We call our meeting to order for November 2nd, the Utility Services Board for the City of Bloomington
on a reminder that our mission is to enhance the quality of life in our community by providing safe,
sustainable, and high quality drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater services in a cost-effective
manner, promoting public health, economic vitality, and environmental stewardship.
Our vision is to be the leading municipal water utility organization in Indiana. All right, our first
item then, is there any petitions or communications from the public? Any public members here to speak
on any items not on our agenda tonight? Yeah, come on up to the podium and just give us your name so
we can get it in the record.
Good evening, my name's Barry Lemming. I've lived in the Bloomington area for about 20 years. I own
two successful businesses here that I run for about 18 years. I purchased, my wife and I purchased a
condo in Peppergrass at a sheriff's sale a few months ago. And when we went to get the water connected,
I was there and the water was, I could hear the water running in the toilet and the guy, the utility
guy said, yeah, we need to,
figure this out, so I shut the water off at the toilet. And then we did not go back to the house for
about a month and a half, because we had other projects that we were doing. But the previous owner of
the property, who had lost it for not being able to pay bank payments, obviously, contacted me and asked
if she could go back to that property and get some of her things, because she had left a lot of stuff
in the house. And I said, sure, that's no problem. Take whatever you want. You've got a couple weeks.
Anyway, it was about a month later, month and a half later, I went back, opened the door, and I could
hear the toilet running. I said, oh, no. Went and shut the valve off, and a few days later, I get the
bill for $1,120-some. I filled out the request form, the online form for the adjustment, and I was denied
that because they said that once it enters the sewer, that there's
no adjustment for that. And then I scheduled a meeting with Matt Havy and Michelle. And they basically
said the same thing, that they don't have the authority to make any adjustments on it. But I'm really
here for two reasons. One, to ask for an adjustment in this case.
I know it's not a lot for CBU, but for a working family like myself, nearly $1,200, well it is $1,200
now with the late fee that just was added on. It's a huge amount for me. But I'm also here because I
see a problem. And the problem is, well, first of all, I worked
Many years ago, I was a software developer. I wrote programs for utility districts, for banks, for real
estate companies, and for some government agencies. So I know quite a bit about software development.
And one of the core concepts of a system development is called safe by default. And what that means
is whenever there's a default option or a default field,
the programmer puts the safe option in there. Like if you're gonna make a bank transfer, you
don't automatically, it doesn't automatically pop up to $9,909,000, it pops up to zero, right? It's
the safe value. And the problem that I see here is that the utility district informed me that a note
was placed on the door. And that's great, you have somebody's home. But if nobody's there,
You know, it's not helping anybody. And Matt also informed me that I had the option to enroll in the
program for the automatic alerts. And there is what I don't understand. As a software developer, why
are you requiring customers to go through a lengthy process of setting up an account, creating a password,
filling out forms,
to get an emergency basic service that should be automatic. I did some research, and approximately 70%
of utility districts that offer emergency alert services automatically inscribe their customers in it
and give them the option to opt out. But here it's backwards. Here, instead of automatically being enrolled
in it with the option to opt out,
You have to physically go in and create, you have to go through a long process in order to get notified.
And like when the gentleman said at the introduction of the meeting, City of Bloomington wants to be
a leader. And I think one of the most important things that a utility district has to take in consideration
is the environment and the safety of the customers, safety of the environment, safety of the customers.
And by doing that, by the way the process is now, by forcing your customers to go through this process,
a lot of them aren't going to do it. A lot of them aren't even going to notice it. I didn't even notice
it. I just saw the email. I didn't open it. And I already knew the water was turned on. I saw the email
that said, welcome to city of Bloomington or something. Your water's turned on. I didn't open the email
and go through it and say, oh, yeah, man, I need to go set up an account.
You know, like I said, 70% of the utility districts already do that automatically. Duke Energy, they
sends out alert notices automatically. I'll just go through a list of some of them. La Porte,
Indiana does. Indiana American Water Company does. Northbrook, Illinois does. Cleveland, Ohio. Owasso,
North Carolina, Kansas City, San Francisco. A lot of utility companies, or most of them, do that. And
my biggest issue is with the environment.
You know, I think I was charged with 70,000 gallons of water. And that's wasted. The energy is wasted.
