Good afternoon.

Please allow me to call the June 24th Board of Public Works meeting to order.

I'm Todd Wilson, the board chair.

I'd like to uh ask my board members to introduce themselves, starting my left.

Bob Perrin.

Idrish Redman.

Leslie Schulte.

Um that's four board members.

We do have a quorum today.

Um I'd also like to introduce our board counsel, Benjamin Moracle behind me and our board coordinator, Jennifer Dominguez.

First item on our agenda today is to adopt the revised June 24th, 2026 agenda.

Do I have a motion to adopt the agenda?

So moved by Bob Perrin.

Do I have a second?

Seconded by Aegis Redman.

All in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Seeing none that motion carries.

Next item on agenda is approval of minutes.

Do I have a motion to prove the June approve the June 10th meeting minutes?

So moved by Leslie Schulte.

Do I have a second?

Seconded by Aegis Redman.

All would all in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Seeing none that motion carries.

Good afternoon, Nathan Sheets, Department of Public Works.

I've got a number of bid awards before you this afternoon, beginning with uh an on call construction services for vertical construction with Glen Roy Construction Company Inc.

This is JOC 26009.

The Engineering Division staff recommends the Board of Public Works approve and authorize the director to award JOC 26009D on call construction services vertical construction to Glenroy Construction Company Inc.

of an indefinite quantity indefinite delivery contract for construction services on the basis that they submitted a responsive and responsible bid, and DPW is awarding five contracts from this bid.

The anticipated yearly budget is one million dollars to be shared among the five contracts.

The contractor shall perform all pre-price tasks for the unit prices set forth in the construction task catalog multiplied by the adjustment factors.

The job order contract is a three-year contract with bilateral option to withdraw from the contract at each anniversary of notice to award.

Adjustment factors increase at each year based upon the ENR construction cost index.

On May 14th, 2026, five bids were received.

Glen Roy Construction Company Inc.

submitted all required bid documents completely.

Glenroy's post bid submittal included the company's diversity inclusion plan along with their written commitment to put forth a good faith effort to meet the owner's participation goals of 15, 8, 3, and 1 percent with each assignment made under this contract.

The Office of Minority and Women Business Development will review the contract's effort in securing subcontracting opportunities with disadvantaged companies.

For what again we would call vertical construction.

Um questions, concerns?

Thank you, Nathan.

Would you be able to take all five of these at once?

That would be Yeah, very good.

With consent of the board, I'd like to take items 3A, 3B, 3C, 3D, and 3E all together.

So move.

So move by Bob Perrin.

Do I have a second?

Second by Aegis Redman.

Um do we have any questions?

I just have one.

So I understand we're approving a contract for labor by these construction firms.

How will material costs be decided for these?

So there's uh what's called a uh basically uh unit price book.

So there's uh a price book for each one of these activities, and what they've priced is essentially a multiplier.

And so you take the multiplier that they've provided and multiply it by that uh the the unit price associated with that work type, and then that's what is actually billed.

And so if we do have uh need, um we work with the contractor, kind of explain what the scope of the project is, and then they provide uh essentially pricing in order to do that.

Any other questions?

Uh is a million dollars is that very small part of what our total spend is for horizontal.

Um so it it it's kind of unknown at this point in time as far as overall need.

Um these tend to be things that we need to react fairly quickly on if these were known fixes that we need to work on.

Um we would typically go through our design bid build process, but these tend to be things that happen as you can see in the uh board memo.

There's an adjustment factor for uh working outside of normal business hours, and so these tend to be things uh I wouldn't necessarily call them emergencies per se, but something that requires a uh a bit more um uh expediency in order to address.

And I'm gonna allow uh Sam Barris to comment about some of the need uh and what this uh contracts adjust addressing.

Yeah, thank you, uh Director.

I think Nathan handled this very well, but just to be clear, this isn't a defined million dollar budget for these types of projects.

Um they they can vary in scale.

Some of these, you know, could be you know in the hundreds of thousands of dollars range, and uh just to give you, you know, an example of some of the types of stuff, you know, we mentioned work on one of our salt barns, but these could be roof repair projects, they could be um rehab of uh buildings that we have some new planned use for, like work we've done at our our training center out at the Belmont campus, and so a million dollars would really be uh you know, I think of it more as a true maximum here uh and not a defined amount that we intend to spend on these types of projects.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Are there any other questions?

