WEBVTT 00:00:00.770 --> 00:00:07.503 - It is 5 30 p.m. On October 7 2025 and I call to order this regular meeting of the Board of Public Works 00:00:07.503 --> 00:00:14.172 - First on the agenda. We have messages from board members. Are there any messages from the board? None. 00:00:14.172 --> 00:00:20.840 - All right before we begin I will just say if there is anyone joining us in person when it is your time 00:00:20.840 --> 00:00:27.314 - to speak we'll ask you to come to the podium for anyone joining the meeting on zoom you can use the 00:00:27.314 --> 00:00:28.350 - raised hand and 00:00:28.706 --> 00:00:39.654 - Function or the chat function and we will ask you to unmute and speak at that time So first we will 00:00:39.654 --> 00:00:50.602 - start with appeals. The first noise appeal is at 519 West Hoosier Court Avenue Hello and Adina from 00:00:50.602 --> 00:00:58.046 - city legal Can we push this one to and go to the next one? Missouri 00:00:58.722 --> 00:01:12.153 - Because the officers on their way Sure, okay, so we will pause that and we will go on to the next noise 00:01:12.153 --> 00:01:25.841 - appeal which is 710 East 1st Street All right Almost Hello, I'm officer high tank with Bloomington Police 00:01:25.841 --> 00:01:27.262 - Department 00:01:30.594 --> 00:01:37.596 - Let me just get to the right spot in the packet Could you tell us a little bit about what happened We 00:01:37.596 --> 00:01:44.873 - have the staff report is there any other information that you can provide Not other than what was already 00:01:44.873 --> 00:01:51.875 - mentioned. We received a noise complaint for that address and we received three more noise complaints 00:01:51.875 --> 00:01:55.582 - before we responded to that address for for noise and 00:02:10.146 --> 00:02:18.355 - We'll go ahead and do questions from the board You said three more complaints all in the same evening 00:02:18.355 --> 00:02:26.403 - all the same night or is that over the course of time? Correct all the same night. Okay And there's 00:02:26.403 --> 00:02:34.854 - a document in the packet that has it looks like the complaint log I'm just trying to determine the times 00:02:34.854 --> 00:02:36.222 - That were called 00:02:39.234 --> 00:02:54.694 - 2253 2256 2302 2303 Okay, can we have the appellant come to the oh, sorry more questions from the board 00:02:54.694 --> 00:03:08.222 - almost I'm thinking slowly tonight So your your statement is that you personally witnessed 00:03:08.386 --> 00:03:14.708 - Excessive noise coming from the appellant. Is that correct? Yes, sir. Okay, and what was the nature 00:03:14.708 --> 00:03:21.219 - of the noise? I was a loud party people flowing into the street We also got a complaint that there was 00:03:21.219 --> 00:03:27.731 - possibly firearms and drug use that did not appear to be the case No firearms or drugs, but definitely 00:03:27.731 --> 00:03:34.116 - noise. Okay, and were there other people cited the same evening at the same address? I don't believe 00:03:34.116 --> 00:03:37.150 - so. Okay was there something specific about the 00:03:37.314 --> 00:03:43.070 - the appellants Noise that came to your attention that others were not cited He lives there. We cite 00:03:43.070 --> 00:03:49.057 - the resident that lives there. That's responsible for the party. Can you say that again? He lived there 00:03:49.057 --> 00:03:54.871 - He said he lived there and we cited we cite the resident that lives at the address of the complaint. 00:03:54.871 --> 00:04:00.743 - Okay so just as a matter of course and just for kind of our knowledge do you cite the the leaseholder 00:04:00.743 --> 00:04:04.830 - essentially or the sublease holder or any resident of the apartment of 00:04:05.122 --> 00:04:14.248 - It's whoever lives there. So basically anybody that's on a lease there or claims that they're a resident 00:04:14.248 --> 00:04:23.200 - there. Yes Okay, but again, there was just the noise Complaint filed against the one person right now. 00:04:23.200 --> 00:04:31.978 - Yes, ma'am Okay now if we can ask The appellant to come if you could please state your name and then 00:04:31.978 --> 00:04:34.846 - Provide us with your information 00:04:35.586 --> 00:04:41.501 - Alright, my name is Carter Clay Smith. I'm the resident at 710. This is Anthony Escobedo He's the one 00:04:41.501 --> 00:04:47.358 - who the complaint was filed to and our appeal was grounded in the fact that this was a private event 00:04:47.358 --> 00:04:53.158 - for my club I hope I founded a professional development club last year called black in business and 00:04:53.158 --> 00:04:59.073 - it was for members only but because of Bloomington it's a party school people like to have fun and so 00:04:59.073 --> 00:05:05.278 - it got out of hand due to getting out of control people were spreading the word without our permission and 00:05:05.442 --> 00:05:09.764 - They were coming to the residents without our permission the doors were locked so we wouldn't let other 00:05:09.764 --> 00:05:14.044 - people were not invited in Because of that there were a lot of people out on the streets that we tried 00:05:14.044 --> 00:05:18.365 - to get to leave I believe I don't know if I remember correctly I believe he said that the officer tried 00:05:18.365 --> 00:05:22.604 - to get the people leave and they also wouldn't leave you tried to get them leave ourselves before the 00:05:22.604 --> 00:05:27.133 - complaints came they could also be fair to mention that it should be on the record that all those complaints 00:05:27.133 --> 00:05:31.413 - that were just mentioned all happened within the span of ten minutes and it was because that there are 00:05:31.413 --> 00:05:31.870 - these like 00:05:32.290 --> 00:05:37.469 - These random people who just showed up on our lawn. It was like a surge of people in like a 10 minute 00:05:37.469 --> 00:05:42.596 - span We couldn't control it. I know there was like so the police came twice the first time they gave 00:05:42.596 --> 00:05:47.724 - us the ticket We completely understood like we're gonna quiet it down lock the doors did whatever we 00:05:47.724 --> 00:05:52.954 - could and yet there was still like a surge of people Where I'm kind of confused is that they they told 00:05:52.954 --> 00:05:58.234 - us noise wasn't an issue like that That was what one of the police officers told me he said They walked 00:05:58.234 --> 00:06:01.534 - up to the house and it wasn't it wasn't loud like everything was 00:06:01.762 --> 00:06:06.214 - Noise wise was contained in the house. I thought it was quiet, but it was just it was the people so 00:06:06.214 --> 00:06:10.799 - 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 00:06:10.799 --> 00:06:15.295 - control over and to follow up on that We've also done extensive work with our neighbors We've talked 00:06:15.295 --> 00:06:19.969 - to all of them to make sure that it's okay because we know that we're in their community We don't impose 00:06:19.969 --> 00:06:24.555 - ourselves and so we want to make sure that everybody says, you know everybody we want to have fun, but 00:06:24.555 --> 00:06:25.534 - we also don't want to 00:06:25.858 --> 00:06:30.864 - Ruined other people's day and so we tested the noise. We've talked to all of our neighbors who are like 00:06:30.864 --> 00:06:35.774 - in close proximity to us We tested it before the party We tested it before the party actually started 00:06:35.774 --> 00:06:40.587 - the same night of the party and they also all confirmed that the noise was not an issue Halfway are 00:06:40.587 --> 00:06:45.497 - about 30 ish minutes into the party We texted Jeff who has he has a sensitivity to like hearing issue 00:06:45.497 --> 00:06:50.359 - that we talked about and so we were like, hey Jeff How's the noise the party starting to pick up? So 00:06:50.359 --> 00:06:52.958 - we want to make sure like if you should adjust or not 00:06:53.314 --> 00:06:58.671 - Jeff said everything was fine. It wasn't until the people came, and then specifically a certain, I don't 00:06:58.671 --> 00:07:03.824 - know who it was, certain group of individuals, they came in a black suburban, and they were blasting 00:07:03.824 --> 00:07:09.130 - music outside of their car. So the noise wasn't even coming from our residents. It was coming from this 00:07:09.130 --> 00:07:14.385 - mystery vehicle that decided it was appropriate to pull up in front of our house and just blast music, 00:07:14.385 --> 00:07:19.538 - just bothering everybody. And so that's really the extent of our appeal, is that we feel like it was 00:07:19.538 --> 00:07:23.262 - not on us, but on residents. And especially since we didn't invite them, 00:07:23.426 --> 00:07:29.090 - Completely just like word of mouth that these other people invited these people it was a private event 00:07:29.090 --> 00:07:34.809 - for my members and his members and I feel like Really the noise complaint came from that black suburban 00:07:34.809 --> 00:07:40.309 - that was blasting the music Because that's the only possible source of the noise besides the people 00:07:40.309 --> 00:07:45.918 - chattering which isn't enough to get a noise complaint So that's pretty much the extent of our appeal 00:07:47.586 --> 00:07:57.723 - Can I ask which of you resides in the apartment or is on the lease? I was the one who spoke to the police 00:07:57.723 --> 00:08:07.381 - officers. Yeah Let's start with I just have a follow-up question. Can the officer come back and just 00:08:07.381 --> 00:08:13.310 - speak to the issue of the the one officer said there wasn't a 00:08:14.146 --> 00:08:20.832 - Enough noise something you said something about noise and it doesn't necessarily match what was in the 00:08:20.832 --> 00:08:27.323 - call log Sorry, I didn't hear the first part of what you said. Can you repeat that for me? You said 00:08:27.323 --> 00:08:33.944 - that One of the officers said that there wasn't noise There was two other Officers there at the scene 00:08:33.944 --> 00:08:40.565 - and he specifically told me that it was like yeah noise isn't the issue. It's because of these people 00:08:40.565 --> 00:08:43.486 - So that's why I'm just confused as to why it 00:08:43.586 --> 00:08:50.615 - Is a noise citation when the police officer told me it wasn't the noise. So is that referring to the 00:08:50.615 --> 00:08:57.852 - same? Call I wonder or is that are we considering this if I was if they're saying that I was there that 00:08:57.852 --> 00:09:05.089 - would be the same call I only responded to that residents once When I arrived I did hear loud amplified 00:09:05.089 --> 00:09:11.422 - noise coming from the residents not a car outside Okay, thank you Questions from the board 00:09:14.146 --> 00:09:25.809 - Some questions for me and this I think is directed at staff Is there a are there statutory Findings 00:09:25.809 --> 00:09:37.706 - or is there a burden of proof that we need to find in order to approve something like this? From City 00:09:37.706 --> 00:09:41.438 - of Bloomington legal department 00:09:41.730 --> 00:09:49.996 - Casamanian so under fourteen point oh nine oh three oh noises prohibited It's Any unreasonable noise 00:09:49.996 --> 00:09:58.426 - shall mean sound sound that is volume frequency or pattern that prevents disrupts injures or endangers 00:09:58.426 --> 00:10:06.365 - the health safety welfare prosperity comfort comfort or repose of reasonable persons of ordinary 00:10:06.365 --> 00:10:07.838 - sensitivities, so 00:10:08.034 --> 00:10:16.479 - I would ask that you look to that statute fourteen point oh nine zero three zero and the Bloomington 00:10:16.479 --> 00:10:24.840 - municipal code You get two attorneys here today one more thing I'd like to add is in fourteen point 00:10:24.840 --> 00:10:33.284 - oh nine oh three OB it's unlawful for any person to cause or make any unreasonable noise or to allow 00:10:33.284 --> 00:10:37.214 - any unreasonable noise to be caused or made in 00:10:38.050 --> 00:10:44.544 - Or on any real or personal