Good afternoon.

I'd like to call the June 10th Board of Public Works meeting to order.

I'm Idris Redman, acting chair.

Board members, please introduce yourselves.

Sabekel Juwanza.

Bob Perrin.

Susie Cortey.

Dan Haig.

Thank you.

I would also like to introduce our board counsel, Benjamin Moracle and Board Coordinator, Jennifer Dominguez and GPW staff.

First item on the agenda is I'd like to move to amend the agenda to remove under item number seven change orders final stuff six-054.

Remove that item from the agenda and to the next board meeting.

Do I have a motion to adapt uh adopt the amended agenda?

So moved.

Thank you.

Um moved by Bob Perrin.

Do I have a second?

I'll second.

Second by Daniel Haig.

All appro uh all in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Next item on the agenda is approval of the minutes.

Do I have a motion minutes from our May 27th meeting?

Do I have a motion to approve the May 27th meeting minutes?

So moved, Mr.

Chairman.

Moved by Suzy Corti.

Do I have a second?

I have second.

Second by Sabako agenda.

All in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

The next item on the agenda on the agenda is a public hearing resolution.

I'll ask board counsel Benjamin Morkel to read the rules governing public comments.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Before we open the floor to public comments, we would like to remind board members and the public of a few ground rules so that everyone can have a fair chance to speak and be heard.

Is important that we each observe the following rules.

First, each speaker will be limited to two minutes.

Second, public comments must reasonably relate to the agenda item under consideration.

Third, speakers who stray from the item under consideration or become unduly repetitious, maybe asked to move on to their next point or to conclude their comments.

And finally, attendees who cause disruptions that prevent the board from proceeding through today's agenda reasonably efficiently will be removed.

Please remember that the first amendment does not protect some types of threatening speech or incitement to violence.

We will deal with those issues as they arise, but we do not anticipate that they will.

And now Mr.

Chairman, if you will entertain a motion to adopt these rules, we can proceed to public comments.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman and members of the board.

My name is Joe Glass.

I'm the executive director of the Indianapolis Bond Bank.

Uh we have two resolutions before you today.

The first is resolution 17, which approves a list of capital projects to be funded by a 40 million dollar uh new money bond issuance by the Metropolitan Thoroughfare District.

Uh the second is a bond resolution.

Uh approving that 40 million dollar bond issuance.

Um, that has already been approved by council, so this is the last approval step for that issuance.

It also approves a refunding issuance of up to 121 million dollars.

Um we anticipate uh achieving uh a savings of about uh 1.9 million dollars through that refunding of existing Indy Roads debt.

Um that will go before the council.

Um tomorrow it'll be before the um public works committee.

Uh both uh resolutions require public hearing and uh happy to answer any questions of the committee.

Any questions from board members?

This is a public hearing, so I asked are there is there anyone from the public who would like to speak regarding resolution number 17 and resolution number 18?

Okay, hearing none, the public comment is now over.

Um do I have a motion to approve resolution number 17?

Uh resolution number 17.

So moved.

Uh so moved by Bob Perrin.

Do I have a second?

I'll second.

Second by Susie Cordy.

All in favor, signify by saying aye.

Any opposed?

The motion carries.

Do I have a motion to approve resolution number 18?

So moved by Daniel Haig.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Second by Sabako Chwanza.

All in favor, signify by saying aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Thank you, everyone.

The public hearing is now closed.

The next item on the agenda, bid awards and Nathan Sheets.

Yep, good afternoon, Nathan Sheets, Department of Public Works.

Uh this is a justification for bid award for project ST 29020.

This is Girl School Road.

Uh slight typo in the memo.

This is actually uh split into two different phases.

Uh phase one is actually from Rockville Road to 21st Street, and this is with Calumet Civil Contractors Inc.

The Engineering Division staff recommends the Board of Public Works approve and authorize the director to award ST 29020 Girl School Road from Rockville Road to 21st Street to Calumet Civil Contractors Inc.

in the not to exceed total amount total agreement amount of 10,374,000 on the basis that they are the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.