The filtration of it, the purification of it, the sewer process treatment plant, that's all wasted all
because the software developer or whoever makes the decisions here chose the wrong answer. Because safe
by default is automatically enroll people and let them opt out if they want to. And I know I'm not the only one.
I know it happens all the time. It's like you're catching most of the people. You've got the people
who are signed up. Your system's there. You're going to catch them. If there's a water usage way out
of normal, they're going to be notified. And if it's owner-occupied property, they're living there,
you're going to get a notice on the door. But if it's not, it doesn't fall in those two categories.
If it's an investor or the property's vacant for whatever reason, they're on vacation.
Uh, or they're between renters and the owner hasn't signed up. It's you're creating waste and I don't
honestly don't see any viable reason for that. Maybe there's something I don't know, but what is the
reason? What is the logic? Why do you make them go through this process instead of just automatically
enroll them and say, Hey, you'll re you'll be enrolled.
But if you don't want these notices for whatever reason, why wouldn't you want to be notified if your
water has been used? Ridiculous amount. But if you don't for some reason, check the box. Good. And now
we're not wasting millions of gallons of water. We're not wasting millions of gallons of sewer treatment
and electricity and energy. And all it is is just doing one simple little change to your software. So
those are the two things I'm asking to consider that for the environment, for your customers.
And yes, I would also like to be able to get a discount on this. And I probably won't charge you my
regular $25,000 software consultation fee. Just kidding. Thank you. Maybe we need a credit. Yeah. Well,
thank you, Mr. Lang. We appreciate you coming down and raising those on really two points there. We'll
take a look at our normal procedures that there's some limits that we have according
um, state and local regulations that we have and what we can, um, what we can allow in terms of, uh,
forgiving and not forgiving, uh, fees for usage. There are some limitations. So, uh, we'll have to take
a look at that and, and by our next meeting, we can, uh, we can get a definitive answer for you. On the, uh,
the software idea, we'll take a look at that too. That's an interesting idea to automatically enroll
people and ask them if they want to opt out. The only thing I think that, the only thing that would
be a challenge in that that we'd have to work on is when you initially sign up, you don't know really
how much you're going to use. And it takes a while to figure that out.
Yeah, I've got mindset pretty low and I regularly get the alerts depending upon how many people are
running the washing machine at my house when family comes to visit and things like that. My alerts start
to pop up. And because I I've kind of looked to see
what my normal monthly usage is. And I wouldn't have known where to start with that if I didn't have
a baseline. But you've got a good point. You've got a good point. Yeah. Right. The kind of situation
that you were in would have made sense that we use the software to send people a notice.
And that makes sense because of the kind of transient population that we have. We have situations like
this where we have renters and things. Sometimes it goes between different accounts. It could be that
people have moved out. It hasn't clicked over to the property owner, things like that. But those are
things we can work through. Good points. Any comments from the board? Yeah, Amanda? I think it's an
excellent suggestion. And I think it's something that we should definitely
research at a minimum. Um, there's, you know, there's got to be something that we can say, you know,
that what would be considered an excessive use. You let individuals know that we're doing this and then
they opt in and they go in and set it themselves. The gentleman that was just up there. I'm sorry. I
did not catch, catch her name. Um, also mentioned himself that, you know, he got an email and he didn't
read it. We're all humans. We all don't do that.
with many, many times. I do believe it will cause a lot of questions for our customer service department
when they're getting these, when individuals get emails, they're gonna make a phone call and say something,
but it opens the conversation and that'll be a short period of time while that's being introduced. So
I think it's an excellent idea and I can't believe that we haven't,
thought that through before. We've made it an option, you know. Yeah. But to be proactive. Yeah. The
false study might be different. Again, going back to your comment, Kirk, you know, are the transition
of individuals that live here, you know, we know which one, you know, we know which properties are rental
properties, even if you just assign a number that based on historically what
someone has used to be a baseline. I definitely would like to see us research this and see if it is
a possibility.
interested very much to hear the research that we'll take the time to do over the next two weeks before
our next meeting. Can you just, since you mentioned that you'd received an email, just so I'm clear,
can you please share how you set up your service for you to receive the bill for that property? I don't
remember. I mean, I just went through the basic process. And obviously, I'm not living there. But yeah,
I mean, it asks for your email.
So you did you go online to set it up and then you said I'm just I mean I guess because mine's been
set up previously so I've not you know set up the utility and so you know I didn't know if you came
in here to this customer service and you went online. I think Matt mentioned that it gives you the option
to sign up for for paperless billing and that that's where you sign up for the notifications.
