- I'm gonna go ahead and call this regular session of the Bloomington Common Council the order here on
- December 17th 2025 Will the clerk please call the roll? Ruff Rallo here Piedmont Smith here Stasburg
- here daily here Zulek here Rosenberger here. Sorry here. Thanks. I
- Great, thank you so much. So I often start on meeting with just kind of a note about something. And
- so today this is our final meeting of the 2025 council session. And I just wanna take a minute and thank
- city staff this year for all of the work that they've done. And I especially wanna call out, I wanna
- call out a few,
- folks and I realized that I could like literally call out every department because all of them at one
- time or another like kind of like step up and do things no matter which department that they're in but
- this tonight specifically I want to call out our public works and our plow teams because we've it's
- December 17th. We've had three snow events that have not one of them has happened between eight and
- five Monday through Friday.
- So and somehow things still got plowed and we could still go so a huge Thank you to our plow teams our
- snow removal crew and that also includes not just the folks that are out there actually plowing but
- all of the dispatch related folks that are Managing behind the scenes and mechanics managing behind
- the scenes and all of those sorts of things that make those things go And I also want to shout out sanitation
- because they're still out there early in the morning picking up our our cans in
- And I'm really happy that we, if you didn't know, delayed trash pickup by a day this week so that Monday
- morning when it was really, really cold, our crews did not have to get out there. So I appreciated that.
- that the city did that. And the last category that I want to call out are just administrative staff
- members. You know, those folks that organize the calendars, they answer the phones, they keep everything
- organized, they make our appointments, they have a lot of connection with residents who call in, and
- sometimes it's a little bit
- underappreciated. And I want to give a special shout out to our own temporary legal researcher, Christine,
- whose last day is officially today in the position that she's been in.
- She started this temporary position in May and has done a phenomenal job supporting council members
- and also council staff. So a huge thank you to Christine. And I would have gotten her flowers or something,
- but she's actually flying somewhere tomorrow and I thought that it would only be a burden to give her
- something the day before she flies somewhere.
- With that, I'll go ahead and summarize the agenda. We are gonna start out with four minutes for approval
- from our four budget hearings this year, August 18th, 20th, 25th, and 27th. Then we'll have a report
- time. We'll start with reports from council members, then we'll have a report from
- the planning and transportation department about unified development ordinance updates. We've had a
- couple of deliberation sessions about that kind of stuff this year, and the planning department has
- done some reaching out to the community about that, so we'll hear more about that. We do have a short
- report from the committee on council processes for council committees, and then we'll have our first
- reports from the public. So that's the first time for the public to comment on an item that is not on
- our agenda this evening.
- So members of the public will have three minutes to comment on things not on the agenda. During legislation
- time, there will be time for people to comment on things that are on the agenda. We will not
- have appointments to boards and commissions tonight, because there are none. We have no legislation
- for first readings, because it's the last meeting of the year. And that also, though, means that there
- are several things for second reading, in one case, actually, third reading.
- that we will cover tonight. So our legislation for second readings and resolutions starts with ordinance
- 2025-19, amending title 15 of the Bloomington Municipal Code regarding removal and impound of vehicles.
- This is a third reading for that item. And two weeks ago at our last regular session, we did adopt amendment
- one to that. Then we will go to ordinance 2025-20
- which is amending chapter four of the Bloomington Municipal Code entitled non-consensual towing businesses
- and other updates. Then we will have resolution 2025-21, acknowledging receipt of the collective bargaining
- agreement between the city of Bloomington and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal
- Employees for years 2026, 27, and 28. Then we will have ordinance 2025-40, oh, and just as a note,
- Yesterday in the packet addendum, there was an updated agenda put out and that resolution was added
- in that packet addendum. If anybody's going, wait a minute, that's not the agenda that I'm looking at.
- In the packet addendum released yesterday is this updated agenda with that resolution. Our fourth thing
- on the agenda after the resolution is ordinance 2025-47, amending Title VIII of the Bloomington Municipal
- Code entitled Historic Preservation and Protection to establish a historic district around the Ivan
- Adams House,
- And then we'll have ordinance 2025-43 to annex certain real estate to the city of Bloomington. And lastly,
- we'll deal with ordinance 2025-46 to amend the zoning maps in anticipation of that annexation.
- After our legislation for this evening, we will have an additional period of public comment. So if anybody
- wants to comment on something not on the agenda and they did not comment during the first period of
- public comment, then they can do that then. Any notes on council schedule and then we will adjourn.
- So going back to the beginning with minutes. I move that the minutes from August 18th, August 20th,
- August 25th,
- August 27th from 2025 all be approved Second, thank you. We have a motion to approve the minutes any
- councilmember questions or comments on those minutes Great since we're all here in person we can go
- ahead and do a voice vote on this all those in favor Please say aye. Aye any opposed Thank you so much
- motion passes unanimously moving on to reports from councilmembers Let's go ahead and start down at
- the end my left with councilmember. Sorry. I
- No report. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Rosenberger. I have a report It's not really prepared
- so I just I wanted to I guess debrief very quickly on a Redevelopment Commission meeting that happened
- this Monday and talk about a Property that is owned by the RDC a couple of properties. It's called College
- Square. It's
- College Avenue across from the Atlas bar between third and fourth streets And basically, this is an
- awesome property that the city or RDC bought a few years ago and The Convention Center and the CIB basically
- thought about making it a hotel and that is still an option I'm sorry. I did not prepare this at all
- So we just have to kind of wing it
- Okay Okay, I just want to give you a brief summary right and we're looking at making that entire property
- a Hotel a host hotel for the Convention Center. It's a really huge. It's a really huge piece of land
- It is it is a city block long and so something that we're kind of
- Pushing pause on making the whole thing potentially a host hotel, which I think is really exciting I've
- been thinking of it kind of as like a mini Hopewell development It is almost a blank slate where we
- can we can put a lot of stuff in there that the city needs and residents need Just for example, there's
- a similar block on call on college is North College
- potentially across from Big Red.
- And it has a hotel it has restaurants on the bottom. It has shops along along college It has a parking
- garage in it. It has So the seven I think it's a seven-story commercial building and it has potentially
- maybe 80 housing units in it So I think it's neat that we have a lot of options for this property where
- we can look at housing We can look at affordable housing. I know folks are really on board with getting
- more affordable housing downtown. So
- It's really a neat city opportunity that doesn't come along a lot, but it's mostly a parking lot right
- now and I think that's it. I'm just looking forward to the RDC Well, I think they're not really working
- on it right now anymore But the CIB and the county and the city all working together on this To see
- what we can really get in that space. Thanks Thank you council members you look do you have a report
- no report, thank you. Thank you councilmember Daly. No, thank you Thank You councilmember Flaherty
- Yeah, thank you. I also wanted to follow up on recent activity with the Bloomington Redevelopment Commission
- because I think there were some pretty Material like choice points around policy and trust and I think
- it was a positive outcome even though there was some Challenges along the way. So I just wanted to highlight
- some of that as well for the public and just reflection so I wanted to thank the members of the RDC
- for their service and for meeting with us along with department directors Cooper Smith and Killian Hansen
- during a work session last week and
- It was definitely not an optimal set of circumstances and choices that led us to that work session But
- hopefully folks learn from it and we can meaningfully involve the city's fiscal body on major financial
- decisions in the future Especially where the council has formalized a policy position on the
- issue Tangentially, I do have a number of ideas around RDC related reforms, but I will save those for
- some time in 2026 I also wanted to specifically credit commissioners Cassidy McRobbie and Meyerson on
- for introducing and voting on an amendment to their resolution 25-136 prior to its passage at their
- Monday meeting this week. So that resolution, consistent with the clear policy position of the City
- Council, confirmed that the RDC does not intend to give away a $7 million piece of property to a private
- hotelier in order to subsidize a convention center host hotel. I won't get into the question of whether
- a subsidy is needed for a host hotel. That's a different question, but that was the decision of the
- RDC at that time.
- So this is a $7 million win for the residents of Bloomington, whose tax dollars can now be leveraged
- for resident benefits. In particular, affordable housing is a prime option, as Councilmember Rosenberger
- highlighted, and there's actually a variety of pathways to achieve that from here, including on that
- site or even elsewhere, if we sold that site or traded it with the county government, for instance,
- which owns land to the south, some of which actually has relatively affordable housing at this moment.
- So this matters because for the past decade, there has been widespread agreement explicitly among folks
- involved with the Convention Center expansion that two specific funding sources are meant to cover that
- expansion project. And to be clear at that project, the Monroe County Capital Improvement Board,
- or CIB, has repeatedly characterized as inclusive of a host hotel. So those two funding sources are
- the food and beverage tax and the innkeeper's tax. The former was meant primarily for construction,
- while the latter was meant primarily for operations and maintenance.
- The county government has also used the innkeeper's tax to purchase land as a possibility for convention
- center expansion. So before the city council was willing to agree to appropriate the city's food and
- beverage tax proceeds, it made itself very, very clear that its understanding and expectation, consistent
- with the decade of discussion on this, was that the food and beverage tax proceeds alone would be the
- city's sole financial contribution to the project. To the best of my recollection, and I'm pretty sure
- about this, no one with the CIB or other interested parties raised objections at that time.
- and said, no, we don't think that's possible, or we're going to come to the city later for other resources.
- And so some members of the council in particular were quite explicit that this was conditional for their
- vote, or conditioned for their vote. And so we moved forward. We appropriated the funds. Of course,
- the convention center is going up right now. But now we face a situation where the city is being asked
- to contribute a considerable amount of additional taxpayer dollars to the burden of our residents.
- And I think there are lots of good other options. Several media sources, I think, or at least one who's
- here with us tonight, did cover a memo that a few colleagues and I sent to the RDC earlier this week
- that outlined some of those options. I think it would be a great idea for elected officials of both
- county and city government to get together early in the new year to talk about those options and how
- to make sure that we're using those two funding sources that have long been identified for the Convention
- Center expansion project optimally to achieve those outcomes that everybody wants.
- And so, really, that's it. I wanted to update folks on that. I wanted to acknowledge that the RDC vote
- was, I think, an important inflection point of some sorts. I think the risks were not just the finances
- itself, but also trust from the public, from the city council to the mayor's administration with the
- CIB. And based on other things that have happened over the past two years, that's not always been,
- you know, our strongest resource. So it would have been a shame to see it go further south.
- So with that, thank you again to those commissioners and RDC for their service Thank You councilmember
- Ruff I'd just like to take a second to Thank our council leadership council members Stossberg Piedmont
- Smith and daily for the work they've done On council leadership this year. It's a lot of extra work
- and a lot of times pretty thankless and So it's it's greatly appreciated
- Last thing I just want to quickly just say Show some respect and gratitude to the bipartisan principled
- stance taken by our Indiana Senate and rejecting a completely Out of line power play In redistricting
- the redistricting recent redistricting push
- It was coming down on Indiana from outside and just really I had died people from all over the country
- from friends of us and and Colleagues from around the country from all different brittle political
- persuasions saying Wow Thanks, Indiana Senate I'm proud to have connections with with with the state
- of Indiana at this point in time which we haven't always been able to say so
- Much appreciation and respect to them to the Indiana Senate for that. Thank you Thank You councilmember.
- Oh, I just like to make an announcement that Councilmember rough and I have our monthly constituent
- meeting this Saturday at 10 a.m December 20th, we have it by zoom and you can find that link at the
- council website which is bloomington.in that gov slash council and You're welcome to join us. We have
- Usually very lively intense discussions numerous topics and we're scheduled for an hour But we often
- go 90 minutes two hours and councilmember rough me spend the rest of the day on zoom I'm not committing
- him but But we we look forward to seeing people there so it's a it's a good time so please come Thank
- You councilmember Piedmont Smith Yes
- I'd like to just highlight, as I've done in the past, to highlight yet another way in which the Trump
- administration is violating the US Constitution that we all have sworn to uphold and that President
- Trump has sworn to uphold, but is not doing a very good job of. Today's topic is war powers, US Constitution
- Article 1, Section 8, paragraph 11, Congress has the power to declare war.
- Even though in early October, President Trump decided that the United States is engaged in a formal
- armed conflict with drug cartels, that his team has labeled terrorist organizations and that suspected
- smugglers for such groups are unlawful combatants. So basically he's declared war on a drug cartel and
- he has killed 80 plus people doing it in violation of international law
- the Constitution. I just want to quote a little bit from an article that appeared yesterday on the American
- Constitution Society website by Chris Edelson, a professor at American University. Over the past three
- months, the Trump administration has effectively gone to war with an amorphous foe.
- Although the administration describes this as non-international, i.e. not between nations, armed conflict
- with vaguely defined drug cartels, it is in fact a one-sided affair in which US missiles have struck
- and killed more than 80 people on boats in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific. Perhaps most notoriously,
- one of these strikes killed two men who survived an initial attack and were clinging to wreckage. Some
- experts are concerned that all of the strikes are simply murder.
- Despite the broad consensus among international law experts that the US military campaign violates
- international law, President Donald Trump has suggested he could escalate the fight, including perhaps
- by an invasion of Venezuela. The administration has claimed without evidence that the boats it is attacking
- are bringing drugs from Venezuela to the United States. The Trump administration's military actions
- also violate US law.
- many, many disappointing things about the Trump administration. And I just, I think we need to keep
- talking about it and keep pointing it out that this is a violation of law and a constitution that we're
- all so proud of. That's it. Thanks. Thank you. I also have a short report. Hopefully it'll be short.
- There's a few things that I wanted to mention.
- I appreciate Councilmember Ruff bringing up the Indiana Senate and the failure of that mid-century
- redistricting vote. I mentioned that a couple weeks ago, and I just wanted to kind of follow up on that.
- And I am thrilled that our senators listened to the people of Indiana who, by and large, through surveys
- and through calling both Republicans and Democrats and also independents, all were
- Predominantly against that move and I'm really really happy that our senators actually listens to the
- people in this situation And I wanted to make a note about my constituent meetings as well I'm gonna
- change those up a little bit in the new year I've been kind of doing that a little bit trying trying
- some different things to figure out how I feel is the best kind of way to
- connect in different ways with constituents. So I feel like my the best constituent meetings have really
- focused on one person and they're like
- concern that they're bringing in that moment. And so instead of having just constituent meetings where
- it's like, hey, everybody come to make sure that those people that come with very specific things that
- they want to talk about can just make a calendar appointment with me. So there's a lot of tech out there,
- I'm sure, that you've used it, where it's like, yes, just schedule an appointment with me. Here's your
- time blocks. So it'll be something like that.
- ways to do that and to get on my calendar. So look for that in the new year. That's a new tech field
- you could say for me. I've never done that before. I know it's not hard. But during the holiday recess,
- I'm hoping to set that up.
- then I'm gonna take a note to actually talk about council scheduling right now, even though council
- schedule time is at the end, because by the end of a meeting, maybe my colleagues aren't gonna be listening
- as closely anymore, so I'm hoping that you're all listening right now about my note on council scheduling,
- which is that in January we have a couple weeks without regular session meetings, but I'm gonna urge
- you guys right now when you're looking at your January calendars to kind of pencil in some reservations
- on those Wednesday nights for interview committees.
- because interview committee stuff, as a reminder, is changing next year with the new resolution that
- Council Member Zulek, I'm pretty sure, is the one who brought that. So that all needs to be rethought.
- And I spoke with Clerk Crosley today, and so she also kind of has that on her schedule and hoping to,
- you know, in January, get some of those things scheduled. So if we could, as council members, try to
- work with that and thinking about our January schedule, that would be fantastic. And other than that,
- just to our community,
- Happy holidays, all of the holidays. Happy Hanukkah a little late, happy solstice, merry Christmas,
- happy Kwanzaa, happy new year, a little early, a little late, all of those things. But happy snow days.
- E-learning is almost like snow days, sort of, for some people. So winter can be a fun time. Anyway.
- That wraps it up and we are moving on to reports from the mayor, city clerk, city offices, and city
- boards and commissions. So we have our planning and transportation director, Hiddle. If you could,
- as usual, state your name for the record and it's great to have you here.
- Thank you. Good evening David Hittle director of the Department of Planning and Transportation Here
- with a year-end update on our housing attainability study slash project To let you know where we've
- been and where we're going with this with this important, I think initiative So the project purpose
- is to consider potential unified development ordinance or UDO amendments and other housing policy changes
- to increase access to attainable housing in Bloomington. And with any changes to UDO or other ordinance
- language, you look for your marching orders, really, from the comprehensive plan. You want the language
- in the comprehensive plan to guide you to make those changes. We talked a little bit about this in a
- little bit more detail at the second of the deliberative sessions, and I kind of quoted from all of
- the points in the comp plan that are pertinent.
- taper that off a little bit and just kind of cut to the chase and talk about this goal 5.3 that talks
- about housing supply to help meet current and projected regional housing needs of all economic
- and demographic groups by increasing Bloomington's housing supply with infill development reuse
- of non-residential developed land and development
- Vacant land if it is at least partially surrounded by existing development and the specific policy that
- comes from that says encourage opportunities for infill and redevelopment across Bloomington
- with consideration for increased residential densities Complementary design and underutilized housing
- types such as accessory dwelling units duplex triplex and fourplex buildings courtyard apartments bungalow
- courts townhouses row houses and live workspaces and
- Avoid placing these high-density forms in single-family neighborhoods that last sentence kind of just
- slams the brakes on the vibe that the rest of the paragraph I think establishes and I'd have loved to
- have been a fly on the wall of the Moment that the decision was made to add that last sentence, but
- I'm not sure exactly where that came from I think there is a lack of precision in the language there
- and I think it's muddles the intention of the previous paragraph for a variety of reasons
- Comprehensive plan also includes the climate action plan which does state encourage density and increase
- housing options and affordability with the goal of increasing gross density by 3% of 2018 values So
- this initiative set out to find out how we can do that how we can realize those particular Recommendations
- from the comprehensive plan and so beginning earlier this year about five or six months ago
- We established that we would be meeting with a variety of stakeholders neighborhood associations institutions
- the university the school district the development community and and talk about variety of issues among
- them housing So we met with all of those groups as I mentioned still a few more to go We have neighborhood
- organizations scheduled through January and I think one in early February and peer cities scheduled
- throughout January as well and
- With regards to pure cities. We looked at cities that are a little bit more akin to the profile
- of Bloomington than just your typical college towns Bloomington is a relatively small city nestled against
- really large University and so it doesn't it's not terribly instructive to look only at Ann Arbor or
- Madison or some of our Big Ten
- The big ten usual suspects if you will so we expanded that to talk to other cities that have
- large universities That are a little bit more can in terms of ratio permanent residents to student residents
- that that Bloomington is so we've been adding to this list and Excited to add Bozeman, Montana to it
- next week, which is on
- a sentence only a planner would ever say, I think. But they're very interesting in that they are a blue
- village in a red sea. They are leading the nation in housing reform and zoning reform relative to housing.
- And they, fascinatingly enough to me, have a huge influx of population and a median housing price of
- a million dollars almost.
- If you kind of take the whole thing and boil it down to really a fundamental tension, it's this,
- it's good, it's needed, it's desirable for us to optimize residential infill opportunities. At the same
- time, another sentence that's true is that off-campus student housing pressures may overwhelm
- core neighborhoods. So where there is
- Opposition to ideas here. It's coming from those core neighborhoods and really core isn't the right
- word It's really more campus adjacent neighborhoods And and we've sort of seen by virtue of the fact
- that off-campus housing pressures are so Large and the existing built environment of Bloomington giving
- its population outside of the university is not particularly large that there is the potential for this
- dynamic that's not desirable to take place and
- If we look at our zoning map all of the yellow indicates Single-family zoning. I should say residential
- zoning the lighter the yellow the the lower intensity or lower density the zoning the single-family
- typologies are allowed so the canary yellow was it basically are two and
- Which allows only for single-family dwellings. I'll add the caveat that it does allow for accessory
- dwelling units But for a variety of reasons including restrictions on those placed by the zoning ordinance.
- There's not a lot of those being built right now So we have about 5,000 plus acres that are in that
- category of single-family zoning exclusive
- We have 200 acres that are R4 that also allow for duplexes by right. And then we have 1,400 acres that
- allow for different types of multifamily. So the overwhelming majority of residentially zoned land in
- the city of Bloomington allows only for single family dwellings.
- This is the allowed use table which tells you a little bit more about that in detail as you get into
- the the mixed-use districts There's a variety of residential and commercial and multifamily uses that
- are allowed but the our districts which are essentially the residential districts are very single-family
- only heavy Really the goal here with this project is to allow for more diverse types of housing to flourish at least
- Give them a fighting chance in the city right now. It's been historically easy to build single-family
- dwellings And as of late, it's been easy to build really big mega student development projects But not
- much in between so we'd like to change the regulations do more removal than addition to take
- away obstructions and obstacles that I think do not rightly curtail the development of this this missing
- middle or gentle density type of housing and
- We're going to look at a couple different variations here. One of them is the idea of the cottage
- development. This is not in Bloomington. This is in Santa Monica, I believe. It's a very common type
- of development, previous mid-century and before.
- Really the 20s to the 50s. They're also very common in Chicago common in Minneapolis common in a number
- of eastern cities We'll have really one of these in Bloomington, which I'll talk about just a little
- bit in a moment We do have a slot for this in our zoning ordinance But among its restrictions is one
- that says you have to start with a minimum of an acre You have to have a minimum of 400 square feet
- of internal green space per dwelling unit
- the individual dwelling units are not allowed for sale and They are allowed nowhere by right. So in
- order to develop any of these anywhere You need to get conditional use approval from the BZA, which
- is a process that that is not without friction This is another example from California. This is an example
- from Fishers more recently built that's 11 units, I believe on
- 1.7 acres so 6.5 units per acre Obviously the land costs are reduced if you're able to put a number
- of houses A number of dwelling units on a property like this. They're smaller than normal dwelling units
- And so they they tend to be much more affordable to people Beyond those who might be able to afford
- a single-family dwelling today, especially in this city Here's Bloomington's example. And this is a
- little bit more than just
- A cottage development. This is the co-housing project on short street. So there's a lot of cooperative
- operational parameters at play here It's fascinating place. I spent an afternoon there and I don't know
- if everybody's visited or not but I think if you're able to Sit down at the pavilion and talk to their
- founders a little bit about how it's developed and you can kind of experience the actual life of the
- neighborhood which I think makes it really really appealing. This is just a quick site plan and
- Overview that shows central greens and then the houses flank those greens rather than flanking streets,
- which is the typical arrangement This is one in Indianapolis I talked a little bit about it at the last
- deliberative session and I'll just repeat that here because I think it's instructive These are two urban
- lots 35 feet wide that were consolidated and on which were built six
- dwellings They're all single-family dwellings. They're all owned fee simple They are I think 1200 square
- feet each three bedrooms and 2.5 baths apiece They are for sale in a two of them. I've sold I think I
- And the going rate for those is $271,000, which is, again, you know, we'd love to be able to see houses
- for sale less than that, but that's quite a bit less than the median sale price in Bloomington. Again,
- smaller houses, smaller lots, less yard, really all, I think, desirable things for a lot of the people
- that live here, especially given what we know about the demographics of the city these days. The most
- common household is a single person.
- Two-person household and the second most common is a single person and together they make the vast majority
- of the household types that are in Bloomington And there's just a lot of desire for this type of housing
- development and it's just not available anywhere This view from the beginning at the front of this site
- Also, we're looking at duplexes and triplexes
- And the opportunity to allow them perhaps a little bit more frequently with conditions and protect perhaps
- in specific overlay areas This is a duplex This is a duplex that is actually in the the house catalog
- that is part of the Hopewell development. So just a little bit of background about that and
- Hopewell will be sort of governed by a catalog with a variety of different home types and the person
- who buys a lot there will choose from that catalog one of any any one of a number of a dozen different
- homes this this is a duplex in that it has a Front unit and then another unit attached that's above
- a garage in the back And it's simple architecture, you know, it's it's relatively modest in terms of
- its of its
- Silhouette and massing, smaller than the average house, and again, small yard, something that I think
- we would like to see encouraged here. Where you begin to run into real concerns about these kinds of
- housing typologies is existing character of neighborhoods and opportunities for those typologies
- poorly executed to compromise that character. Again, we took a quick look at this at the last deliberative
- session. I think it's instructional to do it again. But this was 7-11 East Cottage Grove two years ago.