CNN, do I have a motion to approve items 3A, 3B, 3C, 3D, and 3E?

So move by Edis Redman.

Do I have a second?

Seconded by Bob Perrin.

All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Seeing that motion carries.

Uh next item on our agenda will be change orders.

Um Nathan?

Yeah, thank you.

This is uh change order number one final to project S D 04068, Haverstick Regional Detention Basin with William Charles Construction Company LLC.

The engineering division staff recommends the board of public works approve and authorize the director to execute change order final to SD 04068, Haverstick Regional Detention Basin with William Charles Construction Company LLC and the decreased amount of 25,367.23 cents for a new total not to exceed contract amount of 595,632.77 cents.

Change order number one final will provide compensation and quantity adjustments for WDC one and change order one point one, which is summarized below.

Uh WDC one is uh additional um seating that we needed to uh do as part of the project in order to terminate our have a notice of termination, um and uh change order number one point one was basically uh final quantity true-ups as part of the project.

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

Very nice to have a project with one change order, and that's the final one to go.

Yeah.

Any questions?

CNN, do I have a motion to approve the final change order?

So moved by Bob Perrin.

I have a second.

Seconded by Leslie Schulty.

All in favor signify signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

That motion carries.

Next one, Nathan.

Yes, this is uh change order number two, final and final acceptance for project ST 26054.

Michigan and New York two-way conversion project with Wreath Riley Construction Company Inc.

The engineering division staff recommends the Board of Public Works approve and authorize the director to ratify and execute change order number two, final and final acceptance to ST 26054.

Michigan and New York two-way conversion project with wreath Riley Construction Company Inc.

and the decreased amount of 981,785 and eight cents for a new total not to exceed contract amount of 15,161,214.92 cents with 699 days added to substantial and final completion dates.

Change order number two, final and final acceptance.

We'll provide compensation and time adjustments for change order detail 2.1 and 2.2 and work directive 3 through 10.

As you can see, there's a kind of a laundry list of of things that the individual work directives addressed, ranging from uh additional um rail removal that was uh found um during the construction of the project, um some sidewalk repairs.

Uh there was an impact attenuator uh for one of our bridges that needed to be repaired, uh, had some additional pavement markings, uh a signal removal, um, a number of other uh things and again this is basically a final quantity true up as well.

Contract change order number two, final and final acceptance accounts for an additional six hundred ninety-nine days added to substantial and final completion dates.

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

Open for questions.

So this is almost a million dollars.

Is it going to be allocated somewhere else?

Um, you know, we uh it's as as the director mentioned it's it's good to have uh uh negative change orders.

Um the that money does come back into DPW's coffers and and uh allows us to reallocate those on additional projects, seeing none do I have a motion to approve the final change order and final acceptance?

So moved so moved by E.

Just Redman.

Do I have a second?

Seconded by Leslie Schulte.

All in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye, any opposed?

That motion carries.

Uh next one, Nathan.

Yes, this is uh change order number two final for CW 2402, Indy Access Curb Sidewalk and Ramps 2024, milestone with milestone contractors LP.

The engineering division staff recommends the Board of Public Works approve and authorize the director to execute change order number two, final to CW 2400 two, indie access curb sidewalk and ramps with milestone contractors LP, and the increased amount of 74,582.45 cents for a new total not to exceed contract amount of 703,760.13 cents and no change to the substantial and final completion dates.

Change order number two final will provide compensation and quantity adjustments.

Uh this again basically at the end of the project we true up uh our quantities and uh contract change order number two accounts for no change to substantial and final completion dates.

Um we were, I guess we're two of three.

We had uh two relatively large negatives and we've got a a positive here, but uh not in common to uh have positive change orders as final as well.

Thank you, Nathan.

Do we have any questions?

Do I have a motion to approve the amendment or I'm sorry the final change order?

So move.

So moved by Bob Perrin.

Do I have a second?

Second by Isaac Redman, all in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

That motion carries.

Uh thank you, Nathan.

Next item on our agenda are professional services amendments.

Mark St.

John will present.

Thank you.

Mark St.

John, Chief Engineer for the department.

Uh the first item I have before you is amendment number eight to ENG-20-017.