Well, I don't want papers building because I'm old school and I've got a file for each of my properties
and I put physically put the receipt in each once and then go, you know, just that's how I do my book.
So I don't want papers of billing. I don't I don't know if the option was elsewhere or it was only within
the paper was building, but it should be automatic and just a note there to say, hey, if you don't want
this, click this box and we won't do it. Thank you.
billing? Yes, I met with Matt and Michelle, and they said they don't have authority to do anything.
So some things I think are clear to us who've been on the board a long time. Number one is if water
goes out, there's no decision that we can make that would reimburse your money. That's the rule. And
part of it is fairness, that if we did allow you not to pay, that it would be distributed among all
the other ratepayers
paying for your water. In any case, it's not anything that we can overturn. However, the sewer part
of it is reimbursable. That is, you can get a reduction because it was, is that not true? Well, even
in certain circumstances, yeah. Like if it doesn't go through. Yeah. I think we need to, yeah. We've
done that in the past.
Yeah. Well, hi. Chris Wheeler with City Legal. So if water goes through the meter, as long as the meter
is correctly functioning, there is no alteration that can be made. If it gets metered, it has to be
paid for. The utilities department can't and doesn't ask what you're using the water for and doesn't
care how much you use. If it goes through the meter, you got to pay for it. On the back end, what you're
suggesting though is there are some
instances where a correction can be made on the wastewater side. And that is if you can show that the
water didn't enter the wastewater system. So you have to show there was a break in the line somewhere
out in the yard or in somewhere where it didn't get into the sewer system. And in that situation, then
there's an opportunity to reduce the sewer side by a percentage. But in this case, because it was a
toilet. It was entering the system. Yeah.
So there isn't any opportunity on that side either, unfortunately. I guess the only, the other thing
I would suggest that Matt probably told you is that we do have a provision where you could pay off the
bill over time without being in arrears. Was that communicated? I assume that the toilet malfunctioned.
Is that what happened or did somebody turn the water back on?
No, that's a different problem. I believe the lady that the previous owner, when she came to get her
things, I believe she turned the toilet on, and you just didn't tell me about it. Because that's she
was the only person that I know of that was in the property after I turned off the toilet. Yeah. OK.
Well, yeah. I would also suggest, in addition to the door hangers, because this happened to me. I had
a line break.
I saw the door hanger because I work at home. I'm home all the time. But when that happened, I thought
if I didn't see this, I would have had no idea until my next bill. And it's going to happen over and
over again. Yeah. So I think a really easy thing, no matter what the software developers are able to
do, would be just to contact the property email or whatever, some other form than
the door hangar. Especially when the service address is different from the billing address because then
you know whoever is paying the bill doesn't live there. I think anytime I mean people could be out for
any reason or not use their front door or whatever. You have something if we've sent a human to physically
deliver a hang tack to a door. So we know that we have had an address
So what would it take for a human or, you know, or a report to spit out the next day to say this has
happened and customer service could not then say, let's make a phone call because it's still going,
you know, when there's been no contact from the customer or start with the phone call instead of sending
someone out. But does our system does it do text messaging as well?
We so we worked with Tyler to do Tyler notify for delinquent accounts because we had a similar situation,
but instead it was Someone wasn't aware that their account was delinquent. And so we had worked on having
text messages sent as an alert so I think it is a natural progression that we could
I mean, we'd have to look into it, obviously, but it is a natural progression that we might also be
able to notify customers the same way we now are able to with their delinquent accounts. But yeah, that
was kind of the first not opt-in text message service we'd worked on. Yeah, I can remember. I know I
get an email, but I can't remember if we get a text.
We don't get a text. We simply get an email. Much like Kirk, I know when my kids are doing laundry at
my house. When they come home. Okay. Well, thank you for that advice. We appreciate it. All right. Any
other petitions or communications from the public?
All right, next item is the approval of minutes of our meeting of October the 19th. And we all had a
chance to take a look at the minutes. All right, it's been moved and seconded to approve the minutes
of October 19th. All in favor say aye. Aye.
