WEBVTT 00:00:00.354 --> 00:00:17.937 - Welcome everyone to our April 22nd 2026 regularly scheduled council meeting May the clerk, please call 00:00:17.937 --> 00:00:29.886 - the roll Here Smith Zulek here. Sorry yet daily Rallo here rough here 00:00:30.178 --> 00:00:38.805 - Rosenberger here. Thank you. Thank you Now we will summarize the agenda so next we will do minutes of 00:00:38.805 --> 00:00:47.517 - approval Then we will have reports starting with council members Then we will have a report from chief 00:00:47.517 --> 00:00:56.990 - Decoff on flock then we will have reports from council committees and then we will have public comment and then 00:00:57.282 --> 00:01:03.105 - Legislation for first readings we have none tonight, but we have quite a lot for second readings and 00:01:03.105 --> 00:01:09.274 - resolution So buckle in everybody we have a resolution in support of County Council's counterparts Efforts 00:01:09.274 --> 00:01:15.386 - to keep the county's criminal justice buildings within city limits and close proximity to social services 00:01:15.386 --> 00:01:21.439 - We have a resolution of the Common Council of the city of Bloomington, Indiana approving certain matters 00:01:21.439 --> 00:01:26.686 - in connection with the formation of a certain economic development area It's kind of vague 00:01:27.362 --> 00:01:35.221 - We have an ordinance to amend the city of Bloomington zoning maps by rezoning a 6.3 acre property from 00:01:35.221 --> 00:01:43.003 - residential urban lot are for and residential family are M within the transform redevelopment overlay 00:01:43.003 --> 00:01:51.167 - to plan unit development and to approve a unit Excuse me to approve a district ordinance and a preliminary 00:01:51.167 --> 00:01:55.134 - plan and the short version of that is hope well and 00:01:55.234 --> 00:02:01.318 - Then we will have a resolution to initiate a proposal to amend title 20 of the Bloomington Municipal 00:02:01.318 --> 00:02:07.522 - Code in order to improve sustainability and housing affordability. And finally, a resolution directing 00:02:07.522 --> 00:02:13.365 - the Housing and Neighborhood Development Department to develop a framework for long-term housing 00:02:13.365 --> 00:02:19.569 - affordability. After that, we will have additional public comment, general public comment for anything 00:02:19.569 --> 00:02:21.918 - that is not on the agenda, and we will 00:02:22.082 --> 00:02:31.702 - go over any council schedule comments and then we will adjourn so buckle up y'all cuz we are in for 00:02:31.702 --> 00:02:41.418 - a long night I'm so glad you decided to join us do I have any motions for minutes for approval which 00:02:41.418 --> 00:02:50.846 - we have none okay councilmember reports councilmember daily sorry a little flustered thank you um 00:02:50.978 --> 00:03:01.738 - Just wanted to address I was at the RDC meeting on Monday evening where they voted to for a resolution 00:03:01.738 --> 00:03:12.289 - to put the Bunger Robertson property up on for open up for bids for What is the word I'm looking for 00:03:12.289 --> 00:03:20.542 - sorry, this is why I shouldn't request for RFPs. Thank you very much sorry and 00:03:20.674 --> 00:03:29.291 - Despite several of us asking them not to as well as the CIB they voted to go ahead and open it up to 00:03:29.291 --> 00:03:38.421 - RFP's so This does not necessarily preclude the land swap that the CIB has proposed for the South property 00:03:38.421 --> 00:03:46.526 - on by Seminary Park But I was I was incredibly incredibly disappointed with that vote. I think 00:03:47.234 --> 00:03:54.062 - Even though and it was acknowledged that it's probably not a financial even trade I don't I don't Think 00:03:54.062 --> 00:04:00.758 - that it is a losing proposition I think it is actually a huge return on investment if we were to swap 00:04:00.758 --> 00:04:07.585 - those properties I think the Bunger-Roberson property is is ideal for the host hotel for the convention 00:04:07.585 --> 00:04:13.822 - center and we want this convention center it is in progress it is happening we want it to be a 00:04:13.922 --> 00:04:20.463 - Successful as possible and having the hotel right there is going to add to that and then keeping that 00:04:20.463 --> 00:04:27.325 - south property for the city For affordable housing right near Hopewell, which we're focusing on affordable 00:04:27.325 --> 00:04:33.738 - housing for it's a huge Opportunity and I feel like it's just a win-win all around so I know that I 00:04:33.738 --> 00:04:40.215 - am not the only council member that supports this land swap, but I really hope that the that the RDC 00:04:40.215 --> 00:04:43.486 - will reconsider the this proposal from the CIB and 00:04:43.810 --> 00:04:54.332 - Thank you. Thank you. Any other council reports. Councilmember Piedmont Smith. I have been in various 00:04:54.332 --> 00:05:04.752 - conferences and meetings the last few weeks so I just wanted to report out on those on March 25th. I 00:05:04.752 --> 00:05:12.798 - attended the first the first day of a two day program hosted by heading home. 00:05:13.122 --> 00:05:21.029 - called housing problem solving with the National Alliance to End Homelessness. So they had guest speakers 00:05:21.029 --> 00:05:28.713 - leading this. It was mainly for providers of services to unhoused people. And their approach is called 00:05:28.713 --> 00:05:36.172 - housing problem solving, which is a conversation-based approach focused on identifying solutions to 00:05:36.172 --> 00:05:40.126 - support people in resolving their own housing crisis 00:05:40.386 --> 00:05:47.853 - as quickly as possible by any needs available to them. So it's a very person-centered, empowering people 00:05:47.853 --> 00:05:54.965 - to think about solutions to their own problems. About 60 people participated, including people from 00:05:54.965 --> 00:06:02.433 - the city of Bloomington and both of our large townships. Secondly, I want to report I went to a national 00:06:02.433 --> 00:06:09.118 - conference, local progress conference in Seattle called Affordable Homes, Stable Communities. 00:06:09.474 --> 00:06:17.264 - Various tools for community stabilization and development were discussed in order to keep affordable 00:06:17.264 --> 00:06:24.977 - housing and develop affordable housing, including community development corporations. We visited El 00:06:24.977 --> 00:06:33.230 - Centro de la Raza, which has a great history in Seattle as a community organization and providing housing, 00:06:33.230 --> 00:06:38.398 - funding through local government bonds, CDBG funding, TIF funding. 00:06:38.530 --> 00:06:45.517 - community use of vacant buildings, and various forms of social housing. There was a lot of discussion 00:06:45.517 --> 00:06:52.710 - about how housing is a resource and a human right, and it should not be primarily an investment vehicle, 00:06:52.710 --> 00:06:59.560 - so decommodification of housing. In our capitalist society, this is very difficult, but communities 00:06:59.560 --> 00:07:04.766 - have gone the social housing route, and Seattle is a great example of that. 00:07:04.962 --> 00:07:13.065 - and also preserving existing housing through rehabilitation and eviction protections just cause requirements 00:07:13.065 --> 00:07:20.722 - for people to be evicted. Third, I went to the Heading Home Regional Housing Summit on April 14th here 00:07:20.722 --> 00:07:28.676 - in Bloomington. We heard some local success stories about small developers creating and funding affordable 00:07:28.676 --> 00:07:34.846 - housing. It was noted that scrappiness is one requirement for people trying to get 00:07:35.618 --> 00:07:43.186 - affordable housing funded. We learned about Streets to Home Indy, which is a collaboration between the 00:07:43.186 --> 00:07:50.900 - city of Indianapolis, philanthropic organizations, and faith communities to provide housing. Our keynote 00:07:50.900 --> 00:07:58.321 - speaker was Vu Lee, who's the founder of Nonprofit AF. And just a quote from him here, he used a lot 00:07:58.321 --> 00:08:05.374 - of humor in his talk, but also really pointedly looking at the systems that have failed people. 00:08:05.890 --> 00:08:13.742 - And he said we need to stop acting like we are begging for money and recognize that we are partnering 00:08:13.742 --> 00:08:21.593 - with foundations to fix problems that they are often complicit in creating. So really our systems are 00:08:21.593 --> 00:08:29.522 - broken and the social service agencies need to be considered partners with funders and not just people 00:08:29.522 --> 00:08:34.910 - begging and being subjected to all kinds of requirements. And at that 00:08:35.778 --> 00:08:44.782 - summit we also heard about community land trusts in Bloomington the Avalon Land Trust that Hugh Farrell 00:08:44.782 --> 00:08:53.526 - talked about and then the Summit Hill Community Development Corporation run by Ryan Still. I just my 00:08:53.526 --> 00:09:02.270 - last comment is about Donald Trump and his Iran war so it's not related to housing or to local stuff 00:09:02.270 --> 00:09:03.742 - but I just can't 00:09:04.226 --> 00:09:10.276 - let this bullshit go on without saying something about it. So Trump's war in Iran has accomplished nothing 00:09:10.276 --> 00:09:16.043 - except for death and economic havoc. There's no sign of a change in regime to benefit the freedom and 00:09:16.043 --> 00:09:22.036 - self-determination of the Iranian people. The best outcome we could possibly hope for is that Iran agrees 00:09:22.036 --> 00:09:27.803 - to intense limits and monitoring of their nuclear capabilities, an agreement the Obama administration 00:09:27.803 --> 00:09:31.422 - achieved in 2015 and Trump pulled out of during his first term. 00:09:32.258 --> 00:09:41.063 - So again, pointless actions by a blustering idiot. Finally, I will agree that I would like to see the 00:09:41.063 --> 00:09:49.781 - land swap with the CIB be pursued. I think this could be a win-win situation for our community. So I 00:09:49.781 --> 00:09:57.982 - hope that the RDC gives that serious consideration. I am disappointed at their vote on Monday. 