- It is Wednesday, August 26th at 3.30. I'm sorry, not 3.30, slightly after 3.30, 3.36. So first on the
- agenda is public input for items not on the agenda. Do you want to acknowledge? Oh, that would be good,
- too, because. I don't know if we have to do a roll call. No. But that would be good. So present in the
- Nattie Hill Room is Surveyor Tron and Wright Rondoff.
- I'm here as Commissioner Jody Madeira and also Commissioner Julie Thomas. So first on the agenda is
- public input for items not on the agenda. We have no one here in the Natt U Hill Room. Would anyone
- online like to offer public comment on items not on our agenda? Seeing no hands, I will move on to the
- second item.
- item on our agenda. Approval of minutes. I actually have an item. I would actually like to move that
- we amend our agenda to re insert something that was struck off, which is the long range dream, long
- range stormwater plan contract award with WSP. Yes. And then also as suggested, but
- that we should make it contingent to legal's final approver approval prior to final action. That's for
- emotion. I'm just putting it on the agenda. Okay? Sure. I. That is fine with me. Do you have any comments
- on putting that back on the agenda? No, I'm happy to voice vote. Yes, let's do a voice vote all on all
- in favor of putting the long range
- That is back on our agenda. Would you like to keep it in its original location? It's fine. Okay.
- All right. So any other modifications on the agenda? Okay. Then we'll move approval, move forward with
- approval of the minutes for July 22nd, 2026. Any comments or questions on the minutes? All right.
- I believe we can do a voice vote for that as well. All in favor of approving the minutes for July 22nd,
- 2026, say aye. Aye. Moving forward to our stormwater expenditure report for May, June, and July 2026.
- Okay, for May.
- pipes, we spent $4,084.76, and backfill $5,339.10, and then gas was $5,619.16. That was our main expenditures
- on that month. Any questions? We need to make that change, too. Yeah. In the minutes. I already made
- it in my motion.
- No questions. I don't have any questions. Okay. Pull up the packet. Other one out, so I'm just trying
- to dig through my email. I had not really planned to attend, but then was trying to make sure we had
- a... Questions? The packet should be in there. Going through the website. Okay, there's two of them now.
- I just had to refresh it. Yeah, because I sent the agenda separate, then the packet is a totally separate
- document. Is there any large expenses that you wanted to bring attention to? If not, then no questions.
- Not in May. The large ones were the ones I read off. Yeah, summer.
- And then for June, we had field crew supplies, $5,183.16. And backfill, $22,924. Fuel, $5,978.43. Contractual
- services, $22,081.35. And that was for traffic control. And we also paid the IU fellows.
- Close all fees, $4,904.22 cents. That was for street sweeping. And then public education, $1,850. And
- that was to rent a room for Ivy Tech for the work. Contractors workshop. Contractors workshop. That
- was back in January. They billed us a little late for that one. Yeah. Yeah, they did. Okay. Any questions?
- a comment not a question. Just with the out of category transfer from professional fees to backfill
- slash pavement repair maintenance. Is that a reflection of us taking on some in-house projects and instead
- of paying those services to contractors? We did have several more projects this spring in-house to repair
- or replace
- And so that would be where some of your backfill and the back, the pavement repair is coming from. Yeah,
- our crew has been very busy this year. So it's not exactly a one-for-one, but it does show our initiative
- of taking on more in-house projects, which I applaud and are very supportive. So I just wanted to bring
- that out and bring attention to it, not just for the board, but for the public too. So bravo. They've
- been very busy replacing and repairing a lot this year.
- Okay, for July, we had the gas was 7,675.86, professional fees $14,857.51, and then the service, maintenance
- service, fleet maintenance, 9,520.49, and the grade all needed repair again.
- the cost on the repair for the greater. It gets a lot of use. Is was that divided between high that
- was my question is actually how did that get divided between highway and stormwater or did storm is
- this storm waters great all. Okay it's not it's not okay got it thank you. Just verify. What was that
- dollar amount trying to look on my phone it's a little difficult. For the repairs or maintenance of
- the greater nine thousand.