All right, minutes are approved. A regular meeting on the 19th. Next we have standard invoices. And
I've already set a chance to review the standard invoices for today.
that we approve the standard invoices. All right, she's been moving and seconding. Any discussion on
invoices? Can you please just remind me where we stand with our interdepartmental agreements? So after
this page process, we will still owe them for 2025. And we're planning on paying that over the next
couple of months, or in the next couple of months. And then after that, we'll be caught up. And then
hopefully, go ahead. Do we know the exact amount of the 2025? Yeah.
Um, so then I'm just curious why, um, why isn't it just paid? Uh, cashflow reasons. Okay. That's a lot
of money to shell out all at once. Certainly, yes. Okay. So. Okay. Yep. That's the only reason. And
then we'll be caught up. So then. Yep. Then hopefully. We'll only be like one year. Hopefully the first
half of 2027. Okay. We'll put 2026 to bed too. Perfect. Thank you. Yep. Thank you. All right. Any other
discussion?
favor for standard invoices for today say aye aye opposed all right motion carries next then is utility
bills for October 22nd all right it's been moved and second to prove the utility bills for October 22nd
All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? All right, we've got one more utility bill for October 29th.
Review that. I move that we approve the utility bill for October 29th. All right, it's been moved and
seconded to approve the utility bill for October 29th. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed?
motion carries next is wire transfers fees and payroll for November let's see the total there is five
hundred and sixty five thousand four hundred forty four dollars and ten cents all right it's been moved
and seconded to approve the wire transfers for today all in favor say aye aye opposed
All right, motion carries. Next then is the customer refunds for inactive accounts and final bills.
And let's see, there's one there for an overpayment. All right, it's been moved and seconded to approve
the customer refunds. Any discussion?
It's the same, I'm sure. It's probably the same one, yeah. Okay, so Dora dialed properties. What is
the sewer install fee that we're refunding them? Those were two single-family residences that paid for
a sewer installation fee to get rid of their septic tank. And then after the payment was made, these
fees were waived due to the fact that they were changing the septic tank, right? Yeah.
already and so we yeah they pretty they paid it and then got qualified for the program so now we're
refunding the payment so normally people don't pay anything yeah and it doesn't end up on these claims
well fantastic glad to hear people are using the the reimbursement program and that we've been able
to convert from the septic system to the sewer yes any other discussion
customer refunds all right it's been moved and seconded to approve customer refunds all in favor say
aye opposed all right motion carries next then is item five approval of the consent agenda items
turn to Catherine Zager for that report. Good evening. I'm Catherine Zager, utilities director. I'm
presenting tonight's consent agenda totaling $28,787 for non-chemical contracts. First is with Groomer
Construction Inc for $24,987 for the 4th Street curb and concrete installation.
Next is with Neowater Treatment LLC for $10.72 per gallon for the 2027 supply of Neowater FX300 phosphorus
remover at Blucher Wastewater Treatment Plant. And last is with Electric Plus Inc. for $3,800 for diagnostics
for the low service drive number four at Monroe Water Treatment Plant.
there any member who wishes to consider one or more of these items individually hearing none if there's
no opposition these items will be approved as recommended by staff hearing no opposition the consent
agenda is approved okay thank you you've saw that agenda item number we initially was agenda item six for
RDC agreement will not be heard this evening. So our next item is requesting approval of resolution
2026-19 to recommend amendments to title 10 of the municipal code in Bloomington entitled the wastewater
chapter 1017 food service establishment wastewater discharges.
hear a report from Attorney Wheeler. Good evening again. Chris Wheeler with City Legal. If you took
the time to review the staff memo, you will see that in July of this year, the state passed House Enrolled
Act 1348, which enacted a new statute
The state is now finally addressing fats, oils and greases. Up until this year, the state has been wholly
silent on the concept of regulating fats, oils and greases. CBU has been regulating fats, oils and greases
for quite some time now, and that's where we find our 1017 addresses how we regulate fats,
oils and greases. With this new statute, we are no longer in compliance with state law on a few things because
the state saw fit to do things a little bit differently than we do, which is not completely unheard
of. As a result, we've had to sit down and go through Title X of the Bloomington Municipal Code at 1017
and identify those areas where we need to make amendments to bring ourselves into compliance with this
new statute. When you go through the red line of Title X, Section 17,
I think it's pretty self-explanatory what we're trying to do. There are quite a few changes being made,
but mostly what we're doing is adopting new definitions that meet what the state's expecting of us.