property occupied or controlled by the person So I think the residents said 00:10:44.544 --> 00:10:50.911 - it was their house. They did have an event that drew people to it Maybe more people than they wanted 00:10:50.911 --> 00:10:57.405 - But they failed to control the environment It resulted in noise that the officer said she heard coming 00:10:57.405 --> 00:11:03.772 - from the house and she issued a ticket I think the finding that the board can make is based on those 00:11:03.772 --> 00:11:07.870 - facts. We do have the owners here admitted they had an event and 00:11:08.098 --> 00:11:14.208 - Caused a crowd to come for whatever reason whether it was social media or I don't know how the people 00:11:14.208 --> 00:11:20.319 - knew about it, but they were there acknowledged by the owners and The officer said I heard noise when 00:11:20.319 --> 00:11:26.429 - I was coming up to the house And so I think it was a failure to control the environment that resulted 00:11:26.429 --> 00:11:32.659 - in the unreasonable noise I think that's the finding that the board can make if if you so wanted before 00:11:32.659 --> 00:11:35.774 - you go so, you know, I I come from the board from a 00:11:35.970 --> 00:11:43.777 - Planning and zoning and BZ background was very specific findings yet But yeah, what I'm hearing you 00:11:43.777 --> 00:11:51.663 - say is that we're simply weighing the facts and whether the facts of the testimony Correspond to our 00:11:51.663 --> 00:11:59.470 - understanding and reading of the city statute. Yes, right. So obviously to support a code violation 00:11:59.470 --> 00:12:05.950 - there have to be facts to support it and The officer has said she personally heard 00:12:06.402 --> 00:12:14.077 - Noise coming from the house loud enough that it was it was in her professional opinion unreasonable 00:12:14.077 --> 00:12:21.829 - noise we did get verification from the occupants of the home that they also knew there was noise now 00:12:21.829 --> 00:12:29.735 - it was they said outside of The residents but it was I think per the code on their property and it was 00:12:29.735 --> 00:12:33.726 - it was it wasn't they weren't able to control it so 00:12:33.986 --> 00:12:40.593 - It's a violation to allow any unreasonable noise to be caused or made in or on real or personal property 00:12:40.593 --> 00:12:47.138 - occupied or controlled by that person and so As long as you have that finding in the record those facts 00:12:47.138 --> 00:12:53.683 - in the record It would support this if should it get appealed to the next level and one sorry one final 00:12:53.683 --> 00:12:58.654 - question This is the first one of these I've seen since I've been on the board 00:12:59.938 --> 00:13:05.854 - Recourse for the appellants if we were to deny the appeal could make an appeal to circuit court and 00:13:05.854 --> 00:13:12.184 - then we would Again why this has been put in the record why the officer was here was to say I had personal 00:13:12.184 --> 00:13:18.277 - knowledge of this, you know The comment about the other officer what he said Is here say he's not here 00:13:18.277 --> 00:13:24.429 - to testify it We don't know whether in fact that officer said that or not not saying that the occupants 00:13:24.429 --> 00:13:29.694 - aren't telling the truth We just don't have actual proof of that and so if they chose to 00:13:29.986 --> 00:13:36.258 - Appeal to the circuit court and then we would we would prosecute that at that level and then see what 00:13:36.258 --> 00:13:42.592 - the trial court did One additional question and then we'll give you a chance to come back up I'm sorry 00:13:42.592 --> 00:13:49.172 - the appellants mentioned a black suburban with a lot of noise emanating from it And I just want to confirm 00:13:49.172 --> 00:13:55.567 - that you said when you heard noise you identified it is coming out of the house Not the street in front 00:13:55.567 --> 00:13:58.334 - of the house. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Thank you. I 00:13:59.746 --> 00:14:06.447 - Give you another chance to speak I'd like to follow up first on the facts that were mentioned for speaking 00:14:06.447 --> 00:14:12.898 - about the facts I don't know if the officer can testify to this as well But the majority of the people 00:14:12.898 --> 00:14:19.286 - were not on our property but on the sidewalk and under my understanding I'm pretty sure that's public 00:14:19.286 --> 00:14:25.611 - property and not under us One inability to control and like manage the people it was not under us We 00:14:25.611 --> 00:14:29.118 - we control the people that we had under our supervision 00:14:29.474 --> 00:14:35.278 - These other people are not under our supervision. They were not inside our property. And we kicked them 00:14:35.278 --> 00:14:41.082 - off our property onto the street. That's where this whole debacle happened. Also, speaking towards even 00:14:41.082 --> 00:14:46.719 - the rule of recognition, I feel like the whole point of this is to kind of like, the purpose of that 00:14:46.719 --> 00:14:52.467 - tort is to make sure that the entity or the people who are actually causing the noise are held liable. 00:14:52.467 --> 00:14:58.494 - And I feel like it'd be almost unjust to find us liable if we're not the parties responsible for the noise. 00:14:58.850 --> 00:15:05.698 - Also One of the attorneys mentioned something about Like the source of the noise and who is responsible 00:15:05.698 --> 00:15:12.282 - for it and I feel like that's a key key thing that we should harp on and how that The source of the 00:15:12.282 --> 00:15:14.718 - noise we will continue to state that 00:15:15.522 --> 00:15:20.522 - As it's our fact of the matter that the noise was not coming from our house We did multiple checks to 00:15:20.522 --> 00:15:25.425 - make sure our noise would not be above like any limit any limit that would disturb bother the peace 00:15:25.425 --> 00:15:30.425 - prevent anybody from sleeping There's a family next to us the guy who has the the ear problem next to 00:15:30.425 --> 00:15:35.327 - us We did our due diligence to make sure would not bother them during the party unless the door was 00:15:35.327 --> 00:15:39.102 - open at the time I'm sure that's why it was loud because once the door opens 00:15:39.202 --> 00:15:44.458 - the music is able to transcend a lot farther. But once the doors are closed, we've tested multiple times. 