- Five hundred and twenty dollars and forty nine cents. Okay, that's A lot of money, but it's a very expensive
- piece of equipment. So So not as much as you would think Awesome, thank you The questions comments on the
- to new business. So first item of new business, we have the shoes, very contract amendment number five
- for the baby Creek redesign. And I'm going to go ahead and make a motion to approve, um, the shoes,
- very contract amendment number five. I will second that. Um, so I'm sure you have not to exceed on that.
- What? We can, um,
- about it first, maybe. So you have all seen projects, design projects related to Baby Creek several
- times now over the last almost decade. And we hope that this is the final one, the final plan that you'll
- see. So notably, this plan will include a new schedule down here.
- partially on pages eight and nine of the packet for the next four years to staggered design and construction
- of each of these crossings. One of the biggest cost savings that we will see is not including a run
- around. The replacement method will allow us to keep one lane of traffic open during construction so
- that residents
- will still be able to access their homes with very limited interruption. And that also means that we're
- not disturbing their property or the creek area as significantly as if we did include the run arounds.
- So you'll see it as a staggered approach with the final construction happening in 2029. Go ahead.
- I was just going to ask if you could then give us what the change order amount is, because there are
- things cut off and things added, and what is the outcome of that change order financially? That's a
- great question. I think that the original, when they bid out the first crossing, the anticipated cost
- was almost half of what the bids came in at.
- which I think the beds were close to a million dollars just for one single crossing, which is a lot
- of money for a single crossing. And so the hope here is that this design will be at least a quarter
- of that. When we do go to construction, it'll be much in the couple hundred thousand dollars for construction
- rather than a million.
- But my question is, when you have a change order, there's usually a dollar amount involved. Is it higher?
- Is it lower overall? How has the contract changed in terms of the time? It will be lower overall because
- they've already done a lot of the design work. And so this is just checking to make sure that this new
- design matches
- the figures that they've had before. So there will be just a hydraulics check to make sure that things
- haven't changed since they did their initial hydraulic modeling, and to make sure that these new structures
- that are going to be part of the design all line up together to adequately convey the drainage and not
- give us the same problem that we're seeing now. That's it. Thank you. Got it. Perfect. So I don't have
- exact dollar amounts for you, but we do know that it will be less
- Well, I guess to that point, the amount that's on here listed, if we put it not to exceed, that's fine,
- right? Because any change order we would see in the future. Correct. And to be clear, this is only for
- the first crossing. We don't really want to do that.
- the hydraulic modeling check and then the design of the first crossing, it doesn't include construction
- or anything else. So it is limited in what they're giving us with this initial. I would recommend we
- do not include a dollar amount because it's lower overall and we let this play out and see how it goes
- because this is something where they are, we're doing something outside of a traditional bridge project
- here and so
- Let's see what happens. It doesn't mean then like during each phase the construction phase would be
- presented with the dollar amount again. Yes. Yes. So this is for the preliminary design. We'll get the
- final design which would include a quote for the engineers design quote for the construction. And then
- when we bid it out we'll see what the contractors think. I guess.
- I don't see it being problematic having the not to exceed, especially if they're going to come back
- here for the construction cost. If it creates some difficulties, I would want to know that outside of
- us needing to approve a higher amount for the same type of work that you just outlined.
- be able, depending on how the vote goes or the motion, I don't think able to support a not to exceed
- clause. Also, just it would be nice to have some visualization aids or graphs, maps within this proposal,
- because when you say structure,
- 1345, 1349, 1362, you know, that's good because you're reviewing the design plans and things of that.
- But, you know, unless I come over and ask you to kind of point to these on a map, you know, it doesn't
- really give me any spatial understanding of where these structures are. So just even like just a simple
- aerial with some points on it, you know, with labels.