00:09:58.082 --> 00:10:06.178 - I think the idea is not dead. However, and and can be brought forward with other proposals. That's it 00:10:06.178 --> 00:10:14.910 - Thank you other comments councilman Stasberg Thank you. I just want to report real quick from Plan Commission 00:10:15.266 --> 00:10:21.678 - The last plan Commission meeting the body recommended several UDO changes And those all came from the 00:10:21.678 --> 00:10:28.405 - planning department as part of their like annual updates there were several just kind of technical changes 00:10:28.405 --> 00:10:31.422 - that just corrected language and things and and 00:10:31.554 --> 00:10:38.319 - Clarified stuff and then there are a few more Substantial things and I assume that we'll be seeing actually 00:10:38.319 --> 00:10:44.833 - I think we have to see that sometime before summer recess In terms of state guidelines of when it needs 00:10:44.833 --> 00:10:51.159 - to come to us. So if anybody has any questions on that, you can let me know. Thanks Great. Thank you 00:10:51.159 --> 00:10:57.485 - other council comments councilmember Rosenberger. Hi. Thank you I just wanted to chime in on the RDC 00:10:57.485 --> 00:11:01.118 - meeting and the potential Hopefully still for a land swap 00:11:01.218 --> 00:11:07.698 - I think it's awesome that the CIB that the county transferred the seminary apartment properties to the 00:11:07.698 --> 00:11:14.115 - CIB. I think the tenants at seminary apartments really love where they live right next to the beeline 00:11:14.115 --> 00:11:20.972 - and right next to Kroger. It's honestly I think one of the most walkable locations in the city is especially 00:11:20.972 --> 00:11:27.578 - for folks who might not be able to afford cars. I think a land I'm hoping a land swap is still possible. 00:11:27.578 --> 00:11:29.214 - I think for sure for me I 00:11:29.666 --> 00:11:35.714 - Never thought of a land swap as being the whole Bunger Robertson property for the seminary apartments 00:11:35.714 --> 00:11:42.058 - properties. Those are very different price points. I think seminary apartments has not yet been appraised, 00:11:42.058 --> 00:11:47.988 - but it was bought for somewhere under three million, and then Bunger Robertson is somewhere between 00:11:47.988 --> 00:11:49.470 - seven and eight million. 00:11:50.178 --> 00:11:56.089 - Bunga Robertson is a huge block. It's almost an entire city block so that property can be subdivided 00:11:56.089 --> 00:12:01.942 - our UDO allows for subdivisions and so we can they already see I'm hoping could look at subdividing 00:12:01.942 --> 00:12:08.029 - that property so that it is an equitable swap for the seminary square apartments and then we could have 00:12:08.029 --> 00:12:10.078 - a hotel right where it needs to be 00:12:10.690 --> 00:12:17.217 - probably at that corner of college and third, and then we can keep, it's a 29 affordable units, naturally 00:12:17.217 --> 00:12:23.375 - occurring affordable units at seminary apartments. So I think that would be really awesome and I do 00:12:23.375 --> 00:12:27.870 - encourage the CIB and the RDC to keep talking and doing their very best. 00:12:27.970 --> 00:12:34.192 - I also just want to say this is one of my favorite weeks of the year. It's a little five week. Love 00:12:34.192 --> 00:12:40.787 - how people come into town. Love that there are just hundreds of students out there who have been training 00:12:40.787 --> 00:12:47.257 - all year and four years for these two very special days in April. And as the spiritual and motivational 00:12:47.257 --> 00:12:53.790 - coach of the Cutters, I would like to say God said, go Cutters. Everybody have a great and safe weekend. 00:12:57.282 --> 00:13:06.525 - Thank you. Are there any other council comments? Councilmember Rallo Comes to mind that I'm I too am 00:13:06.525 --> 00:13:15.677 - very supportive of this proposition to swap those properties because It seems to me the the outcome 00:13:15.677 --> 00:13:24.828 - could be very very good for the community could get the CIB what they they would like in terms of a 00:13:24.828 --> 00:13:26.750 - site for a hotel and 00:13:27.618 --> 00:13:36.843 - It isn't a one-to-one in terms of market value of the land, but I think we should keep in mind that 00:13:36.843 --> 00:13:46.067 - the administration was proposing to give the Bunger Robertson site away Totally so it seems that it 00:13:46.067 --> 00:13:55.569 - could be feasible But I will wait and see and suspend judgment until we find out more about about that 00:13:55.569 --> 00:13:57.598 - situation Thanks. Bye 00:13:58.658 --> 00:14:05.854 - Great, thank you. Anybody else? OK, I will take a stab at it. 00:14:06.178 --> 00:14:11.924 - Second, what a lot of my colleagues said about their support for a land swap to construct a convention 00:14:11.924 --> 00:14:17.782 - center hotel. I think we have the opportunity to do something really brave in our community and continue 00:14:17.782 --> 00:14:23.361 - moving this project along while simultaneously saving housing and one of our beloved nonprofits, My 00:14:23.361 --> 00:14:29.274 - Sister's Closet. I also just want to report out from a conversation that I had at the Capital Improvement 00:14:29.274 --> 00:14:30.334 - Board meeting this 00:14:30.498 --> 00:14:37.864 - Wednesday which is that some of the the hesitancy that I've heard at least on this project is that people 00:14:37.864 --> 00:14:45.230 - believe this is a building that won't be used well I'm happy to report back that in a lot of our downtown 00:14:45.230 --> 00:14:52.179 - Bloomington board meetings on which I sit as a member as a representative from council eight groups 00:14:52.179 --> 00:14:54.750 - have already booked out into 2027 in 00:14:55.458 --> 00:15:02.421 - January of which the new convention center will be ready. And so a lot of these people that are booking 00:15:02.421 --> 00:15:09.184 - the space are booking at sight unseen and before it's even ready. So I think when people think about 00:15:09.184 --> 00:15:16.080 - whether or not this building is going to be useful, if we already have people booking this place sight 00:15:16.080 --> 00:15:22.843 - unseen, imagine how excited people will be when they see the beautiful building that has been built. 00:15:22.843 --> 00:15:23.646 - I know that 00:15:23.842 --> 00:15:30.506 - The Arts Commission has done a lot of really great work on our 1% to the public arts. And I've seen 00:15:30.506 --> 00:15:37.236 - some of the designs. And nothing's been decided on, but everything looks very cool. So I'll just say 00:15:37.236 --> 00:15:43.967 - thank you to the Arts Commission. And thank you to the CIB, who's volunteered years of their time at 00:15:43.967 --> 00:15:51.230 - this point to this community project. And they've all been very, very lovely to work with. So thank you. OK. 00:15:53.026 --> 00:16:00.934 - Anything else for the good of the order before we move on? In that case, let's move on to reports from 00:16:00.934 --> 00:16:08.995 - the Office of the Mayor, City Clerk, City Offices, and City of Boards and Commission, which is our flock 00:16:08.995 --> 00:16:16.826 - report from Chief DeKoff. Please take the stand and do we have a presentation? Okay, no presentation. 00:16:16.826 --> 00:16:22.814 - Please state your name for the record and begin when you're ready. Thank you. 00:16:23.874 --> 00:16:30.486 - Good evening council. My name is Mike Decoff. I am the police chief for the city of Bloomington. I'm 00:16:30.486 --> 00:16:37.229 - here tonight to report on a memo that you received last week regarding flock public safety and its Use 00:16:37.229 --> 00:16:43.972 - within the Bloomington Police Department So first I want to start with license plate reader technology 00:16:43.972 --> 00:16:50.780 - has become a very effective and non intrusive tool available to modern law enforcement many departments 00:16:50.780 --> 00:16:52.286 - across the country and 00:16:52.610 --> 00:16:58.588 - have solved crimes who otherwise have gone unsolved thanks to this technology. The Bloomington Police 00:16:58.588 --> 00:17:04.567 - Department has taken deliberate steps to implement FLOC responsibly with strong policy, strict access 00:17:04.567 --> 00:17:10.486 - controls, and regular audits. Today I wanna walk you through what we have, how we use it, and how we 00:17:10.486 --> 00:17:16.347 - protect civil liberties in the process. So the equipment that the Bloomington Police Department has 00:17:16.347 --> 00:17:19.102 - is we have 11 permanently mounted LPR cameras, 00:17:19.266 --> 00:17:25.963 - Those are license plate reader cameras. They're placed on major red ways into and out of the city and 00:17:25.963 --> 00:17:32.136 - at key intersections They capture still photos of license plates on public roads only We have 00:17:32.136 --> 00:17:38.899 - four permanently mounted video cameras in the downtown area. They replaced some cameras Roughly a year 00:17:38.899 --> 00:17:45.662 - ago that had been there for many years that had worn out they are not monitored in real time, but they 00:17:45.826 --> 00:17:52.285 - record so that if there's an incident and we need to go back and see what happened, we're able to pull 00:17:52.285 --> 00:17:58.743 - up that video. A recent example is the IU National Championship celebration where we had approximately 00:17:58.743 --> 00:18:05.139 - 5,000 people converge on Kirkwood and they helped us monitor the event and keep it safe. We also have 00:18:05.139 --> 00:18:11.473 - four mobile trailers that have video. Some of them have LPR technology and some of them have gunshot 00:18:11.473 --> 00:18:15.486 - detection technology. They are not permanent, they are deployed 00:18:15.778 --> 00:18:22.602 - When problems arise at different places around the city Those were purchased by the hand department 00:18:22.602 --> 00:18:29.494 - after apartment complex complaints that involve vandalism theft drug dealing and weapons calls We've 00:18:29.494 --> 00:18:36.932 - also used those in the downtown area in parking lots at nights and on weekends due to increased disturbances 00:18:36.932 --> 00:18:41.982 - that we have had in those areas and after several calls involving weapons 00:18:44.098 --> 00:18:51.673 - What LPR does and doesn't do. What LPR captures is a still photo of the rear of a vehicle and its license 00:18:51.673 --> 00:18:59.034 - plate as it travels on a public road. The photo and a time stamp and that's it, nothing more. LPR does 00:18:59.034 --> 00:19:06.181 - not collect vehicle registration, name, address. It's not linked. It doesn't do facial recognition. 