[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",5975078,"mediaKeyId","5829607-4f19b7912a7b77bc169e6f9dffc3174a","parentId",5829607,"title","Public Works Committee backs DPW 2026 plan; activists say budget lacks Vision Zero funding","audioSeconds",2054,"startMs",456350,"endMs",2510560,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5829607-4f19b7912a7b77bc169e6f9dffc3174a&start=456&end=2510","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5829607-4f19b7912a7b77bc169e6f9dffc3174a/thumbnail_456350.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/5975078/Indianapolis-City/Marion-County/Indiana/Public-Works-Committee-backs-DPW-2026-plan-activists-say-budget-lacks-Vision-Zero-funding","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5975078-0dad575612de7f2484e6ae88b3030648/orig.mp4?Expires=1770634045&Signature=HIQYztRAmVJ4Tld19MJ2RX6ouM8060mbKlq205hKHahjbhDVyYvBYQqGCTN2EsXF56G9yafV5hbijC0ID88s4xFroC5Ju0Z~P-Mg8rdAm0CG4K8kQgHBtCFJ3XWS6dEt6VwQFn1~uy3CpBuILvCvbVGuH9UOfbl6MfjOLI2rK3FWoYS6era3jsJ4Xiv-LBPs3LQOCP4zxUZAG76NUu1nfb2qitKm6-P3oXeoOxxr2D-HPooJvGgNC3UZ8vU3eUWkQ~DxRbFCHrU5iisj~8CrU0ywWqYbktqWfaEE4bPwmQ~fLFJ3tlbXXheRdUuQ916qHIi01dc9Xi15FMdhqM7Njw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Indianapolis, IN","date","2025-09-25T00:00:00Z","article","The Public Works Committee voted to forward the Department of Public Works' 2026 portion of the city-county budget to the full City-County Council after a presentation that outlined road-treatment strategies, outputs and new procurement methods intended to accelerate resurfacing and maintenance work.

Director Wilson (Department of Public Works) presented a data-driven strategy that groups street work into several treatments: pothole filling (year-round, weather permitting), contractor strip patching (emergency rapid response on worst sections), in-house D4 crew work (small roadway segments and residential streets), residential resurfacing (contracted reconstruction or mill-and-overlay), and thoroughfare resurfacing (longer-term fixes that include ADA ramps and signals).

The presentation estimated contractor strip patching would cover portions of about 200 lane miles in 2026 (staff stressed patching is applied only to the worst sections within chosen segments) and noted about 40,000 potholes were filled countywide this year. The budget includes an anticipated minimum of $16 million per year for residential resurfacing tied to a state match (an $8 million local contribution matched by the state). The packet also includes a new $10 million allocation for contractor patching on top of an existing $6 million, producing a larger patching investment in 2026.

For counselor-select resurfacing projects — roughly $1 million allocated per councilor district, totaling about $19–$20 million — the department said it awarded contracts to three contractor teams (Reece, Raleigh, Milestone and E&B were named) and is using an alternative delivery method grounded in the state's amended build-operate-transfer procurement law. Mark St. John, the department's chief engineer, said the process selected contractor teams in July and is currently working with them to finalize design details and pricing so construction can proceed faster than traditional design-bid-build procurement. Staff said some counselor-select work should begin this fall, with most activity occurring in 2026.

Councilors pressed staff on why lane-mile outputs and resurfacing totals appear small relative to older assessments. Director Wilson and staff said residential resurfacing often includes design, ADA ramps, drainage, curb work, signal coordination and sometimes full reconstruction, which raises project cost per lane mile compared with simpler overlays. Staff emphasized Mayor's Action Center service requests and counselor input remain important data sources even as the department ramps up an Infrastructure Asset Management (IAM) plan to collect objective pavement condition data across the network.

At public comment, Connie Szabo Schmucker, advocacy director at Bicycle Garage Indy, urged the council to fund traffic-safety work, requesting $35 million to address traffic violence and criticizing the absence of a Vision Zero action-plan line in the DPW budget. Christina Hartley read a list of people killed on the city's streets so far this year and urged councilors to prioritize safety investments over repeated maintenance that she said does not prevent deaths.

Director Wilson acknowledged the Board of Public Works asked about a Vision Zero line item and said safety is “inherently included in everything we do,” listing safe routes to schools, protected bike infrastructure, sidewalks, tactical urbanism pilots and HAWK signals as examples. Staff said the department will present the Infrastructure Asset Management plan to the council in 2026 and provide ongoing updates to the committee.

