Moving along to the consent agenda Tonight's consent agenda is very long. So bear with me for a moment
- on the consent agenda. We have minutes from July 1st 2025 minutes from the special meeting on July 14th
- 2025 resolution 2025-070 mobile vendor blooming tie-on wheels resolution 2025-073 holiday market
- resolution 2025-076 Polish American Heritage Month celebration resolution 2025-077 Bloomington Book
- Festival public improvement acceptance for 1503 West Arlington Road subdivision public improvement bond
- reduction for the Ralston Drive subdivision memorandum of understanding between the Board of Public
- Works and Bloomington Transit for the West Second Street project and
- Change orders two and three for the long view greenway project contract with ENB paving LLC for the
- downtown paving project contract with acu brine LLC for salt brine machine maintenance service agreement
- with groomer construction for planter box repair at the southeast corner of Kirkwood in Washington outdoor
- lighting service agreement with Duke at West Smith Avenue between South Fairview Street and South Jackson Street
- outdoor lighting service agreement with Duke at North oris drive between West 11th Street and North
- Monroe Street outdoor lighting service agreement with Duke at various locations from West Smith Avenue
- to West 17th Street and South Euclid Avenue to South Roger Street contract with ENB paving LLC for the
- Union Street raised crosswalk and payroll Are there any items that need to be removed from the consent
- agenda this evening? I
- Any comments from the board on the consent agenda? Any comments from the public from the consent agenda
- this evening? Again, if you are on Zoom, feel free to use the raise hand function or chat. All right,
- seeing none, is there a motion? I move approval of the Board of Public Works consent agenda for the
- meeting of October 7th, 2025. And I second. With the motion and a second, I will call the roll. Roach? Aye.
- I motion passes Next we will move along to new business and the first order of our item under new business
- is the proposed lighting plan and encroachments for the Bloomington Convention Center Engineering I
- will be bringing you the rest of the agenda tonight
- So first up we have a preliminary approval for encroachments into the right-of-way for the new Convention
- Center This is for three street lights that will replace the Cobra headlights that were removed To provide
- adequate street lighting in that section of East 3rd Street They just wanted approval that we will accept
- these encroachments into the right-of-way before they go through the process of installing them and
- Thank you questions from the board. Okay. Let me let me make sure I understand So there will be another
- encroachment agreement for there will be an encroachment agreement This is just you're just giving them
- a verbal approval that we will accept the encroachment agreement later on Why couldn't we just approve
- the encroachment agreement now? Because we don't want to do a formal encroachment agreement until it
- is actually in place. Oh Okay
- So that way we know that it is built the way we want it to be built Okay, and these are going to be
- privately owned and paid privately owned and maintained Yes, or they will be maintained and paid for
- by the Convention Center All right. Thank you Questions from the public on this item All right, is there
- a motion I move
- preliminary approval of The proposed lighting encroachment agreement for the Bloomington Convention
- Center And I second with the motion the second I will call the roll Roach. I Korone I motion passes
- Next item is road closure and noise permit for night work for the Baxter Village subdivision So this
- is a request for a road closure on East Moores Pike between Smith Road and 446
- For back the Baxter Village subdivision for them to complete their tap into the water main So that they
- can provide water to the future subdivision This request includes night work, which will be done on
- October 14th and October 20th The rest of the work will be done during the day To this is to limit the
- impacts on this very well traveled road
- I know that in the work session you had asked that the notification go out to the neighbors we have
- required that and told them that the permit will not be issued until we receive confirmation that the
- Neighbors have been notified Thank you very much for that much appreciated other questions. All right
- questions from the public I
- Either in person you can approach the podium or on zoom Okay, seeing none is there a motion I move approval.