00:15:44.458 --> 00:15:49.515 - We tested it after the appeal and after we got the citation. Everybody that we've talked to, all four 00:15:49.515 --> 00:15:54.523 - of our neighbors, the ones at seven, I don't know, but the Jeff, Anka, they're all professors, River 00:15:54.523 --> 00:15:59.729 - and Rowan, all these people, they all attested to us and said that the noise wasn't a problem. Actually, 00:15:59.729 --> 00:16:04.836 - one of our neighbors made a joke and said, did we still throw the party? Because they didn't even hear 00:16:04.836 --> 00:16:09.150 - the noise. I understand that maybe hearsay, but going back to the facts of the matter, 00:16:10.178 --> 00:16:15.806 - It was under our control and what was on our control was kept underneath the legal limit What wasn't 00:16:15.806 --> 00:16:21.545 - outside of our control we kicked them off the property So it was no longer our responsibility and what 00:16:21.545 --> 00:16:27.173 - they chose to do on public property I feel like has nothing to do with us and last going back to the 00:16:27.173 --> 00:16:32.801 - intention of the ordinance in the first place is to hold those accountable liable and our engagement 00:16:32.801 --> 00:16:33.470 - in the fact 00:16:34.594 --> 00:16:40.509 - We have done our best to hold ourselves liable beyond that and I feel like it would just be unfair to 00:16:40.509 --> 00:16:46.656 - blame Stuff that is outside of our circumstances when we did our due diligence. We control the situation. 00:16:46.656 --> 00:16:52.456 - We got the people off our property To still say it's our fault. But that's what I would say and the 00:16:52.456 --> 00:16:58.371 - key facts are we kicked them off our property We did our due diligence and the noise is only loud the 00:16:58.371 --> 00:17:04.286 - doors open So, of course the officer would say the noise is loud, but that's that's what we would say 00:17:05.890 --> 00:17:25.372 - Thank you Any other questions from the board Any questions from the public or on zoom All right hearing 00:17:25.372 --> 00:17:30.430 - none do we have a motion I 00:17:38.178 --> 00:17:51.550 - I'll move that the board of public works deny the appeal from the noise violation at 710 East first 00:17:51.550 --> 00:18:05.055 - streets with the finding that's the appellants My phrase that Margie do I need a specific finding or 00:18:05.055 --> 00:18:06.526 - is the the 00:18:07.298 --> 00:18:16.347 - in the record enough So there's case law that says boards and commissions speak through their minutes 00:18:16.347 --> 00:18:25.308 - I think that I Will give you the language of the code then again though if you'd like to think about 00:18:25.308 --> 00:18:33.470 - your motion again unreasonable noise means sound that is a volume frequency or pattern that 00:18:34.562 --> 00:18:41.205 - Sort of disrupts the the repose of reasonable persons and I can tell you that I wrote this noise ordinance 00:18:41.205 --> 00:18:47.662 - back in the day and Reasonableness standard is required. So it's because it's the courts have said it's 00:18:47.662 --> 00:18:53.932 - hard to Sometimes hard to define but everybody knows it when they see it, you know, you kind of know 00:18:53.932 --> 00:19:00.451 - what's reasonable What's unreasonable noise that you can hear outside of a house from outside of houses, 00:19:00.451 --> 00:19:02.686 - you know considered unreasonable so 00:19:03.554 --> 00:19:11.502 - Was the one that you mentioned earlier about? Allowing yeah, yeah, and that's subsection B except as 00:19:11.502 --> 00:19:19.450 - otherwise Provided it shall be unlawful for any person to cause or make any unreasonable noise or To 00:19:19.450 --> 00:19:27.398 - allow any unreasonable noise to be caused or made in Or on any real or personal property occupied or 00:19:27.398 --> 00:19:32.670 - controlled by that person. So allowing the unreasonable noise That 00:19:32.802 --> 00:19:41.507 - Their property or property that they control. I will just again reiterate that the officer said she 00:19:41.507 --> 00:19:50.647 - heard the noise coming from the house Okay, so let me let me rephrase this I moved that the board denied 00:19:50.647 --> 00:19:59.614 - the noise appeal at 710 East first Street finding that the appellants Did allow for unreasonable noise 00:19:59.614 --> 00:20:01.790 - to be caused or made and 00:20:02.114 --> 00:20:14.846 - or on their real estate And I will second with a motion a second I will call the roll This is a motion 00:20:14.846 --> 00:20:27.702 - to deny the noise appeal Roach I Korone I Motion passes to deny the appeal at 710 East 1st Street Thank 00:20:27.702 --> 00:20:30.174 - you both for coming 00:20:30.882 --> 00:20:40.991 - Automatically provide information about appealing if desired Okay All right, so now we will move on 00:20:40.991 --> 00:20:47.966 - to the other noise appeal which is 519 West Hoosier Court Avenue and 00:21:00.962 --> 00:21:07.785 - This one we have looks like just the officer. I'm sorry. The officer is here. Okay Can you tell us your 00:21:07.785 --> 00:21:14.346 - version of what happened please or connecting to the staff report So on the night of the noise call 00:21:14.346 --> 00:21:20.906 - it appended for approximately 27 minutes or more before we went to respond to it by time we respond 00:21:20.906 --> 00:21:26.942 - I believe I'll have my notes in front of me, but it's like 43 minutes before we arrived and 00:21:27.362 --> 00:21:33.716 - Parked roughly 50 to 100 yards away could hear the music for my vehicle approached the apartment. There 00:21:33.716 --> 00:21:39.948 - was three people standing outside My approach to the apartment I asked who lived there you still hear 00:21:39.948 --> 00:21:46.118 - the noise from inside the apartment doors and windows were all closed Young lady said that she lived 00:21:46.118 --> 00:21:52.411 - there. I informed her why I was there for noise ordinance everything else violation and complaint When 00:21:52.411 --> 00:21:56.382 - I did such she asked if I could give her a warning I said no and 00:21:57.250 --> 00:22:03.172 - At this point in time, I believe, I don't know the exact time it was, but it was after midnight. And 00:22:03.172 --> 00:22:09.270 - being the distance where I was while I parked, I could still hear it from my vehicle and while I exited 00:22:09.270 --> 00:22:15.310 - the vehicle, I went and requested her ID and issued her a noise ordinance. I explained to her what the 00:22:15.310 --> 00:22:21.466 - ordinance was, how to appeal the ordinance, and the steps she needed to go through. Thank you. Questions 00:22:21.466 --> 00:22:24.222 - from the board? Is the appellant here with us? 00:22:29.282 --> 00:22:42.507 - So similar to the last the last appeal just want to make sure I understand your testimony correctly 00:22:42.507 --> 00:22:55.996 - you personally witnessed Excessive noise coming from this address. Yes, okay April could we hear from 00:22:55.996 --> 00:22:59.038 - the appellant, please? 00:23:03.362 --> 00:23:09.719 - Hi. So my name is Surya Tejamodkuri and I'm a graduate student here at IU. This is my first time dealing 00:23:09.719 --> 00:23:15.955 - with any kind of citation, so I really appreciate the chance to explain what happened. So on the night 00:23:15.955 --> 00:23:22.373 - of the incident of September 14, 2025, we had a small gathering at our house that involves roughly around 00:23:22.373 --> 00:23:28.791 - eight to nine people. It was a birthday party. I was not the host of the gathering. I live in that house. 00:23:28.791 --> 00:23:33.150 - I live in that house very separately, not so involved with my roommate. 00:23:33.570 --> 00:23:40.084 - And because it was the birthday party of my roommate, I was just invited to the party. I had no control. 00:23:40.084 --> 00:23:46.288 - I didn't organize any of the event. The actual host name was Lokesh Reddy Elluri. And in the packet 00:23:46.288 --> 00:23:53.112 - submitted with me as additional information, he has provided a signed statement accepting full responsibility 00:23:53.112 --> 00:23:59.006 - for the noise that night. So let me, I just want to clear some facts mentioned by the officer. 00:23:59.138 --> 00:24:05.562 - So when the officer came, there were three people outside standing. It was me, my friend, and my another 00:24:05.562 --> 00:24:11.680 - friend who was a female. So I want to mention that my female friend never talked to the officer. He 00:24:11.680 --> 00:24:17.798 - always talked to me. And he did not issue the citation to a she. He issued the citation on my name. 00:24:17.798 --> 00:24:24.222 - So I'm a male. So the citation was issued against my name. I was the only person talking to the officer. 00:24:24.514 --> 00:24:29.489 - I was honestly nervous about that situation. And since I had my ID back on my phone, I didn't want to 00:24:29.489 --> 00:24:34.366 - escalate this issue. So I handed it over when he asked, I was just cooperating with him. So that is 00:24:34.366 --> 00:24:39.340 - the reason I believe the ticket ended up being issued in my name, just because I was the first person 00:24:39.340 --> 00:24:44.217 - he interacted with. Not because I was the one hosting the party, not because I was the one managing 00:24:44.217 --> 00:24:49.094 - the party or not because I had any control over the party. I had no authority over the music or the 00:24:49.094 --> 00:24:53.630 - number of guests. I was just cooperating with the officer trying not to escalate this issue. 00:24:54.306 --> 00:25:01.947 - I respectfully agree with all the rules of City of Bloomington and the community rules and also understand 00:25:01.947 --> 00:25:09.160 - my responsibilities as being the resident so I have attached other supporting documentations as well 00:25:09.160 --> 00:25:16.659 - with my appeal so I respectfully ask the board to consider this information as I was not the responsible 00:25:16.659 --> 00:25:20.158 - party. Thank you very much. I want to clear that 00:25:20.514 --> 00:25:28.157 - I was the one who talked to the officer. Officer didn't have any conversation or any kind of wording 00:25:28.157 --> 00:25:35.649 - with any female that was present outside the house. I was just outside talking to my friend. Okay, 00:25:35.649 --> 00:25:43.292 - thank you. Questions from the board? So questions for the appellant. Just to confirm, you are one of 00:25:43.292 --> 00:25:46.622 - the leaseholders at 519 West Hoosier Court. 00:25:46.882 --> 00:25:55.309 - And the person that you say is Responsible that took the responsibility. Are they also a leaseholder 00:25:55.309 --> 00:26:03.819 - at that address? Yes, they are okay, and were they Were they in attendance were they there physically 00:26:03.819 --> 00:26:12.329 - at the location at that time? Yeah, they were there physically at that location that time Okay, thank 00:26:12.329 --> 00:26:15.166 - you Thank you is the other person 00:26:15.490 --> 00:26:23.787 - Who's the leaseholder, the one you're referring to who did not speak with the officer, the female? No, 00:26:23.787 --> 00:26:31.439 - she did not speak with the female. She did not speak with the officer. The female did not have 00:26:31.439 --> 00:26:39.978 - any conversation with the officer. But the female is the other leaseholder. No, she is not a leaseholder. 00:26:39.978 --> 00:26:45.214 - She was just an invited guest. Questions for the officer? Sorry. 