- would be really nice especially when we're talking about you know a potential over all projects and
- construction you know million to half a million to a million plus to get this to the finish line so
- that's just something personally that would be very helpful for me and then just to be very transparent
- I did have the
- conversation with our stormwater program manager just a second ago that I think I have confidence in
- our stormwater program. I think we have a very expert team of people over there. My concern is still
- some unknowns. So this might be a project I can get behind, but I would really like to see what happens
- with that reorganization discussion before
- we potentially commit more money and obligate stormwater dollars to projects without knowing what that
- impact may be. And I know November's not that far away. So to get behind this, I'm going to, again,
- have confidence and faith into the program and the program manager and their team. But it'll be hard
- if we see another project like this come on the agenda before
- we understand what's going on with that reorganization effort with the town of belts. So that's just
- a general comment. I know we don't need to get into that or address that. That's just I want to be very
- transparent and let everyone know kind of work time because it will impact our budget moving forward
- and also have a long range plan. And I think getting that thing in place will really give us a
- ability to do a forecast of our expenditures and know where those obligations are going to fall. Our
- operational costs and our personnel costs. So I recognize that there is no map included with this, which
- would help clarify some things for you all and the general public. So I hope you can see this map. The
- first crossing is kind of right here, where this first little bend is past the big bridge.
- And then there's other crossings. The second crossing is not too far. And then the third one is a little
- further back, which is the worst one back here. And then there is, right around here, the fourth one
- is a little further back even. So this final crossing is not part of the scope of this, but these,
- and they get a little complicated because of the way that the water has winded around the road, crisscrossing
- it multiple times, and so it's coming in at odd angles. Thank you for showing that. Appreciate it. This
- first one, yes, is just here at this little bend. Are there questions or comments?
- I don't know if we got seconded. Yeah, I seconded it. I would like to just put the not to exceed $107,700.
- Complicating anything. If you're going to do a not to exceed, I'd recommend something like $120,000.
- There are some things that may change here. Okay, that's fine.
- even 130 would be okay. You know, I doubt, I doubt they're not, I doubt they're going to go to over
- 200,000 without coming back and talking to us. But you know, I, I like to make sure we put in some of
- those parameters also. Can you name a number please for a motion? I would like to offer a friendly amendment
- to, but not to exceed that 120,000, $25,000. You said 125. Yes.
- I will second that because it does not matter. Can we do a voice vote on that? We have to do a voice
- vote to amend the motion. Yes. All right. Voice vote. All those in favor of amending the motion to approve
- the Shrewsbury contract amendment number 5, Baby Creek redesign, with a not to exceed clause for $125,000, say aye.
- Aye. That motion passes. So then I believe we can go to the public. We have no one here in the NatU
- Hill room. Would anyone like to offer public comment on this online? No one? You have to do.
- Thomas? Yes. Madeira? Yes. Enright Randolph? Yes. Motion. Wonderful. All right, so now we're on our
- added item of business, bring back the long range drainage plan contract award, which was says on the
- agenda continue to September 23rd, 2026. But again, we amended the agenda to move that forward to today.
- I'm going to make a motion
- that we consider the long-range stormwater plan contract award for WSP. Yes. And I was just going to
- say that that is not the drainage plan. It is the stormwater contract. What is the title? It's the long-range
- stormwater plan contract award. Yes. And yes, so. Is that going to be the official name, even though
- it says drainage?
- Well, it'll be the long range drainage plan. Um, I added contract award because this was, we are awarding.
- I don't know why, because the drainage board isn't doing it. No, I true. Yeah. I guess it's county drainage
- in general. So, um, I call it the stormwater long. It's always been a stormwater long range plan as
- far as I've been like the last one we did. And the last one was to, we can just rename it. We don't
- have to do it. No, no, no. Yeah. No issue with us renaming it to stormwater.
- Okay, good. Okay. So, uh, Yeah, I guess that's a shilling question. No, no, I'm just saying he can give
- us information about this contract. Do we have to vote on that? Okay. Yeah. All right. Mr. Dilling.