- Oh Do you have a question on this particular item sir? All right, if you could approach the podium and
- state your name, please I
- My name is Joseph Bradley Davis. And my question is, could you please reiterate what the potential negative
- impacts of going ahead and approving this decision might be so that the general public will more fully
- understand what this immediate vote might
- Resolved in thank you Thank you very much I will ask staff just to reiterate what's on the staff report
- about this item, please So this is a petition or a request for a road closure of East Moores Pike between
- Smith Road and 446 that does involve some night work this is to
- Tap into the city's water main to provide water service for the future Baxter Village subdivision, which
- is a 19 or an 18 lot single-family subdivision that is going in in this area The work is structured
- to have to date to overnight work periods that is to limit the
- Closures during the MCC SC days so that while school is in session. There is no detour Because the detour
- for this this particular work is up to 3rd Street So that is the reason for the night permit There are
- our minimal there's only really two houses that are right adjacent to this subdivision
- They will be notified as well as the neighborhood to the the neighborhoods to the north The work is
- going to be done over fall break to limit impacts to MCC SC Thank you very much so I would just encourage
- the The contractor to do more than just notify those two homeowners that they have told them that the
- We will not actually issue the permit until we receive a copy of the notification that was sent to them
- And usually what we've been doing is we have been asking them to send those out via email And include
- engineering in the email that is sent to the adjacent property owners. It'd probably nice to go and
- knock on the door
- Pardon probably nice to go knock on the door and have face-to-face conversations, but yes, we have we
- can't prove that but we can correct email correct, but yeah to Paraphrase the request of the the public
- the impact to the public here is temporary inconvenience During construction. Yes. Yes. Thank you. Mm-hmm
- All right. Is there a motion on this item? Yes, I move approval of the road closure and noise permit
- for night work for the Baxter Village subdivision And I second with the motion a second. I will call
- the roll Roach. Hi Caron. I motion passes The next item is sidewalk closure for building associates
- at Winston Thomas fire training center This is a request for a pedestrian diversion and closure of the
- west sidewalk along South Walnut Street as part of the Winston Thomas
- Fire training and logistics station project at 3812 South Walnut Street This is a one to two day closure
- that will be required to tie in the existing sidewalk to the new sidewalk Once the pedestrian diversion
- is in place the existing sidewalk will be removed to facilitate the utility work The traffic control
- will be in place from October 13th through December 25th. So that's the diversion that will be in place
- Pedestrian access will be maintained via the new sidewalk section Thank you very much questions from
- the board Are there questions from the public anything on zoom Okay Seeing none is there a motion? I
- move approval the sidewalk closure for building associates at
- Winston Thomas Fire Training Center on South Walnut Street and I second With a motion a second. I will
- call the roll Roach. Hi Caron. I motion passes Next we will move along to staff reports and other business
- We have a staff report from engineering We in 2024 did an MOU with Monroe County Regarding the Monroe
- County Karst Farm Greenway Project connector where we transferred
- Parts of the city's right-of-way to the county to allow them to build out infrastructure That project
- has completed so we will be taking back our right-of-way on Liberty Drive and Constitution Avenue And
- this is just to update the board. We've gone out. We've inspected everything it meets city required
- city codes and specifications And it will just now be back under city control
- The mo you has has ended and we just wanted to update the board So just just clarifying We didn't transfer
- the right-of-way we transfer the maintenance responsibility for the correct. Yes It was always city
- right-of-way. We just transferred the responsibility for the maintenance and the ability for them to
- construct in our right-of-way great and the reason why they were constructing in our right-of-way was
- because the MPO
- granted the Funding to the county correct for the project as a whole Including parts in the city limits
- and parts out of the city limits. Yes. Okay. Thank you Thank you Next we have approval of claims any
- questions from the board about claims questions from the public about claims All right, seeing none
- is there a motion I
- Move approval of the claims for the meeting of October 7th 2025 and the amount of 1 million seven hundred
- seventy three thousand five hundred and sixty one dollars and 78 cents I Second with a motion in a second.
- I will call the roll Roach. I Crone I motion passes With that we come to the end of it our agenda and
- I will call adjournment. I