00:26:45.314 --> 00:26:57.947 - Don't remember your name. How many citations were issued that night? Residents, just one. Okay, and 00:26:57.947 --> 00:27:10.581 - is it typically your practice that when you find someone who resides at the location, who holds the 00:27:10.581 --> 00:27:14.750 - lease, who's the property owner, 00:27:14.914 --> 00:27:26.557 - You issue the citation to that person or do you try to track down the person who's ultimately responsible? 00:27:26.557 --> 00:27:37.764 - Residents are responsible what happens there? Okay. Thank you I'm trying to frame my question. I don't 00:27:37.764 --> 00:27:44.510 - know if it's for legal but if there's two parties who live in 00:27:45.090 --> 00:27:54.687 - residents that are both leaseholders and one Is responsible but indoors and one is not responsible but 00:27:54.687 --> 00:28:04.190 - outdoors and the officer talks to the person outdoors Who claims not to be responsible for the noise, 00:28:04.190 --> 00:28:13.694 - but the noise is happening indoors with the other resident I Would appreciate a little feedback maybe 00:28:15.586 --> 00:28:22.109 - Margie rice city legal. I think it goes back to the control issue. So You know think about who what 00:28:22.109 --> 00:28:28.762 - when we're why and how it's a party there is loud noise The you know leaseholder is in control of the 00:28:28.762 --> 00:28:35.350 - property can ask people to leave can ask them to stop whether or not They invited the people over it 00:28:35.350 --> 00:28:42.590 - is their house. They are paying right there they have control over it and if they choose not to stop the noise 00:28:43.202 --> 00:28:49.208 - and it gets out of control and the officer has to be called. It's really an objective standard. Um, 00:28:49.208 --> 00:28:55.394 - if, if, you know, if there was noise, it was heard by an officer. So, you know, there's complaints and 00:28:55.394 --> 00:29:01.580 - they come and they hear the noise and the person who's in charge of that space, whether or not they're 00:29:01.580 --> 00:29:07.886 - participating in the activities allows the noise to continue. That's there's culpability. And so I think 00:29:07.886 --> 00:29:12.030 - that the owner, if you know, my apartment, my house, I can say, Hey, 00:29:12.226 --> 00:29:18.625 - You know what you need to leave. It's this may not be my birthday party I may not be invited but it 00:29:18.625 --> 00:29:25.024 - is my house and and you know, you need to leave because this is It's out of control. And so I think 00:29:25.024 --> 00:29:31.743 - that's it's a really a control issue Does that answer your question or does it not answer your question? 00:29:31.743 --> 00:29:38.270 - I Think so I think so. Thank you. Yeah, it's a little bit of you know being at the wrong place at the 00:29:38.270 --> 00:29:40.318 - wrong time and if you allow the 00:29:40.482 --> 00:29:46.736 - The noise to continue and don't stop it then you know, you can be liable for that Yeah, I'm just concerned 00:29:46.736 --> 00:29:52.873 - that one resident was outside the house. The complaint was about the noise inside the house The resident 00:29:52.873 --> 00:29:57.374 - ticketed was outside the house not inside the house with the noise sure, but 00:29:57.570 --> 00:30:03.438 - The officer is hearing the noise approaching the house. Certainly that person can hear the noise I don't 00:30:03.438 --> 00:30:09.083 - think I did not hear the person say they didn't hear the noise or there wasn't a party going on They 00:30:09.083 --> 00:30:15.063 - chose not to stop it. I don't know why they chose not to stop it It resulted in a ticket if this appellant 00:30:15.063 --> 00:30:20.763 - believes that the other Person was more responsible. They can always get reimbursed, you know for the 00:30:20.763 --> 00:30:26.520 - ticket from that person but sometimes choosing to allow noise to continue when you had the opportunity 00:30:26.520 --> 00:30:27.358 - to stop it and 00:30:27.522 --> 00:30:37.097 - Happening and it bothers the neighbors such that the police get called, you know, it's it's a lesson 00:30:37.097 --> 00:30:46.672 - learning how to control your environment Okay, thank you very much other questions from the board no 00:30:46.672 --> 00:30:53.118 - questions from the public on this item Okay, so is there a motion I 00:30:54.818 --> 00:31:05.428 - Move that the Board of Public Works deny the noise appeal at 519 West Hoosier Court Avenue finding that 00:31:05.428 --> 00:31:15.732 - the appellant Did unlawfully allow unreasonable noise to be made in property that they control And I 00:31:15.732 --> 00:31:23.486 - second with the motion in the second I will call the roll Roach. Hi Karan I 00:31:23.650 --> 00:31:32.080 - Motion passes to deny the appeal And with that we will move along to petitions and remonstrances Are 00:31:32.080 --> 00:31:40.843 - there any comments or questions actually comments about any item that is not on tonight's agenda? Anyone 00:31:40.843 --> 00:31:49.022 - in person in council chambers or online if you would use the chat function or raise your hand and 00:31:54.082 --> 00:32:02.678 - Moving along to the consent agenda Tonight's consent agenda is very long. So bear with me for a moment 00:32:02.678 --> 00:32:11.358 - on the consent agenda. We have minutes from July 1st 2025 minutes from the special meeting on July 14th 00:32:11.358 --> 00:32:19.454 - 2025 resolution 2025-070 mobile vendor blooming tie-on wheels resolution 2025-073 holiday market 00:32:20.322 --> 00:32:27.742 - resolution 2025-076 Polish American Heritage Month celebration resolution 2025-077 Bloomington Book 00:32:27.742 --> 00:32:35.458 - Festival public improvement acceptance for 1503 West Arlington Road subdivision public improvement bond 00:32:35.458 --> 00:32:42.878 - reduction for the Ralston Drive subdivision memorandum of understanding between the Board of Public 00:32:42.878 --> 00:32:47.998 - Works and Bloomington Transit for the West Second Street project and 00:32:48.482 --> 00:32:55.310 - Change orders two and three for the long view greenway project contract with ENB paving LLC for the 00:32:55.310 --> 00:33:02.480 - downtown paving project contract with acu brine LLC for salt brine machine maintenance service agreement 00:33:02.480 --> 00:33:09.786 - with groomer construction for planter box repair at the southeast corner of Kirkwood in Washington outdoor 00:33:09.786 --> 00:33:17.502 - lighting service agreement with Duke at West Smith Avenue between South Fairview Street and South Jackson Street 00:33:18.658 --> 00:33:25.064 - outdoor lighting service agreement with Duke at North oris drive between West 11th Street and North 00:33:25.064 --> 00:33:31.663 - Monroe Street outdoor lighting service agreement with Duke at various locations from West Smith Avenue 00:33:31.663 --> 00:33:38.262 - to West 17th Street and South Euclid Avenue to South Roger Street contract with ENB paving LLC for the 00:33:38.262 --> 00:33:44.861 - Union Street raised crosswalk and payroll Are there any items that need to be removed from the consent 00:33:44.861 --> 00:33:46.334 - agenda this evening? I 00:33:47.746 --> 00:33:55.237 - Any comments from the board on the consent agenda? Any comments from the public from the consent agenda 00:33:55.237 --> 00:34:02.584 - this evening? Again, if you are on Zoom, feel free to use the raise hand function or chat. All right, 00:34:02.584 --> 00:34:09.787 - seeing none, is there a motion? I move approval of the Board of Public Works consent agenda for the 00:34:09.787 --> 00:34:17.566 - meeting of October 7th, 2025. And I second. With the motion and a second, I will call the roll. Roach? Aye. 00:34:17.890 --> 00:34:25.886 - I motion passes Next we will move along to new business and the first order of our item under new business 00:34:25.886 --> 00:34:33.360 - is the proposed lighting plan and encroachments for the Bloomington Convention Center Engineering I 00:34:33.360 --> 00:34:37.246 - will be bringing you the rest of the agenda tonight 00:34:40.290 --> 00:34:47.340 - So first up we have a preliminary approval for encroachments into the right-of-way for the new Convention 00:34:47.340 --> 00:34:54.457 - Center This is for three street lights that will replace the Cobra headlights that were removed To provide 00:34:54.457 --> 00:35:01.507 - adequate street lighting in that section of East 3rd Street They just wanted approval that we will accept 00:35:01.507 --> 00:35:08.158 - these encroachments into the right-of-way before they go through the process of installing them and 00:35:10.978 --> 00:35:17.407 - Thank you questions from the board. Okay. Let me let me make sure I understand So there will be another 00:35:17.407 --> 00:35:23.836 - encroachment agreement for there will be an encroachment agreement This is just you're just giving them 00:35:23.836 --> 00:35:30.204 - a verbal approval that we will accept the encroachment agreement later on Why couldn't we just approve 00:35:30.204 --> 00:35:36.447 - the encroachment agreement now? Because we don't want to do a formal encroachment agreement until it 00:35:36.447 --> 00:35:38.302 - is actually in place. Oh Okay 00:35:38.530 --> 00:35:47.811 - So that way we know that it is built the way we want it to be built Okay, and these are going to be 00:35:47.811 --> 00:35:57.184 - privately owned and paid privately owned and maintained Yes, or they will be maintained and paid for 00:35:57.184 --> 00:36:06.929 - by the Convention Center All right. Thank you Questions from the public on this item All right, is there 00:36:06.929 --> 00:36:08.414 - a motion I move 00:36:08.578 --> 00:36:16.122 - preliminary approval of The proposed lighting encroachment agreement for the Bloomington Convention 00:36:16.122 --> 00:36:23.666 - Center And I second with the motion the second I will call the roll Roach. I Korone I motion passes 00:36:23.666 --> 00:36:31.286 - Next item is road closure and noise permit for night work for the Baxter Village subdivision So this 00:36:31.286 --> 00:36:37.246 - is a request for a road closure on East Moores Pike between Smith Road and 446 00:36:37.378 --> 00:36:45.606 - For back the Baxter Village subdivision for them to complete their tap into the water main So that they 00:36:45.606 --> 00:36:53.517 - can provide water to the future subdivision This request includes night work, which will be done on 00:36:53.517 --> 00:37:01.666 - October 14th and October 20th The rest of the work will be done during the day To this is to limit the 00:37:01.666 --> 00:37:04.830 - impacts on this very well traveled road 00:37:04.962 --> 00:37:13.076 - I know that in the work session you had asked that the notification go out to the neighbors we have 00:37:13.076 --> 00:37:21.353 - required that and told them that the permit will not be issued until we receive confirmation that the 00:37:21.353 --> 00:37:29.630 - Neighbors have been notified Thank you very much for that much appreciated other questions. All right 00:37:29.630 --> 00:37:31.902 - questions from the public I 00:37:32.162 --> 00:37:44.090 - Either in person you can approach the podium or on zoom Okay, seeing none is there a motion I move approval. 00:37:44.090 --> 00:37:55.361 - Oh Do you have a question on this particular item sir? All right, if you could approach the podium and 00:37:55.361 --> 00:37:58.206 - state your name, please I 00:38:01.698 --> 00:38:14.359 - My name is Joseph Bradley Davis. And my question is, could you please reiterate what the potential negative 00:38:14.359 --> 00:38:26.434 - impacts of going ahead and approving this decision might be so that the general public will more fully 00:38:26.434 --> 00:38:31.358 - understand what this immediate vote might 00:38:31.682 --> 00:38:42.964 - Resolved in thank you Thank you very much I will ask staff just to reiterate what's on the staff report 00:38:42.964 --> 00:38:54.463 - about this item, please So this is a petition or a request for a road closure of East Moores Pike between 00:38:54.463 --> 00:39:01.406 - Smith Road and 446 that does involve some night work this is to 00:39:01.506 --> 00:39:10.519 - Tap into the city's