On call transportation design services with Butler, Fairman, and Sufer Incorporated.

The Engineering Division staff recommends the Board of Public Works approve and authorize the director to execute amendment eight to ENG-20-017.

On call transportation design services, a professional services agreement with Butler Fairman and Sufer Incorporated with no change total agreement amount, added scope of services, and updated rate schedules.

This amendment will also extend the agreement expiration date to December 31st, 2028.

Amendment 8 provides time and updated rates to complete additionally requested design work.

This will include construction phase services and lighting design work.

Happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you, Mark.

Do we have any questions?

Do I have a motion to approve the amendment?

So moved by Bob Perrin.

Do I have a second?

Seconded by Leslie Schulte.

All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Seeing none that motion carries.

Mark St.

John.

Thank you.

The next item I have is amendment number six to ENG-21-001.

On call transportation design service with WSP USA Incorporated.

The Engineering Division staff recommends the Board of Public Works approve and authorize the director to execute amendment six to ENG-21-001.

On call transportation design services and professional services agreement with WSP USA Incorporated with no change to the total agreement amount of $1,820,000.

This amendment will provide updated rates and extend the agreement expiration date to December 31st, 2027.

Amendment six provides additional time and updated rates to complete requested work related to this on call agreement.

More particularly they've helped us complete uh a federal funding application for the safe streets and roads for all uh no four thank you.

Do we have any questions?

Seeing none, do I have a motion to approve the amendment?

So moved by Idris Redman.

Do I have a second?

I'll second.

That's seconded by Leslie Schulte.

All in favor, signified by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Thank you, Mark.

Nathan, you're back up.

Yes, this is uh amendment number one to Project GT 32002, Pleasant Run Greenway phases one, two, and three with the Etika Group Inc.

The Engineering Division staff recommends the Board of Public Works approve and authorize the director to ratify and execute amendment number one to GT 32002, Pleasant Run Greenways phase one, two, and three, a professional service agreement with the Etica Group Inc.

and the increased amount of two hundred ninety-four thousand seventy-two dollars and fifty cents for a new total not to exceed agreement amount of five hundred seventy-five thousand four hundred and seventy-two dollars and sixteen cents.

This agreement provides additional scope of services, updated rates, and will extend the agreement expiration date to December 31st, 2027.

Amendment number one provides funding time and updated rates and additional scope to complete additionally requested inspection work.

This amendment will add inspection for Pleasant Run Greenway Phase 1, which is GT 32001, to Pleasant Run Greenway phases two and three, which is project GT 32002.

That was not originally included in the initial service agreement.

As you can see in the board memo, this is for an increased amount of 294,007.50 cents and adds additional rates, scope, and time to that particular contract.

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

Thank you, Nathan.

Are there any questions?

Seeing none, do I have a motion to approve the amendment?

So moved.

So moved by Bob Perrin.

Do I have a second?

Second by Leslie Schulte.

All in say favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Seeing none the motion carries.

Uh next one, Nathan.

This is amendment number one to Project BM25182.

Union Station Bridge Rehab with Bullinger Lock and Associates.

The engineering division staff recommends the board of Public Works approve and authorize the director to execute amendment number one to BM 25 182.

Union Station Bridge Rehabilitation.

The professional services agreement with Bullinger Lock and Associates, and the increased amount of $382,102 and 33 cents for a new total not to exceed agreement amount of $2,433,040.03 cents.

No change to scope of services, no change to consultant rates.

This amendment will provide no change to the agreement expiration date as well.

Amendment number one provides funding to complete additionally requested inspection work.

If you guys have driven down or attempted to drive down either Illinois or Capitol north of South Street, we've got a pretty large project that's ongoing, where we're rehabbing those particular bridges, doing a lot of uh work on the ground, but also overhead.

Um there's a lot of uh reconstruction and rehabilitation of the structural steel associated with the bridge.

And as you can imagine, uh there's a huge uh uh hotel project that's ongoing and work that's happening on Georgia Street, and uh we've had to ensure that the project was coordinated well with all the activities that are going on downtown, immediately adjacent to the convention center.

