Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Roadway Debris Claim topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee upholds denial of gravel‑in‑tire claim after investigators find incident linked to DOT work
Summary
Sonia Escamilla appealed a denied claim for tire damage she attributed to a construction gravel piece on East Howard Avenue; the city reported the item was likely from a Wisconsin Department of Transportation (DOT) project and the committee moved to deny and will refer the matter to full council.
Get email alerts on the Roadway Debris Claim topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sonia Escamilla appealed the city’s denial of a claim for vehicle damage she says was caused by a piece of construction gravel on East Howard Avenue. Escamilla told the committee she obtained an $893.75 repair estimate after her vehicle developed a flat and that photos showed ongoing construction at the relevant location.
City staff said the original investigation had been done at the wrong address and, on further review, identified the work as a Wisconsin Department of Transportation project rather than a city operation. City attorneys explained that to hold the city responsible the claimant must show the specific stone that punctured the tire was placed by a city crew. The committee moved to deny the claim; the matter will be forwarded to the full Common Council on June 3, 2025 for final action.
Escamilla said she worked from home and moved her vehicle only once that week and provided photos of construction before and after the event. City counsel said the evidence indicated the contractor work was DOT‑managed and not city street work, and the committee recorded the denial recommendation and will send formal notice if the full Common Council concurs.
Because the investigation tied the construction to DOT work, city staff concluded the city is not liable and recommended denial. If Escamilla wishes to pursue recovery, the transcript records the usual advice: follow the claim denial process and consider other routes if the contractor or DOT is potentially responsible.