- This was 7-11 East Cottage Grove a couple months ago. And this is what 7-11 Cottage Grove is proposed
- to be next year. Now, in a lot of ways, this makes sense. This is a stone's throw from the university.
- And there's probably good reason to increase density in that particular location.
- would argue that this is not particularly successful in preserving or honoring or really recognizing
- in any way existing neighborhood context. If you look at some of the figures behind it, it begins to
- become apparent why this is happening. This is a three-unit structure. Each unit rents for $6,000
- a month. So that's about $18,000 a month in whole.
- Look right across the street. This is a single-family dwelling that is that was for rent for forty six
- hundred and twenty dollars a month so eighteen thousand one hundred and twenty a month versus four thousand
- six hundred and twenty a month you begin to see that the pressures for creating these kinds of changes
- Another thing that we are interested in looking at is the possibility of easing path for accessory dwelling units and
- This is an accessory dwelling unit actually built in Bloomington. Actually, let me rephrase that. This
- is not in Bloomington, but the thing was built in Bloomington. Um, this is from origin studios, which
- ships mainly to the coasts. I think they've built one in town, um, but they build high end sort of bespoke
- ad use and they ship, um, to the places where ad use are welcomed with more open arms. Um, I think they have,
- developed one and placed it in town actually. Interestingly enough, and this is a look inside the warehouse
- in Bloomington, the owner has a history in developing housing in developing nations and I think is very
- interested in putting together a product that is much more affordable and seeing that being used here locally.
- With that idea comes another one which is which is creating opportunities for administrative lot splits
- Just look at any one of these. This is this is The idea of the single-family dwelling in front with
- an ADU then developed in back You have a single-family dwelling in front in Bloomington It's probably
- pretty expensive once you build the ADU and back becomes that much more expensive as a property because
- you essentially have two houses on it but if you're able to split off that ADU and sell it fee simple
- Either by administrative lot splits by acknowledging that on a corner lot You have two street frontages
- or by creating an opportunity for flag lots to make that back lot legal Then you're allowing more people
- in infill area, which means you're again. You're using existing pipes existing streets You're not building
- new infrastructure. You're not asking the police department to stretch emergency services to stretch
- its service area so it's the most cost-effective way of locating more people in the city and
- We're also going to looking at subdivision regulations Specifically recalibrating lot dimension requirements
- a lot of our zoning districts width and area and other dimensional requirements Are quite a bit greater
- than the the lots on which they stand, especially the older lots Which were developed with with less
- width with less area And I think one option is to is to make it so that the dimensional requirements
- actually match those that are that are built and are not
- thrusting those older homes and lots immediately into non-conforming status Also, I think that as I
- noted earlier we can make our architectural regulations more meaningful for example right now with duplexes
- we have very subjective language telling us to take a look at their porches and their door orientation and
- site development in terms of parking, but those don't get us very far. I think in terms of providing
- for a truly desirable architectural end product, I think we can do a better job of that. Let's talk
- to some local architects. Maybe the idea is to put together a work group to help improve those architectural
- regulations so that neighborhood character is not compromised in the way that I think arguably you could
- say it is right now.
- Short-term rental is it's something that's been talked about At any given time this number has changed
- but I'm going to say now that at any given time there are 400 listings in Bloomington that are identified
- as Perpetual meaning year-round whole house rentals meaning no one lives in them. They're only used
- as literal mini hotels
- That number has changed in terms of what we've thought it was, but as I've talked to people in the industry
- and looked at the way that AirDNA, which is the main data aggregator for short-term rentals,
- how they do it, it looks as though there are about 400 at any given time. It's a big number for houses
- taken out of circulation for a city the size of Bloomington. There's not much we can do in terms of
- zoning regulations. We are exploring the idea of capping that
- Requiring permits and then establishing a maximum cap so that it can't get any greater and then ideally
- over time Some of those there through attrition would come back into the housing pool Looking and talking
- with with peer cities there are a number of techniques that are employed to deal with with the issue of
- I won't call it a problem, because there's problems in a lot of ways. It's a good problem to have. But
- the issue of off-campus housing, one of them is to impose separation requirements so that if a home
- is occupied by students, then it needs to be separated by a certain number of feet from other places.
- That's done in Pennsylvania. Another is to establish a rental density allowance. That's done in a number
- of cities in Minnesota, and Carmel and Fishers also did something similar.
- I think arguably their motivations are a little bit different. I think in Carmel and Fishers, they are
- pretty forthright about it just about just not wanting rentals. Our concern here is the distribution
- of student housing, I think. But those are opportunities. Other things that are happening with regards
- to housing attainability is we are at the beginning slash middle of an audit process, which is looking
- at how we handle our permit reviews and ways for us to become a little bit more efficient in that.
- Time is money. So if we're able to do that, it takes away costs of development. The HW stands for Hopewell.
- So those are components of the Hopewell program. It's going to be the pre-approved home catalog, which
- I think we could extend to use elsewhere in the city, the Lender Developer Training Program, which will
- happen next year. The pursuit of advanced building codes is something that I think is next year or the
- year after. In a lot of places, there are
- amendments to building codes legislative Usually coming from the state that that allows for things like
- single staircase designs and Sort of removal of relic fire codes that that no longer Have much to do
- with safety but allow for more more efficient development and then the there's
- an opportunity to improve coordination with IU. There's really no formal coordination with IU with regards
- to how off-campus housing is executed. And I think that that's something that could be done. Other places,
- usually the larger cities have very comprehensive formal written agreements with the universities within
- them. They can include everything from shared stadiums to mitigating
- Mitigating payment to the city for for neighborhood impacts. There's really a variety of things I don't
- know that that's something that could be employed here would be employed here, but it's I think it's
- interesting to note that those exist Timeline director Hittle. Yes as a note that's been 20 minutes,
- which is the period So a couple more minutes, maybe I wrap that up and then council members you can
- help me decide Whether you want to have extra time for questions after that. Okay, so
- Thanks. This is the end. We're at the timeline. I apologize. I didn't know I was taking that much time.
- So our goal here is to come forward with a housing attainability UDO package, which is going to be the
- things that we've talked about here and then whatever comes up in the meantime that we will bring forward
- for review and refinement and adoption eventually, hopefully, that will incorporate the things that
- we've just discussed, and do it in a way that satisfies as many concerns as possible. That is the general
- timeline through April. I'd like to complete the first phase of outreach immediately, and then begin
- to craft UDO amendment ideas and options, take those back to the public and to stakeholders, and then
- through the late spring, refine the draft amendments and initiate adoption.
- I'll stop there. Thank you. Um council members. Do you have questions? Okay, we have a couple of questions
- up here. So let's go ahead and extend Let's start with just five minutes until 721 Just because we do
- have a lengthy legislative agenda council member all Thank You director head home So two housing studies
- I'm aware of have indicated that people desire owner occupied single-family homes
- Over the last decade or so we've had a disproportionate number of rentals built And at the same time
- as you notice we as you noted we've had a number of a thousand or so Homes that have been converted
- to short-term rentals so And
- So there's institutional investors, there are people who are buying and renting these. Fishers Indiana
- put a 10% cap on rentals recently. It's effective January 1st of 2026. Is that something we could explore
- to try to maintain the housing stock that we have that people desire? Yeah, that's certainly one of
- the techniques that could be employed. It's one of the things that we'll look at.
- Again, I think we don't want to demonize student housing. It's good that students are here. And we don't
- want to, I think, necessarily follow the same line of reasoning that Fishers did in their employment
- of that particular rule. I think that they're relatively forthright in that rentals are a less desirable
- mode of residing
- than owner-occupied. And I don't know that that's a course we want to take, but that is being utilized
- in other college towns as a means of distributing where housing rentals, or student rentals in particular,
- are located. So that'll be part of what we're looking at, yes. It is a tool that's out there. It's used
- extensively in Minnesota and other places, especially where there are colleges, and it's something that
- can be done.
- To hear that. Thank you other questions council members who look Thank You director Hiddle earlier in
- your presentation. I heard you equate core neighborhoods with campus adjacent neighborhoods Would you
- say that that's correct? Yeah, I wrote core neighborhoods But but really there are campus adjacent
- neighborhoods green acres for example that you wouldn't really call core so it may be better that the
- language I could have used was campus adjacent and
- most of which are core, but not all. Thank you. In a town where over 50% of the population is students,
- to what extent do you think it's a reasonable expectation for residents who are not students who are
- living within a square mile of the circumference of campus that people don't live with students?
- To me, every student would want to live near campus. I don't understand why.
- I don't think that the expectation should be especially for Campus adjacent neighborhoods that they
- wouldn't live near students. I don't think that's reasonable I Think that You know as I talked to the
- neighborhoods what I expected to hear was concerns about student behavior and that was really minimal
- and as I talked to other other
- Peer cities that's one of the things that they talk most about I don't hear as much of that here. What
- I what I really hear is that When when this when a lot is repurposed for student housing, especially
- if it's redeveloped the thing that is built is Jarringly different from what it replaced or what was
- there? So from my perspective, I'm hearing a lot about more architectural standards massing things like
- that I don't think that
- The idea of trying to remove students from those neighborhoods is a good one. For one thing, if we distribute
- them all over the city, then perhaps those that wouldn't have had to have drive to campus are now driving
- to campus. More vehicle miles traveled. There's a lot of reasons that we would want them within walking
- distance. But it's really structures that are being built for them that I think are really staggeringly
- out of place with the neighborhoods that are established.
- That have a right to expect something better And when you say student housing, are you referring to
- the luxury multifamily homes that are available to everyone or to IU housing? No, I'm referring more
- to Not not the mega projects not the high amenities student housing on North North College more to the
- the infill housing that's being put into
- campus adjacent neighborhoods, like the one I showed you on Cottage Grove, where a house is removed
- and a thing that is clearly intended for students that has all the hallmarks of student housing and
- is in fact eventually rented to students is replacing it. That's more the student housing that we're
- talking about. But it has no legal status as student housing.
- Yeah, Pennsylvania does. They've established student housing is a structure in which an undergraduate
- lives, one or more. We don't have that here. OK, thank you. And I just have another question. It's not
- directed at you, so please don't take it anyway. But the way we talk about students is pretty aggressive.
- Do you think that that has any impact on students wanting to stay here and be a part of our workforce?
- That's a good question.
- I'm not meaning, or certainly hoping that I'm not coming across as talking aggressively about students.
- It's not you. And I think that that goes for my department as well. I mean, what is Bloomington if there's
- no university? What is the university if there are no students? We absolutely have to accommodate them.
- I just think that it can be done better than we're doing it now. Absolutely. Thank you. But your point
- is very well taken. I appreciate it.
- Thank you. That is technically the end of the time that we had does anybody else have a burning question
- that okay So I'm gonna extend for another three minutes till 725 you think that'll do it. We'll try
- councilmember Flaherty Thank you. I want to echo and elevate the points councilmember Zulik was raising
- it, you know I think there were a number of generalities that don't hold true universally and we should
- be very careful about language that tends to stigmatize or villainize some of our residents I hear it
- a lot too. What I also heard in those comments was like I
- a perspective that's different than what we heard in the presentation, and that brings me to my question
- about process. What I see on the screen right now is an anticipated staff process over the next five
- months, and I'm curious for what you envision to be the best path for collaboration between city council
- members who are legislators and policymakers in our own right, also care very deeply about implementing
- the values and ideas and policies and goals in our comprehensive plan and our climate action plan, and indeed,
- Collaborated with your staff extensively in the past in order to propose ideas And so where do our ideas
- on you do changes related to housing attainability in this project fit into this process? Are they welcome?
- How will they be included? Tell us what you'd like to see please and in particular I well I'll leave
- it at that and I think some follow-up probably in written form would be helpful to give structure and
- clarity to all of us Thank you. Yeah, I do have some ideas and I'm certainly open to other ideas from
- the council if there are other
- Ideas are processes that would work better I do want the the the coordination and the conversation with
- council as we move into this I'm thinking that by March we're going to be able to assemble that packet
- that housing attainability udl packet that's going to have probably not just a rote set of language
- that take it or leave it but will have variety of options some different ways of incorporating different ideas
- mixing and matching some of the mechanisms that we've talked about here and then take it back to the
- public and and Council for refinement review further consideration at that point Yeah, and that's that's
- about it Thank you. Just a brief follow-up. Would you it sounds like that would set the universe of
- the possible with what you propose in March and then we'd be left to refinement and
- At a subsequent phase. Would you be open to council members contributing ideas to that universe of things
- that is explored in the next phase of public engagement? Yeah, I review and refinement is the phrase
- that I wrote And and then my my idea there is that during the review part the beginning part You know
- other ideas it we're open to other ideas. So we're not we're not again. We don't want to come
- To you or to the public with anything that's pre baked or even half baked We want we want input from
- everybody who's interested in providing input, right? I want to make sure we get the input on ideas
- that are coming from council members as well Because this has been a point of friction before where
- even there's opportunities for future input But we're told that wasn't the right way to do it. So we're
- gonna do it a different way This is the different way I'm making sure that we are active and like clear
- in the expected process So we don't get blindsided again in the future by the mayor
- Thank you. Yeah, and I'll add to that that I think we can put that in writing so that it is more clear
- because it's not, as I'm leaving it right now, there's not the clarity that it should have. So I think
- we'll do that and then forward it to the council. Yes, sir. Great, thank you. Any other burning questions
- that are gonna necessitate an extension of this report time again? Great, thank you so much.
- Perhaps there'll be follow-up via email, but I really appreciate your coming today and for your presentation
- Next we have I gotta get back to my agenda Reports from council committees committee on council processes
- councilmember Piedmont Smith Yes, thank you. I just wanted to make
- Colleagues and the public aware of a few things that the committee on council processes have been working
- on And they are as follows We're looking at moving the general provisions regarding boards and commissions
- in the municipal code from section 2.08 executive branch to section 2.12 boards commissions and councils
- number two we're looking at allowing for discussion at first reading and
- Number three, we're looking at allowing a consent agenda for certain items that require a vote but are
- not substantive and or controversial. And number four, we're looking at whether or not we might require
- a council member to sponsor each item of legislation that appears on the agenda of a regular session.
- So if you have colleagues who are not on the committee, have any feedback, please contact a committee
- member. And same for members of the public, if you have concern or interest in these. The committee
- is comprised of myself, council members Flaherty, Daly, and Zulick. Of course that committee makeup
- may change in January, but I want to make sure everybody knew what we're working on, thank you.
- Thank you. Are there any councilmember questions for councilmember Piedmont Smith and the committee
- on council processes? All right. Seeing none, we will move along down our agenda to reports from the
- public. So this is our first period of public comment. If there is a member of the public who is interested
- in making a comment on an item that is not
- on our agenda tonight. If you are here in person, you can go ahead and make your way to the podium.
- There should be a sign in sheet and you can sign in and then state your name for the record and you
- would have up to three minutes. If you're on Zoom, please raise your hand using the reactions tab or
- you can send a chat message to the host. And I do see somebody approaching the podium. So we'll go ahead
- and start here in chambers when you've signed in and are ready. Is the timer all set? Wonderful, thank
- you so much. And begin with your name.
- Thank you, Madam President. This is Christopher Emge from the Greater Bloomington Chamber of Commerce.
- You know, I wanted to talk, I could talk about several different issues that are sort of affecting this
- community, but that being the last meeting of the fiscal and calendar year, I want to do a little bit
- of reflection from a chamber business perspective. I want to first acknowledge the Council's ongoing
- work on outcome-based budgeting. It has been a process, and it's been a very gradual one and at times
- challenging.
- Slow, but the effort continues to move forward Outcome based budgeting is a noble endeavor one that
- strengthens accountability clarifies priorities and helps ensure public resources are aligned with measurable
- goals It's not easy. It's necessary and when we have to do less with less essential Also want to recognize
- the broader fiscal and council processes undertaken this year Councilmember Piedmont Smith mentioned.
- It's I think usually my favorite hour within the council and
- The willingness to dig in the details wrestle with Some trade-offs engaged in discussion outside the
- regular session has been vital and a really big council benefit. I believe Those additional conversations
- whether their committee work sessions or smaller since it smaller settings have helped clarify a lot
- of issues before they reach this room and that matters and before I go further I just want to kind of
- briefly acknowledge sort of my role in this space with the chamber its work I take
- very seriously, but I don't take myself seriously. I generally enjoy the never-ending cycle of local
- government, including our brethren at the county, the clash of personalities, the strong opinions, the
- long and even longer meetings, and the imperfect process of trying to muddle through this. I do this
- work because I want the city to succeed. In fact, as my family have formally begun house-hunting, one
- of our non-negotiables is staying within Bloomington's incorporated boundaries.
- That's not accidental. This is more than a job, but rather reflects a long-term commitment to this community
- that I have confidence in their future You know, I also want to nods the deliberation meetings While
- they have not been perfect see last week. They are a step in the right direction Creating space for
- the council members to talk through issues with one another and
- for the public to better understand the different perspectives strengthens transparency and leads to
- better outcomes. I truly believe that these conversations are a very effective and clear way to sort
- of visualize and talk about the goals that members want to accomplish in a timely and wise fashion and
- that our progress is measurable. This year has not been without our challenges and I hopefully next
- year we can get those different disagreements and tough conversations to a better position.
- But those disagreements is not a failure in many cases reflects the council cares deeply about the right
- thing Thank you for your services. You're navigating a very challenging landscape and I'll see you in
- 2026. Thank you. Thank you Are there any other members of the public who would like to make a public
- comment during this period? Do we have any hands raised on zoom? Yes, there's one wonderful. Let's go
- ahead and go to zoom then
- When you're unmuted, you can state your name for the record and then you'll have up to three minutes
- Hi, this is Paul so I Would like to thank council members Rollo Ruff and Stossberg for holding monthly
- meetings with groups of Bloomington citizens. I Wish that every member of the council did the same I
- also wish that five minutes were allowed for public comments as existed last year. I
- Meanwhile, for the past few days, I've been appalled by how many of the sidewalks in Bloomington have
- been left unshoveled by irresponsible property owners, thereby leaving hapless pedestrians to trudge
- through snow and ice. A large part of the problem is that the current municipal code is outdated. Title
- VI covers snow removal. Section 6720 provides details about code enforcement and fines for non-compliance.
- The initial penalty is only $50. The second violation is $100.
- all subsequent violations occur of a fine of 150. That ordinance was written in July of 2014. The city
- of Bloomington analysis found that the median home value in 2015 was $173,000. Over the past few months
- in comparison, the median home value was varied between 300,000 and 375,000 depending on when and by
- whom the analysis was done.
- It seems accurate to say that the housing market in Bloomington has doubled since 2014. Therefore, I
- request that the City Council amend the code and double the snow removal fines. Finally, a few days
- ago, I was using Google Maps, and I accidentally discovered that the street views of the neighborhood
- just west of the stadium are several years out of date. What I saw on my computer screen was the ghost
- of a livable, walkable neighborhood.
- with abundant old trees and low density houses and businesses with generous setbacks. In other words,
- it was a real neighborhood with front yards. What exists today are monstrous mega student development
- projects, a term used by the director of housing just earlier this evening. These are ugly four story
- buildings that crowd the sidewalks so as to squeeze every bit of profit out of the land.
- It is really sad to see Bloomington selling its soul to the paradigm of continual growth. I think we
- are actually on the verge of declining university enrollments due to declining birth rates and due to
- our friends with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. It seems to me that IU probably sees
- this coming and they are externalizing their temporary need for housing onto the city.
- Absent increasing enrollments, Bloomington does not need more people. We need to figure out how to shield
- ourselves from the intrusion of the capitalist marketplace instead of submitting to it and thereby betraying
- future generations. This is a long overdue conversation. I think that growth is killing Bloomington,
- not nurturing it. Thank you. Thank you for your comment. Any other hands raised on Zoom?
- I don't see anybody moving in chambers. So we will carry on down our agenda We don't have any boards
- appointments to boards and commissions tonight. We don't have any legislation for first readings So
- we'll go right into legislation for second readings. I Move that ordinance 2025-19 be introduced and
- read by the clerk by title and synopsis only Second, thank you Since we're all here we can do a voice
- vote on this
- It's been moved and seconded to introduce ordinance 2025 19 all those in favor, please say aye Aye opposed
- Thank you. Will the clerk please read Ordinance 2025 19 to amend title 15 of the Bloomington Municipal
- Code entitled removal and impound vehicles regarding chapters fifteen point four eight and fifteen point
- five to Updating permissible towing and storage charges for authorized towing services the synopsis
- is as follows
- Ordinance 2025-19 updates the maximum charges authorized towing services may collect when performing
- city initiated toes to reflect more accurately the costs associated with towing services and current
- market pricing Thank you so much Move that ordinance 2020 2025-19 be adopted second
- Thank you so much. As a note, as I said earlier, this is technically a third reading on this item. And
- at our regular session a couple of weeks ago, we did adopt Amendment 1, which was included in the packet.
- Who's here to present from the city? And of course, last time we had an extensive discussion around
- this. So go ahead, please state your name for the record. Good evening. Edina Casamanian, Assistant
- City Attorney for the City of Bloomington.
- At the last council meeting I had the opportunity to present proposed legislation under title 15 of
- the Bloomington municipal code Which distinct from title four covers police and city initiated towing
- Tonight we're here again to discuss title 15 and I'm here with police contracted towing companies and
- with sergeant Jacob hunter to answer any questions you may have regarding title 15 and
- Thank you. I do have an amendment on this one. Does council want to talk about the amendment first or
- do you have questions about the ordinance as it's presented to us? I don't see any questions. I'm gonna
- pass the gavel to my vice president All right, so we have an amendment just to remind everybody amendment
- one was adopted two weeks ago and
- And I believe we have another amendment council member Stossberg. Yeah I'd like to move amendment four
- to ordinance twenty twenty five nineteen second. All right it's been moved and seconded. Council member
- Stossberg could you please tell us what the amendment is about. Yeah. So the amendment that I proposed
- last week if you recall I had a concern with two things. I have concern with the storage fees. Twenty
- four hours.
- And that seems to not be an issue last week in terms of my amendment But I also had a concern about
- the business hours not being defined in the the ordinance but like saying that you know additional fees
- could be charged outside of business hours, but not having any concept of what business hours would be so
- In terms of those two changes, and I included a memo, by the way, in the packet addendum yesterday,
- sections two and three of my amendment deal with those two things. And the phrase that we agreed upon
- with legal was to refer the business hours to be defined in the police contract.
- And that seemed to be okay with everybody and that was kind of discussed last time to actually in terms
- of folks who were present said Yeah, like we can work that out and the police department said yeah,
- we can make sure that that is in the contract So it's like clearly defined for everybody
- And then this the first section of this actually comes at the request of the administration To change
- the word officer to member of the Bloomington Police Department in acknowledgement that sometimes non
- sworn officers are respondents in different cases including things like vehicular accidents And so they
- might be the person
- in charge in those situations. And also there was also the question last week. If you remember, there
- was another amendment that was never introduced last week that had to do with payment of fees. And those
- changes were made because of state code updates. And so this was just another section that had been
- they forgot to change that section. So I hope that was clear. So you may have any questions for me about
- it. Are there questions about Amendment 4?
- To ordinance 2025 19 Okay, I don't see any I Guess we can go ahead and go to the public Is there any
- member of the public who would like to speak to the amendment? Just reviewed by councilmember Stasberg
- to the amendment to ordinance 2025 19
- Anybody in chambers getting up to speak to the amendment And I see a shake of the head from our staff.
