Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Maintenance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board presses manufacturer for bridge-lighting fix or refund after repeated failures
Summary
Trustees expressed frustration over years of intermittent bridge-lighting outages, directed staff to press contractor and manufacturer for a firm completion date or pursue reimbursement, and discussed possible legal remedies and replacement options.
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Maintenance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Trustees sharply criticized the slow progress in resolving repeated malfunctions in the US Route 30 pedestrian bridge lighting and directed staff to push the contractor and manufacturer for a firm completion date or to seek reimbursement.
Trustee Geier said the board and taxpayers have repeatedly requested updates and that the current pace is unacceptable: "This isn't good enough," he said, citing multiple meetings with little resolution. Staff reported the contractor completed grounding work in February and the manufacturer has acknowledged a product failure and verbally agreed to replace the defective fixtures. The contractor currently holds replacement fixtures, staff said, and the manufacturer has asked that replacements be bench tested and that grounding and DMX cabling be verified to avoid repeat failures.
Board members pressed staff for a firm ETA; staff said June or July is their target but did not commit to a specific date. Trustees discussed refunding the village’s costs if the manufacturer cannot resolve the problem promptly. One trustee urged the village to pursue a full refund of all costs, not just the light fixtures, if the situation cannot be resolved; staff said they can raise that option with the manufacturer and consult the village attorney about remedies.
Staff also noted the contractor has not been negligent, that testing indicates installation was performed properly, and that access and servicing the side of the bridge complicate replacements. Trustees asked staff to return with an update and to explore legal and procurement options, including replacement with an alternate manufacturer if warranted.
No formal vote or contract change was taken; the board directed staff to escalate pressure for a resolution and to report back with a timeline and recommendations.

