The Municipal Services and Properties Committee approved Ordinance 10-78-2025 on Sept. 29, giving consent to the County of Kiowa to resurface Neff Road and adding a supplemental section to fund non‑bridge improvements under the railroad bridge.
The amendment, offered by Councilman Casey, adds a limit that "the scope identified by the amendment shall not exceed $65,000," a cap the committee approved before adopting the ordinance as amended.
Committee members and staff said the county is leading the resurfacing but that some sidewalk and railing work beneath the rail bridge would be handled as part of the project. The director of capital projects said the city does not have authority to perform work on the bridge structure itself and that the proposed under‑bridge work is limited to public‑right‑of‑way items such as railings, concrete, and sidewalks. The director estimated the under‑bridge improvements "probably around $50 or so grand" but said the item has not been bid and the cost is not exact. The director also said the city could choose not to proceed if bids came in much higher.
Councilman Harrison asked whether the project includes railroad‑owned bridge structure; staff replied it does not. Council members discussed the potential for a higher estimate and were advised the city could decouple the work and later treat it as a separate city project if needed.
The committee recorded the amendment and then approved Ordinance 10-78-2025 as amended. No roll‑call vote totals were recorded in the public remarks at the meeting.
Committee members and staff who spoke about this item included Councilman Casey, Councilman Harrison, the chair of the committee, the director of capital projects (Eric DeRosa), Assistant Director Chambers, and Manager Sotowski.
The ordinance supplements Ordinance 671-2025 and provides the city’s consent to the county resurfacing work while authorizing the supplemental under‑bridge scope up to the $65,000 cap. The law department reviewed the amendment during the meeting and there were no legal objections stated before the committee approved the amendment and the ordinance.
The committee did not adopt any additional binding direction to proceed beyond the amended ordinance; staff said they could decline to perform the under‑bridge work if final bids exceeded the budget.
Looking ahead, the director and staff said the county retaining responsibility for the bridge structure means further coordination with the railroads will continue as needed.