We are adopting some requirements. We had kind of a blanket requirement to use a specific type of grease
detention or grease intercepts in
interception device and the state wants more flexibility so that developers and property owners can
choose what it is they'd like to use. It also changes some of the requirements by the state as to how
often certain detention and interception devices have to be pumped and maintained and then what kind
of reporting has to be done with regards to that sort of maintenance
and pumping requirements, what those intervals are. So these little nuanced areas of the law, we needed
to brush up our own fog in order to bring it into compliance with what the state expects. The good news,
I guess, is that with the flexibility that the state would like municipalities and local entities to
use, it does allow for developers to avoid some of the expense
that goes along with some of the bigger interceptors. So they can use detention devices as opposed to
interception devices, which can be cheaper to install. They can be smaller, so the footprint is a little
bit smaller, allowing them to have more option on where they might place these interceptors or these
retention devices. We also had a scenario where if you were building or developing
in areas that were zoned for food service establishments, CBU wanted those new properties or those new
developments to just go ahead and install the facilities for grease interceptors unless they entered
into an agreement with CBU to do a deed restriction stating currently we don't have any intention to
do a food service establishment but if we should change our mind we agree to put
and interceptor into the ground. With the new state laws, we have had to change our model a little bit
and be a little more flexible and allow new development to show that they are not going to be doing
any grease interception. They're not going to be doing anything that would cause grease. So they may
not be using a food service establishment. So we had to change some of the language to allow for that
kind of flexibility as well, which allows some developers who simply aren't going to
be using any kind of a food service establishment to avoid some of that upfront cost of installing grease
interceptors. So some good news for the developers, because of this flexibility, I think that's something
that is good to know. I'm happy to try and answer any questions with regards to the changes that are
being made. I'm not going to go through and line items, show you everything that we're asking to change,
but I'm happy to try and go through some of the questions you might have as you've reviewed this stuff.
Amanda. I just wanted to, first of all, whoever did the chart for us, I don't know if it was your office
or somebody here, this was very, very helpful in understanding everything and showing us the old,
the new, why we have to make this change. It made it very, very easy to read and comprehend. So I want
to say that I appreciate that.
Chris, what if there is a developer that is now and I don't know if we have anyone right now that is
building something that has particular requirements that were set forth by the city and they have provided
plans. They have gotten all the approvals to get work done and now no longer have to
install the grease receptors, but we've already like they're already kind of in process. Is that something
that the developer that has to come back to CBU to or to the city to get something amended? Does that
make sense? It does. Or like, you know, does it like, oh, well you were pre July one. So this doesn't
know this doesn't apply to you or you are now after July one and
we need to have some sort of appeal process. I don't know what CBU is doing with regards to some of
those transitional developments at the moment. The state law took effect on July 1st. So we, yeah, sure.
If you want to come up here, come on up and give your name and
My name is Carson Swafford. I'm the pre-treatment inspector here with City of Bloomington Utilities.
As of July 1st, we made sure that all of our processes were up to date with what was in the state code.
So as of July 1st, we were defaulting to that on all decisions that we made regarding any plan reviews
that were happening. So anyone that would have been installing a grease trap, we made sure that it was
appropriately sized based on
State law Thank you. Thank you for being proactive with that. That's yeah, that's that's great. Appreciate
that Yeah, so that's what I would have hoped to hear and everything that happens prior to July 1st Certainly
was still under the old laws that there were local regulations Thank you Does someone at the state read
our regulations to make sure we're complied so you could write anything you wanted. We did not ask for
anybody at the state to review our work. There isn't anybody up there who has a job to review local
regulation. Even if we were to ask anybody at the state, they might say that they would decline. They'll
let us handle it. Doesn't that put us at risk if we
put down. Well, we have that situation going on regularly because we have to try and come into compliance
with what the state's doing and our interpretation of the state's law might not always match up with
somebody else's interpretation of the state law. So you may have instances where developers might review
the same law and think that it means something differently than what our review meant. So you can you
can find yourselves
At odds so if a developer follows our guidelines But they're different from the state guidelines. Well,
the state has imposed this regulation Responsibility on local authorities to take the state's laws and
apply them locally So they hope that we do it correctly correct. Yeah, we are any any municipality that
has this sort of utility is charged with having to
Introduce a fog ordinance if they don't already have one and if they have one to update it to be compliant
with the state's new laws Because the state has now entered into this area
we are required to follow what the state mandates. If we were trying to regulate in a manner that was
inconsistent with the state, it would invite litigation and it would get resolved through litigation
if we took it that far, or it could be possible that
We didn't realize we were not in compliance, and they pointed it out so that we could change the way
we regulate and work it out that way as well. But certainly, the tiebreaker would be a court reviewing
the state versus local ordinance and saying whether or not the court thinks that we are in violation
with state law. OK, good luck. Well, I'm pretty confident that we have buttoned this up to be compliant
with state law. We have to do it all the time. I'm sure you have. Yeah.
constantly having to make sure that we are in compliance with what the state allows us to regulate.