Project ST 29020 Girl School Road from Rockville Road to 21st Street consists of a west side complete streets project, which provides for rehabilitated traffic lanes, one lane in each direction with a two-way left turn lane, multi-purpose path on the west side of girls school and landscape setbacks and tree lawns that can support improved stormwater drainage.

Substantial completion is scheduled for November 30th, 2027 with final completion scheduled for August 10th, 2028.

The engineer's estimate for construction of this project was 11,235,566.50 cents.

On April 23rd, 2026, five bids were received.

The low bidder was Calumet Civil Contractors Inc.

in the not-to-exceed amount of 10,374,000, which was 7% lower than the engineers' estimate.

Their part six XBE participation indicates that they've made a good faith effort to meet the owners' goals of 158, 301 participation with 8.6 to MBE, 5.1% to WBE, 0% to VBE, and 0.5% to DOBE.

Their post-bid submittal subcontract supplier participation shows how those goals will be met.

The Office of Minority and Women Owned Business Development reviewed Calumet Civil Contractors Inc.

submittal and found that they've put forth a good faith effort.

And if you have questions or concerns about the bid award, I'd be happy to try to answer them.

Perfect.

Thank you, Nathan.

Are there any questions?

Yeah, I just have one.

With it being a complete streets project outside of the multi-use trail, like what other design features?

So good news is is we're uh doing total uh resurfacing throughout the corridor, so we will get brand new pavement marking.

So that uh does pop up from time to time as as uh payment markings wear out.

So we'll have brand new asphalt.

Um we will be putting down thermoplastic pavement markings which tend to last a lot uh longer than a typical paint.

Um, and uh there's also some lane narrowing, um which we think will uh reduce the overall speeds throughout the corridor.

Um just to I did a quick calculation.

Um there's about 1.7 miles of additional new pedestrian facilities along the corridor because essentially today along this corridor, there's a little bit of sidewalk as you get closer to 10th street, but that's about it.

So it's it's about 1.7 miles of new facility, and then there's about 1600 feet that we are upgrading from a standard five-inch sidewalk to a 10-foot multi-use path.

Thank you.

Thank you, thank you, Nick.

Any additional questions?

Hearing none, do I have a motion to approve this bid award?

So moved by Daniel Hake.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Second by Sebaco Jawanza.

All in favor, signify by saying aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries, and Nathan, you're back up.

Um I think I'm gonna handle this one.

Okay, um, sorry.

Mark Mark St.

John, uh, chief Engineer for the department.

I think there was a little bit of confusion on who would be presenting this, but I will be presenting this one, though Nathan's name is on the memo.

Okay, um, it's a justify justification for bid award for CL-45-066, small structure rehabilitation uh located at 1350 stop 11 road.

Um, the engineering division staff recommends the board of Public Works approve and authorize the director to award CL-45-066, small structure rehabilitation, 1350 stop 11 road to Yardberry Companies Incorporated in the total not to exceed amount of 347,741 dollars on the basis that they are the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.

Project CL-45-066 small structure rehabilitation at 1350 stop 11 road consists of a culvert rehabilitation over Churchman Ditch.

Substantial completion is scheduled for March 9, 2027 with final completion scheduled for May 6, 2027.

The engineers' estimate for construction on this project was 420,880.

On April 30th, 2026, three bids were received.

The low bidder was Yardberry Companies Incorporated and a not to exceed amount of $347,741, which was 21% lower than the engineers estimate.

Their part six XBE participation indicates they made a good faith effort to meet the owner's goals of 15% MBE, 8% WBE, 3% VBE, and 1% DOBE participation with 3% MBE, 2% WBE, 0% VBE, and 0% DOBE.

Their post-bid submittal subcontracts subcontractor supplier participation shows how those goals will be met.

Happy to answer any questions, or maybe Nathan can help me or Natalie if depending on what they are.