- So nobody online has raised a hand So we can come back to the council. Are there any final comments
- on the amendment? Councilmember daily Just thank you. I know we had a really extensive conversation
- about this last week and it caused a lot of hand-wringing so
- I'm really happy with these changes. Thank you very much. I'm happy to support this Council member Stossberg.
- Thank you. I hope by lack of questions and comments others are also willing to support this I want to
- send a thank you out to staff legal and the police department who helped refine this language over the
- last couple weeks and also our council staff who helped prepare documents things Any other comments
- Seeing none, will the clerk please call the roll on amendment for to ordinance 2025-19? Councilmember
- Flaherty. Yes Ruff. Yes, Rallo. Yes, Piedmont Smith. Yes Stasberg. Yes, Daly. Yes, Zulek. Yes Rosenberger.
- Yes, sorry. Yes. Thank you. I
- All right, that amendment is adopted by a vote of nine zero and I'll hand back the gavel. Thank you
- so much Madam chair, yes Councilmember all or breath. Yeah, I would like to Introduce amendment five.
- I'm not sure if this is the time to do it. I've shared that amendment with everybody it It's in your
- inbox should be With my fellow council members
- think the city legal has Discussed it with Okay, so we have a motion to introduce amendment five that
- is in our inboxes And it looks like it has shown up on the big screen right now. Do we have a second
- for that motion? Thank you Councilmember off do you want to talk about your amendment? Yeah, very briefly
- in talking with
- Over the past few days some of the business members involved in in both non-consensual toes and and
- the toes Under title 15 that this is dealing with This amendment adds the ability for The towing companies
- tone business to have a $25 administrative fee that's
- separate from the the physical cost of the physical toe and I think the the amendments entirely consistent
- with the whole purpose of the ordinance in that the purpose of the ordinance is to bring fees and rates
- up to date and to reflect real costs of doing the toes and Based on my conversations with
- doing the toes From the businesses. I became convinced that this They've been there are costs Administrative
- costs that are just not captured not reflected by the changes that are proposed in the ordinance out
- in the ordinance changes outside of this and not being someone who's
- involved in the business I I I won't probably be the best person to Try to answer questions, but I think
- during the comment section of public comment. We should be hearing from Folks who will do a much better
- job than I could do it explaining as was explained to me over the past several days why This is justified
- fair needed
- reflective of the reality on the ground and in finally I'll add that my understanding is that both the
- sheriff's office for the county who manages the county initiated toes and the IU in Indian University
- for their toes explicitly allow in their in their language this a fee 25 dollar administrative fee separated
- out broken out
- itemized out of the actual toe itself so if Folks have some questions for me. I will I'll try to answer
- as best I can at this point But I think we'll definitely be hearing from folks who are professionals
- in the business and who will make the case that That this is necessary and fair Questions for councilmember
- rough from council members. I
- Thank you, how did you identify $25 as the the cost sorry, I can barely hear you How did you identify
- $25 as the cost for well in my discussions with the towing businesses my understanding was that was
- actually something that When they were initially solicited for input from the city to the upcoming changes
- We're going to be worked on and done and introduced This was actually a number and if a cost that was
- brought up and Didn't make its way into what we finally saw us in the proposal for the ordinance changes
- and at initially my understanding again is initially the the businesses didn't feel like it was something that
- They were going to push for harder again, but since that time in the past several months There have
- been some changes in state auditing auditing processes of the towing businesses and their toes and some
- additional city administrative Demands that have caused them to rethink Not really pushing to have this
- as part of the changes this $25 administrative fee
- So I think we'll probably hear more about that when people have an opportunity to speak but $25 was
- The it might be the number it might actually be the number that the city I mean that the county and
- IU also have identified is what they allow or what they what they admit for This fee, okay, but that's
- unconfirmed that's not confirmed I
- Maybe someone can confirm when we get up, but that's my understanding Okay, thank you. Thank you. Are
- there other councilmember questions for councilmember of councilmember Piedmont Smith Yes, so the Ordinance
- as amended without this new amendment already allows for an administrative towing fee of $25 to the city and
- So this would add another $25 going to the towing company. Is that right? It would be both assessed
- Yes, so that fee that goes to the city for that I believe that the BPD charges before a person can go
- get their car from the towing agents that goes to that's a that's a Charge almost like a tick a traffic
- ticket to the city
- The the towing business has nothing to do with that that goes that's what you pay the city through BPD
- To get the form that you need to take to get your car released. I believe that's my understanding So
- yeah, this is separate. This is purely for the administrative burden on the businesses Okay, I have
- another question Are there other first-round questions for a consumer? Okay, I I have I
- Do you know what these fees are actually for? Yeah, well for example, I do have a couple brought up
- for That were articulated to me So for example Plymouth City, so one I'll give one example for the title
- 15 type toe city
- initiated towing versus title for non-consensual private towing so Bloomington City parking enforcement
- any tows impounded from Bloomington parking enforcement Must verify amount of ticket accumulation for
- release vehicles cannot be released until all parking tickets in collection have been paid in full or
- payment arrangements made our business office being the private tow not the city or
- Our business office is responsible for getting collection charges collected from set amount from form
- emailed from Bloomington City Parking We must have paint copies and confirm paid amounts from collection
- agency before vehicle can be released Once we've confirmed this amount requested be paid then we can
- release vehicle to registered owner so this is some administrative process that the That the business
- undertakes and
- That's an example that I was just it was described to me. Is there a fee for acquiring that information
- from the city? For acquiring that information. Yeah, like is there a direct fee for the wiring that
- I'm like does the city charge the tows company paid the $25 to this to the BPD but for this this is
- a There's no payment that the only payment is from the person getting their car
- That's not what I'm asking I'm asking so it sounds like it sounds like in that message that you just
- read the the tow company needs to
- Confirmed that payment was made on those tickets. So basically they have to like look something up So
- what I'm asking is is there a fee charged to the tow company? For asking the city for that confirmation
- and information and I kind of see the clerk machine over there and I don't know if maybe Because this
- is probably like the clerk's office that deals with all of these tickets and things So is there a fee
- for that information exchange? we don't always deal with these but
- The form that is issued by parking enforcement No, I don't believe that the towing companies have to
- pay for that I believe usually the person who's gotten their vehicle towed is responsible for getting
- the form from parking enforcement and bringing it over to the towing company so they can verify it parking
- enforcement can generally look in
- T2 which is the program that we use for parking enforcement and tracking citations and permits and those
- sorts of things So it will list the license plate with any citations that have been issued in our outstanding
- the form itself lists the amount as posted ticket numbers themselves, which could be problematic if
- they appeal those tickets in the Middle of that step, but I think that's something that can be handled
- Come back in but there's no fees associated with any of that exchange of information No, okay. Thank you
- Other first round questions Comes member Piedmont Smith. You said you had a second round. Um, yeah,
- I You know just reading the ordinance It's like there's a fee for this then there's a fee for that and
- if this then there's other fee and this is this it just you know starts rattling your brain and makes
- it sound like a bank with all these hidden fees
- So I'm wondering whether it was considered to add this $25 in to just telling fee so that we don't so
- that we have one less fee to list here so that it's more straightforward to the Vehicle owners. Yeah
- my understanding and in talking with the businesses was that That would be acceptable
- unacceptable approach but less desirable because with the My understanding is they feel like they would
- like to have a breakdown so that people see of what what the costs are what what what they're paying
- what it's going towards and and that break that breaking out of the administrative component as opposed
- to actual physical toe itself is is an important thing for their
- Business and their public engagement. I think they felt like with with with their customers or the people
- who are they're working with That's my understanding. Okay. Thank you Are there other questions?
- All right, I have a second round question to you I'm wondering if there's a staff opinion on this amendment
- or I mean we have We have our
- City attorney here. We have police department representative. We have representative from ESD any all
- of you want to come forward and They're having a debate over there for folks on zoom They're they're
- not sure who's who's gonna have to come up and give an opinion on this for me. I
- Thank you and Edina Casamania from city of Bloomington assistant city attorney This is new so I haven't
- had times to really consider it. So that's my Opinions or any other two companies, so thank you. Okay.
- Thank you Other questions councilmember rough I would like to
- Make sure people do know it was 11th hour But I did reach out to legal and we did we did have a discussion
- and I appreciate your responsiveness to my To my outreach for input from you. So, thank you Would you
- like to clarify your No, yes, I did we did talk and so I am aware of it but it wasn't brought up during
- any of our conversations and
- When we were considering proposed legislation for title 15 in the last, you know few months So I did
- explain that to councilmember ruff. But yes, we did we it's new today I found out about it today. So
- and we did talk about it just and briefly and you don't have a position on it or an opinion on it or
- I Don't have an opinion or a position Okay, yeah any other staff members wanna
- If you'd state your name for the record D del Rosa assistant director for small business development
- ESD Once again, I Literally just saw and heard about this when I walked into council chamber, so I haven't
- had time to review it I would like to have confirmation as to what
- And you does as far as there as far as this administration fee so I can have some informed input on
- it but at this time because of the Lack of time to review this. I don't really have a position on it
- Okay, thank you Any other councilmember questions about amendment five?
- All right, seeing none, let's go ahead and go to public comment. So this would be just public comment
- related to Amendment 5 to Ordinance 2025-19. Is there anybody in chambers who would like to speak to
- Amendment 5? Thank you. Go ahead. There's a sign-in sheet. Go ahead and sign in, and then state your
- name for the record. And then you'll have up to three minutes.
- My name is Cody Chandler. I own a Chandler automotive and towing. We this fee is allowed to be charged
- at IU and county also lets us charges fee they call it a service fee but we are allowed to charge that.
- The reasoning for this charge is their specific requirements on release of each of these vehicles. So
- these are impounds. So there is an administrative duty on each one of them. For Bloomington parking
- we actually determine
- The paid tickets the city doesn't do that. We confirm that on our end So we get the form it'll have
- a number on it and then we are the ones that make sure they pay the collection So it's on us that they
- pay those collection fees on the non-consensual side The record-keeping requirements are separate from
- normal record-keeping requirements. We're not talking about the non-consensual side right now because
- we're just on title 15 but as far as
- On the city initiated that that's the reason why there's specific requirements Thank you, yep We have
- another person coming forward in chambers so go ahead and state your name for the record then you'll
- have up to three minutes Thank you for signing in Hi
- Ken perishkins Westside service and towing here in Bloomington Thank you again for the opportunity to
- be able to do some of your towing with the city We appreciate it. I would just like to clarify some
- of the fees and charges that you're talking about the $25 administration fee that city Bloomington Police
- Department charges
- Generally those fees are only charged if there is an initiation of investigation or something like that
- So just because your car got towed by BPD Doesn't mean you have to go get a release form from the city
- of Bloomington Not all of those fees not everybody gets that $25 fee Only the ones that were
- under investigation that they have to investigate or something like that. Okay I'm just giving you real-world
- specs of it. If you guys have any questions for me, I can answer that the administration fee for us
- to conduct that are a lot with the the city of Bloomington
- towing ordinance where they are get city tickets and he was another gentleman mentioned that You we
- confirm the fees
- That person had to pay for their parking tickets, which means we have to call the city. We sit online
- We sit in on hold we wait We have to go from not only from the city to see if they've paid then but
- have their tickets also went to collections So then we have to call and find out who the collections
- agency is on it confirm with them Then we have to call back There's a lot of hours and sometimes when
- the parking tickets and stuff. It can be a real mess the city unfortunately needs to work on
- Getting that collaboration a little bit better back and forth between us so that we don't have to do
- all the confirming We towed it because you had parking tickets. We didn't go look for it. We didn't
- chase you down We didn't do that. The city called us to come and get it because they were in violation
- with that being said We as the towing company have to now do all that work trying to get back and forth
- No, they did not charge us a fee But there is a lot of time invested by trying to get a hold of all
- these people to confirm that they've had all these tickets paid
- Personally think there's also more stuff that goes in with it also State regulation requires us to file
- a 72-hour notice anytime we tow anything in whether it's whether it's towed in by you guys whether they're
- You know, whatever the condition it was towed in those are fees incurred to us. That's not even on here
- That's more administration fees that we pay out of our pocket plus the person in the office having to
- file those that paperwork
- Then if they don't respond after the 72 hours Then we also have to notify the state again and all the
- lien holders and everybody else that we have your car or the parent Whoever the lien holder or the title
- holder the car car is those are a lot of fees that we incur ourselves That we don't also get to charge
- and in all honesty the $25 is cheap, but we're willing to make it at that point A lot of places let
- us charge up to 50 to 75 dollars for administration fees. I don't think we're really asking for that
- much If you guys have any other questions, thank you appreciate it
- Thank you. Do we have any hands raised on zoom right now for this public? Okay, wonderful looks like
- we have somebody else in person Go ahead and sign in state your name for the record and you'll have
- up to three minutes Hi, sorry, I'm Cameron myself I'm with Blaine's record service in reference to a
- question that was asked if there's any direct, you know fee for us to get information from
- No, there's not but there are very indirect costs with us. It is a lot of labor. It's very intensive
- to Handle the impound process whenever a vehicle is towed by the police And that's the the cost does
- not get reimbursed even by the $25. There's title searches Certified letters we have to send out sometimes
- two three four five
- Per vehicle at nine dollars a piece that come up So the $25 while it is appreciated doesn't nearly cover
- the cost, but it would be definitely appreciated in the addition of this You know the the time that
- it takes is is a Is a real consideration because we do spend a lot of time in office and a lot of people
- to make sure that someone Legitimately gets their vehicle back to the right person especially in a very
- student centered town and
- You run into a lot of situations where you're dealing with not the registered owner. We have to contact
- the registered owner sometimes in a different state So there is a lot of like I said time, you know
- when time has value as well So I I fully support the $25 for that reason Thank you Anybody raise the
- hand on zoom anybody else in council chambers who wants to speak to amendment five? Right seeing none
- that's gonna come back to council
- Is there council comments on this? Council member, sorry. I might have missed something. So I totally
- understand the argument being made. And then I understood the comments made by the public. Can somebody
- help me understand something I'm missing? Because all the examples that were given seem to be not examples
- of consensual towing, but rather like when somebody is getting a ticket or something, doesn't that fall
- under the next thing that we're talking about, not under Title 15?
- Councilmember rough. Do you want to explain why you have that under title 15? Does anybody maybe from
- the police? Department want to talk about why these fees might come with a police initiated toe I Think
- probably city legal might want to talk about the just reading title five to title 15 title four. That's
- what I missed you Well
- Let's go ahead and just in case there are other people who also might have confusion about this because
- if there's anything I learned as a teacher One person's question is usually another person's question.
- I'm sergeant Jacob Potter with the Blompton police And I know from the police department perspective
- as far as this administrative fee I know it may help the tow companies when it comes to parking enforcement
- and their toes but I can say from the police department's perspective we act we have a form that any
- vehicle that we tow under our authority, so if it's not a
- What we call a private tow where the owner is actually requesting the tow truck to come get their car
- safe from a traffic accident If we tow it under our authority, basically the owner doesn't want it towed,
- but we're gonna tow it will fill out a tow form We take that tow form turn into our records department
- In order for the vehicle to be released that said individual owner operator has to show up to BPD and
- we fill out the rest of this tow form and
- which then gets given to them or sent to the tow company for the release of that vehicle. So that shows
- the tow companies that per the police department, you are allowed to release this vehicle to them. I
- see their argument as far as under parking, because I know there's some frustration with that, but from
- the police department perspective, I don't see any reason for the fee itself. Okay, thank you.
- Council member, sorry, does that answer your question about the difference between the two?
- Other councilmember I I thought that we are on comment, but maybe we any last questions as a question
- or comment Okay, any questions? Councilmember P not smith So I don't I'm a little confused by what sergeant
- hunter just said so There is already in the ordinance the $25 administrative fee that goes to BPD for
- you know the time it takes to
- Fill out the forms and and then I believe I heard him say that he sees no reason for the tow company
- to have an administrative fee Did did I understand that correctly? And if so, could you please elaborate?
- I I just say from the police department perspective because the example given for this administrative
- fee we Eliminate that they don't have to communicate with us to wonder whether or not the vehicle can
- be released and
- We give that form to them and we make sure it's given to them through the citizen or through the vehicle
- owner Okay, I see but But the arguments given through the public comment that they still have to make
- sure that there are no outstanding parking tickets or other related fines Against that vehicle owner
- That's still valid. I mean that that's still that is a that's a valid issue and
- When it comes to parking because obviously Parking is no longer with police or under the police department
- So from my understanding just from my interaction with the public and the work Parking enforcement say
- they tow a vehicle for unpaid tickets The same frustration that you guys that everyone's been told at
- council tonight has been explained to me to where it's an issue of them trying to get
- Confirmation that all fees are paid to parking We don't have that issue Because we clearly have that
- form sent over to the tow company for the vehicle to be released So they rarely have to call us back.
- Hey, can this vehicle be released? The frustration that they're having is is the parking enforcement
- issue I can't speak to that in their process, but I know from the police department standpoint We are
- very open with them as far as the vehicle being released or can it not be?
- The administrative fee that you asked about for for us There are key components or key times when we
- don't charge that like recovered stolen vehicles So say someone's car stolen and we find it on the south
- side of Bloomington We call the tow company to come pick it up. They still have to come to us to get
- a tow form Completed or signed saying we're releasing it, but we don't charge that fee for that type
- those types of issues
- We also have the ability to override that fee so a supervisor can do that For that administrative fee
- on our end in case circumstances come up And so on we can always override that But that's the answer
- for your if that enlightens you on the $25 fee for us for the city Can I ask a follow-up so Mr. Parrish
- was saying that the $25 fee is only charged if there's an investigation in
- Initiated is that how does investigation typically that that could be very wide? As far as what can
- entail so that could be as simple as a traffic stop say a driver's arrested The vehicles in the roadway.
- We obviously can't leave it there So we tow it under our authority We felt the tow form when they come
- to pick the vehicle up. They have to pay that $25 fee and
- Again, like I said, like the recovered stolen vehicles, we don't charge for that. Other circumstances,
- we can override that fee if we need to. But that's typically what those fees would come from.
- Thank you. Thank you. Other questions? All right, council members, did you have a comment? Yes,
- thank you. I just want to say thank you to all of the representatives from the tow companies that came
- out to speak with us today.
- Actually was planning on voting no against this but after hearing what you all had to say, I'm going
- to vote Yes, so I just want everyone in the room to know that activism works and so does public speaking.
- Thank you Thank you, are there other councilmember comments comes number Flaherty Yeah I'm gonna vote
- no. I feel some uncertainty about it and the lateness of it I know Colleague is acknowledged is like
- part of it and
- The challenge with this, including the first time we heard it in 2020, is that we're talking about setting
- a reasonable overall level for towing with respect to a set of business decisions that we have very
- little insight into. We can talk to folks all we want, but this forum is not a good place to work through
- the nitty-gritty of the business costs and what's reasonable. And I guess my view is ultimately we need
- to set a reasonable level overall. This is an increase. This is what these ordinances are about.
- and how folks run their businesses and how they manage costs, of which there are many, you know,
- no doubt, is up to them. And we hope we set it at a level that is viable for businesses to do the business
- in a non sort of extractive or userist way, right? And that's the principle, I guess, and I feel like
- that's what the fee is about and that's what the update was about. And I'm open to it needing to be
- higher than what was proposed in this ordinance coming from staff, but like I am not in a position now
- to be able to make that determination with any type of confidence. And for that reason, I don't feel
- like I can reasonably vote no. I'm sorry, vote yes on the amendment. So I just wanted to explain my
- thinking on it. Thank you. Thank you. Other council member comment on amendment five. Council member
- Ruff. Yeah, I know that some staff asked for verification of the IU
- The county having allowing a service fee or administrative fee. That's for this exact this purpose this
- specific purpose. I'm pretty sure that I'd be surprised if that's not accurate if I've been told something
- wrong and if we have one of the speakers Confirmed that one of the towing company representatives Mitch
- said that that is the case it is allowed by the city and and I mean by that county and by IU
- Plus to mr. Flaherty's point I believe I looked into this a little bit. I believe that the city I mean
- the county allows 200 and that the tow cost when the fees are all added up is about two 210 or 215 I
- use is the same in our school the cities will be I think 200 at this so it'll be a less and
- this administrative fee which I
- believe are is allowed by the county and by you brings it actually closer to what the Amount is for
- the city. I mean for the county and for iu toast that that's all I want to say. Thanks Thank you other
- councilmember comment Councilmember Piedmont Smith Yeah, I'm also uneasy about approving this for the
- same reasons that councilmember Flaherty stated
- It seems like this is something that our staff is more the staff in not just the city legal department
- but the economic sustainable development department who actually works with businesses and would have
- a better insight into you know what is reasonable and could verify these these comparisons that we're
- hearing tonight. They're in a much better position to make a recommendation and this was not part of
- the recommendation that
- The city staff brought us in the ordinance itself. So I am quite hesitant to approve it just on you
- know the basis of kind of hearsay at this point. Not that I don't trust everybody's you know input tonight
- but I it doesn't seem like a solid basis on which to to make a decision. So I'm not sure about supporting
- this amendment tonight. Thank you.
- Thank you other councilmember comment councilmember Rosenberger Thank you, I Would just like to echo
- what councilmember Piedmont Smith said I understand it's just sometimes we have really late amendments
- But I do not feel like I know enough to vote Yes on this. So for now, I am a no vote Other councilmember comment
- Seeing none, I'll go ahead and take a turn at council member comment. I'm actually I'm also a no vote
- on this I think that This kind of
- You know in terms of dealing with the parking tickets and the clerk I feel like that's something that
- you know as councilmember Flaherty said should be kind of built into other business expenses and then
- in terms of some of those other Fees that and and I appreciate the gentleman who spoke with me a couple
- a couple weeks ago after the meeting about this and as One of the public commenters said, you know state
- regulations require 72 hour notices which means that you know, they might there might be fees, but they
- might not accrue until
- Multiple hours afterwards and so to be able to give all two companies this like immediate ability to
- charge this extra $25 fee I just I'm really opposed to that without any other I mean it it doesn't say
- that they need to be itemized to actually meet actual fees that the tow companies are charged for Having
- to you know pay money to look up information or
- access databases or anything like that. It's just this kind of flat fee. And that, to me, it means that
- this $25 could just get dumped on top of every single tow by every single company every time that happens.
- And once again, I'm going to bring up what I brought up last week about predatory towing. And I appreciate
- that there's some honest tow companies out there. But we also need to remember that there are a whole
- lot of predatory tow companies out there. And those predatory tow companies take advantage of
- residents, especially our student population, especially our visitor population and especially our population
- that Might not be able to very you know carefully and strictly read our city code to figure out all
- of these things and to realize that they can complain about inappropriate towing so I am a no vote on
- this and I really urge my my colleagues to to not
- Approve this additional fee unless there were lots more Lots more places to protect residents in terms
- of itemizing and really understanding it and I'll also second the the concern that I think Councilmember
- Piedmont Smith mentioned in terms of our staff recommendations and and things Consulting with staff
- around this sort of fee issue. So, thank you If there are no other councilmember comments
- Seeing none Will the clerk please call the roll on amendment 5 to ordinance 2025 19? Councilmember Ruff
- Yes Rallo. Yes Piedmont Smith. No Stossburg. No daily. Yes Zulek. Yes Rosenberger. No, I'm sorry Yes
- No Wait a second, I lost count five four zero that was five four Yes passed, right? Okay. All right,
- so that amendment passes five to four All right, that brings us back to ordinance 2025 19 as amended I
- Are there councilmember questions? On it as amended Is there public comments on it so now this is like
- public comment on the entire ordinance As it's been amended by three amendments amendment one amendment
- four and amendment five So this you know, this also includes like the original ordinance which does
- have some things not that have
- Been covered in the amendment. So I see somebody in chambers already signing in Please state your name
- for the record and then you'll have up to three minutes Okay, my name is Jacob Padawan. I'm with toe
- time towing and recovery. I don't tow for again the police here in this town, I don't other towns, but
- I did want to kind of help with that uneven vote that I do believe the $25 administrative fee is a good
- thing on that side and
- As she was concerned with was slapping that on every single tow these guys Tow cars all the time have
- a lot less abandoned cars than paid cars, but at the same time I was hoping to give you guys some numbers.