00:19:06.181 --> 00:19:13.470 - It doesn't contain video footage. It doesn't collect demographic information or personal identifiers. 00:19:13.666 --> 00:19:21.051 - Or does it assign risk scores or crime predictions? This tool simply supports investigations and it 00:19:21.051 --> 00:19:28.657 - does not forecast behavior. On the privacy side, cameras are pointed only at public roadways. The same 00:19:28.657 --> 00:19:34.270 - observation that any officer or citizen could make that stands on a street. 00:19:34.946 --> 00:19:41.034 - There's no software that is used to create patterns or associations between individuals' activities, 00:19:41.034 --> 00:19:47.485 - and they're not placed near sensitive locations such as reproductive health facilities, churches, mosques, 00:19:47.485 --> 00:19:53.573 - or temples. Talk a little bit about the access, audits, and data protection. So access is limited to 00:19:53.573 --> 00:20:00.083 - sworn officers and data analysts within the Bloomington Police Department. All users must complete in-house 00:20:00.083 --> 00:20:04.062 - training on policy and usage before gaining access to the system. 00:20:04.418 --> 00:20:12.539 - Every search requires an active case or an event number and a stated reason why the search was made. 00:20:12.539 --> 00:20:20.660 - You cannot search just because. The system also employs a drop-down menu with pre-programmed reasons 00:20:20.660 --> 00:20:28.782 - for searches such as theft, weapons, different types of crimes that might occur. The system logs who 00:20:28.782 --> 00:20:31.998 - searched when the event number and why. 00:20:32.578 --> 00:20:39.282 - System audits are conducted every 60 days to ensure compliance. Data retention is currently set at 30 00:20:39.282 --> 00:20:45.854 - days, then permanently deleted unless entered as evidence in a criminal case. Policy violations are 00:20:45.854 --> 00:20:52.493 - subject to discipline up to and including termination. BPD does not participate in the national FLOC 00:20:52.493 --> 00:20:59.262 - network. Data is shared only with other Indiana law enforcement agencies. FLOC does not sell BPD data. 00:20:59.262 --> 00:21:01.694 - BPD owns 100% of the data collected. 00:21:03.682 --> 00:21:12.344 - I just want to highlight a couple of cases where we've had successes with the FLOC LPR technology. Within 00:21:12.344 --> 00:21:20.842 - the last year, there was a kidnapping where the subject vehicle was followed to the Kentucky state line 00:21:20.842 --> 00:21:29.095 - using the FLOC network. The victim, fortunately, was recovered safely after a pursuit and a crash of 00:21:29.095 --> 00:21:31.710 - that vehicle at the state line. 00:21:31.970 --> 00:21:38.478 - The technology was used to assist the Owen County Sheriff's Office in a homicide that they investigated. 00:21:38.478 --> 00:21:44.986 - The vehicle was located, later confirmed driven by the suspect, leading to an arrest. There was a sexual 00:21:44.986 --> 00:21:51.494 - assault case that was used where the suspect's vehicle was identified. A timeline was set up. We finally 00:21:51.494 --> 00:21:57.755 - found the vehicle, interviewed the owner of that vehicle, which they confessed to the crime and they 00:21:57.755 --> 00:21:59.614 - were later charged with rape. 00:22:00.706 --> 00:22:08.987 - Another homicide where there was a vague description of a vehicle. The data was analyzed over several 00:22:08.987 --> 00:22:17.593 - days and we were able to identify a suspect and make an arrest on a murder charge. Within the last couple 00:22:17.593 --> 00:22:25.792 - of months, there was a homicide in Westfield, Indiana. That vehicle was recovered in Bloomington and 00:22:25.792 --> 00:22:30.014 - helped them process that crime. And the most recent 00:22:31.042 --> 00:22:39.432 - The flock success story was just last night. There was a woman who was beaten in the head with a hammer 00:22:39.432 --> 00:22:47.500 - and stabbed. The suspect left. We were able to get flock information on that suspect vehicle and we 00:22:47.500 --> 00:22:55.971 - made an arrest this morning and charged that person with attempted homicide. Little bit about contracts. 00:22:55.971 --> 00:22:59.198 - The 11 LPR cameras and operating system 00:23:00.002 --> 00:23:08.385 - was signed in February of 2024 for $40,650. There's an annual renewal of $36,500. That renewal was not 00:23:08.385 --> 00:23:16.686 - signed this year, and that contract has been canceled. There are four downtown video cameras that was 00:23:16.686 --> 00:23:26.046 - signed in September of 2024. The initial amount was $15,000 a year, and then subsequent years were $12,000 a year. 00:23:26.306 --> 00:23:35.069 - And the four mobile trailers, there's a current agreement that was signed in October of 2025. And those 00:23:35.069 --> 00:23:43.832 - are roughly, I believe, 90,000 a year for two trailers each. All agreements were sole-sourced, approved 00:23:43.832 --> 00:23:52.848 - at the department level without border commission approval. The total program cost to date is $236,829.68. 00:23:52.848 --> 00:23:55.966 - In closing, I would like to say that 00:23:56.386 --> 00:24:04.636 - Flock is a powerful investigative tool. When it's used responsibly, it contributes to solving serious 00:24:04.636 --> 00:24:13.290 - crimes in our community. We have built in meaningful safeguards, we have strong policies, strong training, 00:24:13.290 --> 00:24:21.379 - strong audits, and we also restrict sharing. I will welcome any questions. As I stated earlier, the 00:24:21.379 --> 00:24:25.342 - Flock contracts were not renewed, and so the LPR 00:24:26.114 --> 00:24:33.608 - Contract actually ends at the end of this weekend I'll take any questions you might have. Thank you 00:24:33.608 --> 00:24:41.102 - questions Councilmember Piedmont Smith Yes, thank you for the report Which contract was not renewed 00:24:41.102 --> 00:24:48.821 - because it seems like there are at least four different contracts here listed the license plate reader 00:24:48.821 --> 00:24:54.142 - contract expired and so that one has not been renewed and we are still 00:24:54.562 --> 00:25:02.437 - Working through the process of ending the other contracts, but the LPR system just ended so that that 00:25:02.437 --> 00:25:10.236 - will go away This weekend the other contracts we still have to terminate and that is a legal process 00:25:10.236 --> 00:25:17.957 - that I am NOT going to comment on I will let the attorneys talk about that Is it can anyone give an 00:25:17.957 --> 00:25:23.902 - estimate of when those can be Terminated and is there a possibility of just? 00:25:24.514 --> 00:25:32.163 - covering those cameras While we wait for the termination to take place Well, those are video cameras 00:25:32.163 --> 00:25:39.962 - that have been up for many years If that is the direction that we want to do and just do away with the 00:25:39.962 --> 00:25:47.838 - downtown video cameras But we are looking at replacing the flock cameras with other brands so that it's 00:25:47.838 --> 00:25:50.110 - not tied to the flock network 00:25:54.018 --> 00:26:03.849 - Thank you, Council Member Asari. Thank you so much, Chief DeKoff, and hi colleagues. I just had a question, 00:26:03.849 --> 00:26:12.952 - have a couple of questions, but because we're thinking about this in the broader sense, not just in 00:26:12.952 --> 00:26:15.774 - reaction to flux specifically. 00:26:15.906 --> 00:26:25.299 - But I'm interested on this, on the process of procurement. And particularly, you mentioned both in the 00:26:25.299 --> 00:26:34.419 - report and just now said again that I think the word was sole, this was a sole source purchase. And 00:26:34.419 --> 00:26:37.246 - could you explain a little bit 00:26:37.346 --> 00:26:46.374 - about why that's the type of purchase that doesn't need to come for board approval. And then the follow-up 00:26:46.374 --> 00:26:54.558 - question is what was the sort of formal justification, if you will, for sole source designation? 00:26:56.290 --> 00:27:03.077 - I'm Margie rice and the corporation council. I can address that question so Hello, so the issue of sole 00:27:03.077 --> 00:27:09.865 - source contracts is always brought to legal and the controller and it's generally when there's a unique 00:27:09.865 --> 00:27:16.782 - provider or a unique product you want that either has features or Capabilities that somebody else doesn't 00:27:16.782 --> 00:27:20.894 - provide so if an apartment wants to sole source something that 00:27:21.730 --> 00:27:27.899 - It does have to be verified by the controller Obviously legal talks about it as part of the contract 00:27:27.899 --> 00:27:34.251 - and so this I wasn't Necessarily involved in the departmental conversations about the options that they 00:27:34.251 --> 00:27:39.198 - were looking at but I know that this one did pass the test with a controller and 00:27:40.226 --> 00:27:46.042 - And what's the test when we talk about the test with the controller? What is that test? Generally, if 00:27:46.042 --> 00:27:51.744 - there are specific features that other vendors don't have, that there's something unique about this 00:27:51.744 --> 00:27:57.617 - product. And so that would have been a conversation between the department and the controller. And the 00:27:57.617 --> 00:28:03.661 - controller would have to essentially say, yeah, I agree with you, that this is a unique product, a unique 00:28:03.661 --> 00:28:09.534 - vendor, and there's nothing else out there. You can't send it out to bid and get 12 different options. 