Storm Water Management Board - Regular Meeting

Of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Hey, good morning. Welcome to Stormwater Management Board Meeting, August 25th, 2026. We'll start with the first Greenwich Forge case.

Yes, we have two cases in front of you this morning. The first one is docket number SM26-0017, NIPSCO and the care of Caramita, rewrapping of an existing aerial gas pipeline crossing over Hannon Ditch, which will include excavation within the regulated drainage easement. The staff or SWAB's recommendation was approved per staff recommendation as heard at the 10th, 2026 SWAB meeting.

I move that we approve.

Second. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries.

The second case is docket number 10-26-0019, Valparaiso City Services in Care of DLZ, Indiana. This is the installation of a new 16-inch C900 PVC raw water main via open trench construction and a 20-inch C906 HGPE raw water main via horizontal directional drilling within the regulated drainage easement and crossing Flint Lake Garden Terrace. The SWAT's recommendation was approved per staff recommendations and contingent on the requested revisions to the construction plans at the August 10, 2026 SWAT meeting.

What were the significant revisions?

So the applicant was proposing 18 inches of separation between the water main and the invert at Flint Lake Garden Terrace Ditch. Porter County standards is five feet of separation distance between the water main and the invert at Flint Lake Garden Terrace Ditch. I know that the applicant has requested the specific section of Porter County standards or ordinance that quotes that. I have not been able to find it. I have asked Kevin to assist with me finding that specific location. I know, or quote, I've read it somewhere. I just, with everything that's been going on, I haven't been able to take the time to do the full research into it.

It's been our longstanding policy. A communications ordinance has it in it specifically, but for the last 25 years, I think, our board has pretty much adhered to a five-foot separation.

I move that we approve.

Second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Claims?

And then we have a couple of claims from the regulated drains fund for drainage board approval. This is Reeves Ditch South in the amount of $24,405.80 and Windridge Subdivision in the amount of $2,751.93. And with that, we approve.

We have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Stormwater Board Management Claims.

Yeah, so a series of claims from the Stormwater Fund. We have Bright Focal Ditch in the amount of $1,922.55. Cobb Ditch in the amount of $500.00. The County Road 550 East Bioretention Area in the amount of $3,688.75. Cricket Creek for $4,767.50. Duck Creek Estates Subdivision in the amount of $11,160.00. Ludington Ditch in the amount of $1,202.50. And Windridge Subdivision in the amount of $393.07. So moved. Second. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries.

Next, the invitation to bid results, bid acceptance, contract to work.

Yeah, so this contract or staff-recommended contract and award is for the Moraine Manor Ravine Stabilization Project. As a reminder, this project is the stabilization of 420 feet of eroded ravine between 670 and 672 Vlasta Court. Sealed bids were opened at a public opening on July 20th. Melissa, if you go to the next slide, please. Here is the bid abstract for all bids received. The engineer's estimate or opinion of probable cost was $180,880. The low bid was the Stenger Group in the amount of $198,400.00. You can see that then there was the four bids received in about that $300,000 to $400,000 range, and then the outlier with Davey Resource Group at $629,000. Although the received bids were over the engineer's estimate, staff still recommends awarding a contract to the Stenger Group in the amount of $198,400. Given the site conditions, the access route necessary to complete the work and the scope of work, staff does not believe that lower bids could be received in the future if this would were to be rebid. And the Stenger Group is well qualified. They have done a lot of work very similar to this ravine restoration, extensive stream restoration work as well in the area. So staff's recommendation is a contract award to the Stenger Group in the amount of $198,400. To award the Stenger Group the project for $198,400.

I'm at a second for discussion. So we're seeing four that are kind of within that same amount and then the Sanger Group is an outlier and Davie Resource Group is an outlier. So I just want to make sure that the Sanger Group actually understood all of the requirements.

Yes. So the Stenger Group is a nine-unit contractor. Guerrilla Construction, Baxter & Woodman, and Grimmer Construction are union contractors, so their labor rates, therefore their unit prices are higher. And then Semper Fi Landscaping is based out of Illinois, so their labor rates are higher. unit prices were similar to that of the local union firms. The Stanger Group did understand the scope of work. During our pre-bid meeting, we also did a site visit. They asked an extensive amount of questions, seemed to grasp the scope of work, and yes, they do. In staff's opinion, they do understand the scope of work necessary to successfully complete the work.