Perfect.

Thanks, Mark.

Any questions from the board members?

I have a motion to approve this bid award.

So moved by Susie Courty.

Do we have a second?

Second.

Second by Seba Coach Ones.

All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Next on the agenda is bid rejections and uh number five item number five bid rejections and mark will present.

Um yeah, so the next item I have is a justification for rejection of bid on BR-16-075 Falcon Drive and Eagledale Drive over Falcon Creek.

The engineering division staff recommends the Board of Public Works reject the bid for project number BR-16-075 Falcon Drive and Eagledale Drive over Falcon Creek on the basis that the bid was well above the engineer's estimate for the project.

The project will rebid in the future with modifications to the scope and plans.

Projects project BR-16-075 Falcon Drive and Eagledell Drive over Falcon Creek.

Consists of rehabilitating the existing four corrugated pipe structure at Falcon Drive and the existing three corrugated pipe structure at Eagledale Drive.

New scour protection would also be installed.

One bid was received on May 14, 2026, from Cracker's Demo LLC in the amount of two million three hundred and thirteen thousand two hundred and thirty two dollars and thirty-seven cents, which was approximately 30% above the engineer's estimate for this project.

Happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thanks, Mark.

Are there any questions?

Okay, now do I have a motion to approve the bid rejection?

So move.

So moved by Bob Perrin.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Second by Daniel Hake.

All in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed.

The motion carries.

Next up on the agenda.

Our change orders.

And Nathan Sheets.

Thank you.

This is change order number one to BM 32071.

Shelby Street over Pleasant Run and Raymond Street over Pleasant Run construction using STBG dollars for fiscal year 2026 with Pontum Contractors Inc.

The Engineering Engineering Division staff recommends the Board of Public Works approve and authorize the director to execute change order number one to BM32071, Shelby Street over Pleasant Run, and Raymond Street over Pleasant Run construction with Pontum Contractors Inc.

and the increased amount of 123,563.6 cents for a new total not to exceed contract amount of $4,123,841.72 with 10 days added to the substantial and final completion dates.

Change order number one will provide compensation and quantity adjustments for work directive one, which is summarized below.

Work directive one uh we basically ran into some unforeseen uh trolley tracks that needed to be removed as part of the project.

And so uh this change order will cover the additional cost associated with those removals.

Um, and it will also add uh 10 additional days to the substantial and final completion dates.

Perfect.

Thank you.

Are there any board or any questions from board members?

Yeah, can you speak to um this project?

It's a bridge.

Um, are there sidewalks on this or bike lanes?

Do you add any?

Yeah, so um this is the structure that is just south of the cycle track that we have on Shelby Street.

Um this kind of marries, this is the kind of southern end of the Shelby Street project that is currently under construction.

Um, so there will be bicycle facilities that will continue across the bridge as they existed uh prior to the rehab at the bridge.

Thanks, Liz.

Any additional questions?

Hearing none, do I have a motion to approve this change order?

So moved by Leslie Schulte.

Do I have a second?

Second, second by Bob Perrin.

All in favor, signify by saying aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries and Nathan?

Yes, uh change order number three.

This is to ST 32128, Madison Avenue Road Diet from Pleasant Run to Ray Street, Calumet Civil Contractors Inc.

The engineering division staff recommends the Board of Public Works approve and authorize the director to execute change order number three to ST 32 128, Madison Avenue Road Diet from Pleasant Run to Ray Street with Calumet Civil Contractors Inc.

with no change to the total not to exceed contract amount of 13,778,978.75 cents, and no change to substantial and final completion dates.

Change order number three will provide compensation and quantity adjustments for uh change order 3.1 and work directives number five and six uh work directive five.

Um there's a bridge uh deck that we are working on kind of on the northern limits of the project during construction.

There was some additional uh work that was necessary on the bridge.

Uh work directive six uh is related to construction change uh number eight and uh three point one.