00:28:10.082 --> 00:28:18.255 - that meets the qualifications. So it means that we're buying a thing for one of the specific features 00:28:18.255 --> 00:28:26.427 - that it has that we're saying none of the others, we probably consider other vendors for LPRs, we say 00:28:26.427 --> 00:28:34.520 - none of them have this particular set or this particular feature. And this is a governance question, 00:28:34.520 --> 00:28:38.526 - I'm not interested, I'm not, what do you call it, 00:28:38.786 --> 00:28:46.031 - This is this isn't like to point fingers or anything. I'm just curious then does that get recorded like 00:28:46.031 --> 00:28:52.997 - what the purpose, you know, what was the the justification for This sole purpose purchase You know, 00:28:52.997 --> 00:29:00.172 - I I know that there is documentation in the controller's office about the the justification that's not 00:29:00.172 --> 00:29:05.118 - in my department So I'm not sure what that looks like for every single 00:29:05.410 --> 00:29:11.980 - contract, Julie Martintale in the controller's office is generally the person who looks at those and 00:29:11.980 --> 00:29:18.811 - reviews them, and we could certainly get you information about what that looked like for this one. Yeah, 00:29:18.811 --> 00:29:25.642 - and again, I'm more interested in the process if it's the controller who alone says, okay, yeah, I agree 00:29:25.642 --> 00:29:32.342 - with your assessment that this is a unique feature, therefore approved for purchase versus just trying 00:29:32.342 --> 00:29:34.814 - to think about when we should trigger 00:29:34.914 --> 00:29:41.615 - broader governance oversight and from from other bodies and when we when we look at these type 00:29:41.615 --> 00:29:49.163 - of Technologies that makes sense. We definitely want to pass the sniff test and are not just soul sourcing 00:29:49.163 --> 00:29:56.288 - everything because somebody likes a particular vendor Right. Excellent. I have some other questions, 00:29:56.288 --> 00:30:03.977 - but I'll let my colleagues go other first round councilmember Rallo Yeah, I happened I support the canceling 00:30:03.977 --> 00:30:04.894 - of the flock 00:30:05.442 --> 00:30:14.387 - contract It seems that there are numerous cases of abuse and misuse and privacy violations by flock 00:30:14.387 --> 00:30:23.511 - But apart from that you you obviously find it your department finds it a Useful tool there's no doubt 00:30:23.511 --> 00:30:32.634 - that it could be used in such a way My fear is that you know, where does it where does it stop? Do we 00:30:32.634 --> 00:30:34.334 - have these sort of 00:30:34.466 --> 00:30:42.438 - creeping network of surveillance that that Eventually is dispersed throughout the entire community that 00:30:42.438 --> 00:30:50.180 - is used You know, yes with restrictions those could go away in time, of course Is that the direction 00:30:50.180 --> 00:30:57.999 - that law enforcement is heading generally speaking not just the Bloomington Police Department, but is 00:30:57.999 --> 00:31:03.518 - that a Desired outcome. I don't think so. I understand your concerns. I 00:31:04.770 --> 00:31:13.091 - But at the time we were looking at this technology, it was not this council, it was the previous council, 00:31:13.091 --> 00:31:20.863 - encouraged me to look to technology to solve some of our staffing problems. So that's what we did. 00:31:20.863 --> 00:31:29.105 - And so, you know, I have concerns about some of this, that's why we tried to build in as many safeguards 00:31:29.105 --> 00:31:32.638 - as we can. You know, I'm not concerned about 00:31:32.866 --> 00:31:40.883 - our agency, but I understand the concerns about other agencies and how they use the data. And so I'm 00:31:40.883 --> 00:31:49.139 - just saying that it is a useful tool to help us solve violent crimes. And so if we don't have it, we'll 00:31:49.139 --> 00:31:57.632 - just resort back to the way we used to do things, and it will probably take us longer. There will probably 00:31:57.632 --> 00:31:59.934 - be some that we won't solve, 00:32:00.098 --> 00:32:09.250 - will do everything in our power to resolve cases that we're working on with the means that we have. 00:32:09.250 --> 00:32:18.676 - I don't dispute that it's a useful tool. I think that, you know, I understand. It's just the trade-off 00:32:18.676 --> 00:32:28.926 - in terms of surveillance, privacy, and so forth that I think is our concern. And I think it's a proven concern. 00:32:29.026 --> 00:32:36.349 - I think that we've seen the misuse around the country. And so it's alarming to me that it's been utilized 00:32:36.349 --> 00:32:43.258 - in ways that is above and beyond what you describe. But I look forward to talking to you. Sure, no, 00:32:43.258 --> 00:32:50.236 - like I said, I understand your concerns. I think we live in a world where technology is taking over. 00:32:50.236 --> 00:32:57.144 - I would bet that probably every person in this room has a cell phone. And the information that that 00:32:57.144 --> 00:32:58.526 - cell phone captures 00:32:58.914 --> 00:33:08.121 - is way more than a flat camera. That being said, we don't have access to everyone's cell phones. So 00:33:08.121 --> 00:33:17.604 - in a broader technology conversation, you're right. I mean, there are more and more cameras prevalent. 00:33:17.604 --> 00:33:25.246 - Indiana University probably has the largest supply of video cameras in the county. 00:33:25.954 --> 00:33:34.947 - Other places use LPR technology. But again, I understand that there are concerns about privacy and things 00:33:34.947 --> 00:33:43.686 - like that. We tried to use it very responsibly in a time when we were really understaffed. Our numbers 00:33:43.686 --> 00:33:50.558 - are coming back up. So that was an option that we had that we took advantage of. 00:33:55.554 --> 00:34:04.306 - Thank you You mentioned consideration of other services That would do some of these things. Can you 00:34:04.306 --> 00:34:13.320 - talk a little bit about how you're Assessing those other services that might kind of replace flock And 00:34:13.320 --> 00:34:21.022 - what you might be doing? So we haven't done anything yet. That is a conversation that I 00:34:21.282 --> 00:34:32.686 - Plan to have with the mayor's office and see what direction that she wants us to go and looking at other 00:34:32.686 --> 00:34:43.221 - technology options To see how we can use those to assist us when we do our jobs Others questions 00:34:43.221 --> 00:34:45.502 - Councilmember, sorry 00:34:47.074 --> 00:34:57.820 - Thank you so much, and again, thank you to Dukov and Margie. Didn't get a chance to say thank you before 00:34:57.820 --> 00:35:08.770 - you sat down. My next sort of queries were about sort of questions of effectiveness, particularly, because 00:35:08.770 --> 00:35:16.446 - I appreciate the cases that you highlighted, but I guess I'm curious about 00:35:17.954 --> 00:35:27.925 - how many cases, for example, in the last year, relied materially on flock data versus cases where it 00:35:27.925 --> 00:35:38.193 - was incidental, or maybe like a different way of asking that is thinking about what percentage of total 00:35:38.193 --> 00:35:46.782 - investigations involve LPR queries. So what I'm interested in is both whether you view 00:35:46.882 --> 00:35:54.987 - And I think I know the answer to this question, but you view LPR data as critical, i.e. we would not 00:35:54.987 --> 00:36:03.091 - have solved this thing were it not for LPR data. It's sort of question one. But then my follow-up is 00:36:03.091 --> 00:36:11.998 - that, are we now just routinely using LPR data in all investigations? And so when do you decide we're going to 00:36:12.194 --> 00:36:21.103 - to query the system for LPR for license plates in the course of investigation? So sort of three questions. 00:36:21.103 --> 00:36:29.763 - I'm sorry. I think most agencies use LPR data when they have no leads to follow up on. So some of those 00:36:29.763 --> 00:36:38.089 - cases that I mentioned where we had some successes in making arrests, those were cases where we had 00:36:38.089 --> 00:36:40.254 - no leads to follow up on. 00:36:40.578 --> 00:36:50.039 - Or we might have had something very, very vague or something like that where someone started querying 00:36:50.039 --> 00:36:59.500 - the system. And I just want to highlight there was a report that last year it said I think we used it 00:36:59.500 --> 00:37:09.054 - 9,000 times. You have to keep in mind that every, we could have one query, the same query that's asked 00:37:10.306 --> 00:37:19.424 - 25 times of the system, and it tracks each one. So it wasn't 9,000 separate cases that we used Flock 00:37:19.424 --> 00:37:28.541 - for, it was just 9,000 times it was queried for information. So it might have only been 500 cases, I 00:37:28.541 --> 00:37:38.110 - don't know. That type of information we hadn't kept, so your question about how many times it's been six, 00:37:38.434 --> 00:37:46.871 - I can't tell you that because that's not something that we tracked. I just know the serious violent 00:37:46.871 --> 00:37:55.392 - crimes that we've solved with it. And then is there some type of a process that the detectives would 00:37:55.392 --> 00:38:01.214 - go through to sort of trigger the use of any of this data? Or is it, 00:38:03.458 --> 00:38:09.164 - You know can they just in the courts of any investigation use it right dude is there is there some type 00:38:09.164 --> 00:38:14.706 - of thing that says okay now Now I do it and I need to go through some protocol of reporting that I'm 00:38:14.706 --> 00:38:20.192 - about to do it Or is it just a tool that's available to them like any other tool It's a tool that's 00:38:20.192 --> 00:38:25.789 - available like any other tool if there I mean I can't imagine they would query it if they do you know 00:38:25.789 --> 00:38:31.550 - they had a suspect already and they had a lot of information that's not something that they would do and 00:38:31.906 --> 00:38:39.713 - but it's used mostly when there aren't suspects or there isn't information that's readily available 00:38:39.713 --> 00:38:47.676 - right now that's