- I can tell you that Indiana lean is a company that a lot of us use at least I do now it's a hundred
- and thirty dollars to two hundred and ten dollars on average depending on what state that vehicles registered in
- That's what every guy here is paying on every vehicle that we have for 72 hours out of our own pocket
- So with that administrative fee being slapped on every single car, it's still barely averaging Enough
- money to cover just that cost alone for the amount of abandoned cars that we do get so I just wanted
- to kind of Stand up for them and let you guys know that that's what it costs. I used to do it in-house
- in-house was $100 a year prescription plus a $5 for every single VIN check and
- when it comes down to the car being abandoned and you have to put the ad in a newspaper to let the Vehicle
- or let the public know the car is going to be up for auction Costs roughly seven dollars and fifty cents
- per car to list it in said auction in the newspaper An auctioneer fee to sell that junk vehicle if it
- sells at all or not is $75 per car on average and
- Junk certificate if the car is left behind and you use indiana lean to file a junk certificate Which
- is how we have to legally get permission from the state? to dispose of a vehicle after it's been abandoned
- and not sold at the auction that is again another $60 fee occurred by The tow company themselves just
- to get rid of a car that's going to bring us back roughly 180 to 260 dollars from the junkyard so we
- end up with a lot of
- Lot of costs roughly about $600 invested in every single abandoned car So I hope that helps you put
- in perspective because you are right. You don't have to do any of these things Until it's pretty much
- 72 hours. You have to do it within 72 hours So you are right it doesn't have to be done on day one But
- the amount of cars that get picked up on day one that pay that fee is how we can afford To do it on
- day three for the cars that are not picked up and I hope that helps and
- Thank you. Looks like we have another council another comment in here is anybody raised a hand on zoom
- Okay, go ahead and sign in Signed in once they your name for the record and then you're very sure what
- side service and towing just about the 72 hour I don't think you guys understand the clarification on
- that the 72 hour notice means that the owner lean holder or occupant of the vehicle has to have notice
- in their hand within 72 hours not filed within 72 hours and
- So generally the same day filing when we get the car in is when we send it out Because you have to send
- certified letters and notifications to the property the owner of the vehicle the 72-hour notice Which
- is required by the state of Indiana has to be in their hand within 72 hours Not just us filing the paper
- Okay, so those fees generally are accrued the very same day the vehicle comes in because a lot of these
- vehicles are abandoned or they get towed away from an accident they may be
- Who knows in the hospital they may have got arrested they may have this the actual owner of the car
- may not know That that car has been impounded. It may be the lien holder. It may be the parent. It may
- be whoever and If we don't file that letter within 72 hour within the reason and they receive it We
- cannot charge more than 72 hours worth of it So if it's there for 30 days before the lien holder finally
- comes to get it if they didn't get my letter I get to charge three days. I don't get to charge 33 days. I
- See what I'm saying? They have we have to give legal notification and it has to be in their hand within
- 72 hours Just to clarify some of that. Thank you Thank you another person in council chambers Go ahead
- and state your name for the record and then you'll have up to three minutes. Hey, I'm Cameron Myzel
- again with Blaine's record service. I wanted to clarify just a couple things Councilmember Silsberg
- you had an issue with predatory towing. I think everything we're talking about in title 15 is
- directed You know, there's a different standard The police are allowing us to do it because we've met
- certain requirements You and that the fee that we were asking for it says just to help cover our cost
- It is also in line with what the county allows us to charge as well as IUPD I know you need to seek
- further clarification, but just another person to tell you that it is as well $25 for those You know,
- I appreciate the opportunity to toe for the city of Bloomington and
- And it's been really insightful this year being able to learn kind of the different things with the
- city, because we hadn't done it forever. So we're back on there, and it's great to be able to do it.
- And I just wanted to just... We try to do everything legitimately. And I hate to get bulked in with
- people who don't. And I get really, I don't know, just passionate about it, because...
- We do try to do everything by the law by the book. We're transparent about our pricing We try to itemize
- everything out with us. I understand your concerns because I've seen both sides And I and I completely
- understand the apprehension before I was in towing I thought you know tow companies were a bunch of
- You know sleazeballs. I didn't know any better But after the last few weeks, you know, our our services
- have been so necessary the amount of hours that me and my guys have put in
- It's the things that we don't think about you know, and I understand this is the dirty side of it You
- know, it's the it's the money no one wants to pay and I get that completely and I understand that We're
- just asking to be able to charge what we're worth on the things that the police are asking us to do
- Thank you Thank you. Is there other public comments on Ordinance 2025 19 as amended Any hands ended
- up raised on zoom
- That brings us back to councilmember comment then on the ordinance as amended So any councilmember comment
- councilmember Piedmont Smith Yes, I I do think that You know, we need to allow towing companies to charge
- what it costs them to do the work Overall I believe
- This has been a very frustrating thing for me to review as a council member. This ordinance as well
- as the next one are on our agenda because I feel like we received incomplete information from city staff
- in order to really put this in context and understand all the details. I'm still confused about the
- 72 hour thing that the state mandates. I just feel like
- We were given a very short memo to go with the changes. Then we were given another very short memo that
- went with in the packet for this week. And there were several questions that I had raised even before
- the first reading or the first, I'm sorry, before the second reading that were not clarified in a timely manner.
- And so I find that this whole process has provided the council with insufficient context and information
- to understand the changes and to approve the changes. Now that we have drawn it out to a third reading
- and there have been a lot of emails back and forth and our staff and legal staff and other people have
- chimed in, I do feel better about it.
- I do understand it well enough that I feel like I can vote on it but I would ask the legal department
- and the related folks in economic development who Speak with our private companies that have licenses
- with the city to please be more careful and inclusive in the future I don't understand why for example
- the amendment by councilmember rough
- was apparently something that towing companies wanted to see and Apparently had stated earlier, but
- somehow it didn't get to staff. I don't know what failure of communication there was there and whether
- it was anybody's fault, but I I just encourage staff to remember that we are all generalists up here.
- We do not know
- You know, we don't have parts of Indiana State code memorized. We do not know how towing companies work
- usually We need a lot of contacts in order to understand and make good decisions So I just encourage
- them to to provide more of that in the future But that said I thank everybody for coming out and speaking.
- I have learned a lot and I will be supporting the ordinance tonight. Thank you Other councilmember comment
- councilmember Flaherty
- Just very briefly earlier this evening when a report was being given about the process committee an
- item that was discussed is the possibility of requiring a council member sponsor for all items of legislation
- in the future some other cities do that it's something I'm interested in exploring and one of the potential
- and Positives, you know that could come from that is getting somebody's eyes from the council perspective
- on legislation before it actually comes here and
- we could hopefully address a bunch of these issues. You could have questions about, you know, was X
- considered, how was this involved? You know, it's not gonna solve everything, but I think this isn't
- the only instance in which we've seen, I guess, legislation coming from the administration, no disrespect
- intended, but you know, we've really had to tediously work through things at the council level, which
- I think is not a good use of everyone's time. And so, that's just a change. I wanna put a plug for it,
- because I think this is an example of one of those times this year when we could have benefited from it.
- Councilmember comment Councilmember Rallo. Yeah, just to say I appreciate the public coming in and the
- businesses and their Informative comments been very helpful Other councilmember comment I'll go ahead
- and take a comment then I'm Honestly a little conflicted right now and it seems crazy to be conflicted
- over a $25 fee but I really think that it's a
- Like it's this philosophical issue for me that if that kind of like administrative fee would need to
- be charged then I think that it should be you know, and honestly one of the public commenters said it
- that well, they're gonna charge everybody a small fee instead of just charging a fee for the people
- that they actually have to look stuff up for and I think that like I really struggle with that as
- concept in this kind of situation and I Really struggle with that as a concept in this kind of situation
- because somebody could get towed and then literally come back to their car an hour later Call the tow
- company, you know, it's required that the vehicle be available within 60 minutes of tow We've already
- said hey, they can charge a $75 out of
- Hours fee, you know token car gets towed at 11 p.m. They come back for it at 1145 they go meet the person
- at at midnight at the soonest possible time that they could get it back and then
- You can get slammed with the tow charge the special fee charge, which we didn't actually ask a question
- about this But it's like how do we know if they had to do something special with the you know with how
- to tow it and then they can get charged with the out of business hours charge and then they can get
- charged with this administrative charge even though they didn't really have to do anything for it and
- I think that that's extremely problematic that we're
- Dumping those charges on our residents and yeah, I acknowledge that this is for like the police initiated
- toes So maybe it's a little bit different But I'm not sure that it actually is and one of the goals,
- you know is to try to keep these two codes 15 and for an alignment and I think this is a place that
- I really have a problem with putting this language into the next one because of the predatory towing
- issue which I don't think happens as much with the police contracts towing because the police have contracts and
- You know something about this fee could be written into that contract you that like well, you know and
- it also sounds like some of the police initiated contacts Contracts have to do with you know, this this
- back and forth and person stuff with the clerk's office which you know takes some labor time, but some
- of them don't and They don't require that kind of thing. They don't require anything and then we put
- it in there anyway, so I'm extremely conflicted right now and
- Even though it seems crazy to be conflicted over a $25 fee because I think that it It could really Add
- up will say that it could really add up So if there are any other councilmember comments Count number,
- sorry I'll just say and I don't know Maybe I'm just I don't know sleep deprived or something but the
- the part the part that
- that I'm a little lost on in this is the functioning of this ordinance to begin with, is that we're
- not setting fees, we're capping them, and I think that in the cases where no fee is mentioned,
- like we're not, that any fee could be placed on things if we're not capping them. So I just, I'm maybe
- a little lost, I don't know, but I think that what we're trying to do here is actually cap
- I mean, maybe it's not the perfect tool but I mean I from the perspective of what's presented to us
- the goal is to Is to cap what can be charged and so I think that that's fairly clear So I'll be voting
- yes for us. But again, please correct me if I'm wrong because I seem to be lost Thank you Other councilmember comment
- I'll respond to that from my perspective. Yeah, it is capping it, but it's also suggesting it. So it
- becomes this like, oh, here's another fee that it's almost like you don't think about the elephant in
- the room until you
- Until like it's in front of you and so like that's that's kind of why I it's like and and in when I
- was looking at state code and that's the other thing actually why I'm kind of concerned about that fee
- is that in state code and I was trying to look it up during the proceedings and I couldn't I Couldn't
- do both things at the same time and effectively look up because state code is can be a challenge but
- my memory is that in state code if they charge fees, they're supposed to itemize their fees and So that's
- where it's kind of like well
- I feel like if we're gonna kind of enter this into our toe ordinance in terms of being able to recoup
- some of those fees, then it should be done differently. That it should be done with more deliberation,
- that it should be done with more attention and understanding of what state code says about what fees
- they're supposed to charge and then how you're supposed to deal with it in state code. Because this
- is one of those, it's like our code and state code, they have to follow
- and and you know, so I just I really I I'm really concerned about that piece of it as well in terms
- of that so and I'm not sure that'll make a difference tonight because the whole thing is it's Probably
- gonna pass at this point Would be my guess but I guess I'm I'm concerned about that and I you know if
- it does pass like I guess I'm just gonna be interested in talking with staff and legal about that more
- in terms of state code and
- Related stuff because I think that this is like a clumsy and far too basic way to introduce something
- Like this that may have merit especially for some of those cars that are there for a long time But might
- also end up being problematic in ways that you know, our legal department didn't have time to really
- look at Other council comment All right. Will the clerk please call the roll on ordinance 2025 19 as
- amended and
- Councilmember Rallo. Yes Piedmont Smith. Yes Stossburg. No Daily. Yes Zulick. Yes Rosenberger. Yes.
- I'm sorry. Yes Sorry clarity, yes and rough yes Thank you. That passes eight one on to the next one
- I move that appropriation. No Sorry Sorry Forgive me. I move that ordinance 2025 dash 20 be read By
- the clerk by title and synopsis only Second, thank you. It's been moved to introduce ordinance 2025
- 20 all those in favor, please say aye I Opposed. Thank you. Will the clerk please read?
- Ordinance 2025-20 to amend Chapter 4.32 of the Bloomington Municipal Code entitled Non-Consensual Towing
- Business regarding updating towing license requirements and permissible towing and storage fees for
- non-consensual towing services under Chapter 4.32. The synopsis is as follows.
- Ordinance 2025-20 updates the maximum fees authorized towing services may charge when performing
- non-consensual towing and imposes additional requirements for licensing and operation of towing companies
- within the city's jurisdiction. Thank you. I move that ordinance 2025-20 be adopted. Second. Thank you.
- Who is here from staff to present?
- Thank you so much. You could introduce yourself for the record and the floor is yours for sure Andrea
- de la Rosa assistant director for small business development Department of economic and sustainable
- development This these amendments, I'm sorry ordinance 2025 20 of proposes these amendments to introduce
- a background check requirement for licensing adding the name of the towing company unrequired signage
- and requiring the towing company to
- to display its license in a conspicuous fashion to be consistent with chapter 15.48 of title 15 of the
- Bloomington municipal code for removal and empowerment of vehicles and also for Bloomington to remain
- competitive with other localities the amendments also increase the fees of the fees a licensed towing
- company is allowed to charge for towing special treatment and storage and lastly the amendments require
- payment of all storage fees for release of the vehicles
- Enable storage fees to begin to accrue after 12 hours at the storage facility Thank you Thank you, and
- I also have amendment on this one, but maybe we can do questions about the base ordinance first
- Do councilmembers have questions about the ordinance as presented? Right seeing none I'll pass the gavel
- then to councilmember Piedmont Smith
- All right, do we have any amendments to ordinance 2025 20 Councilmember Stossberg. Thank you. I would
- like to Move amendment three to ordinance 2025 20 second All right, amendment three has been moved and
- seconded councilmember Stossberg, please Describe what this would do. Thank you. I'm Trying to actually
- find it in my there we go. Um
- So the first thing it does, well, yeah, so the first thing it does in section one is add a section to
- the business license application to require that tow companies tell the ESD department what their business
- hours are and then kind of stick to them. And that has to do with that fee at the end that they can
- charge $75 for
- Fee if a vehicle is picked up outside of business hours, so then this defines business hours per the
- license request it also says that Offers a minimum amount of business hours of 40 business hours per
- week and then having at least some hours on Saturday and Sunday But as otherwise not defined so, you
- know one hour on Saturday and one hour on Sunday at a time of their choosing would count toward that
- People could be open several hours on the weekends and closed during a weekday because that's not necessarily
- prohibited. And I tried to make that language flexible, but also that you need to have kind of a full
- slate of business hours. And my understanding is that most non-consensual toes happen on Friday and
- Saturday nights. And so I thought that that's why I put in the requirement of the weekend hours so there's
- at least some possibility for people to be able to pick up their vehicles
- without a fee on the weekend the other thing that that section one does is Kind of make a slight alteration
- to the background check that was originally presented As it was originally presented the background
- check had to be clear of formal violations from outside the jurisdiction of the city of Bloomington
- and I changed the language to be they need to be free of violations from both inside and outside and
- the jurisdiction of the city. I tried to also format this amendment. So if people don't like a certain
- section of it, then we can strike a whole section instead of just voting no on the whole thing. Section
- two is probably the one that makes the biggest difference. So our current ordinance simply says that
- the signage needs to be, let's see if I can find,
- actual phrasing, that it needs to be posted in plain view and visible to the public at each entrance
- and exit. And I think that that is language that's not very specific. So section two of my amendment
- adds more specific language to the sign requirements in terms of sign size and material and legibility
- and where they're posted. And so it changes the formatting of that just a wee bit too.
- Then the next section switches that as it did in the first one the the storage fees accruing after 12
- hours back to the 24 hours And then adds the additional line that business hours have to be defined
- in the license application described further up Are there any questions for me Any questions regarding
- the amendment that was just described
- member of Yeah, I wonder if the sponsor knows or has an idea who Would the with the tow operator the
- tow business be responsible for Confirming the size of for example the minimum size of the sign and
- if they did do a tow and turned out that that wasn't the minimum size was a med of the signage or and the
- victim or the person who was towed Came back after would they come after the property owner or the towing?
- company did I Think I would have to go back and read through title four carefully in that section So
- maybe staff knows this off the top of their head, but I'm pretty sure that the sign requirements end
- up being on the property owner and
- not on the tow company. And the tow company, there's another section that I think is not being amended,
- so maybe if you didn't go back and read the whole tow ordinance, you might not have seen it, that the
- tow company is required to do a written authorization, including certain amounts of information. So
- that's a piece that, so a tow company doing a non-consensual tow would be in violation if they did not
- Properly do that paperwork and tow authorization stuff and that's on them But I think the signage requirement
- is on the property owner. Is that correct? To my knowledge, I'm sorry detail Rosa assistant director
- for fault small business development To my knowledge that is correct however it is
- The tow company's responsibility to provide all of that information for the signage I believe that it
- is the property owners responsibility to have all of those out In full view this just kind of solidifies
- that with this language Does that answer your question is helpful, thank you I
- Any other questions from council members about the amendment? Okay, seeing none, we will go to the public.
- Is there any member of the public who would like to comment on amendment three to ordinance 2025-20?
- Just the amendment at this time. There'll be an opportunity for overall
- Yes State your name for the record and my name is Jake again with the tow time towing recovery here
- in Bloomington. We are one of the non-consensual Towing providers and I guess my biggest concern on
- the signage thing is not just for me But other companies that are in this particular part of the business
- We've put many strains on business owners
- that we service to be out in the middle of the night and any weather to be present when They should
- be home sleeping just to make sure their business lot is free and clear of cars when the business opens
- again I Want to be clear that the state law says under 9-22-1-16 That states that a vehicle may be removed
- without any warning or signage if deemed to be interfering with business safety and security
- There's usually typically an amendment to a contract where they give us all these written permissions
- beforehand. However, currently we are practicing a separate Consensual toe form for businesses. I had
- a few people that wanted me to bring that up My other concern is that it regulates signage in the state
- law 12 by 18 inches, which is currently what we have I also have reflective signage
- Quarter-inch thick aluminum already out there on a lot of properties that are low-lit if it's a gas
- station I don't waste my money. They look like a light bulb but What I would like to make concern of
- is that to do the signs the way that you guys want I got a quote today from Van Horn that was For 18
- by 24 inch signs the way that you want them with reflective Final it's $80 for just the sign and
- Per-sign and that doesn't include hardware that doesn't the bolts. It doesn't include posts That doesn't
- include construction glue to glue it to a building or anybody's labor to go change all these out And
- if you guys pass a sign ordinance change like that, I have somewhere between 2,000 and 3,000 signs that
- are already out on properties Maintained every year we make sure that they try to be visible and You
- know in good condition like like you guys are asking for But to go change these out for the size difference
- That's gonna cost me 160 to 175 thousand dollars to make that change instantly as soon as you pass it
- I'm one company out of four licensed companies in this town. I Personally think there's way better ways
- to make people Understand the rules regulations and consequences for parking where they are and I have
- very good ideas for that I just think it should fall down to educating the people coming into the town
- better so that they don't make mistakes and if they choose to still
- for the better way to put it, be stupid. You know, everybody does park pretty innocently for 5 to 10
- minutes. I mean, I've done it. I think my own kid's done it. Yeah, I think everybody's been guilty of
- that. My own tow company towed my own kid. I think it's hilarious, and she paid. So it does happen very
- innocently sometimes, and as...
- Stasberg said she's been caught in that situation. I know that a couple other council members have and
- I'll go ahead and comment later. That is your time. Thank you. I'm sorry. What was your full name again
- Jacob? Any other public comment on the amendment Do we have anybody online no, okay, we can come back
- to council members for any any
- Follow-up questions or comments regarding the amendment councilmember Rallo. Did we hear from staff?
- Do they have a comment on this amendment and Specifics miss de la Rosa. Do you want to comment on the
- amendment? I Thank you for clarifying those prices on the signage I
- I do still believe that there needs to be improvements to the signage, but I think that maybe Having
- a lengthy period of time to slowly be able to upgrade Might be a fair compromise Obviously trying to
- spend a hundred and twenty thousand dollars by July is pretty ridiculous I would think as a business owner
- am very much amenable to an extension of a Year two years something to that effect. I'm willing to go
- back to the drawing board on the signage Thank you councilmember Stossberg
- I want to clarify that so that is one of the reasons why when I wrote this amendment I tried to put
- all of the signage stuff into that section to you by itself So that then that could be struck if we
- needed to and then keep the rest However, I do kind of have a question about that that sign quote because
- the minimum size requirement that is in the amendment is 12 inches by 18 inches and I feel like what
- I heard the public comment or say was that he got a quote for 18 inches by 24 inches and
- I modified that to be 12 by 18. And so I modified that because the first draft of this, I needed to
- run it through the UDO, and I needed to run it through engineering, and I needed to run it through all
- of the people who actually put up signs. And so that was where the UDO, there's a whole signage section
- in the UDO. It actually looks like,
- complicated in some ways because there's like things that you can just kind of do no matter what and
- then there's things that you need maybe permission for and maybe you can do it and maybe you can't and
- it's a whole long thing. But anyway, 12 inch by 18 inch signs, you should be able to put those up on
- your property without having to get any special permission from the planning department in terms of
- your signage. And if I'm remembering correctly, you're not limited.
- By number so like in theory, I think you could have like a gazillion 12 by 18 signs and You're still
- within code which would could be you know, potentially like hilarious but So yeah, I changed that to
- the 18 by to the 12 by 18 for that reason But like I said, I mean I put all the signage stuff into one
- section so that we could strike that if we felt like that needed to
- More than two weeks and that was something we didn't get to discuss this particular ordinance a couple
- weeks ago But I was like, oh something needs to be done with signs But there's no way that I have time
- right now to do this and then with this postponement. I thought okay, maybe I can do something with
- signs and This is what I ended up with. So All right any other comments from council members about the
- amendment Councilmember Zulek
- Yes, I would be happy to support this with the strike through of section 2 but I can't support it as
- is Second I don't think that was a motion. I moved to strike section 2 of amendment second All right,
- so we have a motion on the table to
- the amendment by striking section 2 Any comments on that wait is that is a motion to amend an amendment
- a debatable I think so Okay councilmember Sossberg thinks it is so Any comments on that motion
- So I will just say I would prefer to just change the effective date rather than striking all of section
- two. But there's a motion on the table, so I guess we have to vote on that first. Do we have public
- comment on that? Pardon me? Public comment. Attorney Lanner, is public comment required on an amendment
- to an amendment
- It seems to me that it's the same topic, so I don't know that we need public comment again. I don't
- think that the VMC addresses that. Okay. I think, well, I'll go ahead. Is there any member of the public
- who would like to comment on the amendment to the amendment? So that would be striking section two,
- which is about signage.
- I do want to make sure you guys understand I am in full support of making things more transparent and
- obvious and Your name for the record again take a pattern one again with toe time. I do like the idea
- of having reflective signage I don't want anybody be missing these signs So really my only concern was
- the size thing And if we are going to add the reflective being required, I still have quite a few signs
- that aren't like probably 15% of my signs aren't reflective
- noticed she I Don't remember a name behind me said that they were open to like a time frame I think
- two years is more than fair and I would say the average life expectancy of the vinyl on these signs
- When they're reflective is actually about two years anyways, so they should be maintaining those signs
- and replacing them as they dry crack and Whatever, so I think that's more than fair time frame. I hope
- that helps Thank you any other comments on the amendment to the amendment
- Hands on zoom. No, okay. All right back to council any final comments about the amendment to strike
- section 2 of amendment 3 Councilmember Stossberg Yes, I think this is a question for council staff Given
- the comment by both of those folks
- I mean, I would think that there would be a high chance that we would come back with signage requirements
- if this is struck. Is it easy for staff to potentially amend the amendment by changing the date under
- section two?