Um this is uh really used to um offset some of the uh quantities the over and underruns.

Um we try to offset over and underruns that the at the end of the day.

Um we have a project that is basically what was budgeted, and uh so we do occasionally present these to the board mid-project, just to kind of keep track of uh the various quantities questions or concerns?

Perfect.

Thanks, Nathan.

Any questions from the board?

Hearing none, do I have a motion to approve this change order?

So moved by Susie Courty.

Do I have a second?

Second by Daniel Haig.

Um, all in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Up next on the agenda is item number seven, change orders, final and final acceptance and uh Nathan, you are up for the one.

Yeah, thank you.

This is uh change order number one, final and final acceptance to project CH 1802, Fall Creek Retaining Wall Repair with HIS Constructors Inc.

The Engineering Division staff recommends the Board of Public Works approve and authorize the director to execute change order number one, final and final acceptance to CH 1802, Fall Creek Retaining Wall with HIS Inc.

in the decreased amount of $55,774.02 for a final total contract amount of four hundred eighty-eight thousand six hundred fifty-nine dollars and twenty cents with fifty-two days added to substantial and final completion dates.

Change order number one, final and final acceptance.

We'll provide compensation time and quantity adjustments for change order one point three.

Uh again, this is a final true up of quantities, and uh as part of this particular change order, it does add 52 days uh added to substantial and final completion dates.

And if you have questions or concerns, I'd be happy to try to answer them.

Perfect, thank you, Nathan.

Any questions from the board members?

Mr.

Chairman, I need to abstain my vote as HIS as my husband's employer.

Thank you, Susan.

Note it.

Hearing no questions, do I have a motion to approve the final change order and final acceptance?

So moved by Daniel Haig.

Do I have a second?

Second by Bob Perrin.

All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Next item on the agenda, item number eight, professional services agreements and Mark St.

John.

Thank you.

This item is a professional services agreement for inspection on st-30-054, Washington Street rehabilitation from Linhurst Drive to Holt Road with Butler Fairman and Sufer Incorporated.

The Engineering Division staff recommends the Board of Public Works approve and authorize the director to execute ST-30-054, Washington Street rehabilitation from Lynnhurst Drive to Holt Road, a new professional services agreement for inspection with Butler Fairman and Sufer Incorporated in the not-to-exceed total agreement amount of $2,370,712.04 cents with an agreement expiration date of December 31st, 2029.

Project ST-30-054 is for improvements to the street, sidewalks, curbs, traffic signals, and drainage of West Washington Street from Holt to Lynnhurst.

Substantial completion to be on February 14, 2028, and final completion of July 30th, 2029.

Butler Fairman and Sufert Incorporated's XBE participation will include 14.61% to infrastructure engineering incorporated, 10.13% to resolution group incorporated, 3.25% to veterans engineering and technical services, and 2.05% to redemption engineering.

Butler Fairman and Sufer Incorporated was selected through RFQ 2025-3.

Happy to answer questions on this one as well.

Thank you, Mark.

Are there any questions from board members?

And Mark, so is this did you say this is inspection only or does this include design as well?

This is the inspection contract.

Uh design was completed by the Lock Miller group.

I'm sorry.

Well, lock.

Okay.

So that's already been awarded.

Uh design has been awarded and is uh largely complete at this point.

Okay.

Big project, that's a lot of inspection.

It is.

Um, yes.

Thanks, Bob.

Any additional questions?

So can you speak on how this connects to the blue line?

Yes.

Um, so the the blue line um was originally intended to run from the airport to the eastern limits of Indianapolis along Washington Street.

Um at some point during blue line development, um, they modified that West Lake connection, and the blue line now runs down Holt Road to I-70 in the interstate.

Um, knowing that this section of West Washington Street needed substantial improvements, substantial repairs.

Uh the city stepped in, Indigo is also participating in the cost share for construction to continue to complete street improvements along this section of West Washington Street.

Um, so it's not technically along the blue line corridor, it is directly adjacent to it.