Um, as you guys are aware, we had uh men's NCAA uh final four here, and so um it's kind of the perfect storm of projects that have all kind of came together and so uh because of that uh there have been some delays in getting some of this work done, and so the uh additional uh inspection dollars uh will go to help ensure that um we uh are are doing the inspection necessary in order to uh see the completion of the project.

Thank you, Nathan.

Are there any questions on this amendment?

Seeing none, do I have a motion to approve the amendment?

So moved by Eugenis Redman.

Do I have a second?

Seconded by Leslie Schulte.

All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Seeing no motion carries.

And Nathan, one more.

Yes, this is uh amendment number three to ST 31059.

This is White River Innovation District Infrastructure Project with Butler Fairman and Seifert.

The engineering division staff recommends the Board of Public Works approve and authorize the director to execute amendment number three to project ST 31059, White River Innovation District Infrastructure Project, a professional service agreement with Butler Fairman and Seifert, Inc.

and the increased amount of nine hundred twelve thousand nine hundred and thirty thirty dollars and fifty-four cents for a new total amount not to exceed of four million two hundred forty-one thousand thirty-seven dollars and five cents.

This agreement will extend the agreement expiration date to December 31st, 2027.

This amendment will provide for the inspection services for the construction of Henry Street from the Henry Street Bridge east to Kentucky Avenue.

Also included in this is continued inspection of the Henry Street Bridge and South White River Parkway Drive from Oliver Avenue to North Washington Street.

Additional work includes scanning of all faces of the concrete rings and uh form a baseline for the future bridge inspection of those rings.

If you have uh questions about that amendment, I'd be happy to try to answer them.

Thank you, Nathan.

Do we have any questions?

Seeing none do I have a motion to approve the amendment.

So moved.

So moved by Bob Perrin.

Do I have a second?

Second by Ezra Redman.

All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

That motion carries.

Thank you, Nathan.

Uh next amendment, Brian Cavanall.

Thank you.

Brian Kavanaugh, General Counsel for the Department of Public Works.

Uh, for the board's consideration today, amendment number six to contract number two one seven one one for commercial fuel services with Corpey Incorporated.

DPW staff recommends the Board of Public Works ratify, approve, and authorize the director to execute an amendment number six to contract number two one seven one one, a services agreement with Corpey Incorporated for Commercial Fuel Services.

This amendment will extend the agreement for an additional year with an updated expiration date of June 8th, 2027.

DPW holds a contract with Corp Incorporated for commercial Fuel Services for the department's fleet Services Division.

Uh this amendment renews DPW's agreement with Corpey for commercial fuel services for another year.

After this one-year extension, DPW will recompete the agreement.

Yearly expenditures under this agreement is approximately 5.5 million.

Thank you, Brian.

Are there any questions?

CNN.

Okay, just with is Corp, is that speedway?

Fuel.

Yeah.

Yes, that yes, that is.

And uh and you will go out.

I mean it's six years now with this, right?

That's what amendment number six is an annual amendment.

Yeah, it looks like that, and uh per the memo.

We are planning on recompeting that next year.

Good.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Seeing none do I have a motion to approve the amendment?

So moved by Bob Perrin.

Do I have a second?

Seconded by Leslie Schulty.

All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Thank you.

That motion carries.

Thank you, Brian.

Next item on our agenda are final acceptances.

Nathan Sheets.

Thank you.

This is final acceptance for project SD 23062, Farley on Top Creek drainage improvements with William Charles Construction Company LLC.

The engineering division staff recommends the board of public works approve and authorize the director to execute final acceptance for SD 23062, Farley and Top Creek Drainage Improvements Project with William Charles Construction Company LLC.

The final contract amount is 1,256,979.

This board action is for final acceptance of the project.

Open for questions.

Do I have a motion to approve the final acceptance?

So moved by Edis Redman.

Do I have a second?

Seconded by Leslie Schulty.

All in favor signify by saying I.

Aye.

Any opposed?

That motion carries.

Next one, Nathan.

Thank you.

This is uh another final acceptance for project ST22092.

This is the 2022 Thoroughfare Structural Rehabilitation Area 1 with milestone contractors LP.

The engineering division staff recommends the Board of Public Works approve and authorize the director to execute final acceptance for ST 22092, 2022 Thoroughfare Structural Rehabilitation Area 1 with milestone contractors LP.

The final contract amount is 2,438,401.93 cents.