- Relatively easy amendment to an amendment to do on the fly or should we just strike it and then like
- deal with bringing it back sometime next year Are you suggesting that the date of July? 2026 would be
- Changed July 2027 like I mean, I don't know. So maybe it would be way just like quicker and easier just
- strike it and then bring it back but I The motion on the table is
- to amend the amendment by striking. And so I'm just wondering about the advisability of striking versus
- amending the amendment differently. We could amend it by revising the date as well. All right, is there
- a date that Miss Della Rose?
- Mr. La Rosa if you could please come to the podium Detail Rossa City of Bloomington, I believe that
- 2028 I'm sorry. I'm doing the math in my head July 20 or July 1st 2029 I think would probably be the best
- I'm sorry dicey 2029 2028 would be the best extension of that that gives two years for sign replacement
- of just the regular sign replacement that mr. Padawan had Suggested and then whatever else is outstanding
- Okay Okay council members, all right
- So far as we're discussing time periods, I don't know who best to ask this to so I'll ask it to you
- is What's like the natural? Lifespan of a sign because there's a natural time like you don't leave them
- up forever right at some point you update them, right? That's actually funny because I do know a little
- bit a little bit about Yeah, it is around two to three years. It also depends on the weather conditions
- and we have a pretty
- rough environment, even with weather resistant signs, it is around two years. And then because I'm not
- allowed to ask the public a question at this time, can I ask you to get the general sense from them
- if that's roughly true? Because I think there's something, I think if you're thinking about timeline
- and we are saying, hey, we want to update this, it makes sense that you sort of put it on a scale while
- they update them, update them to the new thing. That makes sense. I think that's reasonable. Yes.
- I can't ask you questions, but. Generally, yes. Even the weather resistance signs do need to be replaced,
- and their lifespan in a harsh climate like we do have seasonal climate is around a year and a half to
- two years. So if we set it at that, if we set it at- Around two years should be ample time. And now
- a quick process question. We're considering now the striking of, but then we're having a conversation
- about an alternate approach, which is extending the time period, correct?
- Yes. But there's no motion on the table at the moment. There's no contrary motion. So we still need
- to vote for this motion regardless. And then, OK, so I would just say, I think I would be amenable if
- the ultimate goal is to improve signage for residents as a deterrent around predatory towing, et cetera.
- I think I would be amenable to the approach of extending the timeline so that we actually are, I mean,
- these will be updated anyways, and so we want them to be updated with an improved outlook. I think that
- sort of makes a lot of sense. So I would, in that case, hope that we could maybe withdraw the current
- motion, and I would move that we do the other thing, but I won't move until we make a decision about
- this first one.
- Thank you any other comments before we vote on the motion to amend by striking section two Councilmember
- Stossberg If we vote on it, I'll go ahead and vote no on it so that then we can hope to amend it instead
- So then we don't have to deal with a whole nother ordinance next year changing that Attorney Lainer,
- did you have something to add? We can
- insert the new dates and share the a proposed amendment on on the screen for tonight's meeting. If you'd
- like to vote on that tonight. Thank you. If this motion fails then we might come to that. Thank you.
- Right. What is it not possible to just on the current amendment just
- Right. We need a new amendment to amend the amendment. Like we can't just amend the amendment.
- We need a new, okay. Cool. Yes. Cool. Yes. And you know, there's a statement in the Bloomington municipal
- code that any amendment has to be in writing. Um, so. All right. I think we're ready, um, for the clerk
- to please call the roll on the amendment to amendments. I'm happy to withdraw the amendment.
- The amendment was made that motion was made by councilmember Daley It's up to you I Withdraw my amendment
- to the amendment to strike the amendment. I move that amendment. What would number will it be? Do we
- have to do we need a number? I move that we amend amendment. Whatever. What number is it three? I move
- that we amend amendment three by adding a period of two years and
- Is that right or to July 2028 was that the exploit? Yeah, so I move that we amend amendment three to
- reflect a implementation date of July 1st, 2028 All right, it's been moved and seconded to amend amendment
- three by extending the deadline for the signage adjustment to July 1st, 2028 Any comments I mean questions
- or questions
- Councilmember Stasburg for clarity. Do we need to cite section 2 as part of that motion or should I
- just say it now that that date is in section 2? Yeah, I think you can clarify that and we'll show this
- on on the screen in just a moment. Okay, fantastic All right, should we wait until the motion is on
- the screen Yes, we do need Amendments in writing
- Councilmember Stosper. Oh This is the time that I can comment or just ask a question I'd lost where
- we are. We are at comments. I mean not questions. I'm sorry questions I Would like to give staff the
- opportunity to display this so everybody knows what we're talking about Since we're not just striking
- something we're editing something
- All right, if you could make that a little bit larger. Thank you. Oh, that's super large. All right,
- so this is in section two. So if you could scroll down a little bit. So what we're doing here is in
- part B, we're changing the effective date. Oh, part A and part B.
- to be the part A would be before July 1st, 2028, and part B would be on or after July 1st, 2028.
- All right. If there are no other council questions, we can go to the public. Is there any public comment
- on this amendment to the amendment? Which just extends the time to comply with the new sign requirements.
- Don't see any.
- Anybody raising a hand online? Okay, we'll come back to council. Any comments before we vote? Council
- member Stossberg. I just want to say that my intention with the section was to better and more clearly
- define, honestly for the tow companies, but also for enforcement of this, what posted in plain view
- and visible to the public means.
- So that then it's easier for the tow companies to comply and also easier for residents and city staff
- to determine whether there is compliance. So as the public commenter mentioned I mean it's totally possible
- that you have a whole lot of signs that already fall under this category that are big enough that have
- big enough font that like have all the stuff in them because I didn't actually change the contents.
- requirements Except I think that staff added hours of enforcement there, but I'll bet that those are
- often up as well so Just to kind of clarify that concept that there are probably a lot of signs out
- here out there that do comply with this but once again like it's the predatory towing thing that that
- is really troubling to me generally and so I think the clearer we can make things the better for everybody and
- Okay, any other comments on this amendment? Clerk Bolden, will you please call the roll on amendment
- one to amendment three to ordinance 2025-20? Sure, Councilmember Piedmont-Smith. Yes. Wait, sorry. Stossberg?
- Yes, Zulek. Yes, Rosenpacher. Yes. Sorry. Yes clarity. Yes rough. Yes Rallo. Yes. Thank you All right.
- So amendment 3 has now been amended with a vote of 9-0 to change the the date to July 1st, 2028 so now
- we're back to Amendment 3 as it has now been amended
- Are there any final comments from council before we vote on this? All right, seeing none clerk Bolden,
- will you please call the roll on amendment three as amended? Happily councilmember Stasberg. Yes Daley.
- Yes, Zulek. Yes Rosenberger. Yes Sorry. Yes Flaherty. Yes rough. Yes Rallo. Yes and Piedmont Smith
- Yes. All right. Amendment three has been adopted and I'll turn the gavel back over to President Stossburg.
- Great. Thank you. So now I'd like to. All right. Councilmember Ruff would like to move Amendment four.
- Is there a second for that. Councilmember Ruff. So I mean all these quick quick. Amendment four does
- the same thing that
- Amendment 5 for 2025-19 did it does this does the same thing for 2025-20 which deals with non-consensual
- toes, so it allows that the $25 administrative additional administrative fee My understanding is that
- for the exact same reasons the whole purpose of revisiting or the main purpose of revisiting
- the overall ordinance was to bring the fees into line with what real costs were to reflect real costs
- and the changes that have taken place since the last adjustments were made and that Particularly when
- it comes to non-consensual toes In speaking with some of the operators there they
- Since this process was begun and discussions first happened between the administration and staff and
- Businesses about updating and changing the structure and fees that there have been some state the the
- environment the regulatory environment in the auditing environment of the state has significant has
- significantly increased administrative burden on
- on the towing businesses. And so this adjustment is again something that would have been argued for
- a lot more assertively I think by the towing companies a handful of months ago, six months ago compared
- to now. They would argue a lot more strongly for it now.
- in large part due to an increased administrative burden of the current environment of monitoring and
- auditing of the state of all their work that they do do so again in this case, this is not an area where
- I I have a tremendous amount of knowledge, so I will assume that we'll hear from the operators businesses
- who will explain more about
- what these changes have been and why this Administrative fee is important very important to
- their profitability and success of their business model Excuse me, are there questions on was that amendment
- for Any questions on amendment for it comes member Piedmont Smith
- Councilmember rough on your amendment to ordinance 20 25 dice 19 that was parallel to this one you argued
- that the $25 administrative fee was reasonable because Of the requirements the city puts on towing companies
- to look up and see if The the vehicle owner has any outstanding parking fees or any other fees so that
- wouldn't be the case in
- Ordinance 2025 20 because these are not police initiated toes so I'm a little confused that you now
- have a new argument for the $25 fee, which is the the state Regulatory environment. Can you expound
- on that? Yeah, so it's it's not a Different arguments the same argument. Basically. It's that administrative
- costs to the businesses aren't captured and reflected
- under What's proposed in the ordinance now and that this $25 administrative fee? Will help
- offset particularly particularly increases in the demands that have developed But I think particularly
- in the recent past as has been explained to me
- state record-keeping requirements from pounded vehicles with record logs authorization forms pictures
- keeping documents for years The software that's required for some of the license plating and in VIN,
- you know recording events and actually Doing what is it takes to get those numbers? and again, I think
- I am hoping we'll hear from
- more from the the businesses, but Basically, I've heard their arguments in the past handful of days
- and Considered them to be valid Justification for putting the $25 administrative fee on in this section
- also Okay, so those state administrative burdens were also there for
- Title 15. I don't think it's the same. I think there's a different for a non-conceptual private towing
- I think there's some differences and we'll maybe hear about that if someone wants to from one of the
- businesses wants to talk about that if they're not the same record-keeping requirements and and validations
- required Okay, but they have increased That's my understanding. Okay. All right. Thank you other questions
- Okay, I have one, and I think that it's for the attorneys, and I don't know which attorney should answer,
- because I know there were two different attorneys on these two different ordinances, and I don't know
- if both of them are in the room or not, or maybe one is online, I'm not sure. So I referenced earlier
- when we were talking about the first amendment from Councilmember Ruff, that there was somewhere in
- state code that I had read that talks about itemizing fees, and I've actually managed to find that now.
- that Indiana Code 24-14-5-1 requires an itemized invoice of actual towing charges assessed by the towing
- company that can be made available to the owner of the motor vehicle. And one of the things that it
- titles there is other fees, including documentation fees and motor vehicle search fees, each fee must
- include a full description of the services that were provided. So we're calling this
- an administrative fee, but is an administrative fee different from a documentation fee? So in terms
- of some of those things from public comment and what I heard last week from, or two weeks ago when I
- stayed after to talk to somebody, is yeah, some of these fees have increased to do title searches and
- things like that, and there's requirements on notification related to title searches and all of that
- category of thing, and those fees have increased, but it sounds to me as though if our code is silent on them,
- And so this administrative fee might not even include that fee. Like if that could categorize
- as a documentation fee, which is maybe different from the administrative fee, then the tow companies
- could charge that exact documentation fee already
- Whatever the state, you know, whatever the actual fee is whatever it actually costs them to do those
- searches on those vehicles and that putting in this cap on this administrative fee does absolutely nothing
- to prevent them from also charging that documentation fee on top of it and any other motor vehicle search
- fees because that is
- What Indiana code says so this is where I'll once again raise the issue that this is a last-minute amendment
- that has not gone through legal that has not been fully vetted with the way that state code is laid
- out and I think that it is Incredibly rushed. So I think this has to be a question. So will the attorneys
- please weigh in on that part of state code and the fees and the invoicing and how this administration
- administrative fee would be
- cataloged and characterized and whether you know this actually Encompasses the tow companies then not
- being able to charge other fees Yes, good evening Alexandria Pratt with city legal so the way
- I'm understanding the the argument here I think is
- connected with fees and records under 24-14-8 of state code. There is a requirement there under 24-14-8-2
- to maintain the invoice described in this section for a period of not less than two years from the date
- of issuance.
- That section also authorizes during this two year period, a law enforcement agency or the attorney general
- to request those records. So my understanding is that the claim is that this fee would cover this storage
- and search under this section. But again, this was not brought to our attention until today.
- so I I Don't have any further comment to offer So your interpretation would be this administrative fee
- would cover the record-keeping requirements but the argument that I've heard from Councilmember rough
- just barely actually was that it covers the actual like fees for things being charged and what was mentioned
- earlier in public comment
- fees being charged for looking up title searches and things like that to verify ownership of the car
- and potentially having to mail documents to the owner if the owner doesn't show up on their own within
- a certain number of hours.
- I don't think that would apply to this this situation because under the invoice requirement that needs
- to be listed as a charge the actual charge that was incurred by the town company Okay, so the defense
- of this $25 is like councilmember rough What do you have to say then in terms of the defense of this?
- $25 fee in terms of what you already said I didn't mean to imply or suggest that I thought that the
- Administrative activities and duties and responsibilities were the same under The title 15 type of toes
- compared to the non-consensual private toes my understanding is that there's a very different set of
- requirements and duties and that state auditing activities and and other types of monitoring and enforcement
- have placed a greater
- burden that has manifested in the last half a year that wasn't there before. And that the input from
- the businesses about the ceiling or the cost and fees and associated costs would be argued differently
- now or asserted differently from the businesses than it might have been a handful of months ago.
- Due to the administrative burden that has appeared. Increase, the increase in that. Right. I'm not sure
- how the administrative burden has increased because the section I just quoted that requires the record
- keeping provision has been enforced since 2019. So yes, I understand and appreciate that.
- and but I'm Just speaking for I think business owners who may I hope will speak soon that it's there's
- not been a change in the actual requirements of rules, but there's been a change in the environment
- under which to the extent to which details and Are expected and required and audited Now compared to before so
- That's the change in the environment. That's what I tried to say not not changing necessarily in rules
- and regulations, but change in the environment And I understand but I have no knowledge of that. So
- and I don't really either That's why I'm hoping we'll hear from some of the operators. Yeah. Thank you.
- Yeah. Thanks. Thank you I think that that was we're still in councilmember question area. So are there
- other councilmember questions about amendment for
- All right, seeing none, let's go ahead and go to public comments about Amendment 4 to Ordinance 2025-20.
- So if you're a member of the public who would like to comment, you can make your way to the podium or
- raise your hand on Zoom using the Reactions tab, sign in, state your full name for the record, and then
- you'll have up to three minutes. Hi there, my name is Jacob Padawan, again with Toe Time Towing and Recovery.
- As far as administrative fee, I guess justifications between the differences of what you guys are both
- thinking about As far as itemized charges for like you said certified letters Notifications going out
- You have to do BMV inquiries that cost money to you, but I do agree with you that Every little charge
- should be itemized every step of the way the fur from the first BMV search to
- Finding out who the lean holders are and let's say there's a lean holder and a wife and a You know guy
- that owns the vehicle. That's three letters. You have to send out So in theory you should be charging
- somebody that needs three letters for three letters and charging somebody that only needs one letter
- one letter You know what I mean? Like I definitely agree with that as far as the administrative $25
- fee. I don't necessarily think that covers any of those other fees I think the administrative idea is more
- Related to the administrative requirements to follow these ordinances and state laws. We do get Reached
- out to by attorney generals. Sometimes we do get reached out by the city. I know the city required all
- four towing companies on the Non-consensual towing thing to provide all of our paperwork for the last
- two years that took a whole new employee and my current office staff two and a half weeks to print out all
- All of those forms and it was like three huge paper boxes used for that paperwork I mean that does a
- lot of time and stuff invested too and there's a lot of those things that you don't see you know what
- I mean as far as administrative Goes and if you guys got any questions, maybe I'll come up and try to
- answer those two. Thank you Thank you, it's our other public comment on amendment for Go ahead and sign
- in state your name for the record job up to three months. Yep
- Robert Chandler with Chandler automotive and towing to to clarify what he said on the non-consensual
- towing the records that they set when This ordinance was set in place in 2019 Those records are additional
- to what state records are so they're civic. So when we are audited like we just were there's a specific
- log written off pictures on file every all those items and
- are separate from what we would have in our QuickBooks or what we'd have in our other tow categories.
- On top of that, we still have to do the state fees. Those are still associated with it. But on these,
- the biggest issue is the ordinance has brought separate guidelines, separate paperwork, separate logs
- that we have to keep separate. And especially since this recent audit that we had, we are doing those
- different now for that reason.
- Thank you. Thank you. Is there other public comment on this amendment? Is there any hand raised on zoom?
- All right, see no nobody move in chambers. We're back to council members. Is there comments on amendment
- for council member Piedmont Smith? Well, I'm just going to say the same thing I said for
- for of the previous ordinance and that I Don't feel comfortable Making this decision about administrative
- fees on the on the fly and just based on What the the businesses have told one councilmember so I'm
- going to be voting no on this amendment. Thank you Thank you, are there other councilmember comments I
- I'm also gonna make a comment. I'm also gonna vote no on this. I think that it's preemptive to put this
- administrative fee on here without vetting it better and I also Feel to some degree as we've gone through
- this that it was some measure of Insider sort of communication that this got up here at all as opposed
- to kind of going through
- Larger vetting process with legal and ESD. So I'll also be voting no on this Any last comments Okay,
- will the clerk please call the roll on amendment for to ordinance 2025 20 Yes Yes Yes Yes clarity
- No rough. Yes, Rallo. Yes Piedmont Smith. No Stasberg no So that passes six to three So now we are back
- to ordinance 2025 20 as amended There were no original councilmember comments
- About it or a council member questions about the ordinance as a whole in terms of the original presentation
- of it Has anybody come up with any comments or a question since then? Questions we're on question because
- we have to do public comment you um, and I actually do have one if nobody else has one and I Am wondering
- in the I have to find it now. I'm sorry. Um, I
- towing fees section 432 130 where it Changes the fees for special treatment Who gets like how do you
- decide or get to decide whether a vehicle needs that special treatment or not? and who gets to decide
- that so and like especially in the non-consensual piece when the the
- Vehicle owner isn't actually there Like how does the vehicle owner even like know that that special
- treatment was used and how do they know if that special treatment was necessary? Can anybody answer
- that for me that's from staff Like I feel like this is one of these answers that like staff should have
- asked tow companies so that's why I'm hoping that staff knows the answer this and
- Alexandrina Pratt would see illegal. I think there'll be something the towing companies would be able
- to address better. I understand. It's technical So I'll just leave them to explain Okay, how that works?
- All right Other questions or Let's go ahead and go to public comment then so this would be general public
- comment on the whole ordinance 2025 20 as was amended
- I was gonna clarify on the hang on. Let's let's wait until our staff is ready for the timer,
- please Okay, so go ahead and state your name again for the record Robert Chandler channel I've been
- telling to clarify on like the special equipment Actually, it gets undercharged Believe it or not most
- the time when you tow a car with no keep in mind. There's no keys to these vehicles most the cars nowadays are
- Most of time they're pulled into a parking spot. So the front wheel drift front drive wheels Have to
- have what we call dollies or the car has to be spun around on gojacks to access the front a lot of times
- there could be a curb interference to where a third set of special equipment that we have to use to
- slide it from the curb has to be used and then most these cars are all will drive and
- Some of them have electronic emergency brakes, that's been a new thing. Nine times out of 10, I mean,
- it's almost 9.9 times out of 10 that the special equipment is to be used. It's very rare to regular
- base tow a car unless the keys are accessible. I mean, it's even that nowadays, it's changed dramatically.
- Thank you. Thank you. Are there other public comment? Has anybody raised hand on Zoom about this?
- Go ahead and continue hearing chambers. State your name for the record. You'll have up to three minutes.
- Jacob Patamon with Tow Time Towing again. I'm just going to second exactly what he has. My data shows
- the same thing. About nine cars out of 10 do have to have special equipment. And yes, we multiple times
- have to use two different forms of special equipment, whether that's dollies and go-jacks or sometimes
- it's skates. All different damage-free towing equipment that we have to use.
- Really needs to be kept in your guys consideration is this isn't where somebody's broke down at a Walmart
- and they're calling for the consensual to with keys. Like you said, this is somebody that's illegally
- parked in a vaults parking lot parking garage with a beam on one side and eight inches to the car on
- the other and a lot of times believe it or not alleyways Behind the bluebird. We have four lots behind
- the bluebird Very very tight. We can only fit out of two of those alleys
- I have to stop a whole nother driver from doing what they're doing to come help safely handle a car
- on Go Jackson dollies to an alley so the truck can get to it and pull it out the only alley it fits
- out with dollies. You know what I mean? So there's actually some cars that the cap actually hurts us
- dramatically because drivers have to split those fees, they're paid on commission, they're pretty much
- trying extra hard to do something that's not going to pay them and you gotta take the good with the
- bad, we do it anyway.
- I do want to say that there's also, I towed a Lamborghini Urus twice this year. That's a $450,000 car
- with a carbon fiber body kit that was on it. I think that, like I said, you don't get to pick and choose
- what you're towing. It could be a dilapidated boat that fell off a trailer and somebody left it in a
- parking lot. It could be a car where they robbed the wheels, tires, suspension, hood, motor, transmission,
- half the interior, and left the crustacean sitting in a parking lot at Bard Villa. You know, I have probably,
- Somewhere north of 130 examples of things that aren't even cars that we've had to remove from a property
- from spools of wiring to underground whatever that a bunch of crap is on a Spool that Duke Energy has
- and you know, they just leave stuff everywhere in this town there we they parked full bulldozers on
- people's properties and I've been asked to pull a bulldozer or a Camper semi trucks. I just got called
- to the mall to do a
- Semi and trailer completely separate from each other which I can't do but We have to tell a lot more
- than college kids is what I'm getting at and there's a lot There's a lot to it. So the special equipment
- fees are very important to have and maybe look into Allowing that charge possibly for both of them is
- one thing I was thinking about when it was $25 I don't know because I didn't read it, but I think it's
- getting bumped up to is it 50 and
- on the new ordinance? Yeah, so that's much more in line and fair, I think, too. So I hope that comment
- helps. Thank you. Thank you. Are there other members of the public who wish to comment on this? Has
- anybody raised a hand on Zoom? Okay, great. Seeing nobody, I think that we're back to council for either,
- actually there were no really questions before, so let's go ahead and go to council member comment on
- ordinance 2025-20 as amended. Council member, sorry.
- Just thank you all for being here for this long. Thank you for this long twice. And thank you for your
- contributions. I trust the fact and I should have probably asked just to confirm this.
- Asked separately, you know the these rate changes aren't arbitrary I'm very appreciative of the of the
- city's work and I'm gonna set establishing them Thank you all for your partnerships and and in this
- work and I know that you know Your margins aren't great and you're doing something that sort of helps
- the city keep going Thank you for the businesses that you run and thank you for just being here I'm
- sorry that we're keeping you so long, but I'll be voting. Yes on this Thank you other councilmember comment
- Yeah, I heard the marks my colleague there thanks for bearing with us through a somewhat tedious process
- what I heard mr. Chandler's remarks are a Strong case for back in angled parking to save everyone money
- in the event you get towed Thank you, we'll just we'll just slide in whatever we want right now and
- council come in are there other councilmember comments Councilmember rough Yeah, I just want to thank Mike
- my colleagues for you know understanding, you know, sometimes things Do come up late and are worked
- through as well as a council member who might be sponsoring something can and I want to thank staff
- You know for for also on short notice really helping work up what I thought was fair in terms of improving
- the legislation so and
- We thank the input of the the community of the community who deals most closely with with this activity.