It does complement that project.

Um, and we actually tie directly into the storm sewer system for the blue line project as well.

Thank you.

Perfect.

Thanks.

Any additional questions?

Thanks, Mark.

Hearing no additional questions, do I have a motion to approve this agreement?

So moved.

Moved by Bob Perrin.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Second by Sabako Chwanza.

All in favor, signify by saying aye.

Any opposed?

The motion carries.

Thank you.

The next item on the agenda, item number nine is a discussion.

Uh it's a public comment item.

So I'm gonna ask board counsel uh Benjamin Morkel to read the rules governing public comments.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman, in case anyone forgot these in the last 15 minutes.

Uh before we open the floor to public comments, we would like to remind board members and the public of a few ground rules so that everyone has a fair chance to speak and be heard.

It is important that we each observe the following rules.

First, each speaker will be limited to two minutes.

Second, public comments must reasonably relate to the agenda item under consideration.

Third, speakers who stray from the item under consideration or become unduly repetitious and be asked to move on to their next point or conclude their comments.

Finally, attendees who cause disruptions that prevent the board from proceeding through today's agenda reasonably efficiently will be removed.

Please remember that the First Amendment does not protect some types of threatening speech or incitement to violence.

We will deal with those issues as they arise, but we do not anticipate that they will.

And now, Mr.

Chairman, if you'll entertain a motion to adopt these rules, we can proceed to public comments.

Thank you.

Um do I have a motion to adopt the rules outlined?

So moved by Susie Courty.

Do I have a second?

Second by Daniel Haight.

All in favor signify by saying aye.

Any opposed?

The motion carries.

Staff will begin to present the agreement for the disposal of excess water from Eagle Creek Reservoir.

Please note that this item is for presentation only, and no vote will be taken today.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

Brian Kavanaugh, general counsel for the Department of Public Works.

DPW is before the board and the public today to give a brief presentation on the negotiations between the city and CEG as to the continued withdrawal of excess water from the Eagle Creek Reservoir by Citizens Water, as it has been doing for the last 50 years.

This agreement has successfully supported water supply and reservoir operations for more than 50 years without known impacts to the reservoir's primary purposes of water supply and flood control.

The agreement for which DPW will ask the board's approval at its next board meeting merely extends the terms of this original agreement, which expires on July 1st, 2026, extend it through July 1st, 2027, with options to extend the agreement for successive one-year intervals through 2031.

Pursuant to state statute, the Board of Public Works has the power to provide for the disposal of excess water from the reservoir on such terms as the board considers best, as long as uh as long as these terms do not uh impair the function of flood prevention provided by the improvements.

Under the 1971 Eagle Creek Reservoir Agreement, the DPW determined that the release from the reservoir dam of 2.6 million gallons per day would maintain the mean normal dry weather flows of Eagle Creek downstream from the dam.

In addition, using the data available before 1970, it was determined that there would be at least 15.4 million gallons per day of excess water available in the reservoir, even in the worst drought conditions.

The 12.4 million gallons per day withdrawal of a portion of the excess water as a source of supply for the former Indianapolis water company, of whom Citizens Water is the successor in interest, would not impair flood prevention provided by the reservoir.

Some of the water, uh some of the water supply limits contained in the original Eagle Creek Reservoir Agreement are based on the pre-1970s hydrologic conditions.

The purpose of this review uh for which the board approved uh the contract at the last board meeting.

Uh, purpose of this review is to use more current data and experience uh and and experience to update hydrologic assumptions.

Therefore, DPW and Citizens Water would like to update the drought response with other measures contained in the 1971 agreement, which will further protect the water supply provided by the reservoir.

DPW has recently begun to conduct both a bathhometric survey and a due diligence study on the Eagle Creek Reservoir and the current and the current agreement.

The data DPW will obtain will be used to inform a subsequent long-term agreement agreement with Citizens Water to replace the likely outdated agreement, which has been in place for the last 50 years.