Again, uh board action is for final acceptance of the project.

Questions.

CNN, do I have a motion to approve the final acceptance?

So move.

So moved by Bob Perrin.

Do I have a second?

Seconded by Leslie Schulte.

All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

The motion carries.

Next item on our agenda is a walk-on change order.

Uh, Nathan Sheets, please.

Yep, thank you.

This is uh change order number one to Project ST17052.

This is our 29th and 30th Street two-way conversion project with Calumet Civil Contractors, Inc.

The Engineering Division staff recommends the Board of Public Works approve and authorize the director to execute change order number one to ST 17052, 29th and 30th Street two-way conversion with Calumet Civil Contractors Inc.

and the increased amount of 252,401 dollars and eighty five cents for a new total not to exceed amount of ten million one hundred twenty-five thousand four hundred and one dollars and eighty five cents with four days added to substantial and final completion dates.

Change order number one will provide quantity adjustments, also adds a new pay item uh for asphalt service uh to Eugene Street from Ethel to Elmyra.

Uh, this change order also upgrades HMA surface asphalt material for both 29th and 30th from a standard mix to a more durable high performance SMA mix.

Uh this upgraded mix will result in a more durable and quality pavement surface.

Uh change order uh number one covers that uh that new pay item for the SMA service as well as uh the added uh pavement uh improvements along Eugene Street.

Uh as previously mentioned.

Contract change order number one uh accounts for four additional days added to substantial and final completion dates.

Thank you, Nathan.

Do we have any questions?

CNN, do I have a motion to approve the change order?

So moved by Aegis Redman.

Do I have a second?

Seconded by Bob Perrin.

All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

That motion carries.

All right, you're done, Nathan.

Uh next item on our agenda is for uh public comment and the amendment number two for the agreement for the disposal of excess water from Eagle Creek Reservoir.

I'll ask our board counsel, Benjamin Moracle, to read the rules governing public comment.

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.

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 may be 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 would entertain a motion to adopt these rules, we can proceed to public comments.

Thank you, Mr.

Moracle.

Uh, do I have a motion to adopt a rules rules?

So moved by Aegis Redman.

Do I have a second?

Second by Leslie Schulty.

All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

The motion carries.

So we'll open this up for public comment, and I think we've got our first name on here is Cherish.

I think we'll present first and then I'm sorry, Chairs.

Allow us to present and then we'll call you up.

Thank you very much.

Brian Cabinov.

Thank you.

Uh I have today for the board's consideration an amendment to the original agreement for disposal of excess water from the Eagle Creek Reservoir.

Staff recommends that the Board of Public Works approve and authorize the director to execute this amendment to the city's 1971 water use agreement with Citizens Water for the withdrawal of excess water from the Eagle Creek Reservoir.

This agreement before the board merely extends the terms of the original agreement, which expires on July 1st, 2026, through July 1st, 2027, with options to extend the agreement for successive one-year intervals through 2031 until we are able with this board's input to come uh to a new agreement.

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

Under the 1971 Eagle Creek Reservoir Agreement, uh 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 of 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 a successor in interest would not impair flood prevention provided by the reservoir.

Some of the water, 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 is to use more current data and experience to update hydrological assumptions.

Therefore, DPW and Citizens Water would like to update the drought response and 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 bathometric survey and a due diligence study on the Eagle Creek Reservoir and the current agreement.

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

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

The sole purpose of this amendment before the study has been concluded, DPW and Citizens Water will renegotiate the next long-term agreement with the input of the board.

So just a couple of things to clarify again, the agreement before the board today, does nothing to change how we have utilized and protected Eagle Creek for the last 50 years.

In layman's terms, what the board is voting on today, this agreement allows DPW time to conclude its studies on Eagle Creek and then requires the parties to negotiate in good faith a new agreement that balances the health of Eagle Creek with the city's water use needs.

After we have concluded our study, you know, we want to commit to returning to the board and the public for their and your input before we negotiate the subsequent long-term agreement with CEG, as is envisioned with this amendment.

Thank you, Brian.

This item is now open for public comment.

Are there any board members that would like to speak?

Or have any questions?

I just have one simple question.

How does how does um uh discharging from Eagle Creek more water than what we're saying now?

How does that impact the flood prevention purpose of the reservoir?