- Thank you very much. Uh, the, um, I understand that the stormwater board met with Debbie SP and others to
- do interviews and selected WSP. So the WSP sent us a project or some proposed contracts. One is the
- master services agreement which would apply to any type of contract we have with WSP and then there's
- the work order contract which is the specific one for consulting services. So the master service agreement
- is written as if it covers
- construction design construction documents and so forth so it's not really applicable to what we're
- doing here and so if my feeling is if the county were ever desirous of hiring WSP to do construction
- or design work that I would I would not recommend signing this master service agreement because it's
- It limits their liability to $50,000. It requires the county to fully indemnify them, even against the
- contributory negligence actions, which the Tort Claim Act gives us coverage on. So I would never recommend
- signing that. But if you are going to just
- have them do a consulting contract where the likelihood of damages are minuscule. I think it's okay
- with a few corrections, and I shared what I suggested
- with Erica, she sent it to WSP, and they sent us revised contract back. And those changes basically,
- they have a, the contract starts out and it refers to WSP, then it shifts to consultant, but there was
- nothing that really tied consultant to WSP, so we made that connection. Then, let me see if I can find
- my email to make sure my, yeah.
- get this a lot where companies say that the documents produced are professional services, and we always
- have to change it to work for hire. And that's a copyright thing, which means we own the documents,
- we can do whatever the heck we want with them, and you can't stop them. But we did put in there that if
- if the contract ever involves construction documents or estimates, that we would not use them on any
- other project without WSB's approval. And that seems fair to me, because if they design a project and
- they construct it, and then we have somebody else come in to do an addendum or an amendment or an addition,
- and they refer to those plans, and they make a mistake that creates problems. WSP just wants to be off
- the hook, and that's reasonable. Then, let me see. Okay. Finally, we just said, let's make this master
- services agreement
- contract good for two years. That will cover the 15-month projected time for the consulting contract
- to be completed. And then if in the future we ever wanted to hire WSP to do construction design and
- so forth, we would enter into a new master services agreement. But we'd have to wait two years for that.
- So those are the changes. And with those understandings, I feel
- about it, but you know, it's the kind of contract we see all the time now from engineering companies
- where they just, it seems like they don't want to take any responsibility for anything they do, and
- if they can get away with that, good for them, but we hope that we can not agree to those things. And
- WSP agreed to those changes that you've outlined here? Yes. Okay.
- that. Okay so I'm good with that in this contract will then go to now it's had legal review. It will
- now come to the commissioners for final approval. Yes. Yeah. I guess. When said and I guess there's
- probably some subjectivity. Um.
- you know, to maybe recommended practices or solutions. And I guess what I'm trying to get at is let's
- say there's a project that is recommended and they provide some best practices and we have the capability
- to do that in-house
- and we're not gonna maybe contract that work out, where does that line come from us being able to use
- the document to execute that project and it not be considered them actually almost providing us construction
- plans? I mean, there's some ambiguousness there or uncertainty of what a full on engineering shovel
- ready project within this plan to what is just,
- best practices? Well, I would say best practices are best practices, but construction design would have
- measurements, specifications, things that relate exactly to the project site. So yeah, I don't see a
- lot of opportunity for confusion there. Okay. And then just to drill in a bit more, we couldn't utilize
- those for in-house purposes?
- I feel like if we're going to pay for that, they're going to provide it, and we have the means to do
- it in-house, that seems fair. As you stated, that if we were going to do contractual services, we need
- to get their approval, but like... Yeah, if we're doing it in-house, we're doing it on our own design,
- okay? Our staff is going to go out there and figure out
- how to install this pipe, you know, what size pipe they need to order and so forth. So that's all done
- in house. So that wouldn't be something that WSP is providing us. That kind of... And they wouldn't
- have to kind of give us the thumbs up approval like if we were going to... Okay, I just wanted to clarify
- that because I understand using another company's work to, you know, offset some of your own time and
- effort if you're a private
- service provider, but using that internally for us, the stormwater program to tackle some of these issues.