- So thanks to everyone Thank you other councilmember comment That's my rosemary hi, I want to say also
- thanks for being here and then I just wanted to say in general Sometimes I don't talk that much because
- there's so much other talking that I opt out So I just want to put that out there. I am paying attention.
- Thank you. I
- Thank you other councilmember comment All right, I'm gonna be really short and say I My question about
- that special treatment wasn't because I was quibbling with the concept of Needing special treatment.
- I just wanted to understand exactly what that meant. So I appreciated understanding the Damage free
- aspect in terms of you know, how you have to get vehicles out and
- I also appreciate the city attorney's Contributions in terms of understanding that administrative fee
- and what is supposed to cover a little bit and so that Clarifies things for me Better for this ordinance.
- I had to think about it for a little while which is why I voted no earlier But I will go ahead and support
- this as even with that $25 administrative fee kind of I'm still not sure that I
- love it. And that's where it's just like I can see like, okay, maybe an administrative fee is reasonable
- based on the title of Indiana code that the attorney read in terms of that
- record storage, but that requirement has been there for a while, so shouldn't that be factored in somewhere
- else? And so that's the part that I'm like, I feel like that should be factored in somewhere else in
- terms of the cost of doing business. And also 25 seems sort of arbitrary to me still. So I'm still not
- a huge fan of that. But if anything, we can always amend this title again.
- It proves that that $25 is not a good number. So I'll be supporting this as it stands currently Any
- last councilmember comment Great, then will the clerk please call the roll on ordinance 2025 20 as amended?
- Councilmember Zoellick. Yes Rosenberger. Yes. I'm sorry. Yes clarity. Yes rough. Yes
- Rallo. Yes, you month Smith. Yes Stasberg. Yes daily. Yes Thank you. Thank you. So that passes nine
- zero Onto the next and I do want to note that this is the resolution that got added on the agenda yesterday
- I Move that resolution 2025 dash 21 be introduced and read by the clerk by title and synopsis only second
- Moved and seconded introduced resolution 2025 21 all those paper, please say aye. Aye opposed.
- Thank you. Will the clerk please read Resolution 2025 21 resolution acknowledging receipt of the collective
- bargaining agreement between the city of Bloomington and
- and American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees for calendar years 2026, 2027,
- and 2028, and pledging fiscal support. The synopsis is as follows. This resolution presents the collective
- bargaining agreement negotiated between the Executive Branch of the City of Bloomington and the local
- 2487 American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees.
- also known as AFL CIO asked me Council 962 to the common council of the city of Bloomington Monroe County
- Indiana for their review rather than approval and to inform them in detail of the fiscal implications
- of the CBA. By passage of this resolution the council acknowledges receipt of the CBA its opportunity
- to make inquiry and expresses its support to fund the same. Thank you. I move that resolution 2025 dash
- 21 be adopted second.
- Thank you. It looks like we have deputy Marinette waiting to present if you could state your name for
- the record and on the floor shores Gretchen app deputy mayor. I'm very happy to present to you our AFSCME
- contract negotiation I won't reiterate everything that's in the memo in the interest of time since we
- have folks who are still waiting but I will say that we had a very productive bargaining session all
- year and I'd like to thank our partners in AFSCME and all the department heads who
- Did a great job of gathering input from 200 AFSCME employees across three different divisions to inform
- our agreement Just to give everyone a sense of the timeline we began at the beginning of the year We
- conducted a salary study together some market information and compared to the current salary rates We
- began our negotiation meetings with AFSCME in July and held about 10 meetings with them to go over the
- contract line by line It's a very long contract
- It was approved by union members by a vote of 82 to 7 on December 2nd The cost of implementing this
- contract was fully covered in the budget that we've already presented and that you've already approved
- and passed for 2026 so no further appropriation will be required We will bring an amended salary ordinance
- in January that will include the new pay schedules for the different roles
- The significant points of this particular contract it includes a five flat five percent increase in
- That you had already proved across all positions for 2026 3% cost of living for 2027 and 2028 we did
- a significant amount of work on the pay grades and tenure steps for apps me they had many many pay grades
- 23 if you compare to the entire civil city has 14 and that covers in the civil city that covers roles
- from an entry-level position all the way up to the controller and
- people supervising millions of dollars and hundreds of people the apps me positions do not
- include supervisory or financial responsibilities and so we we wanted to Make sure that we weren't spreading
- too thin across too many grades. We also improved their tenure steps. That is the most significant impact of
- Most asked me members of this is that instead of it taking in the example I gave in a particular role
- It would have taken 25 years to get essentially a $4 an hour raise
- We have shortened that schedule so that they now reach the midpoint of their salary after five years
- and for most AFSCME employees that means they will not only receive the percentage increase we discussed
- but they will also By the end of the three-year contract have moved up one or two steps in tenure, which
- is a significant increase
- kind of hidden pay raise the only employees who don't benefit from that are the people who are already
- at the max of the tenure scale who've been working for the city for 35 years and that's only about six
- people we also increased on-call pay a few certifications some shift premiums and for convenience for
- administration and ease for employees change some funding that we would give employees to reimburse
- them for equipment costs to
- Siphoned we don't need to it's a lot of paperwork to administer. They know what equipment to buy We
- can just give them the money and they will more efficiently purchase their own gear for that I'm happy
- to answer any questions that you have about the process or about the changes that have been made Great.
- Thank you so much. Are there any questions from council members about this? I
- I have one question actually because the resolution one of the things that spells out is that the council
- is aware of the fiscal implications and so basically you say there aren't any fiscal implications next
- year because it's already like built in but I just want to want to clarify that step because the tenure
- steps like because like the 5% was built in but is the tenure step like that piece also like built in
- somewhere already? Well the tenure step it is it is
- We don't have to allocate any additional money for tenure changes that will happen in 2026 when we create
- our 2027 and 28 budgets and then we'll Have to allocate, you know Salaries accordingly wages accordingly
- to cover those but for 2026 budget year like we're all set. They're all set. Great. Thank you any other
- questions Great, let's go ahead to Public comment then if any member of the public would like to comment
- on Oh Council members, sorry
- Thank you. Thank you, Deputy Mayor Knapp. Just a question about whether or not there are within the
- contract, within the CBA rather, are there agreed upon staffing levels with different branches or with
- different entities within AFSCME? I don't believe so. I mean, the salary ordinance that we'll bring
- to you I think spells out
- Pretty sure correct me if I'm wrong on this someone who knows better How many roles are at each title
- is that correct? Yes, but then does the city commit? Good evening council Jessica McClellan city controller
- the AFSCME contract doesn't have a number of positions, but the salary ordinance does I
- And the salary ordinance will come to you in January and every position will be divided out into what
- department is in and how many positions the city's currently has in that Think how many employees the
- city has in that position, but we're not committing within the within the CBA We're not making a firm
- agreement for example that we will staff with some or say anything like that Just saying on a year-to-year
- basis that foot absolutely correct, and that's a good point. Thank you so much Thank you. Any other
- last questions?
- I want to jump preemptively to public comment again. All right, so now we can move to public comment
- I think on resolution 2025-21. If there are members of the public who would like to comment on this
- resolution, you can make your way to the podium if you're in chambers or raise your hand using the reactions
- tab on Zoom. I don't see anybody moving in chambers. Has anybody raised a hand? Okay, I think that brings
- us back to council then. Any council members have any final comments?
- Councilmember Piedmont Smith Just thank you to the negotiating team and asked me leadership and I'm
- glad we came to a good resolution Other councilmember comments I'll just quickly second that and also
- say that I really appreciate the tenure step apart and really appreciate that idea that you know, you
- don't have to work for 20 years in order to get a
- $4 that it takes a little less time. I think that that is a little bit more rewarding and Could then
- potentially retain talent better and I think that that's really important because it costs a whole lot
- to train people so Council member sorry, I just want to give kudos to the administration particularly
- dr paycheck and our Well
- departing controller. But to all of you, I think this is worth noting that this is the third contract
- negotiation, right? I mean, we did police, fire, and now the AFSCME in the space of essentially a year.
- at least the reports that we're getting are that, you know, they were very positive, that everybody's
- very happy. We had a unanimous support of the police union, et cetera. And I think that that's a really
- good indicator, right, of something that we've set out to do as a city, which would be, you know, what's
- the word that you use, top-tier
- Of choice employer you say it better, but you know an employer of choice And and I just really want
- to commend the the administration for handling it I think so smoothly also to counsel Margie Rice just
- thank you very much for for doing this so well And and appreciate this resolution. Thank you Thank you
- any other council member comment Fantastic will the clerk please call the roll on resolution 2025 21
- Councilmember Rosenberger. Yes. Sorry. Yes clarity. Yes Rough. Yes, Rollo. Yes, Piedmont Smith.
- Yes Stasberg. Yes, Daly. Yes, Zulek. Yes. Thank you Thank you that passes unanimously 9-0 on to the
- next I Move that ordinance 2025 dash 47 be introduced and read by the clerk by title and synopsis only
- All those in favor, please say aye aye opposed. Thank you. Will the clerk please read Ordinance Ordinance
- 2025-47 to amend title 8 of the Bloomington Municipal Code entitled historic preservation and protection
- to establish a historic district regarding the Ivan Adams House historic district Bloomington Historic
- Preservation Commission petitioner
- The synopsis is as follows. This ordinance amends chapter 8.20 of the Bloomington Municipal Code inside
- a list of designated historic and conservation districts in order to designate the Ivan Adams House,
- parcel number 013-065800-00, Lades Lot 28, located at 115 East 12th Street, City of Bloomington, Monroe
- County, Indiana, as a historic district.
- Built in the mid 1920s, the Ivan Adams House is a craftsman California bungalow that retains a high
- degree of architectural integrity. The house is associated with Ivan Adams, one of the most prominent
- local stone carvers whose work can be found in significant and recognizable sites around Bloomington
- and the United States. Thank you. I move that ordinance 2025-47 be adopted. Second. All right. Who is
- here to present ordinance 2025-47 for us?
- Come on up state your name for the record and then the floor is yours Thanks, Noah Sandweiss historic
- preservation program manager for the city of Bloomington Department of Housing and Neighborhood Development
- The property at 115 East 12th Street qualifies for local designation under the following highlighted
- criteria and
- found in ordinance 9520 of the municipal code for historic significance 1A, having significant character,
- interest, or value as part of the heritage, development, or cultural characteristics of the city, state,
- or nation, or is associated with a person who played a significant role in state, local, or national
- history. The petitioner in this case is the Bloomington Historic Preservation Commission, and the property
- in question is located at 115 East 12th Street,
- which will be referred to from here on out as the Ivan Adams House. 115 East 12th Street is a gable
- front, one story California bungalow that retains most of its original features, but has been resided
- with wide asbestos board. The house was first owned between 1927 and 1945 by Ivan Adams and his wife
- Gladys. Ivan ranked among the most prominent local stone carvers
- whose work includes the Bloomington Courthouse World War II Memorial, the IU Seal at Foster Quad Dorm,
- contributions to the columns and frieze of the Fine Arts Palace for Chicago's Century of Progress exhibition
- in 1933, the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, D.C., the 21-foot statue of
- Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital at Indian Hill in Camden, New Jersey, and various other statues, the Virgin
- Mary and Catholic Saints,
- for institutions around this country. A monumental statue of his marks the grave of Gladys and himself
- in Rose Hill Cemetery. Adams' Herald Times obituary in 1968 describes him as one of Monroe County's
- most famous stone carvers. And in 1977, local carver Ronald Wampler described him as, one of the greatest
- stone carvers in the area I've ever known. After Adams moved out, the house was rented for the next
- 30 years to a number of tenants.
- most of whom did not stay longer than several years. One of the most prominent occupants was Robert
- Quirk, a professor of Mexican history and an editor of the American Historical Review. He was a recipient
- of the Frederick Jackson Turner Award for debut books by historians and lived at the address from 1955
- through 1956. In 1977, this house was the first Bloomington residence of James and Susan Butler, founders
- of the Butler Winery.
- From 1987 through 1991, Thelma is the residence of opera student Judith Barnes and visiting lecturer
- in Spanish, Anthony Kerrigan. Kerrigan won the National Book Award in 1975 for his translation of Miguel
- de Unamuno's The Agony of Christianity and a senior fellowship in literature from the National Endowment
- for the Arts for a lifelong contribution to American letters in 1988.
- He was the first to translate the Spanish writings of Jorge Luis Borges into English and taught at both
- IU and Notre Dame while living at 115 East 12th Street. Judas Barnes is the founder of the Vertical
- Player Repertory Opera Company in New York. For a property to be eligible for listing under this criterion,
- several conditions must be met. Firstly, in most cases, the person associated with this property must
- have made their significant accomplishments
- at least 50 years ago. And secondly, the property must be associated with this period in their life
- or career. Anthony Kerrigan has been widely acknowledged for his contributions to Spanish literature.
- However, there are other properties associated with his career from more than 50 years ago. So it would
- be difficult to make the case for designating the house in which he lived from 1987 through 1991. Susan
- and James Butler established one of the early Southern Indiana wineries, as well as the Indiana Wine
- Grape Council.
- They left this house in 1982 when they established their own winery and their contribution to local
- history is more closely associated with the Butler Winery property. Stone carver Ivan Adams lived at
- this property for a good part of his productive career while he participated in carving of public and
- religious monuments, both locally and nationwide. He's locally recognized as one of the most prominent
- carvers in Southern Indiana limestone history.
- particularly as the number of sculpture carvers dwindled post-war. He moved in 1946 to 2921 South Rogers
- during the latter part of his career where he built a house and workshop, neither of which is still
- standing. The exterior of the building at 115 East 12th Street has been fairly unaltered from its original
- appearance and is an excellent example of a 1920s California bungalow. I'm just going through some examples
- of some of his work both
- Locally and nationwide Thank you Is that the conclusion of your presentation that is okay. Thank you.
- Mr. Sam Weiss I'm giving the gavel back to President Stossburg. Great. Thank you so much Are
- there councilmember comment or questions for mr. Sandweist? Councilmember Piedmont Smith I
- In my experience, I find this an unusual request in two ways. And I want to ask you if there have been
- other precedents that I'm just not thinking about. For one thing, there's only one criteria that's met.
- And for another, it's a single house that's neither notable nor outstanding. Do you know whether there's
- been precedent for one or both of those qualities in getting historic designation?
- So the contributing category, our rating for a historic property means that it's not identifiably eligible
- along architectural criteria for listing. You know, the category that's selected here in Bloomington
- Municipal Code 1A most closely corresponds with
- the National Register of Historic Places criterion B for association with significant individuals. There
- are lots of examples of sites that are associated with significant individuals that may not have a high
- degree of either architectural integrity, which this does, or outstanding architectural significance,
- but are nonetheless significant because of their association with individuals who have made
- a significant impact in state local or national history or are associated with events or broad patterns
- of history that may not be apparent from their immediate exterior appearance. But I mean, I know you
- haven't been with the city all that long, but do you know whether there have been other cases where
- we've approved a single building that is only contributing? Yes.
- Yes, there have. There have been. Can you think of any examples you could share with us? No. Well, what
- was that? Right, there's one nearby, 700 North Walnut. Shoot. Another one that comes to mind, actually,
- my parents' house, 1033 South Ballantine, was nominated for, in part, architectural significance. I
- believe the nomination also included reference to
- its significance for urban planning in post-war Bloomington suburbs. And that was just a contributing
- structure. Right, that was a contributing structure. There have been some other contributing structures
- that have been nominated and since reevaluated as notable. A couple examples that come to mind. There's
- a property, I believe, is it First National Bank? No, not First National Bank.
- The bank building on Kirkwood that was designated and I believe 2023 that had been listed as a contributing
- building initially when that was Passed as a local single building historic district I believe the ordinance
- amended it to be a notable property that one was listed for its architectural significance primarily actually
- Thank you. Are there other councilmember questions? I have one then So when we had the Historic Preservation
- Commission here and we learned about like the process and and that kind of thing How does that translate
- to one property where it's?
- So the way it's been explained to me, it's like there's a committee that decides on the rules, essentially.
- And then everybody has to follow them. But it's just like one person and one property and a single owner.
- It's not a public structure in any way. It's like, how does that translate in terms of who gets to make
- the rules and who ensures the rules are followed?
- You know, one of the things that I've heard as well, the person who might live in a historic district
- and not realize it, and then they make a renovation, and then a neighbor says, oh, hey, you needed to
- go. You know, it's kind of like reporting others. But in this case, like, who's going to enforce this?
- I mean, how does this work? So there are dozens of, I believe, dozens of individually listed
- Buildings as historic districts in Bloomington There really isn't a line drawn in city code as to what
- you call a district Whether it's you know a single building or multiple buildings When it comes
- to Notification of property owners, you know, there's several points at which that happens Of course,
- it happens during the nomination process at a couple of points when the property is up for a vote with
- Historic Preservation Commission to forward to City Council and then again ahead of the City Council
- vote to pass the ordinance also Annually notifications are sent out to property owners or owners of
- properties within hysteric districts in the city of Bloomington so that would also include owners of
- single property districts or owners of properties within single property districts I guess to answer
- the second part of your question
- when Alterations to single property districts are being reviewed I always defer to the Secretary of
- Interior standards for the treatment of historic properties And that's sort of the nationally recognized
- set of standards That's used For say for instance federally funded projects or projects on federal buildings For
- best practices in the treatment of historic properties so that has a recognized set of standards and
- you know, we have a commission as well that staffed with people who have a background and expertise
- in the areas of architecture and history and historic preservation, so You know whether it's a district
- that has its own set of guidelines written by residents or the city or whether it's an individually
- listed building
- There will be criteria laid out in the packet to sort of show the work For how a determination is made
- Okay, thank you other questions All right seeing none we'll go ahead and go to public comments on this
- if there's a member of the public who would like to speak to
- Lost my ordinance number again ordinance 2025 47. I see somebody making their way to the podium already
- Go ahead and sign in state your name for the record and you'll have up to three minutes If you are online,
- you can go ahead and raise your hand using the reactions tab or send a chat message to the host And
- let's go ahead and start here in chambers. Thank you. Hi, my name is John Butler I'm the owner of this
- property and
- I 100% support the designation of this property as a historic district Ivan Adams was an exceptional
- carver and Preserving his memory is important to the cultural heritage of this city And it's a modest
- home It's a thousand square feet. It's a very sort of unobtrusive structure and I think that's
- Partly why it's so important that we save it because a great person lived in this small house and that
- we shouldn't necessarily measure the greatness of our citizens necessarily just by the houses that they
- live in and so, you know this is
- One small building but it helps tell the story of Bloomington in Bloomington's history the stone industry
- Was one of the major industries in Bloomington and for over about a hundred years It was probably really
- the driving force of the local economy and in the stone industry a very small percentage of the people
- who work there were actually carvers there were cutters people who made dimensional stone and
- But there were very few carvers people who made statues and finery and Ivan Adams was one of the best
- to ever do that And so if we can hold this house up As an example of where you know a modest place that
- a great person can come from I think Bloomington will benefit so thank you for your time Thank you for
- your consideration and please vote. Yes, and let us continue this legacy of
- And educate future generations Thank you, are there other other public commenters go ahead and come
- on up Sign in and state your name for the record and then you'll have up to three minutes Hi, my name
- is Sam de Saller and I'm currently serving on the Bloomington Historic Preservation Commission
- Here to voice my support of the Ivan Adams house become a new historic district is proposed by HPC and
- Also supported by the new owners. Mr. Butler I don't have much additional to say as Noah's presentation
- and mr. Butler statement has covered most salient points, but Not as a commissioner, but as an architect
- in a long time resident of Bloomington I note that the process of this proposed district is
- Imparted direct response to our by neighborhood raised residents to counteract development pressure
- a number of houses in the neighborhood This neighborhood alone including 7-eleven East Cottage Grove
- Shown earlier this evening in the presentation by director Hiddle of the Bloomington Planning
- and Transportation Department Over the last several months been either slated for demolition or already
- demolished. We see a lot of these in front of the Commission
- As Director Hittle already noted, what's replacing 7-Eleven Eaves Cottage Grove, though more dense and
- more lucrative for developers, is incompatible with the neighborhood. It removes an entry-level housing
- from the market and perhaps more importantly, replaces the fabric that makes Bloomington Bloomington.
- And I think this house is a stellar example of that in its simplicity and its form. It also removes
- entry-level housing from the market and perhaps
- Until there's some meaningful form of design review for new developments more properties like 7-eleven
- East cottage will be built not more or some more single-family homes will be bought by developers and
- taken off the market I support ad use of rental caps smaller lots and houses infill aggressive design
- review for new housing and buildings in Bloomington and also obviously historic preservation and
- I have time I think I do I'd like to make another plea to both you all and to the mayor's office To
- fill the vacancies on our commission and Confirm those members still willing to serve HPC was made aware
- last week that one of our voting members will have a conflict starting in January and won't be able
- to help us maintain quorum and we won't have enough members to legally meet if Current members are not
- confirmed and barely enough to make quorum if so and vacancies are
- are not filled. We have a couple that have been empty for over six months. Please do what you can. And
- thank you. I hope you approve this petition. Thank you. Are there other members of the public who wish
- to make a comment? I see a couple of people starting to move. Are there any hands raised on Zoom? OK,
- let's go ahead and continue here in chambers. When you get over there, please sign in, state your name
- for the record. You have up to three minutes.
- Hi, my name is Amy Butler. I'm a new owner of this house as well with my husband. I wasn't going to
- speak because I tend to get emotional about this subject. This house was going to get torn down in August,
- beginning of August. We saw a demolition sign on it. I own the house next door to it. Actually, a friend
- of mine, he died last year and left me that house. And I was devastated to see this little yellow house
- have a demolition sign in front of it.
- But I wanted you to know that I am very hopeful that you will let us, if you vote for this, I mean,
- no matter what, we're still gonna take care of this house as best we can and make Bloomington proud,
- but I would really like you to give us the opportunity to help Bloomington's cultural heritage and,
- you know, designate this. You know, the man did amazing work and stuff all the way from California to New York.
- You know, the square in Bloomington, the beautiful kissing couple on the building at Atwater and Third.
- I really would like you to go look at that sculpture. In relief, it's like two to three inches of limestone
- that he carved the kissing couple in. It's amazing. And you should see the size of the limestone blocks
- on the back of the house. They are huge for this teeny little house. But anyway, I wanted to thank the builder
- that gave us the opportunity to buy this house from them once they realized it was going to be culturally
- designated. They gave us the opportunity to buy it, and I really appreciate that. And I want to thank
- my friend John, who left me the means to be able to purchase the house from them so that we know that
- it's going to be taken care of well. And I want to thank our neighbors, especially James Ford, for his
- support in this project, trying to save this little house. But my husband grew up in this house,
- Amazing Carver lived in this house and I think it's something that's worth saving and you know marking
- is culturally significant for the town But anyway, I thank you for your opportunity to do this Thank
- you Other public comment go ahead and come on up You want to go ahead and sign in and state your name
- for the record you have up to three minutes I have to sign in
- My name is Karen Duffy, and I sit on the Historic Preservation Commission as an advisor appointed by
- you. Thank you very much for that. And I just want to really underscore what Dr. Butler said about the
- cultural heritage importance of this. We're all quick, I think, to point out the importance of the limestone
- industry. We understand that it was
- foundational, that's an unintended pun, but to the economic growth and development of our community.
- But we've been very slow as a community to recognize any individual workers. And here, I think when
- this house came up before the Historic Preservation Commission, we recognized that we had an opportunity
- here, a rare opportunity to
- do just this to Bring attention to an individual worker as dr. Butler said again carvers are at the
- top of the Scale I guess you'd say the hierarchy of workers the most highly skilled within the limestone
- industry and this was not just any carver he was a carver's carver recognized by other carvers and so
- and his work is appreciated across the country as well as in Bloomington. So now this opportunity is
- before you and I urge you to support it as we did and correct this lack. Thank you. Thank you.
- Looks like we have somebody else moving in chambers, getting ready. Has anybody raised a hand on Zoom?