Just in case, does Stanger give us some unit prices, too, so we don't have construction creeper

so yes this project was uh it is a unit price job similar to all of our projects um we have our um bid our basis of bid form sorry uh that has all those unit prices i believe there's 17 different work items so if there's something specific that um it's similar to all of our other projects to where there's an unforeseen site condition that is encountered then we could work with them on a change order to adjust the specific unit price necessary for that. This is not a lump sum job.

So this was more apples to apples. I don't see any major issues with it, just as long as we have.

Yeah, and as a part of the contract, I believe that you might have it, you would have the basis of bid form that is included as a part of the contract. If not, that is something that I can get for you. or we can easily pull up if needed.

Where are they out of?

The Stenger Group is out of Goshen, Indiana.

And where is, I should know this, but I can't place it in some marine manner.

So this is, I am so sorry. 50 West. Just so if you take 50 West, just north of 700 North? Yeah. Near the... Oh, I know where it's at. Yes. Sorry. I can picture it in my mind, but it's saying the rows and the different subdivisions in the area, kind of near Lexington Farm South and in that vicinity.

We've had history with them going back 30 years or so since they were first built.

And this is part of that memorandum of understanding that was approved in, I want to say, 2022 or 2023 of the county taking over the responsibility of maintenance for the drainage easements and the infrastructure within those easements within the subdivision.

That's a good point because they were a property owners association. I think the staff handled that very well. From POA.

When this renovation is complete, how long do you think that will last before we're going to have to go back in there and do something, additional stabilization?

I do not believe that additional stabilization would be needed. I mean, you have your typical service life for engineered infrastructure outside of the state. 50 to 75 years now maintenance will be necessary this is a smaller scale step pool conveyance system so there will be sediment that will need to be removed from those step pools to help with that longevity but as far as additional stabilization of the scope i do not believe additional work will be necessary for that engineer service life of 50 plus years

And this has been 30 years for natural processes. That's when we see the degradation locally and why the necessity for maintenance for these things.

And I think also to kind of touch on what Kevin said, ravines are naturally erosive features. The soils that are within them, the topography, they are expected to erode over time. However, when you build a subdivision and then you do a point discharge, like a storm sewer at the head of the ravine, similar to here, you're going to exacerbate that natural process. So that's why within this 35 years when the subdivision was built, you're seeing this significant erosion. And then when the board approved to go out for a bit with this project, one thing we talked about was this slope that is eroding is adjacent to a structure, a house. So if it were to go neglected and allowed to continue for another 10, 15, 20 years, you can see that start to encroach on the foundation and affect the structural integrity of the home. I don't want to get into the nuances of the home being within the drainage easement and immediately adjacent to the ravine, but we do have to, this is the situation that the county has been given. I think it's important to protect the structural assets of the residents. And like I mentioned, I know that the prices are more than the engineer's opinion of probable costs, but I don't see this project having a lower contract value if it were to be rebid and awarded in the future.

This was an area of highly erodible soils. We have kinds of states that Mr. Biggs and I are both really familiar with that we've had sand fill up the street. It's something that I think the planners have always tried to pay attention to. It's demarcated on soil maps, but not really well. when you have the highly erodible soils combined with conditions so the flash flashiness of our storms the intensities that's been our maintenance right here okay we got a motion in a second all those in favor signify by saying aye aye opposed same sign motion carries thank you storm water manager report

So I want to give a couple of project updates, active project updates, and then an update on the Norfolk Southern Obstructed Railroad Culvert at Kemper Ditch on 23. So I will dive in first with Rolling Meadows, the Stormwater Management System Improvements, Phase 1. So the picture on your left, this is looking down Angelica Court, standing at the intersection of Angelica Court and Laguerra Drive. The project reached substantial completion on Friday, August 22nd. In case if you guys have much better memories than me, you will recall in the contract that the substantial date is August 15th. I don't expect you to know that. But the contract substantial completion date was August 15th. Given the amount of rain that we've had this summer, I think it was very reasonable for the substantial completion date to be pushed to August 22nd. That revision to the contract will be reflected in the final balancing change order. They'll be presented to the board at a future meeting. And then the picture on your right, this is looking down Laguerra Drive. The pipe was installed in the left hand lane or which would be the eastbound lane. So you can see the asphalt has been placed. And then the puddle that is just past those candlestick cones, don't be alarmed. That is because this is the joint project we are undertaking with the Highway Department. Our stormwater contract included placing asphalt up to binder layer or Yeah, just placing binder asphalt. And then the highway department will come in and have their own contract to place the surface layer of asphalt. So that small puddle that you see, it is at an inlet, but that is because the water is going into the street and then it's having to stack that inch and a half before being able to get into the inlet at the curb. So it won't always be like that. And overall, the project, I think, looks good. I know that the original plan for the Highway Department was to come in and mill and resurface the entire subdivision. That has been put on hold, but like I said, the surface will still be placed over the limits of the stormwater project. How old is this subdivision? Built in 1999.