Natalie, I think I'd probably look to you on that one.

Yeah, um, so I think in terms of impacts for flood prevention in dry weather conditions, it it probably won't have much of an impact.

Um I think in larger storm events when we may have to enact our flood response plan, there could be an impact.

The biggest thing is just making sure, you know, if we're disposing of of excess water, if we were to allow citizens to not withdraw that water, you know, it serves a large portion of the residents of Marion County, so we would just be discharging it downstream.

So I think that's the bigger concern is just making sure that there's an adequate water supply.

Um, but I think in terms of flood, we would only we would generally only see something in typically larger storm events where our flood response plan would come into play.

Okay, so then you'd have to discharge more.

Yeah, so we get um we we typically discharge more in larger events anyway, and that usually exceeds the so the amount that gets withdrawn, the average monthly amount that gets withdrawn for water supply is generally less than what we would have to discharge in like a larger rain event just naturally to maintain the levels of the reservoir.

Thank you, Bob.

Any other questions from board members?

Comments uh is there anyone from the public who would like to speak on this agreement?

I know Cherish uh wanted to speak.

Good afternoon.

Uh I'm state representative Cherish Prior.

I represent District 94.

My district uh is uh buts uh the Eagle Creek, so I receive and my constituents receive water from the Eagle Creek reservoir.

But I do want to thank you all for holding this, and I do want to thank uh the community and the people that have worked on this project, uh they put a lot of time and effort uh into what is happening uh with the Eagle Creek Reservoir as it relates to the LEET project.

Um I am happy uh about the extension.

Um the one thing that I will say that people have been concerned about is the lack of transparency, uh, the inability to get information.

Um the project um, even with this study continues to move forward.

So I actually have a concern that Eagle that citizens is moving forward on this project without all the data in the studies being completed.

And while I think it is a good idea for this extension of one year, uh my concern is the continual extension and the possibility that it could go to 2023, potentially after the LEAP project is completed.

Caution I will say is that as a legislator, I've seen time and time again where utility companies, water companies, the electric companies have come before the legislature to circumvent the process or to get what they want because there's been pushback at the local level by community members, or they've been pushed back at the local level by local elected officials.

And I don't, I would hate for citizens to use this as an opportunity to circumvent the process and the will of the people in Marion County simply to move forward with the project that they have at hand.

And with that, be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Representative Pryor.

Thank you.

We will not be answering any question or asking any questions.

So thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Jennifer, our next speaker.

Tina.

Thanks for coming up.

Please state your name and where you're from.

Hello, thank you.

My name is Tina Oaks, and I am from the Pike Township area.

I actually live right across from the 56th Street entrance to Eagle Creek, and in one of the neighborhoods, significantly affected.

The first thing I'm gonna be brief, I'd like to bring up is Cherish's comment about citizens moving forward before all the studies are done.

I think everybody here is aware of the uh water main break that occurred in front of the Colts Stadium on 56, also across from Eagle Creek at the beginning of June.

I would say in our neighborhood, um, several of our neighbors contacted Citizens Energy, including my husband.

We all got different answers as to why the water pressure was increased.

Several of my neighbors had water main breaks in order to solve this problem.

They started uh letting water out of the wire hydrant water fire hydrant in my yard about 17 to 19 days ago.

The exact date I'm not sure of because I wasn't home, but based on neighbors, that water hydrant ran 24-7 at approximately from citizen science, two gallons per minute or more, 24-7, and was just turned off about a half hour before I left to come here.

And that again was to release the pressure and the water from their increase of pressure, and we all receive different answers.

Now, quickly, what I would like to say is for this amendment approval, I would like the board to consider results from other studies that are being done that are will be impacted by both the water removal from Eagle Creek to for the uh flood prevention as well as the discharge back.

Um, there are many other studies being done that could impact your decision, and I think you should review those.

Also, as citizens, we really don't want any water removed or taken from Eagle Creek to support LEAP.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Please state your name and where you're from.

My name is Rachel Wolverton.

I'm a resident of Eagle Creek 46254 Indianapolis.

I'm here today representing the 17,963 people who signed my change.org petition back in late December to protect Eagle Creek from the LEAP project.

I'm also representing my children and the future generations of Indianapolis who aren't able to be here today.