This is the whole concept of how much home rule do we have, and we don't have a lot. Not a whole lot
of wiggle room. I think Lynn would be first to tell you just how difficult it is to constantly be having
to update and make sure that you're in compliance with what the state requires as far as regulations
are concerned. I would. Yeah.
I noticed that you pointed out that there is some some concern I guess or some possibility that this
has reduced the amount of oversight that we have in our previous regulations because
Some developers or restaurant owners may seek to have smaller devices that, as I understand it, we used
to have a required maintenance schedule, but that's not allowed anymore. Yeah, the intervals for how
often you need to maintain some of these devices are different than what we would hope for, but there
are best practices that should be followed. There is manufacturer,
recommended requirements for how often you should pump these devices. I think probably our experts can
explain it a little better, but I know that it's not quite up to the rigorous standards that we had
hoped for. We were really trying to do as much as possible to keep fat soils and greases out, and this
might allow a little bit more to seep in than we would hope for.
I'm sorry. Maybe less than the rest of the state. Maybe, yeah. Well, we know the downstream cost of
processing fog, and it makes me a little apprehensive, although I know there's nothing we can do about
it, because we're a subset of state government, and we have to follow what they mandate for us.
It would be not good if we end up having to spend more on the treatment end because of reduced required
capabilities by the producers of the grease. Well, it'll be interesting to see what happens in the next
couple of years. If there are higher instances of clogging in our system,
We might know exactly where to attribute those higher instances, instances. Jim. On the other hand,
for the greater good, the state now has fog requirements that weren't there before. It's quite possible
that a lot of municipalities who were simply turning a blind eye to it cannot anymore. You're right.
That is a good point. The greater good. That's a good point. Although they were
They were having, and their treatment systems, they were having to pay more, which they would have to
spread out among all of their rate payers. So, yeah. Well, at least the state maybe has made a step
forward. And Kirk, you said at the beginning, you set our mission at the beginning. There may be other
cities, municipalities that will now look to us as examples for how we've created our
um, regulations for within our, within the city. Now the state regulations. I hope they wait until we
get to council and recodify so that what they're looking at is in compliance with the state because
if they look right now, they're going to be terribly disappointed in what we have. Or perhaps there
may be some individuals who will be asked to speak at an event or run a workshop on how to set up your
fog regulations.
Great. Any other questions on this one? All right. We're ready for a vote here on resolution 2026-19.
I move that we approve resolution 2026-19. I move and second. Any further discussion? All in favor say
aye. Aye. Opposed? All right. Motion carries. Thank you. You're welcome.
Um, next item is requesting approval of an amendment to section 17 of title 10, CBU rules and regulations
on backflow. And Matt Dabberton is here to talk to us about this, which is we just switched from sewer
now back to water. Yes. Hi folks. I'm Matt Dabberton. I am the environmental program coordinator for CBU.
To give a bit of background on this one, while we're on the topic of changing our rules to be consistent
with other laws, this section of the rules and regulations, as Chris and I found out in looking through
it, predates our backflow program as it was established through the ordinance in 2018. What that meant
was there were several sections that were inconsistent
with what's written in our ordinance and what's written in state law. So one of the most substantial
changes there is the rules and regs currently requires a written 24 hour notice for inspection authority.
The ordinance does not and the Indiana administrative code does not. So changing that will give us more
flexibility and being able to
inspect people's backflow devices to make sure that they're getting tested and working properly to protect
our drinking water. The other substantial change is that we are hoping to add a provision towards the
end of it that gives us the authority to deny the acceptance of test results from backflow
testing contractors that are sending us either inaccurate tests or
falsified tests, things like that. We've had a few issues lately with testers submitting people's devices
as passing when they have installation issues that put our drinking water at risk, which the state requires
them to fail. And so it gives us the authority to kind of regulate within our own system. I'm happy
to answer any questions from there.