First, it was, I think, proposed in 94. And just note that picture with the back in the 90s, the water in that street was at the height of the transformer, the top of the transformer.

Yeah.

And of all people living right there was Ray Welch, our commission building inspector. So that whole intersection, which goes into the development, was under three feet, four feet of water. So that's why the first round of putting the sewer pipe back to the pond is placing that. And that was at the cost. Does this always add a history of flooding? Pretty much.

Yeah. So like Kevin was saying, when the subdivision was originally built, this intersection had significant flooding issues. The drainage board or the county then installed a secondary sewer to alleviate that flooding issue. And then the flooding issues that our department has become aware of and involved in It's more related to the rear yard master drain tile flooding problems or I guess infrastructure issues with the master tile. So as we were looking at reconstructing one of those master tiles, we televised the entire storm sewer network and in doing that we noted that the storm sewer had failed. We had our typical black HDPE pipe that was heart-shaped. That's not what you want to see. It is an oval instead of a circle. And of course, the worst point or worst part of the storm sewer was underneath the driveway. So it was a public safety hazard of potentially causing a sinkhole with someone's driveway. So that's why the first phase of this is to completely reconstruct the storm sewer. And then future phases will be to reconstruct those master tiles that serve as the outlet for the septic system perimeter drain tiles, and as well as the surface drainage for the rear yards within the subdivision.

It's difficult for me to see cases like this. That subdivision is basically probably a little less than 26 years old.

It's older. Huh? It's older. Older than 26? She said 99. They started at 95 with the plunge. So they adhered to it. This was one of a half a dozen subdivisions that was a good less than 30 years old. But it helped sell the stormwater ordinance that we passed in 2005. It was a hard sell with the developers and contractors, but we managed to make a major transfer of ordinances. There was probably about a half a page dedicated to stormwater management overall in the ordinance back from 1983. It wasn't a great thing, but at least this was poster child among other subdivisions. How not to do it? Absolutely. This was absolutely not how to not do it.

There could be a strong case that this land here should have never been built on land.

I don't disagree with that, but that was already decided before I even started. That's how far back that is. Like I said, 95.

We have build tiles that are 100 years old in this county. This system here is less than 30 years old, and it's already collapsing.

Yeah, and I think... I definitely don't disagree with that. The county should not be having to come in. This contract was $1,089,000. We should not be having to come in and spend a million plus dollars on a subdivision that is 30 years old for phase one, right? But, you know, those field tiles, they're not... underneath the roadways they're not underneath driveways they're not within subdivisions so do we have sinkholes on the on those field tiles absolutely but they're in agricultural fields we could do a point repair on those or they're much cheaper to repair because they are through agricultural fields here now we have to work around utilities that have been installed we have to reconstruct the roadway because of those utilities we can't put it in the grass on reconstructing driveways so as kevin said this is definitely another poster child for why we have our current udo our development review program our site inspections during construction to prevent this from happening because it it's much easier to correct it on the front end before as the subdivision is being built and then obviously that's the developer's responsibility right to pay for that on the back end And then correcting it on the back end is the county's financial responsibility, and it's much more expensive because of those reasons I mentioned.

I mean, if this developer were still developing, he or she, maybe for all I know, in this county, they're typically the first ones to complain that we have too many restrictions. And this, as Kevin said, which I agree with him, this could be a poster child is, yeah, this is why.