- Okay, let's go ahead and continue here in chambers. Thank you for signing in. State your name for the
- record, and then you'll have up to three minutes. Hi, my name is Daniel Schlegel. I'm also on the HPC,
- but I'm also director of the History Center here in town. And I just wanted to say, if you just take
- a moment and think about the last time you were in a museum, and then narrow that to a history museum,
- and then narrow that
- to how much you read there. I'll admit, I don't read everything at a museum, and I work at one. But
- my point is, being able to go and see a house like this, although most people, I'm guessing, aren't
- gonna go inside, but being able to see the size and scope of that and realize what someone was able
- to accomplish after living there, makes an impact. No one's gonna stop by there and read a plaque. That's
- not exciting.
- you can't conceptualize something like that. If anyone's traveled to Europe and you've seen some of
- the buildings they have that are literally out of the pages and illustrations of what the Middle Ages
- look like, those buildings are still standing. When you get to go inside those and look around and you
- can start to visualize and understand who lived there, what they did, it makes a much larger impact.
- And this might be a single building, yes,
- But for what we have at the History Center, we have very little about workers. We don't have much on
- the carvers. But something like this is something the city of Bloomington and Monroe County can be proud
- of because of what he's accomplished. After learning about all the great research Noah's done, I've
- tried to go out and see what's local. I haven't been able to go to DC and show us what Noah's told us
- about. But being able to go there and see that, I have a much greater appreciation for all of that.
- So it's just something to consider. Obviously, I'm gonna urge you to vote yes for very good reason.
- But at the History Center, we have a research library. And when people see and read about something
- like this and this stone carver that lived at this house, they've gotten curious about their own, whether
- they're a longtime or newer resident. We had a whole house, I think it was four young ladies from IU
- that were sophomores, juniors, that came in just to research their house because they wanted to know
- more about it.
- No one is famous as this, but the fact they were curious enough that they came in to see it was fantastic.
- And I encourage more people to do that, because you might be surprised at what you learn. Thank you.
- Thank you. Is there any other public comments on this ordinance? Hands on Zoom? Great. All right, let's
- come back to council then. First, any lingering questions that popped up because of public comment?
- Councilmember Piedmont Smith Sorry, it took me a minute I knew I had one in here Is this house in a
- neighborhood that could become a larger historic district Yes Yes, this property is located in an area
- that was surveyed by the state of Indiana as being potentially eligible for a larger district and
- Called the cottage Grove neighborhood and that's currently being explored right it is Okay Is there
- any reason to Why why don't we just wait and since there's no imminent demolition Why don't we just
- wait until we can approve the bigger neighborhood? You could I mean what I would say is this building
- is being nominated on its own merit it was nominated by the Historic Preservation Commission
- prior to any inkling that there would be an effort to nominate the larger neighborhood and You know
- also we don't know what the end result of that process will be Could be lots of outcomes so I would
- urge the council to judge this property on its own merit Okay. Thank you Thank you. Any other questions?
- Right seeing none, let's go ahead and go to a council member comment. I
- Do any council members want to comment on this ordinance? Councilmember Rallo Well, I'm very happy to
- support this I really appreciate being brought forward by Mr. San wise in the in the Commission It's
- an interesting discussion because yeah, I mean, you know typically
- We're looking at architectural significance in this very modest home, but it reflects our local heritage
- and it reflects It really demonstrates the cultural value of structures. So And it really enriches our
- sense of place so And it's very appropriate since this community was shaped and grew with the limestone
- industry One value of of hearing petitions like this is as
- that I learned so much about about history in this community and and so I'll be enthusiastically supporting
- this and thanks for everybody that was involved and and in making it happen Thank You councilmember Zulek
- Yes, thank you. So this property is in the small but mighty district six So naturally I have had the
- wonderful opportunity to meet with the butlers at length and I'll second a lot of what councilmember
- Rallo said But just on the the personal side like these are people that put in the work in terms of
- community engagement They knocked every single door that's in the proposed Cottage Grove conservation
- district that was previously discussed like they have done the work for this project and so I just
- Want to commend you both and mr. Ford who I've also met with so thank you And I'm happy to support this
- Councilmember daily Thank you. Yeah, I'm also happy to support this. I love I love when the historic
- preservation issues come up before us I was a student of history and so these just kind of you know
- tickle my happy spot and I think I think you guys did a great job with
- All the research and the information you provided with us, it's fascinating. I love being able to help
- preserve such important parts of history and of Bloomington. So thank you very much for all the work
- that you have all done with this and for bringing this here and for hanging out so long with us tonight.
- And I'll definitely be voting yes, so thank you. Other council member comment? Council member Flaherty.
- Thanks. Yeah, I really appreciate this.
- proposal and the discussion tonight. Personally, I'm a little torn, and I'll just try to explain. I
- think the contributions of Ivan Adams as a stonecarver are significant and meaningful, and I think preserving
- that cultural heritage is also important. I think there is a variety of ways to do that, and what I'm
- grappling with here is what I would characterize as the less traditional path to historic preservation,
- which is not based on architectural significance, but based on some type of historical significance.
- that criteria and city code says has significant character interest or value as part of the development
- heritage or cultural characteristics of the city state or nation and that's not what we're highlighting
- here, but rather is associated with the person who played a significant role in local state or national
- history and I guess like definitionally, that's sort of like true here, but the word association like
- That could mean a lot of things and I guess I'm just not sure that I
- someone of cultural or historical significance living at a place on its own without more is, for me,
- like a sound criterion or a basis for historic preservation. I did hear remarks about the importance
- of saving a house and preventing new development and things like that, which I understand where that's
- coming from, and I actually appreciate the family, who obviously personally has so much at stake and
- cares so much about this property too,
- has been able to purchase it, and in any case, will be able to preserve it for their own memory and
- enjoyment. But again, I think, to me, those considerations actually drift away from the purpose of historic
- preservation, which isn't to prevent development or keep duplexes out. That's not what historic
- preservation's actually meant to be about, at least in my opinion. And so when we talk about preserving
- history in Bloomington, I just don't think that,
- designating this house as historic Rings true to like there's a disconnect. That's all And so just trying
- to make a principal decision based on how I think about things and I'm actually not a hundred percent
- sure how many of it But thank you for the opportunity to at least think about it that way Thank you
- other councilmember comment Councilmember rough Yeah, I have to disagree that that there's a disconnect I
- the limestone industry We need we don't need to talk about that's meant to this community what the history
- of that is and and this person Living in that house during productive years of his engagement with the
- with the industry I mean this romanticize it a little bit but I think he imbues the the house and the
- property and then in the area around there with
- what he did and what he was. I grew up in Malak Heights on the north side of town and in the 1960s,
- 1960s, seems like a long time ago when I was a young boy, there was a master stone carver who lived
- around the, down the street and up. His name was Harold Elgar. And we used to go up there as little
- kids because he would have in his yard little limestone frogs and animals that he would
- place around, they were all over his property. And we would go up there and we'd go all through and
- around the house and see him looking out at us and I'm sure happy, but that's part of when we designated
- Malak Heights, historic neighborhood, that's part of it. So I just don't think there's, I think there
- is a connect.
- Thread that goes through an individual where they live in a specific house and then out from there into
- the community Through the history and into our future if we preserve it. So I'll be very happy to support
- support this Thank you, excuse me other councilmember comments Hi, thank you for all these comments
- thanks for everyone for being here tonight it's getting late we're not close to done I
- I do not plan to support this tonight. I do I am grateful for all the research done I think with artists
- a lot of the time their legacy is Preserved in their work and I do love that Ivan Adams has work throughout
- Bloomington and the Midwest and the country and I think that Is a tribute to him and I I don't see a
- strong connection to preserve where he lived and then would maybe
- Strive somewhere and do work. I think too for me. It's a very slippery slope in Preserving homes where
- people live who contributed something to our community that is of note. Thanks Other councilmember comment
- I'll just very quickly say then that that I'm I
- Not supportive of this this evening for a lot of the things councilmember Flaherty and councilmember
- Rosenberger just said but also kind of the bigger issue that I feel like it's this interesting precedent
- and I guess for me personally It's like I have a pretty high bar that you have to leap over for me to
- go Yeah, I want to I want to call that a historic preservation district and to just meet one of those
- standards is really
- just is gonna rarely probably make it no matter which one of those things that it is. I agree that there
- are other ways to better kind of mark the memory and the significance of his artwork. And I don't see
- his artwork represented somewhere around this house. And the precedent of doing that, I think that it
- is the really, really slippery slope
- I think that that it wouldn't be great maybe to to start going down that and secondly currently this
- house is owned by people who are going to Use it effectively I'll say and in the state that it's in
- and take care of it and all that kind of stuff I also kind of hesitate to like put these kind of shackles
- on it into the future as well without a larger kind of district so
- That's I guess how I feel about it any last councilmember comment before we go to a vote All right,
- I'm not seeing any so will the clerk please call the roll on Result or ordinance 2025 47 Councilmember,
- sorry. Yes clarity no Rough yes
- Yes, Piedmont Smith. Yes Stasberg. No Bailey. Yes Zulek. Yes Rosenberger. No Thank you that passes six
- to three So
- Recognizing that it's late. I kind of want to give council members a couple minutes to get some wiggles
- out but I also want to recognize that it is 1030 at this point and Yeah, so if people are good with
- just keeping going I know that this is a long legislative agenda tonight and I'm super duper sorry about
- that next I Move that ordinance 2025. Yes. Do you need to vote under the
- Just for each one we should probably do roll calls for introductions or well, we'll see how it works.
- Yeah, maybe I'm sorry just on introductions. We have to make sure that we have two-thirds majority on
- introductions I move that ordinance 2025 dash 43 be introduced and read by the clerk by title and synopsis
- only second
- All right, it's been moved to introduce ordinance 2025 43 We're gonna try a voice vote and see what
- happens all in favor. Please say aye aye opposed Nobody is opposed. So thank you. Will the clerk please
- read Ordinance 2024
- I'm so sorry, I lost where I was. Ordinance 2025-43, an ordinance annexing certain real estate to the
- city of Bloomington, Monroe County, Indiana. The synopsis is as follows. This ordinance pursuant to
- a voluntary annexation petition annexes the real estate commonly known as 2005 West Corey Drive, Bloomington,
- Indiana, a parcel located outside of but contiguous with city boundaries. Thank you.
- I move that ordinance 2025 dash 43 be adopted second. Thank you. Who's here to present tonight? Wheeler
- City Assistant City Attorney Thank you Yep, we can hear you go ahead. Thank you for introducing yourself
- for the record. Thank you. Yes. Thank you Happy to be here happy to talk about this tonight. This is
- a petition for annexation the controlling statute is Indiana code for dash six dash three dash five
- point one and
- This type of an annexation is often referred to as a super voluntary, but it is a voluntary annexation.
- To be eligible for this type of a voluntary annexation, the property in question must be located outside
- of, but contiguous to the city. And looking at the statute, this particular section of the code, contiguous
- means that the annexing property shares at least one eighth of its border with the city.
- Under this particular statute, the way to initiate a voluntary annexation is to have filed a petition
- for the voluntary annexation of the property, and that petition needs to have three things going for
- it, which is to request an ordinance annexing the property. It must then be signed by 100% of the property
- owners, and it must contain a header on the signature page that states, quote, petition for voluntary
- annexation into the city of Bloomington, Indiana, close quote.
- So when we're doing this, I know there are going to be some folks that are going to come up and want
- to argue against this. They can argue against it, but they cannot remonstrate. I think it's important
- for the Council to know that. So there won't be any remonstrating against this annexation. It's not
- available by this statute. However, there is an appeal that can be taken. If Council were to approve
- this annexation,
- then an appeal could be sought. But the only issue on appeal would be whether there was contiguity.
- And in this case, I think you're gonna find that there is contiguity. So there won't be any grounds
- for an appeal. So the facts on this case real quick are that on October 22nd, 2025, Canyison LLC filed
- its petition with the clerk for voluntary annexation requesting that an ordinance be adopted.
- to annex lot two in Cory Lane Estates, which is commonly known as 2005 West Cory Drive. And he's asking
- to annex that particular property into the city. He's eligible to do this because the property is in
- fact located outside of the city and it does meet the one eighth contiguity requirement. The property's
- perimeter totals 433.57 feet.
- The property shares a border with the city that measures 126.04 feet, which greatly exceeds the required
- one-eighth contiguity requirement. One-eighth contiguity would have only needed 54.19 feet, so we're
- well above that requirement. The petition does meet statutory requirements. It did request the ordinance
- be passed. It did, and it is 100% of all property owners who have signed. Kenyus and LLC is the only
- property owner.
- This property was signed, I'm sorry, the petition was signed by William Kanye Womate, who is the president
- of Conyersen LLC. These facts are supported by the warranty deed which came with the petition. That
- warranty deed was recorded with Monroe County Recorder's Office on July 30th, 2024, showing Conyersen
- LLC as owner.
- and articles of organization filed with the Secretary of State Corporations Division shows that William
- Kanyuwamathai is the president of this corporation. The signature page does contain the necessary header
- language, and so the petition does meet all necessary statutory requirements.
- There are a couple of other statutory requirements that need to be met, and that is the council would
- have had to first adopt a fiscal plan before it can consider this annexation, which as you recall, you
- did do back on December 3rd. And then city council must also conduct a public hearing within 30 days
- of the petition being filed, which again, council did do back on December 3rd of this year. With this
- petition properly filed, the fiscal plan adopted by resolution and all other statutory requirements met
- then City Council may adopt an ordinance annexing this property into the city. The ordinance as proposed
- properly declares that the property is contiguous with the city. The petition is signed by 100% of the
- owners and that the property is annexed into the city. That form of ordinance I think is appropriate
- and city legal does recommend that the ordinance be adopted as written. I'm happy to try and answer
- questions if there are any. Thank you.
- Thank you, are there questions from council members about this ordinance? No questions. I do have one
- actually because this was brought up during the public hearing that the roadway that this is actually
- connected to because in the, let me find it, in the petition it said that the real estate is contiguous
- to public highways and public rights of way, but technically that road isn't a public right of way,
- But earlier, or like higher in the document, there is a deed that seems to say that they have an easement
- or right of usage of that road because they're part of the Coraline Estates. So can you just kind of
- clarify that little bit of legal language? Is that problematic in any way? There isn't anything in the
- statute that requires the property to have that contiguity with a roadway.
- What the contiguity that's required is that it be one eighth with the city. It just happens that it's
- sitting on a roadway. It's unfortunate that it mentions it as a public roadway. It is a private drive,
- I believe. I think that's accurate. But that does not change the statutory ability for the property
- to be annexed. It's not,
- of importance as it relates to whether or not the property can be annexed. Okay and is it correct that
- that property does have an easement though for that private road as part of the original like deed stuff?
- Because I was trying to read the deed stuff and understand that. So I would have to sit down and read
- that section of the, well I'd have to read the deed again. I don't recall the language and what it says
- on the deed as to whether it's got an easement to use that
- private drive, but it is part of that whole neighborhood. If it was going to become a landlocked property,
- it wouldn't be too hard to get a court to order that the owner of the property could use that road.
- Okay, thank you. Are there any other questions? All right, let's go ahead and go to public comment on ordinance
- 2025 43 if you're a member of the public who would like to make a comment You can go ahead and make
- your way to the podium if you're online you can raise your hand using the reactions tab Thank you for
- signing in so much You can state your name for the record and go ahead and start when you're ready My
- name is Jay Nelson And first of all just because you can do something doesn't mean that you should do
- something I want to state
- But my grandmother Liz at 2009 Coraline the wooded lot beside her home addressed as 2005 is the subject
- of this proposed voluntary annexation and future duplex At your last meeting you adopted the fiscal
- plan resolution for this annexation I understand state law requires that step but I'm asking you to
- look more closely into the physical physical reality on the ground before you go any further and
- First drainage and stormwater There's a pipe under quarry lane that directly connects the grass basin
- on the north side of the street with the wooded basin on the south side Those two areas function as
- a drainage system regardless, which way the water happens to flow at any given storm Bloomington's own
- stormwater rules in title 13 and the stormwater design manual expect development proposals to map out
- existing drainage patterns runoff directions and outfalls to
- Prove that they will not increase flooding or undermine public infrastructure, and I don't believe that's
- been done yet If this wooded lot is cleared and filled and paved for duplex with parking You're concentrating
- more water into a very small basin tied to one crossroad pipe If that pipe ever plugs fails or simply
- cannot handle extra volume the city will own that problem once the land is annexed That is not theoretical
- issue for us. It would be in my grandmother's front yard. I
- Second karst and substrate subsurface stability Bloomington and Monroe County sit in a well-documented
- karst region with map sinkhole areas and sinking streams The lot in question already already behaves
- like a bowl Cutting the trees adding a structure driveway stormwater facilities without a site specific
- Geotechnical and karst study is a serious risk for the future residents and for the city's utilities
- a sinkhole or other subsidence under a driveway
- Sanitary line or that crossroad drain will be far more expensive than any tax revenue the single lot
- can generate third neighborhood pattern and zoning Cori Lane is a short dead-end Street with one Single
- family with single-family homes this one parcel would be the only city lot on the street and the only
- duplex under Bloomington Udo duplexes in low-density residential districts are supposed to go through a special
- Conditional review including a neighborhood meeting and the BZA scrutiny Because they can be incompatible
- on lots with this When the subdivision was first built the developer had the easiest cheapest opportunity
- to build here They chose not to and left this wooded this strongly suggests. They understood the site
- as marginal and unbuildable because the drainage surface issues Just please vote no on this. It's not
- the right thing to do. Thanks. I
- Thank you. It looks like we have a line here. Go ahead and sign in and State your name for the record.
- You'll have up to three minutes Even council members, my name is Paul post resident on the street in
- question I would also agree with mr. Nelson asked you to vote no on this tonight what I'm gonna do is
- point out the ludicrousness of the whole concept of annexing this one lot on our street and
- As I stated before that area is island for as part of the greater annexation efforts by the city which
- is under litigation currently We're still following all of that It just seems a little odd that what
- hasn't been mentioned tonight is the only reason we're here is because the owner Just wanted to build
- on the property and couldn't connect to the sewer lines. We have city utilities I pay more for city
- utilities than everyone else because I'm technically in the county and
- It's all he wants to do is hook up to the sewer, but we won't do that because of the litigation that's
- still ongoing. It would make much more sense to let all that go through the courts and have an actual
- final answer to that before we decide going further with this one lot creating a headache of logistical
- problems. We've talked about all the things of having just one city lot on a street of non-city lots.
- So I'd ask you to vote no on this. It just doesn't make sense right now There's there's several things
- pending that I think would make more sense to you know, let us get a final answer on those Thank you
- Thank you Has anybody raised a hand on zoom? Okay. Let's go ahead and continue here in chambers Come
- on forward Please sign in state your name for the record and then you'll have up to three minutes. I
- Hi, my name is Joseph Chan and I live on the property right adjacent to this parcel in question and
- You know, we bought this property, you know, it's a starter house And we bought it with a great peace
- of mind. There was a great excellent wooded area I didn't really pay much attention to it until it was
- brought to my attention Just a few weeks ago actually where I
- noticed that someone was trying to build on develop on this storm drain area and I couldn't help but
- notice, Hey, wait a minute. My, my property drains directly into this place. So even if it does get
- annexed or it does, and all of the zoning does get managed out, um, that provides, that presents a,
- a legal trouble issue where now
- Am I supposed to change my properties so that it doesn't drain into this? And there's a bunch of other
- properties that drain into this. And it's only going to cause a bigger issue in the future, perhaps
- not immediately, but the Karst question is certainly something that I feel like the gun is being jumped on.
- And with so many lingering questions that Mr. Nelson has brought up, it behooves us to take a minute,
- step back, and think about what are the implications of even annexing this in the first place. And there's
- just a lot of questions that keep coming up,
- What about the parking situation? It's almost half an acre, but if you pave on it and you have to raise
- it up because there's a lot of incline on this property and the Access from the easement is also at
- an incline as well. I know this because I walk past it every time I mow my lawn And it's it's quite
- steep and the most level access point it touches my
- property. So am I going to have to worry about people, the construction or surveyors coming out of my
- property to survey this land? Who knows? But that's the concern that I have as someone who is going
- to be directly affected by this development and annexation, whether it goes through or not. Yeah, so
- I yield to the rest of the time. Thank you so much. Is there
- Looks like, is there another comment? Yes. OK, good. Go ahead and come forward. Please sign in and state
- your name for the record, and you'll have up to three minutes. Hello. I'm one of the other residents
- in the same street. Can you state your name? Oh, right. Magda Andrade.
- So yeah, I'm one of the other residents on that street. And yeah, I live pretty close to that zoning
- location, that place that is in threat of annexing and rezoning. So I have a few concerns when it comes
- to that property. So as Joseph has said, there is an incline there, and our storm drains go into there.
- But the other concern that I have is that they are, if it is with the intention of,
- Deforesting and building the duplex it can cause a really big risk on the neighbors Yeah on all of us
- and the reason is Well based on what I read from the the notes here there hasn't been any addressing
- on any environmental inspections or anything about the possible cars that there is so without giving
- them the permission to
- rezone and annex without Doing any of those inspections. Well, of course, you're just giving them all
- the leverage to do as they wish to build the properties But then again, there's going to be
- fewer opportunities to take any regulations or any safety checks for whatever is going to be building
- there and then furthermore construction also performs a lot of perturbation and a lot of including the
- weight of the concrete and
- every material equipment used can actually put a risk on the load that the structure has. And yeah,
- furthermore, if that place is deforested, it does come at the risk of further enhancing erosion, which
- could then again be dangerous for our homes nearby. Yeah, it will make our structures look
- Lose integrity when it comes to the actual changing of the property. So there's risks of erosion and
- of course the whole Conversation about the storm drain and yeah, so I come from a standpoint that I
- personally think it's a safety risk and I would please ask you to vote no Thank you, so anybody else
- in chambers who would like to make a public comments I
- Okay, while somebody is walking over, have any hands been raised on Zoom? If you just want to give me
- a big wave when that happens, or if that happens, that would be great. Here in chambers, please sign
- in, state your name for the record, and then you'll have up to three minutes. Hi, I'm Leslie Ruiz, and
- I'm sure you're tired of hearing from me, so I'll be brief. I have serious concerns about the impact that
- Building on this property and I'm aware that this is annexation and I understand and this is just my
- first Ability to kind of voice my concerns about it, you know I have plenty of more flooding videos
- and pictures from my basement and all of the fun things and I'm dealing with water on my side already
- and I'm really concerned about what the impact of them building there would look like and what legal
- issues that might bring up anyways, I know that there's
- you know, common enemy stuff with water here in the state of Indiana, but there's nothing built there
- right now. And if they do build there and it does impact my property, I don't know what recourse I have
- at that point. So here I am at the very beginning of this process, just trying to be heard because I
- do really have concerns. I think, you know, I know my neighbors have lots of concerns too, but I think
- that I am probably the one that would be most impacted by
- everything there. And, you know, I already have a loan for the basement that I had to fix because of
- water. And so I just have large concerns over that. And again, I'm aware that that might not be what
- you can hear right now, but I just feel like I need to say that at this point. I guess I also have concerns
- about parking, like I said last time, and whether there's an easement or not for the road. Does that
- easement include parking? What does that look like?
- Because I cannot imagine that there could be a duplex there and more than one car parked in a 15-foot
- driveway There on that property. I just cannot see it. So they will be using that road. They will be
- parking on that street that You guys don't have any authority over that would be our responsibility.