gonna help us solve a violent crime. Okay, thank you so much, Chief. I have one more 00:38:47.676 --> 00:38:52.126 - set of questions, but I'll wait for Madam Chair to call. 00:38:52.386 --> 00:38:59.578 - Yes, absolutely what we've reached our report time, but I think this is a conversation that everyone 00:38:59.578 --> 00:39:07.055 - wants to have including our audience So if it is alright with everyone up here, I will extend the Report 00:39:07.055 --> 00:39:14.461 - time for another 20 minutes and we will reevaluate there Great and for the good of the order that would 00:39:14.461 --> 00:39:20.158 - be 727 so keep an eye on the clock other questions Councilmember Piedmont Smith 00:39:23.010 --> 00:39:33.319 - Yes, so the outside sharing of data from our flock cameras has been curtailed as of, what, April 15th? 00:39:33.319 --> 00:39:43.628 - Is that right? That was? Yes. I think that was the day, yeah. That day was the memo. It was last week. 00:39:43.628 --> 00:39:50.334 - But isn't it true that flock safety still has access to that data? 00:39:51.106 --> 00:40:01.156 - It's been turned off. We control that at the department level, and so we've turned all that off so they 00:40:01.156 --> 00:40:11.109 - don't have access to that. So the data that's collected by the ALPRs in the last week, isn't that data 00:40:11.109 --> 00:40:19.710 - stored by Flock Safety? I mean, isn't it part of the contract that they obtain that data 00:40:20.194 --> 00:40:28.062 - and make it available to BPD? The information that I have received is they do not have any more, the 00:40:28.062 --> 00:40:35.931 - data has been turned off, the stream has been turned off. And so nobody can access our data. Only we 00:40:35.931 --> 00:40:44.111 - can access it, nobody else can, so it's not being shared with anybody else. So when you access the data, 00:40:44.111 --> 00:40:48.318 - where do you access it from? We access it from Flock. 00:40:48.834 --> 00:40:57.112 - Okay, so it's data on the cloud. I'm sorry, I'm sorry. It's data on the cloud like in an internet server. 00:40:57.112 --> 00:41:05.155 - Yes. Okay. And there have been problems with flock safety securing that data in the past. Yeah, that's 00:41:05.155 --> 00:41:13.042 - what people are saying. Okay. And then I just wanted to follow up on something I had mentioned in my 00:41:13.042 --> 00:41:16.478 - previous question. And especially since the 00:41:17.282 --> 00:41:26.280 - The end of contract only affects the ALPRs and not the other cameras. Can we physically turn off and 00:41:26.280 --> 00:41:35.367 - ensure they are off the other cameras whose contract has not expired yet? Yes, we can. And does Flock 00:41:35.367 --> 00:41:44.633 - have any power to go in and turn the back on? Because this has happened in other communities where like 00:41:44.633 --> 00:41:47.038 - Evansville, Illinois said, 00:41:47.170 --> 00:41:53.219 - We want you to turn the cameras off and that would be turned back on by flock If we decide to turn them 00:41:53.219 --> 00:41:59.151 - off, it would be hard for them to turn them on if we disconnect the power Okay, and that is that your 00:41:59.151 --> 00:42:04.967 - plan for the other cameras whose contract has not ended That is a conversation that the mayor and I 00:42:04.967 --> 00:42:10.783 - are going to have we've not had that conversation yet, but but yes She does not want us to continue 00:42:10.783 --> 00:42:13.982 - having any flock products. So that is that will happen 00:42:15.138 --> 00:42:22.663 - Okay. Can that happen before the contracts are actually terminated? It will happen before the con. Yeah, 00:42:22.663 --> 00:42:30.115 - we have to figure out the legal part of the contracts and how that's going to play out. But we can turn 00:42:30.115 --> 00:42:37.282 - those off, you know, when we want. Okay. I would love to get a commitment from the mayor to turning 00:42:37.282 --> 00:42:41.438 - them off as soon as possible. Thank you. Other questions? 00:42:51.138 --> 00:42:59.314 - Council Member Asari, did you have more questions? Yes, thank you. Just one last set and again thank 00:42:59.314 --> 00:43:05.790 - you all for your patience. A little bit interested in if we were to think about 00:43:05.954 --> 00:43:16.906 - transparency and public reporting, both, I guess, in terms of procurement, but certainly in terms of 00:43:16.906 --> 00:43:27.858 - use. I'm interested if the chief has any thoughts on what that might look like. So as we think about 00:43:27.858 --> 00:43:35.774 - any use in maybe a more expensive way, what would your opinion be on how 00:43:36.066 --> 00:43:43.716 - that type of public reporting and sort of transparency guidelines would work, should work. Yeah, so 00:43:43.716 --> 00:43:51.367 - I think we can research to see what other departments do. I'm sure there are other departments that 00:43:51.367 --> 00:43:59.323 - have public transparency portals. We can look at that. The only thing that I would want to look at more 00:43:59.323 --> 00:44:03.454 - closely is how we report data and we don't compromise 00:44:04.066 --> 00:44:12.636 - any of our criminal investigations that we're doing. And I'm sure there's a way to do that. I'm sure 00:44:12.636 --> 00:44:21.631 - we would not be the first agency to do a public transparency portal on data. So we would just look around 00:44:21.631 --> 00:44:30.286 - and see what everybody else is doing and figure out a good system that works for us. And then just to 00:44:30.286 --> 00:44:33.086 - bring the full loop, in terms of 00:44:34.082 --> 00:44:42.580 - In terms of officer use or detective use, and I know you said a baseline that's clearly reported. I 00:44:42.580 --> 00:44:51.248 - think you said that searches have to be tied to an event. I think you said that it's audited every 60 00:44:51.248 --> 00:45:00.766 - days. What are you looking for in the 60-day audits? Who conducts those audits? Are they internal, independent? 00:45:00.866 --> 00:45:11.060 - What sort of percentage of searches are reviewed when we do those audits? And then also, are you tracking, 00:45:11.060 --> 00:45:20.968 - because you talked about how improper use can result in anything up to firing, but how are you tracking 00:45:20.968 --> 00:45:22.302 - improper use? 00:45:22.658 --> 00:45:29.050 - Find out when sort of some type of unusual query behavior occurs or anything like that and have you 00:45:29.050 --> 00:45:35.570 - had to insert a last question. I know it's a barrel question. I'm sorry, but have you had to take any 00:45:35.570 --> 00:45:42.090 - disciplinary actions around around flock use so far? We have not had to take any disciplinary action. 00:45:42.090 --> 00:45:48.546 - There have been some training issues that were addressed with officers. So when we do an audit it we 00:45:48.546 --> 00:45:51.934 - basically get a report of every query that was done. 00:45:52.034 --> 00:46:02.414 - to the system with who did it, the dates, times, reasons. A lot of that information is, well, it's all 00:46:02.414 --> 00:46:12.895 - reviewed by one supervisor that writes a report that goes to his supervisor that is reviewed. And then, 00:46:12.895 --> 00:46:16.926 - again, any problems that are identified 00:46:17.282 --> 00:46:26.009 - So far, there have just been some minor training ones about filling out the reports the right way. And 00:46:26.009 --> 00:46:35.159 - even with those, there's only a couple usually with each audit that we find. And does that include external 00:46:35.159 --> 00:46:43.717 - queries? So even though you all say you have control over it, if somebody else has queried the data, 00:46:43.717 --> 00:46:46.174 - does that somehow get logged 00:46:46.466 --> 00:46:55.453 - Yeah, so if another agency queries it, we get that information and then we review the circumstances 00:46:55.453 --> 00:47:04.440 - of their inquiry and how they used it and if they followed the same protocols that we have in place 00:47:04.440 --> 00:47:10.910 - for our officers. And in the case that you have that sharing turned on, 00:47:11.042 --> 00:47:19.795 - does that querying happen automatically and it just gets logged or is there a you all decide whether 00:47:19.795 --> 00:47:28.460 - or not to share it type of stage that happens in between? So both. It depends on what type of query 00:47:28.460 --> 00:47:37.213 - it is. For instance, if we enter a like a amber alert or a silver alert or something like that where 00:47:37.213 --> 00:47:40.766 - we put in quite a bit of information and 00:47:41.090 --> 00:47:49.182 - someone would run, a plate would hit, and another agency would get notification, they would get more 00:47:49.182 --> 00:47:57.514 - information because we've already entered it into the National Crime Information Center database, which 00:47:57.514 --> 00:48:05.847 - is a national computer that tracks missing persons, all kinds of things related to the criminal justice 00:48:05.847 --> 00:48:10.814 - system. And so those types of queries, because it's something 00:48:11.330 --> 00:48:17.850 - a safety issue usually, they would get more information and that we would still get that information. 00:48:17.850 --> 00:48:24.305 - But if it's somebody that is inquiring about a specific vehicle, maybe being, if it's another agency 00:48:24.305 --> 00:48:30.953 - that's investigating something and that vehicle hits in Bloomington, then they would get a notification 00:48:30.953 --> 00:48:37.344 - that it hit in Bloomington and then they would reach out to us. And does that happen even with that 00:48:37.344 --> 00:48:39.134 - sharing feature turned off? 00:48:39.906 --> 00:48:48.545 - It doesn't happen with the sharing feature turned off. No outside agency gets any hits from anything 00:48:48.545 --> 00:48:57.184 - captured on a Bloomington LPR camera. Okay. And my final question, I promise I will sit down and not 00:48:57.184 --> 00:49:01.118 - speak again. So the county has ALPRs as well. 00:49:01.346 --> 00:49:09.282 - what's the process of sharing, not sharing, et cetera, with the sheriff's department, with 00:49:09.282 --> 00:49:18.264 - Indiana University, et cetera. We have turned off all sharing, so they receive no information from our 00:49:18.264 --> 00:49:26.723 - cameras. OK. Thank you so much. Thank you for your patience. Thank you. Any other questions? OK. 00:49:26.723 --> 00:49:28.990 - Thank you, Chief Deakoff. 