Yes, exactly. So the work that will be done this week is abandoning that existing storm sewer in place by filling it with grout. And then we will be working towards final completion, which will be the various contract document closeout as well as restoration. So we will be getting very close to having this one done, which is exciting. Next slide, please. The next one is the Hackney Lane Pavement and Drainage Improvements Project. If you will recall, this is the memorandum of understanding between our stormwater program and the highway department regarding this project. The highway department is looking to do a reconstruction of the roadway. The bottom picture that I have, this is standing in the sag of the road or the lowest point of the roadway in Tackney Lane. You can see the inlet in the far right-hand corner with all the dirt around the inlet. The issue here is that this low point is only, I think, approximately 18 inches or 12 inches higher than the adjacent pond. I wasn't able to get that in my photo, but the pond water level is only 12 inches lower than the roadway. So you have a lot of inlet surcharging because of that, and then roadway overtopping. So this project is providing a functioning outlet, not only for the roadway, but then the picture on the far right hand corner, that area of excessive standing water, a functioning outlet for that. The unfortunate or bad news is the picture in the far upper left-hand corner, all the green murky water with the hose sticking out, and then you can kind of see the top of a black tile. This is an unforeseen unknown site condition that was discovered last week. Ruth Riley is the contractor. They have been working to dewater this area for the last couple of weeks. The amount of standing water was known. That was a site condition that was present at contract award. But as they were dewatering, the thought was, okay, we've had an excessive amount of rain. That's why as we dewater, this area is filling back in. But then as they were able to finally get the water to draw down, we had a period with no rain. This black pipe was discovered. It is pouring groundwater um you stand this pipe up and you just have water out of it um this from what we can tell is that this pipe just dives straight underground and then there's almost like river rock so it seems to be some sort of like artesian well that was discovered and then this pipe was tapped into that well um so this area is never really going to dry up with the current dewatering operation that they have. The good news is that I think once we get the outlet storm sewer installed, like I said, we'll have that functioning outlet. It's just how do we get access to be able to get that storm sewer installed. So Reith Riley is putting together a change order price to include timber mats to get access back to here because the soils are so soft due to them being so wet. And then having a different dewatering operation, they think that they can get it dry enough if they dewater continuously for a couple of days while they get that storm sewer installed. So it's not like this dewatering operation would be necessary for multiple weeks on end. We just need a couple of days for them to install that storm sewer. So as I mentioned, Wraith Riley will be getting us that change order price. Staff can issue a work change directive. And then this contract is with the Board of Commissioners. So I'll work with Martin and the Highway Engineering Group to get a change order put together for that.

Where's Hackney Lane?

This is within the Hidden Hollow subdivision, just off of Valley View subdivision, north of, pardon me, south of County Road 150 north, just off the 250 west, County Road 250 west. So I know that Kevin has extensive history here with the drainage board. The stormwater department completed the first phase of this project in 2021 or 2022, and that was at the downstream end of having, installing the storm sewer from near this location to Clark Ditch. Originally, these two property owners with this area of standing water were not willing to grant the county the drainage easement necessary to complete this work at when we, at original first phase. So, Now we're able to come in and do it now, but just we have these on-foreseen site conditions.

And added to that, I believe the highway had entered on the one party's property and that's partied. was already at animosity. It wasn't really something we were trying to help the highway department at that time. This was a highway drainage issue. That water was filling up that low roadway.

Yeah. So why do you think that black pipe is in there?

I think Chelsea's on the right track. It was probably something the developer did. I think this was developed back in the 70s.

Yeah, late 60s, early 70s.

I knew one of the guys that was an operating engineer out there and asked me several questions, but I didn't know about that black pipe going into there. He never mentioned it, but there's a lot of sand seams or, as Chelsea called them, artesian wells, but that basically is water traveling underground that is more lateral with the surface of the ground. the water doesn't just go straight down, it kind of travels laterally along the ground. And that's probably what that is, and probably other tile are hooked up into it.

Well, is there a possibility that you're going to do your work in there and that we're going to have to make some modification because this continues to cause a problem?