- I Don't know But again, thank you for hearing me and read my emails Thank you Thank you
- Anybody else in chambers wish to make a comment I see somebody else moving and I don't see a wave from
- staff So if you could make sure to sign in and then state your name for the record and also if you know
- if you've spoken here about this tonight if you forgot to sign in just Make sure you go and do that
- so that we have that for the record. Thank you Go ahead when you're ready to start with your name. Thank
- you Good evening. My name is lieutenant Ray Reyes retired Navy naval officer
- Also resident on Cory Drive Just to reiterate I've seen her property and and it does attain a certain
- level of flooding Coming from the other side literally two years ago Flooded so bad. I literally saw
- two beavers Set up shop there. I am NOT making that up. I have any of you seen seen this property Beavers
- actual beavers with the tails the whole thing swimming
- That's how bad it can get, almost encroaching into her basement. Have any of you seen the property?
- It's not quite as big as this room. The road is literally there. He's gonna have to fill this hole in.
- No one's seen a picture of it at all, anything? It's just a horrible idea. My neighbor, Paul Post, as
- he told you, it doesn't make any sense. It really doesn't.
- It's just a horrible not that we don't want the property there or neighbors or anything like that. It's
- just it just Physically as an engineer myself, it doesn't make sense is you know, he told you as a builder
- It's it's just a horrible idea and that's all Thank you any other comments public comments about ordinance
- 2025 43 And I didn't see away from staff so that brings us back to council
- Did public comment bring up any questions that council members would like to ask council members? Sorry
- is Attorney Wheeler still on the call? Hey, hey To two quick questions. Are there any known infrastructure
- deficiencies in the area that would require city investment? On the property itself, yes No
- And the question that's come up again and again from residents in the area nearby, if there were some
- material pains put on them or their properties, what recourse do they have? Should we, does the recourse
- change if we were to annex this lot?
- Annexation doesn't have any impact on the recourse that property owners would have that they're adjacent
- or in the neighborhood. The development or not of this property does you know whether it gets developed
- and if there are any issues as between the property owners it doesn't matter whether the property was
- developed as a property in the county or developed as a property in the city.
- What changes is that if we annex the property, then the property owner does have the opportunity to
- connect to the water and sewer, which is available in Corey Lane. So it does make it a little bit easier,
- I think, for the property to get developed. But all of these issues that are being brought up are issues
- that would be brought up at the time of considering the zoning, considering the
- the planning department looking at what's going to be developed on the property. These are issues that
- get hashed out at that time. And then common enemy was brought up. The common enemy doctrine in the
- state of Indiana would apply whether this property gets developed in or out of the city, in or out of
- the county. So all of these issues just are not, they don't impact whether statutorily this property
- can be annexed.
- Thank you. And then the final question as a follow up to that, there was the point brought up about
- conditional uses of duplexes in low density areas. Can you speak a little bit about that and how that
- would apply here? Because I know we have a second piece of legislation following this about rezoning
- that place. I'm not well versed in planning and zoning.
- Would not be able I'd be shooting from the hip and probably getting it all wrong. So I I refrained from
- Trying to answer those because I'm just not educated in the matter then I guess I see one of our planning
- staff members who probably has been waiting here for questions like this and would invite Mr. Grulick
- forward to maybe address that question about zoning if possible, please state your name for the record. I
- Thank you Eric really development services manager So yes with the conditional use approval for development
- on this. This is when we'd have a little bit finer tooth to look at any impacts to any regulations at
- the city of limited utilities has the
- Requirements that the UDO has so they would be required to submit I think we've talked about at least
- a little bit from the last time and in the plane Commission hearings and in the packet The cars feature
- possible cars feature that might be on the property. So that would have to be evaluated There are trees
- that are obviously on the property that could be subject to our tree closed canopy
- preservation requirements You know the lot was planted as as a legal lot of record So it was not there
- are lots that were set aside in here. They have large easements on there There were several sinkholes
- that were identified within this development when this was in the city and came forward for subdivision
- approval in the 1990s
- There were easements that were placed for identified sinkholes this particular feature on this thing
- was not identified That doesn't mean that it's not that now, but that's something that we've identified
- with them that we'll have to evaluate You know if they come forward for development So yes, we would
- review it for any requirements within the udio If it's annexed and comes forward for development
- Thank you so much. And so just the final question on that note, is it, am I correct in saying that should
- we annex this plot lot today, there's still, that doesn't guarantee that the thing would be built. There's
- still a whole mechanism that needs to, that the developer would have to go through in order to make
- sure that all of the things that you just discussed were either ameliorated or planned appropriately.
- Yes, so so annexing this doesn't guarantee that they can do everything that they want, you know Obviously
- the zoning code has a lot of layers to it that guide what can and can't happen here setbacks environmental
- preservation features So all those things would have to met as I mentioned was planted as a legal lot
- of record So it is entitled to some development of some sort and if there are variances that are required
- then that is something that the Board of Zoning Appeals would have to hear and
- Review with a development proposal. Yeah Thank you any other questions from council members Councilmember
- Rosenberger Hi, yes made potentially for the attorney unsure some of the public comments were about
- how this would be the only Property on that street that is annexed because it's a voluntary annexation
- could other properties on the street also do voluntary annexation
- Each property that's outside of the city would have to go through the same examination that this property
- did, which is to look and see whether or not the property has at least one-eighth contiguity with the
- city's boundaries. Looking at the neighborhood, I would think that the properties that are running along
- the same side of the street,
- as the property in question for this annexation, I think all of those properties probably meet contiguity
- because they're bordering the city's boundaries. So they would all be eligible. And then it's kind of
- like a domino effect. Once those properties become annexed, then the properties around them can start
- to look to see whether they have contiguity with the properties that have just become annexed.
- So it's kind of, it can be that. It can have a domino effect, but that always presupposes that other
- people would be interested in becoming part of the city. I don't know if that answers your question
- very well. I can try again. That was good, thank you. Thank you. Other questions from council members?
- Okay, seeing none, let's go ahead and go to council member comment. Do council members want to comment
- on this ordinance? Council member Piedmont-Smith.
- Yeah, I just want to thank the residents who came out both tonight and at our last meeting to talk about
- this. I just want to, I think you made a lot of great points, especially about the environmental issues,
- the flooding issues. But at this point, we are only, we have a petition from somebody to be annexed
- and we have to evaluate it based on just the criteria in front of us, which are, you know,
- that it's one-eighth contiguous to the city, which it is. And so all of these questions about what should
- be allowed to be built there, what's the environmental, the geological decision as to the karst area,
- what are the stormwater impacts of building there, all these things come later. We can't consider those
- if it's not part of the city of Bloomington.
- This is really just the first step. And we have to act on this petition. We can't just say, it would
- be pointless. Before we vote yes on this, it would be pointless to invest lots of time in environmental
- examinations and site plans and all that. We have systems in place to examine all those and to be very
- careful about not building in a
- Feature and to avoid stormwater runoff problems. We have very Detailed requirements about that, but
- that comes later right now. We're only Looking at whether they meet the qualifications to be annexed
- So I just want to be clear about that and I think they do and so I'll be voting. Yes Thank you. Are
- there other councilmember comments? Councilmember rough
- Yeah, I did visit the property. And to me, it's pretty obvious that the majority of the property is
- a literal water conveyance channel. And in order to build on that thing, it's going to take a significant
- amount of modification of the grade of pretty much the entire site.
- not necessarily the main reason I'm going to vote no on this, but I'm in agreement with Mr. Post. I
- don't think it makes any sense to be annexing this while we're in the middle of this annexation fight
- where this administration seems to continue to want to throw good money after bad, in my opinion, in
- this whole annexation business. And I don't want
- throw this little bit into the mix and confuse it even more. If this can be developed someday, well,
- after everything gets sorted out. And I don't really think it's particularly developable anyway, if
- you go out there and look at it. But if they're entitled to something and they want to do it now, then
- deal with whatever county regulations they would have to deal with.
- So I'm gonna be voting no. Thank you, Councilmember Daly. Thank you. I'm just not convinced that annexing
- this property is in the best interest of the city or the residents of Corey Drive. I agree with what
- Mr. Post said as well that it would be, and I wrote this down because I liked the phrase, a headache
- of logistical problems. I think that is,
- Probably pretty accurate for this location. I'm just you know, the annexation and the sewer and and
- how it's going to affect the neighboring properties So I agree that this doesn't make sense. It's not
- the right move right now let everything else play out in terms of the rest of the annexation question
- and then Talk about it then but I think right now. I'm I'm certainly not in favor of this voluntary
- annexation Thank You councilmember Flaherty Thanks
- I broadly agree with Councilmember Piemont-Smith's points and will be voting yes, but I wanted to go
- a little further on this concept of like how this fits into the broader questions around annexation
- and so It's the utilities current policy that we don't grant sewer connections for new properties outside
- of city limits Because we used to do that and have people sign it, you know We used to do that and annex
- people at the same time. It was a pair and
- That was incredibly inefficient from a legislative standpoint. So then, we started getting people to
- sign contracts saying, look, I'm going to be annexed in the future. I know I'm going to be annexed in
- the future. I'm going to get my sewer now. And when it comes time to annex me later, I'm not going to
- remonstrate. Then, we had a lot of folks challenging the validity of those contracts. And the state
- took likely unconstitutional, in my opinion, as a lawyer, unconstitutional action to invalidate those
- contracts, which is against both the state and federal constitution.
- And so now we find ourselves in a situation where the city's policy about connecting the sewer has changed.
- So this property actually can't be developed, is my understanding, if it remains in the county. And
- my colleagues are right that whether it can or not with respect to karst features, et cetera, is like
- a separate question from this inquiry. And so to play it out on the lawsuit front, I don't know exactly
- where everything is at the current moment with the different areas that were intended for annexation
- or attempted to be annexed in the lawsuits.
- If in fact this area of the county is annexed, then this will be immaterial. It's all gonna be annexed.
- If it is not annexed because the invalidation of our contracts is upheld by the state, then I don't
- imagine utilities policy changing and in fact will be in this exact situation where this is exactly
- the type of annexation that will be needed in order for this or any other property to be developed.
- So it's like in both cases actually this annexation still makes sense in my opinion.
- So, you know, yeah, I guess it's just like this. I do think this whole area of the county should belong
- in the city. I think it's reasonable. I think it was aligned with expectations for a long time
- and contractual agreements as well. I know not everybody has those agreements, but lots of folks in
- different areas did. And it was a long-standing understanding between county and city governments that,
- you know, eroded over time. I don't need to get into all that anymore, but like,
- I don't know. I think that is relevant to the picture here but not to the not in the same way that my
- colleagues have expressed Thank you other councilmember comment Councilmember Rallo I share the sentiments
- of councilmember rough and councilmember daily. I I Don't want to rehash the entire annexation debate
- except to say that the decisions pending and I would I
- Prefer to wait To see how that manifests rather than do this Incrementally at this point, so I'll be
- voting no. Thanks Your councilmember comment All right, I'm gonna go ahead and take a minute then I
- Will say I largely agree with councilmember Piedmont Smith and largely agree with councilmember Flaherty
- And I will be supporting this I also
- Like I want to talk for a minute about the zoning stuff. So I'm the planning Commission representative
- for council on the city planning Commission and so like I've seen a lot of this and I and I heard from
- a lot of you guys at the planning Commission meeting related to the zoning of it and I have a whole
- lot of faith like in terms of the the concerns that you guys have like totally legitimate, right, but
- I have a whole lot of faith that
- This isn't just like, if we annex it, then these people can do whatever they want. They can build whatever
- they want there. That's just not the way it works. And I appreciate, I can't remember your name right
- now off the top of my head. I appreciate that you were like, I just want to keep on talking about it
- and every chance I have to be like, I'm really concerned about this drainage piece. Because yes,
- do that. Because clearly, there's some clear concerns about drainage pieces. I think with developing
- that, it might actually, potentially, because they would have to be required to deal with drainage
- Maybe it could even help the drainage if there was approval and I think that there is maybe an if back
- there somewhere but I don't think that that's necessarily relevant with the With with this step that
- we're taking tonight. I also though want to point out again, which I pointed out at Plan Commission
- And I think that I heard councilmember Flaherty correctly saying well if they could connect to sewer
- then they could develop this property right now and I'll tell you they can't actually because the county
- Downzoned this zone earlier this year. So a year ago by right somebody could have built a duplex on
- there, you know the sewer issues aside with with Connecting to County sewer and then earlier this year
- They they down zoned it and now it is not actually a big enough lot to build anything so Whether or
- not somebody should be built on it I mean there's like a lot of politics back there and and and and
- they didn't just
- Down so this lot it was entire sections. We're in a housing crisis So to take something completely off
- the table before it's had environmental review before it's gone through any of these steps and just
- say oh We're not gonna allow anything to be built here ever Because it's too small. I mean I I get real
- concerned about that. So I
- I'm going to be supporting this. I'm also really supportive of you guys continuing to come out as it
- goes through whatever process and planning it ends up having to go through to build anything at all
- on there. Because those environmental reviews, all those things, they have to happen no matter what
- gets built there. Even if it's something like by right, which maybe will be a single family home, it
- would still have to jump through all those hoops to make sure that flooding wasn't going to be an issue
- to make sure all of those concerns that you have are going to be addressed.
- Any other council member comment before we call the roll. Great. Let's go ahead and call the roll on
- ordinance twenty twenty five forty three. Council member Flaherty. Yes. No. No. Piedmont Smith. Yes.
- Sasseberg. Yes. Daily. No. Zulek. Yes. Rosenberger. Yes. Sorry. Yes. Thank you. That passes with a vote
- of six to three. And so we have one more. Try it again.
- I move that ordinance 2025 dash 46 be introduced and read by the clerk by title and synopsis only second
- Let's go ahead and try a voice vote on this and see what happens. All those in favor. Please say aye.
- Aye any opposed Thank you very much. Will the clerk please read? Yes, just for clarification. Who was
- the second? Councilmember Zulek. Thank you
- The ordinance 2025-46 to amend the Bloomington zoning maps and zone property currently in the Monroe
- County jurisdiction to residential medium lot R2 in anticipation of voluntary annexation regarding to
- 2005 West Corey Drive. William, I apologize for my pronunciation, Wamatai petitioner.
- Synopsis says follows this ordinance recommends that the property at two zero zero five West Cory Drive
- be zoned residential medium lot r2 if the voluntary annexation is approved Thank you, I move that ordinance
- 2025 dash 46 be adopted second Thank you. So that annexation was approved which makes this ordinance
- applicable There is an amendment to it
- Why don't we go ahead and do the amendment first councilmember Zulek? Yes, I move that amendment one
- be brought forward for ordinance 2025 dash 46 second Councilmember Zulek, would you like to talk about
- your amendment? Yes very quickly it it is nothing but the correction of instead of an individual this
- is under an LLC, which I do believe is Under the sole proprietorship of
- Individual but it is just an update from the name to can use cognizant LLC Thank you, are there any
- questions for council members who look about this is sort of a bookkeeping issue Great is there any
- public comments about the amendment that's Clarifies the petitioner to align it correctly with like
- other documentation and
- Is there anybody on Zoom for public comment? Okay, thank you. Going back to council then, any comments
- related to this bookkeeping change in amendment one? All right, seeing no comment, will the clerk please
- call the roll on amendment one to ordinance 2025-46?
- Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Thank you. That passes eight
- zero. Councilmember Flaherty out of the room going back to the ordinance as amended. Now do we have
- a presentation from staff.
- State your name for the record and then the floor is yours Thank You Eric Grulick development services
- manager so this resolution in this case Reflects a recommendation from the Planning Commission for the
- zoning for this property Should it be annexed? So as it was decided and voted to be annexed and Zoning
- obviously has to be given to the property So the property is currently in the Monroe County jurisdiction
- planning jurisdiction and is
- Zoned our ES which is a residential one. It's a very large lot Lot type it's a one acre lot size is
- what the county has it Zoned as the minimum lot area as I mentioned a little bit earlier This was when
- this was approved as a subdivision in the 1990s within the city It has a zoning designation of RS the
- RS zoning district had a minimum lot size is 7,200 square feet and 60 feet and
- So all of the lots that are within the subdivision reflected what the zoning code had at the time And
- so fast forward 30 something years now You know that 7200 square foot 60 foot lot size equates to the
- r2 zoning district The comprehensive plan that the county has as well as the comprehensive plan I'm
- sorry the the comprehensive plan that the county has which is called the Monroe County urbanizing area
- plan reflects their comprehensive plan and has a
- as mixed residential This is very comparable to the property to the south of this that is within the
- city that our comprehensive plan has designated as neighborhood residential Both designations encourage
- a mix of housing types Talk about location adjacent to facilities In is predominantly single-family
- in nature of both the zoning districts
- So the Plain Commission's review and guidelines for this were a pretty easy Correlation in terms of
- what the zoning should be for this So r2 as I mentioned reflects what the lot size is sizes are within
- this neighborhood And so that was the Plain Commission's recommendation by a seven to zero vote To recommend
- that this property be zoned r2, which is the residential medium lot zone district so with that I'm
- Happy to answer any questions. Thank you so much. Does anybody have any questions for mr. Grulick
- councilmember? Oh Yes, I'm glad you covered the compatibility If this as this property will now be annexed
- by the decision of the council Any sort of Petition for development there Will require site inspection
- by your department
- So there are you know, there are a couple different development possibilities. So a single-family residence
- Assuming that it would meet all of our requirements. We just need a building permit If the owner comes
- forward with a duplex and that is a conditional use So they would have to have a neighborhood meeting
- that would go to the Board of Zoning Appeals Regardless of either scenario it has to meet the
- udio requirements for setbacks the environmental features would have to be evaluated you know, as I
- mentioned we've already let the property owner know that
- The karst feature or the potential karst feature will need to be evaluated There are trees that are
- on the site that would be subject to our tree preservation requirements So there's a myriad of regulations
- that would apply regardless of whether it's a by-right or conditional use I see. Yeah, I I think I remember
- walking this property back in the 90s when it was part of the city and the Environmental Commission
- and I remember large sinkhole so anyway, the point is is that
- You'll you'll be mapping that sinkhole Yeah, we've already done of it and then the setback that would
- be and then any developable land will be Essentially evaluated by your department. Yes. Okay Okay.
- Thank you. Thank you other questions for mr. Grulick All right seeing none let's go ahead and go to
- public comment on ordinance 2025 46 as amended and
- So again that this this ordinance has to do with zoning this particular parcel into the residential
- to lot Go ahead and come forward sign in state your name for the record You'll have up to three minutes
- If you're on zoom and you want to comment you can raise your hand using the reactions tab or send a
- chat message to the host Go ahead when you're ready. Once again, Jay Nelson in regards to zoning. I'm
- not sure what can be done with this but
- This whole entire road our single-family homes to then annex it and then slap in where we're gonna throw
- a duplex in it Just doesn't really make sense. But being a builder and knowing that property as well
- I don't see how it's physically possible to throw a duplex on there let alone allowing that to be a
- Possibility, I believe is just the wrong way Just kind of a comment on this annexation
- And the rezoning I just think is backwards If I want to DNX myself, I wish I could do that, right? But
- it doesn't seem like there's a possibility to do that But you can annex a property and just jump all
- over it But to even see that if it's buildable and what we're building on should probably be a first
- step here in my concern before you're annexing anything or assuming the responsibilities of that land
- But rezoning this if you do consider doing that it would be great to have some kind of caveat or restriction
- Where it would be to a single family and there would be for the drainage issues or something that might
- be done I don't know what's in your purview your power here to address those things and obviously you're
- hearing nothing but Concerns because there are concerns
- The builder didn't build on this lot for a reason and promise you as a developer and a builder myself
- I would have built on that lot if I had the opportunity. So there's something going on here So I'm just
- you know, putting the cart before the horse is kind of silly on some of this And it's I don't know.
- It's a little backwards to me and it's unfortunate that we're not Going out there doing our due diligence
- first before we're making decisions on mute
- items And I really believe that this is going to be the case with this subject of being annexed over
- and He's not going to be able to build on it. What's the point until the whole litigation is? All done
- with annexation and then you know, maybe something else is done in the future But I don't ever seeing
- a property on here. It shouldn't be rezoned. It shouldn't have been re annexed. So
- Thank you. Are there other members of the public who would like to comment on ordinance 2025 46 as amended?
- Has anybody raised a hand on zoom? All right, not seeing any other public comment. Let's go ahead and
- go back to council. Any questions that came up during public comment? Seeing none. Any comment from
- council members before your vote?
- Yeah, you know, I understand that the current zoning being or in the county's urbanizing plan, it's
- mixed residential and that is similar and consistent with what this proposal Would be but you know and
- I respect that and I appreciate the thought that's gone into that from staff and in the planning
- commissioners but I just think this thing is
- Bassack words and wrong-headed and I don't want to be associated with the yes vote in any aspect of
- it So I'm going to vote no on this, too Thank you any other council comments Councilmember Piedmont
- Smith Well, I disagree I think that this is being done in a logical order First we voted on whether
- to annex it now that it's annexed it needs to
- to be zoned in a certain way. So we know how to apply the UDO. A UDO, may I remind everybody, that has
- very strong environmental protections. So before anything is built there, there will be an analysis
- of the geography and the topography and nothing built within 25 feet of the sinkhole. So if nothing
- can be built there, then that'll be the result. But we got a piece of land now. We have to give it a
- zoning category.
- Um, so I don't, I certainly don't understand why my colleagues thinks colleague thinks this is back
- ass words. I mean, this is a voluntary annexation. This has no impact on the legal case of our attempted
- involuntary annexation. This is one property where the owner would like to be annexed has been annexed
- now. So we're just going to leave this unzoned. It doesn't make any sense.
- Thank you other councilmember comment comes member flirty sort of briefly agree that like I think this
- is I appreciate the perspective that We have like a cart horse issue and that there should have been
- like environmental review first and I just I think it's the opposite I really do think the first step
- here is annexation and zoning and then you look at what specifically can be done or not and It might
- be that the outcome is nothing is built here and nothing can be built here and like if that's the right
- outcome based on our
- City laws then like that's the outcome it should be and that's perfectly acceptable. That's fine Like
- nothing will look wrong will have happened if that's the outcome. It's just like the thing running its
- course So I appreciate that someone wanted to be annexed and that we are learning the process of voluntary
- annexation because it might be One of the primary ways we're annexing for the foreseeable future Thank
- you other councilmember comment Right seeing none. Oh councilmember Allah
- Mr. Gerlich quick question Discussion I guess so I've been commented very much tonight. So take privilege
- and talking a little bit So mr. Gerlich the r2 designation to single-family home conditional use for
- more intense plex, right is is that a
- Does that go before the BZA or is that? Yes, so conditional use for a duplex would go to the Board of
- Zoning Appeals. Okay. All right. That's the clarification I need Thank you Seeing no other councilmember
- comments. I Had a second quick follow-up comment councilmember rough. I Just wanted to clarify Of course
- it I agree that would make no sense I agree with my comment colleague that would get no sense to leave
- the property total unzoned but
- I'm assuming that it's gonna pass It's gonna be approved The other thing I want to clarify was So it's
- just kind of a protest vote making a statement that I do think it's it's bass backwards And that's what
- I wanted to my other comment was it's a fishing reference bass backwards Thank you unless there are
- other comments if the clerk could please call a roll on a
- ordinance 2025 46 as amended Councilmember Rallo. Yes Piedmont Smith. Yes Stasberg. Yes daily. No Zulek.
- Yes Rosenberger. Yes Sorry. Yes
- Yes breath no, thank you that passes seven to We are finally done with our legislative agenda this evening
- y'all We are down to the period of additional public comment If there are any members of the public
- who would like to make a comment on an item not on the agenda This is the time that they are welcome
- to do so if they did not comment earlier at the first period of general public comment
- Anybody would like to make that kind of comment in chambers, please make your way to the podium if you're
- online Please raise your hand using the reactions tab or send a chat message to the host. I Don't see
- anybody moving in chambers has anybody raised a hand on zoom fantastic Council schedule I already noted
- please think about your calendars in the last two weeks of January for interview committee meetings
- that are gonna
- Be figured out the 1st of January meeting and otherwise our next regularly scheduled meeting as our
- organizational meeting on January 7th and Happy holidays and we are adjourned