00:49:29.090 --> 00:49:36.418 - And then am I correct in assuming that there are people in the audience tonight who would like to speak 00:49:36.418 --> 00:49:43.465 - on a flock issue? Okay. At this point in time, I'm happy to entertain a motion to suspend the rules 00:49:43.465 --> 00:49:50.793 - and allow public comment for the flock report. Second. Okay, there's been a movement and a second. Will 00:49:50.793 --> 00:49:57.911 - the clerk please call the roll to suspend the rules to allow public comment for the flock report? Is 00:49:57.911 --> 00:49:59.038 - this debatable? 00:50:02.914 --> 00:50:13.308 - Is it a debatable motion? Can I? Point of information. I don't believe that it is. Oh, okay. Councillor 00:50:13.308 --> 00:50:23.703 - Allen. Okay. Apologies. It is not a debatable motion. That's okay. I just had a counter proposal. Okay. 00:50:23.703 --> 00:50:32.798 - Well, I think we have a motion on the table to suspend the rules and allow public comment. 00:50:32.930 --> 00:50:40.548 - For this moment in time and not there would be another period of general public comment. This would 00:50:40.548 --> 00:50:48.624 - just be for Council or excuse me comment on this report Sure How long would that period of public comment 00:50:48.624 --> 00:50:56.242 - be if we had the public comment right now as opposed to rolling public comment over into the public 00:50:56.242 --> 00:51:01.118 - comment period I believe councilmember Rallo made the motion. I 00:51:03.810 --> 00:51:12.486 - That's efficient. Okay, and maybe why don't we just roll it into normal public comment? Well Well, we 00:51:12.486 --> 00:51:21.077 - could do either but why don't we do 20 minutes limiting? I don't know three minutes per speaker like 00:51:21.077 --> 00:51:29.923 - that. Okay, and do you carry your second councilmember daily? Great in that case, will the clerk please 00:51:29.923 --> 00:51:31.454 - call the roll and 00:51:35.938 --> 00:51:54.897 - Stasberg. Yes, he months Smith Suleik. Yes, sorry Yes, daily. Yes Rallo. Yes Ruff Rosenberger Thank 00:51:54.897 --> 00:51:58.878 - you that passes nine 00:52:01.730 --> 00:52:09.236 - so if anyone who's interested in speaking on this flock report could gather at the microphone and Write 00:52:09.236 --> 00:52:16.814 - your name and when you get up to the mic, please state your name and then you'll each have three minutes 00:52:16.814 --> 00:52:24.103 - to speak It is currently 722 we will continue with public comment until 742 And can we get the timer 00:52:24.103 --> 00:52:27.134 - on the thank you, okay great, thank you I 00:52:27.330 --> 00:52:34.264 - Speaker number one, if you could state your name if you'd like. You have three minutes. Hello. Hey, 00:52:34.264 --> 00:52:41.267 - I'm Sam Dixon, a local worker here. I've been here in Bloomington for the past eight years. Firstly, 00:52:41.267 --> 00:52:48.270 - just thanks to the council for passing resolution 2026-04. I think that was an important moment that 00:52:48.270 --> 00:52:55.273 - brought us to today, having transparency for the community, transparency to the public about the use 00:52:55.273 --> 00:52:57.214 - of technologies like Flock. 00:52:57.378 --> 00:53:06.037 - kind of a big deal to have this after years of having struggles with FOIA requests for data on the system. 00:53:06.037 --> 00:53:13.644 - So I appreciate that action. I was at first pretty confused by the mayor's announcement about 00:53:13.644 --> 00:53:21.817 - the cancellation, but I'm happy that a lot of the questions I had about that were kind of worked out 00:53:21.817 --> 00:53:26.430 - in the question process just now here. One of those was, 00:53:26.754 --> 00:53:34.073 - when are we actually gonna have the cameras taken down? That is kinda my most principle concern because 00:53:34.073 --> 00:53:41.744 - if the contracts are expired or expiring and if we're making a commitment to move away from this technology, 00:53:41.744 --> 00:53:49.133 - what stops us from putting a black bag over it or just taking it down and putting it in a shed tomorrow? 00:53:49.133 --> 00:53:54.622 - And then, just to keep it brief, my follow-up to that would be in looking for 00:53:54.818 --> 00:54:01.887 - potential replacement vendors, potential technologies that do a similar thing but with less flagrant 00:54:01.887 --> 00:54:09.096 - risks. My suggestion to everyone, the police, the mayor, the council, would be just not to have a mass 00:54:09.096 --> 00:54:16.165 - surveillance system at all. So we don't need more cameras. We don't need to be watched at all times. 00:54:16.165 --> 00:54:23.934 - We don't need a continual expansion of the police state and the surveillance state. That doesn't help anybody. 00:54:24.226 --> 00:54:31.013 - And so I would ask that you consider that option and not consider it absolutely necessary that police 00:54:31.013 --> 00:54:35.006 - should be surveilling everybody at all times. So thank you. 00:54:35.714 --> 00:54:41.320 - Thank you. And then also if you're on Zoom, please raise your hand and we will get you. And there's 00:54:41.320 --> 00:54:47.319 - one speaker on Zoom? Okay, great. Speaker on Zoom, we will get to you after this next speaker in chambers. 00:54:47.319 --> 00:54:52.925 - You can go ahead and state your name and you'll have three minutes. Hi, my name is Chris Doran. I'm 00:54:52.925 --> 00:54:58.587 - a Bloomington resident. I would encourage, first of all, I'd like to thank the council and on behalf 00:54:58.587 --> 00:55:01.278 - of many of us who are working on this issue for 00:55:01.474 --> 00:55:08.873 - The resolution, clearly it seems there's good news from what the Chief DeKoff said, that essentially 00:55:08.873 --> 00:55:16.346 - the contracts are going to be canceled. I think I speak for many in this room, including some members 00:55:16.346 --> 00:55:23.818 - of council who do not trust the mayor on this issue. I don't understand if the contracts are gonna be 00:55:23.818 --> 00:55:30.558 - canceled, why it took from March 5th until now, but anyway, it still seems to be good news. 00:55:30.722 --> 00:55:37.216 - The police chief also, I've skipped over a few things. Mainly, the biggest issue is that Flock has control 00:55:37.216 --> 00:55:43.346 - of this data. He clearly was a little bit confused as to whether they did, whether they have control 00:55:43.346 --> 00:55:49.780 - during this time. We know that other municipalities have canceled contracts. Flock has ignored it. Flock, 00:55:49.780 --> 00:55:55.910 - they've taken down the cameras. Flock has put the cameras back up. They claim it's private property. 00:55:55.910 --> 00:55:56.638 - So clearly, 00:55:56.738 --> 00:56:03.880 - this corporation has way too much power. And also, goodness gracious, the bullshit of both the mayor 00:56:03.880 --> 00:56:10.811 - and the police chief and not recognizing SV-57, the state of Indiana passed a law saying that he, 00:56:10.811 --> 00:56:18.024 - the mayor, everyone in this room has to cooperate with federal law enforcement regarding immigration. 00:56:18.024 --> 00:56:22.974 - So these ludicrous statements in the mayor's report and in the chief, 00:56:23.842 --> 00:56:30.167 - Police Chief Deakoff's report essentially saying the information won't be shared that's only in Bloomington, 00:56:30.167 --> 00:56:31.966 - etc. That clearly is not true. 00:56:32.162 --> 00:56:38.144 - They don't have control of that. And so I speak of, I want to support my colleague Sam who just spoke 00:56:38.144 --> 00:56:44.067 - that essentially we don't want mass surveillance. This has been going on for a while. The resolution 00:56:44.067 --> 00:56:49.932 - was pretty clear about if there can't be acceptable alternatives. The concern is that the mayor and 00:56:49.932 --> 00:56:55.856 - the police department are just going to find another license plate reader, which is very concerning. 00:56:55.856 --> 00:57:00.606 - And yes, there are, you know, that's great. I would really encourage the council 00:57:00.706 --> 00:57:06.249 - to do a, I don't know if you have to do a Freedom of Information report, but I would bet about half 00:57:06.249 --> 00:57:12.070 - those reports that the mayor cited are bullshit, right? That the ALPR might have helped, but essentially 00:57:12.070 --> 00:57:17.724 - it wasn't the key deciding factor. And so if we're gonna have mass surveillance, why don't we have it 00:57:17.724 --> 00:57:23.489 - everywhere? Why don't we have it in all our homes? Why don't we have it on ourselves? And the statement 00:57:23.489 --> 00:57:25.374 - that our cell phones have as much 00:57:25.506 --> 00:57:32.076 - can have more information than our cell phones are not connected to a national database that can be 00:57:32.076 --> 00:57:38.712 - accessed by ICE. So this is one of the primary things I would encourage the governance that is going 00:57:38.712 --> 00:57:45.348 - to happen relative to this. No mass surveillance, no ALPR, license plate readers, and certainly none 00:57:45.348 --> 00:57:52.313 - that can be shared with the state of Indiana who we don't trust or the federal government we don't trust. 00:57:52.313 --> 00:57:53.758 - Thank you. Thank you. 00:57:53.986 --> 00:58:00.768 - Apologies, we are going to go to our Zoom commenter now. You will be unmuted or asked to unmute, and 00:58:00.768 --> 00:58:07.887 - then you'll have three minutes. Thank you. This is Kevin Keough. Talking about this, the first impression 00:58:07.887 --> 00:58:14.938 - I had is you would think the police department would have some technical expertise, especially for cyber 00:58:14.938 --> 00:58:22.526 - crimes. And I don't know exactly how their staff there, but you would think they would have some capacity there. 