- And if you don't see the issue for us being able to do that, then yeah, everything's good. I just wanted
- to clarify that a bit. So if that makes sense. Yeah. Okay. Well, and within the scope of what the plan
- that they provide us is they're not giving us any plans. They're going to outline potential projects
- for us and give us a ranking
- based on the criteria we all established with them, but they're not giving us any plans. The plans will
- come at a later date. Even if it is like a recommendation, like replace this pipe, that's gonna need
- to have specifications as Dave said. So we don't expect to have- They go from a six to eight inch, is
- that that measurement? Is that the ambiguity? It would probably be increase this pipe size. It would
- be more generic. Be determined? Yeah. Okay. Yeah. So we don't expect them to give us any
- specific plans that say you need to redesign it in this way. It just says redesign this intersection
- for drainage. And that's what I'm anticipating. I just wanted to drill in that we had the liberty to
- execute things within that document. So thank you. I have one final question on this. Is two years too
- long from your perspective as a stormwater program manager?
- No, I mean, there's always delays that can happen with the getting the plan together. So, you know,
- we've got our 15 months ideal situation for getting the plan to us. But as we know, there's just delays
- that could happen on our end on their end. But I mean, seven months. So if we end in 15 months on time
- and we want to use them, we can't use them for another seven months.
- We could use them for additional consulting. I just wouldn't use them for construction or design. We
- have other firms. Thank you for entertaining my questions and answering them. I would hate to have a
- contract that's too short, too.
- I have two questions. The first one is, do you feel like the milestone points are specific enough within
- the contract term that we are very clear about, you don't get paid until this happens, you get paid
- this percent, then you write. So you feel comfortable with all of that, right? And Mr. Schilling? That's
- something that
- I mean, you're talking about the task payments? Yeah, these are just estimates, and I don't have any
- feel for what stuff costs or what might be involved. There is a provision in the contract that I don't
- think is applicable here that I didn't like, and that was if each of the stages has a not to exceed
- clause, that they could exceed those
- as long as they didn't exceed the final amount, which I would not recommend agreeing to, because they
- can just push it off to the very end, and then walk away, and there you are. But that's not part of
- this that I can see. I guess that's why I'm asking, because we've had difficulty with contracts and
- planning relating to consultation services over a long period of time, and that's why I'm asking. And
- I'm going to ask a question.
- as well about GIS data and whether that becomes ours. And I just wanted to verify that that is in the
- new, because I don't have the contract in front of me. So I just want to make sure that that's in there.
- Yes. We did work with Tron and John, the GIS coordinator, to include the correct language so that we
- would know that we were getting our GIS data from them in the correct format. OK. So yes. And it's ours?
- Yes. OK. Thank you. That's it.
- We have no one here in the Nattie Hill room. Any public comment online on this issue? Seeing no one.
- I will do a roll call. Okay. Did we need a not to see. There'll be information on the at the commissioners contract.
- we're really just, we're just really recommending to the commissioners and commissioners approved this.
- I think we have to approve it too, but let's for another day. Okay. Um, so all in favor of approving
- the, uh, WSP long range stormwater plan scope and a master service agreement, uh, that legal, uh, is
- that how we were doing it?
- we're not doing the master service agreement, right? Just the. Well, the work plan is attached to the
- master service agreement. Oh, so. Would approve the master service agreement and the work plan. Oh yeah,
- and you're OK with that. Yes, OK, I mean, it doesn't sound. It doesn't sound advisable like what you
- wanted. Yeah, yeah, it sounded to me like we could separate them and you're saying we can't separate them.
- But that's why you're saying, don't do any construction design with this particular company until this
- contract lapses. Yeah, I mean, the only reason you're doing the master service agreement is because
- of the work plan. But the work plan is a separate agreement of itself. So you'd really need to do the
- master work service agreement and the work plan component. I'll buy that. Feel comfortable making a
- motion? Do you want to? I feel like there's some legal
- that needs to be. Well added in this. So like, how would we go about they did? David provided the comments
- and we sent it to them and they incorporated his comments already. No, I meant from our motion. No,
- because what? Yeah, I understand your question. So yes, it's already been revised and accepted by WSP.
- So those revisions from legal review have already been made and accepted. So at this point, it just goes to.
- the commissioners. Yes. And you got another bite at the apple if anything comes up. Yes, Mr. Schilling
- was just, I think, walking us through what had been problematic. Yes. OK. All right. Sorry. I just was
- like, what? Yeah. All clear? Yeah, I want to make sure you know what you're voting on. We're clear.