New bathometric survey data will provide a more accurate understanding of reservoir storage capacity and help translate water levels into available water volume.

This data will improve the city's understanding of water entering the reservoir, reservoir water quality and long-term trends, water released downstream, reservoir storage, and operational conditions over time.

Until the study and subsequent negotiations with citizens' water are concluded, this amendment is necessary to ensure that there are no disruptions in water services to the city of Indianapolis.

Subsequent negotiations with Citizens Water will uh will be focused squarely on balancing the city's key interests here, maintaining flood storage capacity, supporting downstream releases, and providing a reliable water supply for the community.

The sole purpose of this amendment before the board is to allow citizens' water to continue withdrawing the same amount of water from the reservoir to serve the city's water use needs as it has for the last 50 years, while DPW concludes and analyzes the results of the of its bathometric survey once the study has been concluded DPW and citizens uh will renegotiate the next long-term agreement with this board's input uh just a couple of points we want to emphasize um you know the statute by definition only allows us to dispose and allows the board to dispose of excess water that's that's the word in the statute that means that our goal and and priority number one is determining what is needed to maintain and protect Eagle Creek and then figure out what to do after that that's that is priority number one.

We also want to emphasize that this is the city's this is a significant source of the city's fresh water um and we are of the position that some form some form of this agreement needs to be active um and we want to commit that after we um have gathered the data and our and our studies are complete we will return to the board we will return to the public to to make that known to have that discussion about what the next 50 years is going to look like with Eagle Creek and Citizens Water.

Thank you.

The item is now open for public comment first I will ask are there any questions from board members.

One question so is the uh in recent years is the water company under whatever name have they withdrawn anywhere close to the 12.4 million gallons per day I believe that is I believe that is a guaranteed daily amount I don't know if you want to chime in on that there have been some instances especially in like heavier wet weather months that they have withdrawn up to that 12.6 or 12.4 amount um it doesn't occur and that's a good thing right yeah yeah I mean it's it's excess water that either goes downstream or they can withdraw it for water supply usage so there have been instances where they have withdrawn that much but there are a lot of instances where it's been much less thank you.

Leslie and then this contract is renewable until 2031 in one year increments does that mean each year that they want to extend it it will come before this board again.

Not as written no what you would be approving is it does that automatically until we are able to come to an agreement.

Thank you.

Thanks Leslie any other questions from board members okay and yeah is there anyone from the public who would like to comment yes.

I will sign in my name is Martin Rich.

I'm a retired U.S.

geological survey research hydrologist I'm a member of the Eagle Creek Park Advisory Committee been a member for 10 years you're probably aware that during the past 10 months a number of us from the advisory committee have been addressing this issue of water supply water demand water and waste water that would affect our park that one and a half million people enjoy every year the things that you are dealing with now are are things that time has brought to us appropriately this is a case study for water supply and water demand in the Indianapolis metro area and I want to thank you I'm at this point for making some good decisions for for not just renewing this this agreement for another 50 years and instead hiring a hydrologist getting my colleagues at the US geological Survey to come out here and do a bathometrics study and to take your time to collect facts.

This needs to be a fact-based decision.

And I'll tell you why I think this is important.

If you'll permit me just a minute to maybe tell you things you already know, but things that I really know.

I've been hanging around Eagle Creek for 50 years.

So the things that I know, not only professionally, or things that I experienced with my family on the water in the woods.

And I feel that the ecosystem at Eagle Creek has taken 50 years to get to this modern, successful, healthy balance.

And it's because over time, there has been some reliable changes in water level each year, and they have afforded some things that made the ecosystem healthy and made it improve.

It's much better than it was when the reservoir was built.

A lot of us that will tell you that, and I worked out there in the 70s, and I can tell you stories about what was then and what was now.

Two things.

The water levels in the spring are high enough to inundate the places where the fish go to spawn.

So we need to maintain that capability because it's the fish that are part of this whole food web out there, this ecosystem, land, water, plants, animals, and the web of life.