Um thank you for postponing any agreements that you guys are going to do with citizens.

Um please remember like we must protect Eagle Creek Reservoir for all future generations, not just what's going to happen in the next five years.

We're talking seven generations.

Um I really would ask if, like what Tina said, please consider other studies that are being done, and also any recommendations of other studies that should be done from the Eagle Creek Foundation and Advisory Committee.

They do have other suggestions and recommendations, and they are very brilliant and know exactly what should be done.

Please involve them in that.

And I do ask that you please consider adding a requirement to your new contract for citizens to remove forever chemicals PFAs.

This is already being done in the state of Indiana.

Charleston, Indiana has implemented this technology in their water system, and Terre Haute is scheduled to do the same thing.

So let's hold citizens accountable to be the good stewards of our water system that they claim to be.

And let's be ahead of the game.

Let's do what's right for our water system and our health, not just what's good for other counties who are taking our water for computer systems.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you for coming.

You're state your name where you're from.

I'm Donna Blair.

I live in 4668, Pike Township.

I am very concerned about the lack of transparency that has occurred as the leap project has uh been developing.

At this time, uh there appears to be additional water lines, perhaps in Boone County being sent to Whitestown that is going to push this project faster than the appropriate studies would allow it to be.

So I am here also to protect the future generations.

The beautiful jewel that we have as the Eagle Creek Park.

I use it regularly along with many, many people in this community as well as other communities.

So please request the transparency before all appropriate studies are done.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thanks for coming.

State your name where you're from.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman, members of the board.

My name's Lou Ann Baker.

I'm a Pike Township resident.

I live near the north entrance to the park, and I currently chair the Eagle Creek Advisory Committee, which has since its creation more than 40 years ago, advised the city on park and reservoir changes and additional modifications regarding Eagle Creek.

This contract remains a key legal element that the city has regarding the operation of Citizens Energy Group, given its independent structure as the city's public utility.

It's important that this contract not just focus on the amount of withdrawal of water.

It also has to contain future accountability provisions, reasonable cost structure, and continuing to look at how it interfaces not just with the water system but also the overall ecosystem, obviously in the park.

We are grateful for the mayor's office push for additional data to inform this decision moving forward.

Thank you to Mr.

Whitman for attending today and his participation and ongoing expertise in these efforts.

We'd like to suggest the possibility of a public dashboard being created in terms of accountability.

A question we've not yet gotten an answer to in terms of water provision.

If the city of Indianapolis enacts a water emergency, how does that water emergency, given the source of water going to Lebanon, potentially impact those Lebanon customers and Lebanon businesses as well?

Finally, as has been noted, we also have neighbors asking why this construction is starting.

If in fact there is intent on gathering more information regarding the project and its impact on the reservoir.

That monitoring we also hope goes on in the future, not just as it relates to the decision of this contract, so that we can continue to monitor any impacts on these changes, both from a withdrawal standpoint and from potential wastewater that may be coming from Lebanon.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

State your name and where you're from.

I'm Martin Risch.

I live in Pike Township.

I'm a career water scientist.

I uh was a public servant my whole career.

I'm retired from USGS, a longtime member of the Parks Eagle Creek Park Advisory Committee.

I made comments to this group two weeks ago.

I believe the new Eagle Creek Reservoir water withdrawal contract should contain provisions to maintain the balance of historic water levels that support the health of the park's ecosystem.

Reservoir water levels need to be high enough in the spring to inundate the fish spawning habitat, and they need to be low enough in the fall to expose the resting areas for seasonal waterfowl migration.

This park is identified by DNR as one of the most significant concentrations of migratory waterfowl in the state.

Future demands on Eagle Creek Reservoir for increased water withdrawal to supply Indianapolis and Lebanon, along with future inputs of treated wastewater to the Eagle Creek watershed.

They have the potential to upset this historic balance of seasonal water levels.

And that's what supports the park's ecosystem.

So DPW controls the water withdrawal and the dam, so you can help control these seasonal water levels.

You will need a water budget model to predict the reservoir water level changes in response to changing water inflows from streams and precipitation and changing outflows from water withdrawals for public supply.

And you'll need more stream flow monitoring at the head of the reservoir in Eagle Creek Park.

The USGS gauge at Zionsville is too far upstream to capture all the flow entering the park.

