Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Government Operations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Madison Parish jurors move to notify Schindler over inoperable courthouse elevator; generator project postponed and material bids re‑advertised
Summary
Jurors agreed to draft an attorney‑reviewed letter to Schindler saying the company will be included in settlement discussions or litigation if the Jury is alleged liable for injury or damage from an inoperable courthouse elevator. The Generator Project was postponed and Public Works material bids will be re‑advertised due to low response.
Get email alerts on the Government Operations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At its Nov. 10 meeting, the Madison Parish Police Jury voted to draft a letter to Schindler, the elevator company, saying that if the Jury is purported to be liable for personal injury or property damage caused, in whole or in part, by the courthouse elevator’s inoperability, Schindler will be included in settlement discussions or litigation. The letter is to be reviewed by the Jury attorney before it is mailed.
The motion to instruct staff to draft the letter was offered by Mr. Jerry Hicks and seconded by Mr. Dave Wilson; the minutes record the motion carried without further discussion. The jurors characterized the inoperable elevator as a continuing maintenance and liability concern and directed legal review prior to sending correspondence.
Also on the agenda, the Generator Project was postponed to the next meeting. The jurors voted to re‑advertise 2026 material bids for the Public Works department after receiving a low number of responses for the initial solicitation; Mr. Johnny Hughes moved and Mr. Dave Wilson seconded the re‑advertisement motion.
The minutes indicate these were procedural and procurement decisions; they do not specify repair schedules, estimated costs for elevator repair, or procurement timelines for the generator. The CEA proposal to donate city property to the library was tabled for a future meeting, where jurors will also reconsider the project timeline (one year versus two years).