Certainly the fabric of this ecosystem is the water.

So when the water levels are lowered in the fall, part of the stream bed at the north end of the lake is becomes exposed.

We call those mud flats.

Thousands of migratory birds come over and land there.

And and if my if my time is up, I'll I'll just say whatever you do in making decisions about this, and what you do is going to affect the future.

This reservoir, think about preserving the fish spawning water levels, and the migratory bird habitat water levels.

And I'm happy to be part of this process, lend my free and measured hydrologic information and park information to help you come to a good decision.

Perfect.

Thank you, Mr.

Rich.

Any other public comments?

Please just state your name.

I do live in Marion County in Pike Township, very close to Eagle Creek.

This week I attended the Lemon City Council meeting, and during a discussion on a voluntary annexation request, a council member asked if they were any closer to receiving an environmental and wastewater study.

This question was not answered.

It was also stated by a council member that the city has annexed so much property that they already do not have enough water for.

This shows poor planning and no consideration given on how much the leap project has on their city or ours.

Excuse me, I'm sorry I lost my place here.

The impact for the use of water and the subsequent discharge of wastewater will have a significant impact on Eagle Creek Reservoir.

Levitton has no water for their project.

The reservoir is owned by the uh city of Indianapolis.

Indianapolis needs to consider how this will affect our community and what the city is getting from this.

It appears to be nothing monetarily and everything negative from the use of the water to the dumping of the waste.

You have the power to protect our community.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any additional comments?

Hi, my name's Sarah Phillips, and I'm a resident in Indianapolis, just on the north side of Eagle Creek Reservoir.

Thank you so much for taking public comment today.

I appreciate your good work.

You have such a nice overview with this team here of what's happening, and your input is going to be so critical to the next 50 years.

Of course, this is important to me.

I do love the park.

I love the economic impact it has for the city and all the wildlife and so forth.

My concern is last week there was a public comment and answer session at the Whitestown Library with Citizens Energy.

At that meeting, I had two particular questions.

One was asking how citizens within the contract with Indianapolis, what enables them with that contract to go out and make separate agreements with another town and county because I was particularly interested how they were able to make the water agreement with Boone County and Lebanon to support LEAP.

They could not answer that question.

I talked to Bruce Cooley, who's the project manager, and he was not able to answer that question, neither was his colleague Michael, who's newer to the program.

So that was very concerning to me because I don't know how they have the right to go out and make those agreements, but certainly putting parameters around them.

So if we ever do get in a drought condition, if they're going out making other agreements with other communities, if Indianapolis starts to have a need for more water, are we still obligated by that contract to give that to them first?

Secondarily, I was asking about the more road construction.

So the imminent domain to build the pipeline to draw water out of Eagle Creek, that construction is starting after June 15th of this year.

And I asked, they've already got it surveyed.

I asked if why they were doing that construction already.

They confirmed they have not completed studies.

The USGS is still can just been engaged to do that survey, and it won't be done for a year.

So they're doing this work ahead of any kind of input scientifically, which makes no sense to me.

So I appreciate your careful consideration of all these issues.

Thank you, Ms.

Phillips.

Any additional public comments?

Just state your name in the microphone.

Sorry, um, my name is Amy Goosman.

Um I am a resident in 46214 on the south side of Eagle Creek.

South side of Eagle Creek.

I live um in the islands uh which there are a couple of bodies of water south of Eagle Creek.

Um I just wanted to be make it aware.

I'm also sorry, a nursing doctoral student.

Um I'm here just very concerned.

Um I have a strong background in public health working at the Marion County Um Public Health Department as a public health nurse.

Um I am a certified nurse midwife.

Um, we already have issues, you know.

I my expertise is maternal child health, which those numbers really show the issues of health in our area.

Um I personally believe that you know, citizens, you know, I appreciate you all being here and everything you're doing, but I feel that um citizens has really broken trust, um, and whatever deals are going on with the city.