And the USGS gauge at 79th Street that's been maintained by DPW since 2014 does not include stream flow or water quality, but it should.

And you'll need to reevaluate the outflow quantity from the reservoir to determine if the rate set 50 years ago is still appropriate.

And last, please include us.

Knowledgeable and engaged advocates of Eagle Creek Park who want to be part of an advisory group to work with DPW and your hydrologist to assure you have the information to support your revisions to this contract.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Please state your name where you're from.

Thank you.

My name's Bill Blimquist, and I uh work for the White River Alliance as their water policy coordinator.

White River Alliance is an Indianapolis-based nonprofit whose mission is to protect and improve the water resources of our entire 16 County watershed.

We bring a science-based data-focused and community-engaged approach to our work.

We appreciate the board welcoming public comment on this important agreement.

Water is a vital resource for our community.

Its use and protection should be a community conversation.

We thank you for providing time for that to occur.

We support the proposed one-year extension of the agreement for the disposal of excess water from Eagle Creek Reservoir to allow the city to complete due diligence on the reservoir.

The city has contracted with Whitman Consulting to collect data and make recommendations, and we endorse the use of the extension for that study.

We offer a couple of additional observations for your consideration.

Decisions regarding its future and about water use throughout the watershed must be focused on data and the long-term protection of both the quality and quantity of our water.

Discussions and decisions must also consider the larger context of regional water management, including the increased demand for water extraction outside of our watershed and where and if that water returns to our watershed and city.

A few years ago, the Indiana Finance Authority completed a central Indiana water study among its findings were that water scarcity is a potential concern for our region.

Last year, the White River Alliance completed a report for the IFA that identified deficiencies in Indiana's water monitoring and data, the very information we are going to reply rely upon to answer vital questions such as how much excess water Eagle Creek has, if any.

For reasons such as these, we support the extension of the agreement and the use of that time to improve the information base for future decision making.

And as always, we're glad to offer any assistance and advice we may.

Thank you for your time and attention.

Thank you.

Megan.

Thanks for coming.

Your name and where you're from.

Hello, my name is Megan Anderson.

I live in Pike Township.

I help support efforts with Protect Pike Township.

And in my professional career, I work for Sierra Club.

Those of us that live on the west side depend on Eagle Creek for our drinking water.

We have no interest in being part of an experiment with the Leap Industrial Project.

Over uh 21,000 people have spoken with elected officials about this issue, including the nearly 18,000 people who signed a change.org petition prohibiting calling for the prohibition of the use of Eagle Creek as a water supply source for the Leap Industrial site.

The city should do everything in its power to protect its only publicly owned drinking water reservoir and its largest park and recreational space.

I just want to be very clear that you know in Pike Township, thousands of us are opposed to water coming from Eagle Creek to Leap or coming back to Eagle Creek, even from upstream sources already.

Fish in our reservoir have high PCB levels, according to the EPA, and we have algae issues because of high phosphorus levels.

And even if that discharge moves upstream, it is unlikely to impact phosphorus levels.

Um we have come we have gone to dozens of meetings.

We've asked Lebanon if they will use the best available control technology for PCBs and for other pollutants, and they won't, they're gonna do what they are required to do by the law, which isn't enough for us in our reservoir, which really holds on to that contamination for a long time because it has very still water.

Scrolling down, sorry.

Um I also just want to emphasize that it's really concerning that Citizens Energy Group will not communicate with our township still.

They will not give the people on Moore Road a consistent construction timeline on their website.

It says June to November.

Um, and you know, people are still having to ask very basic questions and not getting the transparency we need to make informed decisions.

Um, but overall I would just ask that this board do what it can to prohibit the use of Eagle Creek as a supply source for LEAP and also to ensure that that discharge does not make its way back to Eagle Creek Reservoir.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Do I have any comments or questions from board members?

Seeing none, do I have a motion to approve the uh amendment?

So moved by E.

Just Redmond.

Do I have a second?

Seconded by Leslie Schulty.

All in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Seeing none that motion carries.

Thank you, everyone.

This public comment is now closed.

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

Do I have a motion to adjourn?

So moved.

So moved by Bob Perrin.

Do I have a second?

Second by Leslie Schulte.

All of thank you all.

This meeting is now adjourned.