00:58:22.658 --> 00:58:30.434 - But talking about some of the best practices, one that really gets to me is the 60-day audits. To me, 00:58:30.434 --> 00:58:38.362 - that's a post-mortem. I would much rather hear that you have an intrusion detection system or intrusion 00:58:38.362 --> 00:58:46.215 - prevention system that was used. I would also hope there would be automated alerts. You're logging all 00:58:46.215 --> 00:58:52.542 - this, there's tools out there you can use to give alerts. It would be much better. 00:58:52.642 --> 00:59:00.174 - But the key is the technology is going to continue to progress. There are going to be good tools to 00:59:00.174 --> 00:59:07.782 - use, but with that comes the responsibility to use them correctly and use best practices. So I think 00:59:07.782 --> 00:59:15.390 - it'd be a great investment to have the personnel, the resources that are highly skilled in this area 00:59:15.390 --> 00:59:20.286 - that could promote the security and the privacy issues and would 00:59:20.802 --> 00:59:26.885 - be a great source for training within the department and also the entire community and the workforce 00:59:26.885 --> 00:59:33.210 - with the city. So I think there's a lot going on here. Technology, yes, is going to continue. It's going 00:59:33.210 --> 00:59:39.233 - to continue to creep into everything we do. But we need to do the best we can to secure what we can 00:59:39.233 --> 00:59:45.497 - and do it at a high level. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker in chambers, if you could state 00:59:45.497 --> 00:59:48.990 - your name for the record, you'll have three minutes. Yes. 00:59:49.154 --> 00:59:55.159 - I'm Bryce green. I am a Bloomington resident and have been for around 10 years I'd like to echo basically 00:59:55.159 --> 01:00:00.823 - everything everyone was saying up here about being against not just flock this company and its ills 01:00:00.823 --> 01:00:06.488 - But also it's the concept of mass surveillance in general. We don't need to be watched all the time 01:00:06.488 --> 01:00:12.492 - We don't need the technology that is watching people all the time and even if we did all you know believe 01:00:12.492 --> 01:00:17.534 - in the inherent goodness of the Bloomington Police Department like like people have said 01:00:17.794 --> 01:00:23.736 - Other agencies will have access to this regardless of whether or not you flick a setting on a given 01:00:23.736 --> 01:00:29.915 - piece of software. And I'd also like to point out a couple things that I think are pretty alarming that 01:00:29.915 --> 01:00:36.510 - other people have mentioned before is that the police chief doesn't seem to understand how the internet works. 01:00:36.642 --> 01:00:44.072 - or how data works in that when you give your data to a company to store so you can access it from a 01:00:44.072 --> 01:00:51.652 - portal that's on your computer, it means that the data is stored on someone else's computer. And that 01:00:51.652 --> 01:00:59.453 - someone else might not be as noble and gallant as the Bloomington Chief of Police. And so we can't trust 01:00:59.453 --> 01:01:01.534 - it. It's as simple as that. 01:01:01.698 --> 01:01:09.105 - And so I really wanna encourage the council to not only move forward with getting rid of flock as much 01:01:09.105 --> 01:01:16.727 - as possible, you all seem to be on board with that, but also to explore new ways or ordinances or decrees 01:01:16.727 --> 01:01:24.134 - that prevent this sort of thing from happening in the future. Because like Homie said, this technology 01:01:24.134 --> 01:01:30.174 - will progress. There's always gonna be a tool that is very useful to police people. 01:01:30.370 --> 01:01:36.349 - Like and it's gonna be sold and it's gonna be sold as you know a new way to prevent people from being 01:01:36.349 --> 01:01:42.211 - violently attacked that will always be the justification the question is whether or not Bloomington 01:01:42.211 --> 01:01:48.190 - should contribute to a generalized police state or should it be You know look at either look at other 01:01:48.190 --> 01:01:54.169 - models or lead by example one of these municipalities that is actively fighting against it, you know, 01:01:54.169 --> 01:01:55.166 - I don't invoke a 01:01:55.490 --> 01:02:04.713 - you know, Americanism a lot, but it seems to me a very American idea to be against the constant surveillance 01:02:04.713 --> 01:02:13.260 - of individuals. All right, I'll give the rest of my time back. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker in 01:02:13.260 --> 01:02:21.976 - chambers, please, if you could state your name. And you'll have three minutes. Hi, I'm Rebecca Stoops. 01:02:21.976 --> 01:02:25.022 - Lived in Bloomington my whole life. 01:02:25.506 --> 01:02:33.662 - Thank you for ending the Flock contract. That's really wonderful to hear. I hate being spied on. I don't 01:02:33.662 --> 01:02:41.586 - like the idea of being tracked every time I'm driving down Walnut Street. I'm frustrated to hear that 01:02:41.586 --> 01:02:49.431 - they're going to investigate partnering with a new company. Being in local government, you might not 01:02:49.431 --> 01:02:55.102 - be familiar with the corporate world nowadays. Things are changing fast. 01:02:56.898 --> 01:03:05.709 - Nowadays, companies break contracts and break laws as part of doing business. They build it into their 01:03:05.709 --> 01:03:14.690 - business model. It seems like it shouldn't happen. It does. It happens all the time. You shouldn't trust 01:03:14.690 --> 01:03:23.586 - private companies, third parties, with information as precious as where Bloomingtonians are going every 01:03:23.586 --> 01:03:26.238 - day. I want to remind you that 01:03:27.010 --> 01:03:35.849 - The surveillance data is designed to be sold and given away. Whether we tell them not to, they're very 01:03:35.849 --> 01:03:44.688 - likely doing it. We live under an unhinged dictator who, on a whim, could mandate the city to give all 01:03:44.688 --> 01:03:53.355 - of our location data, or mandate whatever company we partner with, or mandate their third party data 01:03:53.355 --> 01:03:54.814 - storage partner. 01:03:55.458 --> 01:04:04.428 - It's extremely messy. Once the data is out there, it's out. We're just giving it to them on a silver 01:04:04.428 --> 01:04:13.575 - platter. So please just cut it off. Stop spying. Stop building mass surveillance. Yeah, I think we can 01:04:13.575 --> 01:04:23.966 - get somewhere better with this. And thank you for listening to us. Thank you. Do we have any other comments on Zoom? 01:04:25.954 --> 01:04:32.872 - Next speaker in chambers. You'll have three minutes if you could state your name. That'd be great Hi, 01:04:32.872 --> 01:04:39.655 - my name is Maria bull I've moved here for school and I'm staying for the summer and stuff like that 01:04:39.655 --> 01:04:46.844 - I just wanted to comment on the police chief's comment about our cell phones being giving the same amount 01:04:46.844 --> 01:04:50.846 - of data that flock uses or less or more than it I can like 01:04:51.170 --> 01:04:56.402 - There's a difference between a flock camera and my phone. I can turn my phone off. I can opt out of 01:04:56.402 --> 01:05:01.686 - this. Whereas with flock cameras, they're seeing you all the time and you can't really be like, hey, 01:05:01.686 --> 01:05:06.970 - I'm gonna turn this off and not be available to it. And then I wanted to comment on something that I 01:05:06.970 --> 01:05:12.725 - felt the other day before I was really getting into this and learning more about what the city of Bloomington 01:05:12.725 --> 01:05:18.009 - is doing with flock. But I saw a flock camera the other day and I was driving back from Indianapolis 01:05:18.009 --> 01:05:18.846 - and I was like, 01:05:19.074 --> 01:05:24.639 - Like a shiver of fear ran down my spine of like, unsettlement. I think an important part of this is 01:05:24.639 --> 01:05:30.316 - the psychological element of being watched all the time. You're fearful. You're like, what am I going 01:05:30.316 --> 01:05:35.881 - to do? Like, what are they seeing? You know, are they seeing my private conversations? That sort of 01:05:35.881 --> 01:05:41.836 - thing. There's just kind of an element of fear that I think is present that I think needs to be considered 01:05:41.836 --> 01:05:47.902 - and not inflicted upon the residents of Bloomington. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker in chambers, please. 01:05:48.098 --> 01:05:58.724 - state your name, and you'll have three minutes. Hi, my name is Kevin Ratcliffe. I was born in Bloomington, 01:05:58.724 --> 01:06:08.754 - lived here most of my life. I came to address the mayor and the police chief, and oh, well, it seems 01:06:08.754 --> 01:06:16.798 - they're gone. So I will yield my time to the gentleman behind me. OK, thank you. 01:06:17.122 --> 01:06:23.804 - Next speaker in chambers if you could state your name for the record, that'd be lovely and then you'll 01:06:23.804 --> 01:06:30.615 - have three minutes Hello, my name is seaforth breeze I've been a Bloomington resident for over ten years 01:06:30.615 --> 01:06:37.103 - somewhere in that range And yeah, I've come before the council before to speak on this issue as I'm 01:06:37.103 --> 01:06:43.006 - sure y'all remember I have a thought camera that's looking directly down onto my porch and 01:06:43.266 --> 01:06:50.532 - It does impact me on a daily basis in terms of exactly the point that one of the last speakers brought 01:06:50.532 --> 01:06:57.728 - up, which is just the psychological effect of always living with that. I mean, the exit to go to work 01:06:57.728 --> 01:07:04.853 - or even to leave the neighborhood that I live in is there as well. So I am always under surveillance 01:07:04.853 --> 01:07:12.542 - the moment I leave my house to the moment I get back to my house. I also wanted to speak though and stood up 01:07:12.706 --> 01:07:20.597 - on the point of the fact that this technology or this technique or this process being sort of like perceived 01:07:20.597 --> 01:07:28.416 - as uniquely valuable and therefore having to be implemented, right? Which is always brought up in questions 01:07:28.416 --> 01:07:35.655 - of security and of sort of policing this notion that you have this tool and there's this temptation 01:07:35.655 --> 01:07:36.958 - to use it, right? 