What kind of customers is this normally where you normally see issues? It varies. I mean, most backflow
devices are on commercial customers' water systems. People will have them for fire sprinkler systems
or domestic water in places like restaurants or things like that.
as well as residential lawn sprinkler irrigation systems. I've seen issues with testing in really all
three of those instances, whether it's irrigation or fire or domestic water. In Indiana, people are
licensed for life for backflow testing, which means that they can forget some of the rules over time.
If you've been licensed since 1985, you're still
within your legal right to submit test results today. But it doesn't mean that people remember every
little installation requirement over that entire period. Okay. Yeah, Jim. Is it difficult to do back
load testing? I know it's quite expensive that we pay every year. The test itself is
not particularly complicated. The testing, the people who are licensed to do the testing, though, have
to go through a 40-hour course with the state in which they learn about all the different rules as far
as how you can install the things in compliance with state law, the exact testing procedure as the state
wants it to be, and then they have to pass a written and practical exam after that.
The actual test itself is rather quick, but the licensing and all of the rules surrounding installation
can get kind of complicated. Thank you. All right. Any other questions for Matt? All right. I move that
we approve the updates to Section 17. Second.
Moved and seconded to approve the amendments to section 17 of title 10 and the other discussion all
in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? All right motion carries thank you Matt for your work on that. Thank
you very much. Next is requesting approval for amendments to section 26 of CBU's rules and regulations
related to stormwater and Liz is here.
Good evening. My name is Liz Carter and I'm the MS4 program coordinator for City Bloomington Utilities.
looking to add a section to section 26, which is the kind of stormwater section of rules and regs that
deals with privately owned driveway culverts. We've had kind of a policy in place about how we treated
driveway culverts in the past, but we've never written it down. So it can be kind of confusing for people.
While we started talking about creating this policy in writing so that it can be clearly communicated,
it turns out we kind of changed our unwritten policy a little bit. So I'm gonna go through how we treat
driveway culverts,
how we will be treating them going forward should you approve this. So a driveway culvert, we have in
the past said the driveway culvert, so the pipe running on your driveway, there might be a ditch on
either side, that is the responsibility of the private property owner. So if leaves get stuck in it,
you, the property owner, need to get the leaves out of it. So once it's there, it's for the property
owner to maintain. But then we have it.
problem when we want to do a ditching project through a neighborhood, either if folks don't have a driveway
culvert or if we need to upsize it to make the whole system work properly. We've run into problems in
the past where if we say that this is your private property, this is your responsibility, folks will
just say, I can't afford to replace that culvert, and that makes our whole project not work.
In the past, we've had some cost share with people, but then again,
our focus would have to be on neighborhoods that can afford to pay something versus neighborhoods that
can't. The goal of this policy is to be clear about whose responsibility these culverts are, in what
situation CBU will bear the cost of replacing them or adding them, and then to what standard we will
put back somebody's driveway. If you have any questions about this, I'm happy to answer them if we get
into the very
nitty-gritty engineering, I will ask Phil to help. All right. Any discussion on this? So we have a program
in place to cost share. We'll have the rules down. So in the past, I think we've kind of made a deal
with people where if they paid for the culvert
materials we would provide the labor to put it in. We're covering the materials and the labor going
forward because not everybody can afford a driveway culvert depending how big it is they can be very
expensive and we don't want to have to walk away from ditching projects because you have a neighborhood
where people just can't afford their part of the cost share. So we want to be in a place where if we
see a need for a ditching project that we're able to go forward with it regardless of
um, the residents abilities to replace their driveway culvert. Okay. What, um, so they're just responsible
for the maintenance forward and what is there some mechanism for violations? Yes. So, um, we added a
clause to title 13 last summer that, um, Kelsey, I believe brought to you that clarified that, um,
culverts our responsibility to the private property owner and gave us the ability to do enforcement
should they not maintain their culvert because of course it can affect other people. All right sounds
like an improvement to stormwater in the neighborhoods that need this improvement. All right any other
questions discussion?
I move that we approve the culvert policy additions. Then moved and seconded to approve the amendments
to section 26. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? All right, motion carries. Thank you. Thank you.
Thanks for your work on that. Next is approval of resolution 2026.