So I think, thank you for asking that question. So obviously, this is considered a wetland, so we had to get the necessary permits from the Army Corps of Engineers and IDEM. My original design was to do a bioswale through this area, and that was to replicate the wetland function that we're seeing, improve water quality, establish native plants, and also, like I mentioned, kind of replicate that wetland function so that we didn't have to do mitigation with the Army Corps. Looking at this, I don't think constructing the bioswale is going to be feasible, just trying to excavate in this area to that depth. So one thing we might be doing is reworking the invert, the elevations of the storm sewer to where we get the storm sewer in. But the surface elevation of the ground that you see will stay. And then we'll just replant some wetland seed mix. So I guess what I'm getting at is the intent of the project was not to fully dry up this area of standing water. It was known it was going to be a wetland. Was it going to have the two feet of standing water it currently has? No. But what we wanted was to have a functioning outlet for this low-lying area. to be able to install or reconstruct the storm sewer within the roadway and discharge it to that point. So I don't think we'll have to come back in and do modifications once we get the storm sewer infrastructure installed. But there might be modifications to the original plans because of this as well. And I think as we get this area dried out and we wrap our heads around, okay, how does the storm sewer installation go? Is the bioswale still feasible or not working with Reith Riley? If we don't do the bioswale, that will offset the cost of the dewatering. And that's something we'll work through with Reith Riley on the contract language of eliminating a work item and that. But that will be included in that change order that is presented to the Board of Commissioners. Melissa, if you go to the next slide, please. The final update I wanted to provide this morning, I know that this board has not met since this issue has shown its face, was the Norfolk Southern Railroad culvert obstruction at Kimber Ditch Arm 23. This is at the North County Highway Garage just off the County Road 250 East near Easton Park subdivision. As I'm sure you all are aware and have heard, there has been significant flooding in this area. Easton Park has their own issues within the town of Chesterton. I don't think it's necessary to discuss those at this board meeting. But one thing I do want to touch on is the obstruction of the railroad culvert. So if you go to the next slide, please, Melissa. Here's some photos. So in the far bottom left-hand corner, that is a photo that was taken on July 31st. Our department received a call from a member of our department on July 31st about excessive standing water in this area. We had also received a drainage complaint from someone that I believe lived in Easton Park regarding this issue. So that was the first that our department was notified of any issues in this area. We were able to have one of our on-call contractors out there that afternoon of July 31st to attempt to remove the obstruction from the railroad culvert by just trying to get it removed from the surface. As I mentioned, it's the railroad culvert.

What was obstructing the water tunnel?

I will get there. Initially, we didn't know. So it was just known that, okay, this culvert is obstructed. We got a contractor out there to try to do a little bit of surface digging and try to locate the culvert. But this is on the railroad's property. So there's significant permits and restrictions to work that can be done on railroad property, and then also significant utilities. So that is important to note because we can just do blind excavation, which you never want to do anyways, but even more critical because of this. And then on, they were not able to, they were able to get the culvert partially open, still unknown what the exact cause of the extraction was, but water was flowing. And then on August 8th, E. golf Coates excavation, which is the contractor for Easton Park. was on site did a similar thing and at that point they saw beavers in the water so that at that point on July 31st if we didn't see beaver activity or a parent beaver activity and then on August 8th it was known okay now this is a beaver dam which was the original thought but not for sure so on August 10th our staff set beaver traps on the county's property and We were able to trap four beavers on our property. Also, one thing to know, on July 31st, we contacted the railroad after we realized, okay, we're not going to be able to get this culvert open free-flowing. And we were finally able to get them to respond, and they meet with us on August 11th. Their response was, yeah, there's a problem, but we'll get to it when we can. Obviously, there was a lot of ongoing flooding that was going on. Finally, on August 14th through August 16th, we were able to get a contact with the railroad's hazardous material response team. They responded to the site. They got the obstructions from the culvert fully removed. That is the picture that you see in the far right-hand corner. Dated August 16th, you can see their crews working to get the water to draw down. You can see the water levels have significantly decreased from the picture originally taken on July 31st. And then on August 21st, you can see even more water levels have decreased. You can't see it very well on the screen, but you'll see there's like a pink paint line, an arrow in that dirt showing like this is where the culvert is. It still is allowing water to flow, yes, but there's a lot of maintenance that needs to occur with this culvert. that we will be reaching out to the railroad about of, you know, we need to get this either reconstructed or opened up better. So that's just kind of a brief summary of the timeline with this issue.

Chelsea, can you just kind of delineate what is county property versus Norfolk Southern property? Where do we start? Where do they start?

Melissa, if you go back to the previous slide, please. So that orange line that's kind of by my red circle that you see going at a diagonal, that is the delineation between the real estate property and the county's property. So then, Melissa, if you go to the next slide again, I would say... Well, let's look at the bottom right-hand picture. I would say pretty much, you see where those tracks, like the excavator tracks, that's pretty much right on the property line of the county's property to the railroad's property.

Whose responsibility is it to maintain the coal?

The railroad's. But now we do have a regulated drain tile that comes from this area, but the railroad is what conveys the surface water. And that surface flow is what was obstructed.

So how much cost did we incur? up to the point to where they finally themselves cleared the rest of it out of there.