Um backdoor, not being studied, not being uh appropriate, not having numbers and things to make us feel okay about this.

Um we personally like we are HOA, we pay extra to have clean water, to have our water treated, um, and we are next to Little Eagle Creek, you know, and we receive water that you know comes from will come from this um project.

So, you know, I just want to make it aware.

Like I'm a delegate for my district.

I'm close with my PC that is in my neighborhood.

We are starting um a community group to look at this and to make people more aware, because we will be making a ruckus about this.

Um, I don't feel it's appropriate.

Um, to be taking the water out and then dumping wastewater.

It's just um, you know, I learned how to paddle board at Eagle Creek.

My son worked at the park.

Um, now I paddle board in my own area um with my dogs, and we're not scared of the water quality.

Um, this is just very scary, and I think we need to look beyond now, beyond the money and look at the big picture of our public health.

Look at the big picture of um, you know, even our history, um, the Native American tribes that lived here and and what we owe to not only ourselves but our future generations.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Please just state your name.

Hi, my name is Megan Anderson.

I work with Sierra Club and volunteer with Protect Pike Township.

Um, thanks for accepting public comment today.

I wanted to share that over 21,000 people have contacted the city about this issue.

17,940 joined a change.org petition titled Prohibit the Leap Project from Using Eagle Creek Reservoir, and 2,806 people contacted the city via the Sierra Club Hoosier chapter.

Um I am very concerned there is no long-term plan to meet the water supply needs or the discharge needs of the leap site, and there's really no short-term plan that any of us want here in Indy.

Um, already that 25 million gallons of water is committed to the existing tenants, and there are six thousand undeveloped acres at the site and IEDC continually adds more.

Um, and so you know I'm glad that the city is pursuing studies, um, including the bathymetric study, but I also want to really make sure that we take the water quality study seriously.

Uh the reservoir is really just a sink with no outlet, and so all those contaminants come and sit at the bottom, and even if the discharge moves upstream, you could expect about the same amount of phosphorus to come to the creek, which could be based on preliminary limits from item over 45,000 pounds of phosphorus each year, which is a huge amount.

Um, and so you know that will increase the chances of algae blooms and you know damage recreation activities, harm harm the ecosystem there.

Um, and so yeah, we are also asking for a dashboard with publicly available data regarding the metered withdrawals from TW Moses.

Um also our drought ordinance is not extending to Lebanon.

They do have their own ordinance at this time, but that's really important for us to be aware of, especially knowing that we could be facing more water withdrawal.

Already this amount is about what Evansville uses every day.

24 million gallons is about what they use every day.

Um, and so yeah, I just want to also underscore the extreme lack of transparency.

Um, and you know, call on you to do the best you can.

Thank you.

Was that my alarm?

I think so.

Yeah, I was.

Sorry.

Sorry about that.

Thank you for your comment.

Any additional comments?

I just state your name.

Hello, I'm Jason Hurley.

What was it?

My name is Jason Hurley.

Okay.

Uh I just think that these type of hearings were public comment.

Can they be held later in the day?

I mean, most people are at work.

I don't know if that's ever been brought up before.

I'm I'm looking for employment myself right now.

I mean, this committees at your at work, the people in the neighborhood that might have a comment can't get here because they're at work.

I just didn't know if that's an opportunity that could be given in the future.

I think I'll sorry.

Uh just wanted to clarify the public comments.

The board members aren't necessarily here to answer questions, but we will certainly take that under advisement.

I'm pretty sure that.

Thanks, Mr.

Hurley.

Any additional comments from the public?

Okay.

Thank you, everyone who did uh speak in the public comment.

Public comments section is now closed.

We will now move on to other business.

And there being no other business, we'll move to adjournment.

So next item on the agenda is the motion to adjourn.

Thank you, Susie Corti.

Moved by Susie Corti.

Do we have a second?

Second.

Second by Sabaca Jawanza.

All in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Meeting is now adjourned.