Dash 18 to designate surplus property for auction or worthless surplus. Matt. For this month. We do
have a old camera truck that is not functioning anymore, so we're going to try to get some money for
that and we have a lot of concrete forms that we've had up on the hill for quite awhile. That streets
taken over most of our concrete work, so we're going to try to get some money for those and clear up
some space.
And then also, there's some pipe that we've had for a while that we're deeming obsolete that we're not
going to use any longer. So those are the big hitters there. OK. Any questions for Matt? I move that
we approve the resolution 2026-18. Second. It's been moved and seconded to approve
surplus property auction or worthless surplus items. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? All right,
motion carries. Next we've got a request for approval of the First Amendment to the agreement with GAI
consultants. Engineer Peden is here to give us the lowdown. Yeah, Jane's off today. So Phil Peden, engineering.
Yes, this is an amendment to the contract you've already approved and what brought it to back to the
board is that there's a permit required through the Army Corps and sometimes it takes a little while
to hear back from them. So by the time we heard back about the permit regarding the element of Section
106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 requiring that historic review of the
structure so once we heard back we the engineers said that that might be a possibility so we originally
has it as a contingent component within the first contract. Controller saw that said you can't have
a contingency in there so that got removed and then now we know for sure it needs to be in there so
we're back to the board after receiving the proposal to complete that permit. So Phil I this is 6th
Street but 6th and Rogers or
It's near 6, and yeah, it's closer to the B line, I think. OK. All right. What's the historic piece
of it? It's got a stone arch. You can't see it. It's all underground. But yeah, it meets the criteria
to go through this process. Gee, if we're going to do all of this, at least we want to see it, right?
Well, you can take pictures. Right. All right. OK. Any questions for Phil on this one? I move that we
approve the contract amendment with GAI consultants. It's been moved and seconded. Any other discussion?
All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? All right. Motion carried. Thank you. And thank you, Phil. Our last item.
of action items it looks like is requesting approval of our on-call agreement with Ken's Westside Service.
Matt. Call contract. Ken's has the equipment to help us move our larger equipment, which not a lot of
other toy companies have. So we're just trying to get them in a position where if we need them, we can
give them a call to move some larger equipment. OK. Good.
All right, any questions for Matt on this agreement with Ken's Westside Tolling? Moved and seconded
to approve the service contract. All in favor say aye. Aye. All right, opposed? Motion carries. Carried.
All right. Next is old business. Any old business from the board? Yes.
It's kind of old slash new business, old business being that we still have a vacant position on the
board. And that's been vacant for, I don't even, I mean, I feel like it's been since the summer. End
of summer. And calling to the attention that we have three board members whose terms technically expired
December 31, to our president and our vice president. Knowing that this is probably not a priority of
the administration and how long this process does take, I really, because Kirk and Molly are both mayoral
appointees. I'm a council appointee. The vacancy is a council appointee.
The council appointees even take, I think, even longer than the mayoral ones because they have to be
interviewed. So we're now at November 1st. I know a lot of that is out of our control, but I do think
we need to be very proactive on that, especially with our two leadership positions. That's a good point.
Cat, have you heard anything from downtown?
the council appointment does take a little bit longer and that is what I know about that. Good that's
that's good to know. Yeah have been checking in on it. And just a reminder that our our board is based
on political party and it has to be balanced so that's you know again something else that I think we
just have to be aware of. Makes it
A little more challenging for the appointing body. It does make it challenging. And it is a requirement
of the state that we do. We stay balanced. That we follow the balance, correct. So anyway, that's, like
I said, old slash new business, Kirk. Yes, OK. That's good. I'm glad you raised that, because we are
two months from
The deadline. And I do know that in the past there has been some leniency with this, but that leniency
has gone into February or March. So again, not a reflection on staff, but this is something that we
do have to put in front of the administration that we want to be able to continue to operate and do
what we need to do to serve our rate payers.
Thank you, good reminder. Any old business from staff? Okay, new business from the board. All right,
new business from staff. All right, then I don't think we've had any subcommittees since the last meeting.
And so then we're up to staff reports. Just one, I wanted to congratulate Keeson.
Page for passing his certified erosion sediment and stormwater inspector exam or the SESWEE. Congratulations.
Great. Thank you. Anything else? All right. Any other petitions or communications from public?
Anybody else? Okay. Well, I think we can stand adjourned then. Thank you all.