water main to provide water service for the future Baxter Village subdivision, which 00:39:10.519 --> 00:39:19.102 - is a 19 or an 18 lot single-family subdivision that is going in in this area The work is structured 00:39:19.102 --> 00:39:24.510 - to have to date to overnight work periods that is to limit the 00:39:24.610 --> 00:39:33.719 - Closures during the MCC SC days so that while school is in session. There is no detour Because the detour 00:39:33.719 --> 00:39:42.570 - for this this particular work is up to 3rd Street So that is the reason for the night permit There are 00:39:42.570 --> 00:39:50.046 - our minimal there's only really two houses that are right adjacent to this subdivision 00:39:50.498 --> 00:39:59.806 - They will be notified as well as the neighborhood to the the neighborhoods to the north The work is 00:39:59.806 --> 00:40:09.672 - going to be done over fall break to limit impacts to MCC SC Thank you very much so I would just encourage 00:40:09.672 --> 00:40:19.166 - the The contractor to do more than just notify those two homeowners that they have told them that the 00:40:19.458 --> 00:40:26.349 - We will not actually issue the permit until we receive a copy of the notification that was sent to them 00:40:26.349 --> 00:40:33.107 - And usually what we've been doing is we have been asking them to send those out via email And include 00:40:33.107 --> 00:40:39.733 - engineering in the email that is sent to the adjacent property owners. It'd probably nice to go and 00:40:39.733 --> 00:40:40.926 - knock on the door 00:40:41.698 --> 00:40:49.083 - Pardon probably nice to go knock on the door and have face-to-face conversations, but yes, we have we 00:40:49.083 --> 00:40:56.612 - can't prove that but we can correct email correct, but yeah to Paraphrase the request of the the public 00:40:56.612 --> 00:41:04.286 - the impact to the public here is temporary inconvenience During construction. Yes. Yes. Thank you. Mm-hmm 00:41:05.666 --> 00:41:12.007 - All right. Is there a motion on this item? Yes, I move approval of the road closure and noise permit 00:41:12.007 --> 00:41:18.347 - for night work for the Baxter Village subdivision And I second with the motion a second. I will call 00:41:18.347 --> 00:41:24.625 - the roll Roach. Hi Caron. I motion passes The next item is sidewalk closure for building associates 00:41:24.625 --> 00:41:31.091 - at Winston Thomas fire training center This is a request for a pedestrian diversion and closure of the 00:41:31.091 --> 00:41:35.486 - west sidewalk along South Walnut Street as part of the Winston Thomas 00:41:35.586 --> 00:41:42.191 - Fire training and logistics station project at 3812 South Walnut Street This is a one to two day closure 00:41:42.191 --> 00:41:48.734 - that will be required to tie in the existing sidewalk to the new sidewalk Once the pedestrian diversion 00:41:48.734 --> 00:41:55.088 - is in place the existing sidewalk will be removed to facilitate the utility work The traffic control 00:41:55.088 --> 00:42:01.630 - will be in place from October 13th through December 25th. So that's the diversion that will be in place 00:42:01.762 --> 00:42:12.216 - Pedestrian access will be maintained via the new sidewalk section Thank you very much questions from 00:42:12.216 --> 00:42:22.669 - the board Are there questions from the public anything on zoom Okay Seeing none is there a motion? I 00:42:22.669 --> 00:42:29.086 - move approval the sidewalk closure for building associates at 00:42:29.282 --> 00:42:37.390 - Winston Thomas Fire Training Center on South Walnut Street and I second With a motion a second. I will 00:42:37.390 --> 00:42:45.813 - call the roll Roach. Hi Caron. I motion passes Next we will move along to staff reports and other business 00:42:45.813 --> 00:42:53.843 - We have a staff report from engineering We in 2024 did an MOU with Monroe County Regarding the Monroe 00:42:53.843 --> 00:42:59.038 - County Karst Farm Greenway Project connector where we transferred 00:42:59.138 --> 00:43:06.810 - Parts of the city's right-of-way to the county to allow them to build out infrastructure That project 00:43:06.810 --> 00:43:14.482 - has completed so we will be taking back our right-of-way on Liberty Drive and Constitution Avenue And 00:43:14.482 --> 00:43:22.003 - this is just to update the board. We've gone out. We've inspected everything it meets city required 00:43:22.003 --> 00:43:27.870 - city codes and specifications And it will just now be back under city control 00:43:28.066 --> 00:43:35.500 - The mo you has has ended and we just wanted to update the board So just just clarifying We didn't transfer 00:43:35.500 --> 00:43:42.447 - the right-of-way we transfer the maintenance responsibility for the correct. Yes It was always city 00:43:42.447 --> 00:43:49.464 - right-of-way. We just transferred the responsibility for the maintenance and the ability for them to 00:43:49.464 --> 00:43:56.550 - construct in our right-of-way great and the reason why they were constructing in our right-of-way was 00:43:56.550 --> 00:43:57.662 - because the MPO 00:43:57.762 --> 00:44:06.690 - granted the Funding to the county correct for the project as a whole Including parts in the city limits 00:44:06.690 --> 00:44:15.360 - and parts out of the city limits. Yes. Okay. Thank you Thank you Next we have approval of claims any 00:44:15.360 --> 00:44:23.945 - questions from the board about claims questions from the public about claims All right, seeing none 00:44:23.945 --> 00:44:25.662 - is there a motion I 00:44:26.434 --> 00:44:34.556 - Move approval of the claims for the meeting of October 7th 2025 and the amount of 1 million seven hundred 00:44:34.556 --> 00:44:42.754 - seventy three thousand five hundred and sixty one dollars and 78 cents I Second with a motion in a second. 00:44:42.754 --> 00:44:50.569 - I will call the roll Roach. I Crone I motion passes With that we come to the end of it our agenda and 00:44:50.569 --> 00:44:52.638 - I will call adjournment. I