So the county encouraged us the cost of having our contractor out there on July 31st. That cost, I believe, was just around $1,000. And then all of our staff time, I think, is the most critical cost because of the amount of time that we spent responding to the site. We spent the bill. This is going to be an ongoing conversation with the railroad about, one, their lack of maintenance, two, the implications and the flooding that occurred. There was a home that flooded because of this. And then also you add in the issues with Easton Park. Easton Park is pointing the finger at, well, this was the cause, the sole cause of the flooding in their subdivision. So I think this will be an ongoing conversation with our attorneys, and I'm sure their attorneys as well. But yeah, that is something that we will probably discuss with the railroad is our staff time. And then how do we get a better response to issues like this in the future that are causing structural issues, flooding issues?

Chelsea had contacted me last week and asked me if the county had ever heard this. And I did a deep dive and had some in my files, had some preliminary drawings, but they had not come formally to Drainage Board according to any of our minutes. I couldn't find anything in our Planning Commission minutes, although there might be something that attacked me from 2000, what's that, when they first started, 2011 or something. But it wasn't until 20 21 2020 it had already been annexed they were advised they'd be best to annex to chesterton back six years before they did their subdivision and i think that was largely because they wanted sanitary sewers so they could have more lots in the subdivision but at that point we had not given approval for a hookup there's a tile that under the And it's only a 10-inch tile. And I think there's a steel pipe going over the top of the tile that might be 12 inches. And we should be thinking about some kind of protection on that as long as it's all exposed again. Because I don't think that end was really protected. But then going back to the real issue was the railroad culverts. by the sounds of things because that was the bypass that would drain the water. Now, having said that, I could not find any flow achievements or any discussion because Eaton Park would have had an outlet over the top of the county highway property on the east side of Bromley. So, I don't think there's any history there, at least formally recorded agreements for Eaton Park to you know, crossover or through the highway, although because there's a natural flow of water across the property, they may have done right, but didn't really have that going through drainage calculations. The only other thing I find was this pond area was, or is a wetland. It still is a wetland. Correct. They decided to use that for detention for the development. But as was discussed with him how, even the wetlands need outlets. And in my opinion, there should have been something formalized. Perhaps Chesterton should have approached Porter County when they were developing the subdivision formally because like I said, we were approached informally back five years before.

Was Chesterton out there at all to assist?

Yes, they have been on site very regularly to help assist. And because it's affecting not only the unincorporated residents, but the town of Chesterton residents.

So yes, we have been working with the town of Chesterton to assist in painting this contract to come out.

We have not received the bill from, well, I take that back. I have the invoice from the contractor for this work. It has not been approved yet or recommended for payment. But I think that this is going to be a much larger conversation. And I think with the board and our attorneys on how do we want to handle this. It was more an emergency response to significant flooding. So just wanted to try to get the obstruction removed and then figure out the intricacies moving forward.

Aside from that, there's still more physical work, I believe.

Yeah, there's a lot of, as you can see on the picture of the site, I mean, there was the temporary cofferdam that was set up just to try to get the water drawn down from this culvert. So there is some work that needs to be done just from removing the beaver dam. And that beaver dam obstructed the regular crane tile as well. um it's a low-lying area that is impounded by a county road and a railroad the only outlet is the railroad and that became fully obstructed so that's why we have the issues that we had so with that that concludes my stormwater managers report okay thank you bridge report So I know Martin sent an email out earlier this morning. I'll just give a quick update based off of his email. Then a more thorough bridge report will be sent at a future date. Bridge 132 on County Road 200 West is proceeding with construction on schedule. Bridge 150 on Mineral Springs Road, the bridge work is complete. However, site work and road work is paused due to a necessary gas main relocation. And that gas main relocation is delayed due to the storm recovery effort.

So that bridge is not open, but the bridge work itself is done?

I don't know the answer to the question. Mineral Springs? Mineral Springs, yes. Okay, I will, I mean, I'll let Martin. Yeah, I'll let Martin kind of provide that.

We're kind of at the mercy of NIPSCO getting out there and moving that gas line.

Yeah, and I'm sure, like I said, Martin will provide a more detailed update with his bridge report that he'll send out to the board. So yeah, that's the verbal bridge report that I have, the 30,000 foot view.

Okay. Thank you. Any other matters which may come properly before the board? Anyone? Okay. The next meeting will be September 15th, 2026 at 9 a.m. meeting adjourned. Thank you.

Thank you.