Councilor discussion reflected differing views: some members said the budget is a prudent response to state fiscal constraints and recent revenue reductions, while others said it does not meet long-term maintenance needs identified in older infrastructure studies. The committee moved and seconded a do-pass recommendation for the DPW portion of the 2026 budget and requested a roll-call vote; the meeting concluded with the item forwarded to the full council for final action on the council's scheduled date.

The committee record separates discussion (treatment options, procurement methods, data collection priorities), directions (staff to present IAM plan in 2026), and decisions (committee recommended the DPW budget to full council). Public safety advocates indicated they will press the council for explicit Vision Zero funding during final budget debate.
","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City Council of Indianapolis, IN - Public Works Committee","oneSentenceSummary","The committee recommended the Department of Public Works' 2026 budget to the full council after a detailed presentation on road treatments and delivery strategies. Public commenters and some councilors urged more explicit funding for traffic-safety (Vision Zero) measures.","taxTitle","Indianapolis City, Marion County, Indiana","taxId",3627,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},5975081,"Committee forwards 2026 solid waste levy; councilors ask about $32 collection fee and recent fiscal",153,60840,214060,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5829607-4f19b7912a7b77bc169e6f9dffc3174a&start=60&end=214","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5829607-4f19b7912a7b77bc169e6f9dffc3174a/thumbnail_60840.jpg","/articles/5975081/Indianapolis-City/Marion-County/Indiana/Committee-forwards-2026-solid-waste-levy-councilors-ask-about-32-collection-fee-and-recent-fiscal","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5975081-9d30cc8fca9b6db19db1daff1e3490c6/orig.mp4?Expires=1770634045&Signature=gyD42GgmUnEZvjzycPKafbIrP9524giKogB87nRnGe6ZtZdfq~4W3NUCQrumG3YG8lTEJq76APpOnZuJwy8i2BkNFTAuO2q1gW~1XI5r6aMZO172x7-oLvwm9F4O9OrSC9ZnCBSPjIDZz29SZ4r-DJ0bH2aBaM9xO8adzOLkxCv1tKZ3ZHY7tUQoONgjUpzdv65zheLVhqAHsG7yWwrqDE3F9z5tzdl0Tg2eBeTgoavFoKmwktGLzgdKmuQDGDBfvz4uSh2Bz~2TW7ksY2TND95K2ZytOejry5s1O~BvZUYwS4jmYRnVbaWfdu367C6YA9uVIr1OijB3eJrbZIBnOQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Public Works Committee voted to recommend the special service district budget for solid waste to the full City-County Council, adopting the 2026 tax rate and tax levy for the solid waste collection special service district.

The measure, presented as an administrative action by Jenny Carter, budget manager with the Office of Finance and Management, mirrors language in section 3.01(e) of the 2026 introduced budget ordinance. The committee moved and seconded a “do pass” recommendation and approved the measure by voice vote.

The proposal reflects the department's revenue assumptions for the solid waste fund, including a continuing $32-per-unit solid waste user fee and a property tax levy that, according to the department's finance staff, generates about 4.5 times as much revenue as the user fee. Sam Barrows, Chief Financial Officer for the department, said there was a fiscal action this year tied to supplemental funding for the solid waste garage and vendor contracts; that fiscal totaled approximately $1 million and was intended to finish construction by year-end.

Councilors asked whether the longstanding $32 user fee — unchanged for nearly 35 years, by one councilor's account — will increase. Barrows said the 2026 budget was built assuming the $32 fee and that contract savings and new contracts starting in 2026 reduced the need for more district revenue. He added the department has no plan to propose a fee increase at this time, and that the fee is not fixed by the vendor contracts: the contracts govern services and what the city pays vendors, not the citizen user fee.

Councilor Gates moved the recommendation to the full council, and the committee approved the motion by voice vote. The committee did not record a roll-call tally in the transcript excerpt; the chair announced, “The ayes have it.”

The committee discussion distinguished between one-time fiscal actions (the supplemental fund for the solid waste garage) and the ongoing revenue structure for the district (user fee plus property tax levy). Staff emphasized that future fiscals are possible if unexpected events occur but that current budget projections assume the levy and the unchanged user fee will cover 2026 operations.

No public speakers addressed Proposal 258 at the committee meeting.

The proposal will be considered by the full City-County Council on the schedule for the 2026 budget process.
","The Public Works Committee recommended the special service district budget for solid waste to the full council, approving the 2026 tax rate and levy while members pressed staff about a recent $1 million fiscal action and whether the $32-per-unit collection fee will change.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Public Works Committee backs DPW 2026 plan; activists say budget lacks Vision Zero funding

Committee forwards 2026 solid waste levy; councilors ask about $32 collection fee and recent fiscal