- Thank you. I'm glad you said it, actually. Thank you. Yeah, it was a great clarification. OK. So Thomas?
- Yes. Madira? Yes. Enright Randolph? Yes.
- Excellent, thank you so much. Thank you. And the last item of new business is the Curry Pike Phase 2
- Televising Contract with Groundbreakers LLC. I'm going to make a motion to approve the Curry Pike Phase
- 2 Televising Contract with, is this? Wait a second.
- I don't have the contract here. It's the last one. It's not, because that says Hydrovac and West Third.
- It's a CCTV. It is. It's West Third Street. It's Groundbreakers. That's their contract. OK, sorry. So
- the Curry Pike phase two, televising contract with Groundbreakers LLC.
- in an amount of $28,489.80. So this is phase two. Phase one is nearing completion. So if you drive on
- Curry Pike and head south from third slash west 48, you should see some nice freshly paved road there.
- And so that's the goal with this is to televised those pipes before we pave it to make sure we replace
- anything and make any drainage improvements before
- it gets nice and freshly paved. Any questions? No. Just for the public, if they look at this, it is
- very confusing because it says hydrobreakers doing business as groundbreakers. Hydrovac services. Yes,
- hydrovac services. But yes, the contract is actually
- on the agenda as Groundbreakers LLC. But if you look for this on the agenda, it says Hydro-Vac Services,
- LLC, DBA, or doing business as Groundbreakers LLC. Yes. So this is what you're looking for if you're
- looking at this online at home. So I do actually, I just want to note that I did ask Ms. Ridge about
- this because this is actually on the commissioner's agenda tomorrow morning because we had done this
- before and I said,
- wait a minute, Curry Pike televised, I remember this. And she said, look, it's a different contract,
- it's a different phase, it's a different company, in fact. So I just wanted to explain the question
- and the answer I got, and I'm satisfied with that answer. Thank you. Yep. And I think, yes, that's definitely
- important to emphasize that it's a different phase. This is a multiple phase.
- project. So I always like to kind of make sure that we bring a little bit of awareness that this is
- one of those proactive measures and one of those things that we are now kind of working in tandem with
- highway to do. So like we're actually making sure that all of these underground
- issues, pipings, water conveyance measures are upkept before we finish the road so we don't have to
- come back after the fact and tear up a new road and then dig down and unclog something and then reconstruct
- that road. So I just wanted, I always kind of try to make note of where that partnership and where that
- collaboration and where that benefit does come into play. So thank you.
- Something else that I found really cool in a nerdy fashion was that the mapping files are accurate to
- the sub-centimeter. GPR is pretty cool. Yeah. That is really cool. Any comments or questions on this
- contract? All right. We have no members of the public here in the NatU Hill Room.
- Would anyone online like to offer any comments on this matter of new business? Seeing no one No roll
- call votes to approve the contract with the groundbreakers for televising curry bike phase two Thomas
- yes, Madeira. Yes, and right Randolph always a yes to maintenance. I
- and we have one item remaining, and that is staff reports, emergency watershed protection program, litter
- of intent has been submitted following the June 17th, 2025 tornado damage. Yes, so we had another significant
- weather event in Monroe County, and I was actually contacted by my contacts with the NRCS asking if
- we were going to apply for the same funding, this funding again, and I hadn't anticipated it,
- this due to the scale. But they encouraged me to get our letter together. And then we're going to meet
- with them on Monday to narrow down some of the locations for the maintenance and potential log jams.
- We just know that the amount of debris that's coming through some of these valleys is going to be significant
- after every single rain event we have for the foreseeable future. So we're trying
- narrow that down to the ones that are going to be most impactful to our roadways or residences and or
- residences so Look for an update on that in the coming months after we get our feedback from them Probably
- not until November or December so the the partner agency is For this we're not doing this alone because
- there's other work getting done so
- Well, the review and the funds are passed through the NRCS, our local chapter, so the Indiana NRCS and
- USDA, because it is federal funds. So then it comes down through them to us. But we don't have a partner.
