Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Business owner and residents press council for explanation of newly posted one-way alley and clearer communications
Summary
Business owner Mike Miller and local residents told the council they were not adequately informed about a new one-way eastbound designation in a downtown alley, asked what problem the designation solved and why there was no apparent engineering finding in the ordinance; council cited safety and statutory notice requirements and pledged to discuss enforcement and communication improvements.
Mike Miller, a downtown business owner, addressed the Monroe Town Council during public comment on June 4 to challenge a portion of Ordinance 20-26-1 (section 4.6) that established a one-way eastbound designation for a downtown alley.
Miller said he and other downtown users received no clear, site-specific findings in the ordinance explaining why that alley was selected for a one-way designation and asked whether engineering analysis, traffic counts, crash history, or other objective bases supported the decision. He presented a packet of maps and supporting materials and asked whether the designation was tied to the state I-24 project (it was not, council said).
Residents at the meeting recounted confusion about the signage and said the new signs had been posted about two weeks earlier. Council members (including S4 and S2) replied that the town complies with the statutory notice requirement (advertising in the paper) and that, beginning July 2025, meetings must be streamed live; they also noted they post meeting notices on the town’s website and Facebook page. The attorney (S4) encouraged residents to bring specific proposals for how the town should do additional outreach beyond statutory requirements.
On enforcement, residents described delayed or limited county 911 responses for non-emergency but significant incidents and asked for clearer guidance on whom to contact; council members said the county sheriff responds to emergencies but non-emergent enforcement resources can be limited. The council asked residents to file written complaints so staff can create a formal record and investigate potential nuisance or public-safety issues.
Council agreed to follow up by reviewing the ordinance language, confirming the signage placements, and inviting residents to submit specific communication proposals; a staff contact (the treasurer/office) was identified as the official point for written complaints and follow-up.