- We are the applicant, but they work with us to make sure that we have a feasible project.
- Yes. Initially you had mentioned some work with Morgan Monroe State Forest. Can you explain that part
- of it? Yes. NRCS has also been working with DNR at Morgan Monroe because they have significant damage
- and debris there as well. And so we're exploring the possibility of partnering with them
- that we will be able to partner with someone on some of that joint jurisdiction area. But we know that
- there will be other areas that are Monroe County only. Um so we'll see how that all pans out. It's always
- great to be able to partner with someone. But I know that the scope of this is much larger than the
- Clear Creek project that is hopefully finishing up the within the next month as well.
- assigned or divided or we don't have any idea yet. It's we're just applying for us. But we do recognize
- that there may be a cooperative relationship with DNR in the areas where we intersect with the Morgan
- Monroe. Thank you. Thank you. We did sign to approve that letter. The commissioners. Yes. So, okay.
- certification. There is nothing formal to approve yet because we're not accepting any funding yet. It's
- just preliminary. Do we know what the time frame will be, by the way? So we had 60 days from the event
- to submit our letter, and then they have 270 days, I believe, from our letter submittal to give us back
- a damage survey report and the recommendation.
- So hopefully it can be a little bit shorter than that, but it is a significant area. So they may need
- that full, the full timeline. And in the meantime, if something comes up like it's going to rain today,
- tonight something comes up and we end up having to do some remediation work as a result of a big rain.
- in that specific area, we're logging that. We're logging it, sorry. Sorry for the pun. We are keeping
- track of those expenses and can potentially use that as maybe part of an offset or a match or something
- like that because we're already doing the work if we have to do it. It's a little tricky with work performed
- already. So we'd have to be careful about that. But yes, we are tracking all of it, especially to know
- the areas that are going to be
- the impacted the most. So yes, we may not be able to be reimbursed for anything, but we're tracking
- it to show we're already doing all this work and it's going to end up costing us quite a bit, especially
- the channels into a jam that our crew cannot, doesn't have the equipment to access. And we don't know
- anything yet about whether there'd be a match required or a local match or anything. We don't know any of that.
- there is a match requirement. So the funding would pay for I believe 75 70% 70 75% of the project. Um,
- and then so we would bring the remaining portion of that. That's what I'm asking about. Can that go
- toward a match potentially if you're already doing some work in that area? Because
- I know that we can use man hours towards the match, but I don't know if it's retroactive. Got it. Well,
- that'll be a good question when we get there. Thank you. That's on my list for Monday. Perfect.
- Thank you, ma'am. Appreciate it. Hopefully we'll have cause to address that. Yeah. Yeah. That'd be nice.
- It's not related to that. I just had a quick announcement. I want to bring some awareness.
- The GIS division has launched Monroe County Precipitation Viewer, and I know that Ms. Pennell has seen
- it. You can check that out. If the public wants to see it, it tracks the precipitation. And we also
- created flow lines from derived contour data, from LIDAR data.
- So you can actually like kind of see where the water flows. Yeah. If you want to bring it up. So you
- just I think this is kind of unfortunately a good time to bring awareness because of what we
- just experienced. But you know if the public is kind of interested of trying to track some of the
- precipitation, look at different hooks. And also when you zoom into a certain scale, it'll show different
- flow lines, it'll show different critical watersheds. And this is something that we just recently deployed
- and made. I just thought it would be a good time to plug it. And thank you for showing it online as
- well to the public.
- And thank you for being so innovative with everything you guys do see the flow lines. I had someone
- Well, this was our GIS technician Nick and Angelo's and I he Created those I actually had someone in
- my office just the other day that was experiencing a little bit of flooding and ponding and you know,
- you can tell what's going on with contour lines, but these
- arrows make it so easy, and they were able to visualize it instantly and was super happy and impressed
- by these flow lines or flow indicators. Thank you. That's it. That's wonderful. Thank you. Yeah. Absolutely.
- And speaking of flow, we have flowed to the end of our... So any other business?
- Alright, then I believe we are adjourned until September 23rd, 2026.