01:07:37.186 --> 01:07:43.707 - When I was younger, I remember reading some of the Senate reports on enhanced interrogation techniques, 01:07:43.707 --> 01:07:50.040 - torture, that the United States did. And it was one of the things that was hammered so many times in 01:07:50.040 --> 01:07:56.561 - that report is the fact that the reason why folks felt it was necessary or the logic behind it was this 01:07:56.561 --> 01:08:02.832 - idea that it could provide something that couldn't be got any other way. And at the end of the day, 01:08:02.832 --> 01:08:06.782 - there were exactly two cases out of hundreds in which they got 01:08:07.266 --> 01:08:16.290 - unique, actionable information, and of those two cases, there was other intelligence that they had received 01:08:16.290 --> 01:08:24.813 - that got them there at the same time, effectively. So, whenever we have questions about implementing, 01:08:24.813 --> 01:08:32.752 - you know, sweeping security, sort of like surveillance, or of, you know, sort of like, I mean, 01:08:32.752 --> 01:08:36.094 - it's just, it's there, that temptation. 01:08:36.354 --> 01:08:42.948 - But we always have to remember that that temptation is not something that we can act upon because it 01:08:42.948 --> 01:08:49.739 - just puts us into situations like we are in right now with protesters having pressure applied upon them 01:08:49.739 --> 01:08:56.333 - and asylum seekers who are hiding right now in many states across the United States. And finally, on 01:08:56.333 --> 01:08:57.182 - the point of 01:08:57.762 --> 01:09:03.212 - the police chief saying that, oh, you know, I don't think we would move towards that direction of, 01:09:03.212 --> 01:09:08.937 - you know, expanding it to, you know, more streets or, you know, more invasive into more, you know, sort 01:09:08.937 --> 01:09:14.496 - of like public spaces. That is just not how it works. We've already made that choice to implement it 01:09:14.496 --> 01:09:20.001 - once, so that logic is obviously, you know, not holding so much water there. And then I think about 01:09:20.001 --> 01:09:25.726 - my current job where people talk about putting it in the buildings, not for the LOPs, but just cameras. 01:09:25.986 --> 01:09:31.407 - Thank you very much. That's your time Next speaker in chambers. You'll have three minutes if you could 01:09:31.407 --> 01:09:36.775 - state your name, that'd be awesome Hi, Seth much Laura Bloomington residents. Thank you all very much 01:09:36.775 --> 01:09:42.249 - for your questions Particularly councilmember Piedmont Smith. I appreciate you really holding the chief 01:09:42.249 --> 01:09:43.038 - to task on how 01:09:43.554 --> 01:09:49.777 - cloud storage works. I'm gonna keep this really brief, because then we have a long night. I know that 01:09:49.777 --> 01:09:56.184 - all of you have received a report about the office, the legal department withholding information through 01:09:56.184 --> 01:10:02.407 - the public records request. If anybody has not read this report, it is on Bloom Docs, big ups to Dave 01:10:02.407 --> 01:10:09.058 - Askins. And the county, the city legal department lied to members of the public and withheld these contracts 01:10:09.058 --> 01:10:09.790 - saying they 01:10:09.890 --> 01:10:16.440 - blatantly did not exist in some cases for up to 15 months across multiple public record requests. And 01:10:16.440 --> 01:10:22.797 - so I would like to ask the council to please begin a formal investigation of the legal department, 01:10:22.797 --> 01:10:28.898 - particularly their public records request process, because they have been lying to the public. 01:10:28.898 --> 01:10:35.319 - Thank you. Next speaker. If you could state your name for the record, that would be awesome. You'll 01:10:35.319 --> 01:10:37.310 - have three minutes. Thank you. 01:10:38.946 --> 01:10:48.744 - Name is miles and I think that we've made just a small step in the right direction with cutting the 01:10:48.744 --> 01:10:58.933 - contract with a brand name of surveillance camera like flock safety and Maybe more important step would 01:10:58.933 --> 01:11:04.126 - be banning the a ALPR technology altogether The same 01:11:04.834 --> 01:11:12.596 - Circumstance happened in Denver, for example where the mayor was pressured to change from flock safety 01:11:12.596 --> 01:11:20.433 - to a different company called axon and I think it's very telling that the mayor and the chief of police 01:11:20.433 --> 01:11:28.194 - You know value their privacy they can leave not confront their constituents But but they couldn't care 01:11:28.194 --> 01:11:34.750 - less about their constituents privacy when ALPR cameras are spying on us every day and 01:11:35.010 --> 01:11:44.280 - So thank you. Thank you. And that. Go ahead. Take your name for the record please. Yes. My name is Haley 01:11:44.280 --> 01:11:53.374 - to Bloomington resident and I'll be just one more voice saying the things that have already been said. 01:11:53.374 --> 01:11:55.934 - But I just really appreciate 01:11:56.066 --> 01:12:03.884 - everyone sitting up here for their work and their tough questions, because as one of my colleagues alluded 01:12:03.884 --> 01:12:11.702 - to, it's been really hard to get answers about this stuff, which feels like a huge problem. So I celebrate 01:12:11.702 --> 01:12:19.301 - the chief's commitment to disabling all flock cameras. We will be holding them to it. But speaking more 01:12:19.301 --> 01:12:25.950 - generally about governance going forward, I think I stand with everyone here who says that 01:12:26.562 --> 01:12:35.211 - We want to limit mass surveillance wherever possible and not just replacing flock with another private 01:12:35.211 --> 01:12:43.692 - company that may have all of the same foibles. And at a bare minimum, if this level of data is going 01:12:43.692 --> 01:12:50.494 - to be collected on us, the public should have the ability to weigh in on whether 01:12:51.106 --> 01:12:57.576 - these tools are valuable to us. You know, there's pros and cons here, like we've all talked about, and 01:12:57.576 --> 01:13:04.046 - we have a right to the full accounting of pros and cons. That means we should have had access to these 01:13:04.046 --> 01:13:10.327 - contracts from the beginning. We should, you know, as the chief talks about how helpful these tools 01:13:10.327 --> 01:13:16.734 - have been to them, I would like to see that justified in clearance, right? So I think that, you know, 01:13:17.058 --> 01:13:25.115 - There should be data about how these tools are being used that the public should have a right to see. 01:13:25.115 --> 01:13:33.173 - And yeah, there should be a real conversation that we have a place in. And yeah, so just can't say it 01:13:33.173 --> 01:13:41.309 - enough. Transparency, super important here. And no more mass surveillance. Please and thank you. Thank 01:13:41.309 --> 01:13:42.494 - you very much. 01:13:42.722 --> 01:13:49.660 - Just I'll say thank you to all of our public commenters I know that this is a scary and difficult subject 01:13:49.660 --> 01:13:56.336 - for many of us and it is very very brave to get up in front of city and Government and say your piece 01:13:56.336 --> 01:14:03.078 - and so thank you very much I promise that this is not going to be the last time that council discusses 01:14:03.078 --> 01:14:09.754 - this issue moving on to council committees, it seems we have a committee report on from the committee 01:14:09.754 --> 01:14:11.390 - on council processes and 01:14:12.002 --> 01:14:19.099 - Councilmember Piedmont Smith take it away Yeah, this is brief So in the packet for today, there is a 01:14:19.099 --> 01:14:26.337 - document called procedures with discussion of ordinances at first reading So that is following through 01:14:26.337 --> 01:14:33.434 - on a vote that was taken in February by this council to allow discussion of legislation during first 01:14:33.434 --> 01:14:38.142 - reading and it normally When we have an ordinance at first reading 01:14:38.274 --> 01:14:44.873 - It is literally just read into the record, and there's no discussion, no questions, no presentation, 01:14:44.873 --> 01:14:51.537 - nothing. So now, going forward, we're going to have the ordinance read into the record, and then have 01:14:51.537 --> 01:14:58.135 - a presentation of the ordinance, have council member questions on the ordinance, have public comment 01:14:58.135 --> 01:15:04.995 - on the ordinance, and limited to 30 minutes. And then it'll be moved to a second reading, where there'll 01:15:04.995 --> 01:15:07.870 - be follow-up questions, not a whole repeat. 01:15:07.970 --> 01:15:14.349 - of what was at first reading, but follow-up questions, final public comment, and final vote, 01:15:14.349 --> 01:15:21.277 - in most cases, unless we move to third reading, which we can't. Anyway, it's not, you won't see that 01:15:21.277 --> 01:15:28.343 - in action tonight because we don't have any ordinances for first reading, but I just want to make sure 01:15:28.343 --> 01:15:35.202 - the public understands that this system is changing, so when we have an ordinance for first reading 01:15:35.202 --> 01:15:36.094 - from now on, 01:15:36.642 --> 01:15:43.148 - There will be a presentation and discussion of it. That's all. Great. Thank you so much. Now we will 01:15:43.148 --> 01:15:49.847 - be moving on to general comments from the public about anything that is not on the agenda. If you would 01:15:49.847 --> 01:15:56.418 - like to speak, please come up to the podium, sign in, and state your name for the public. You'll have 01:15:56.418 --> 01:16:02.988 - three minutes. If you're on Zoom and you'd like to speak, please raise your hand and we will come get 01:16:02.988 --> 01:16:05.694 - you. First commenter in chambers, please. 01:16:15.618 --> 01:16:28.643 - Hello, God bless America. Cool, okay. You know, if you leave here and you drive down Walnut Street, 01:16:28.643 --> 01:16:42.319 - say you're leaving here to take a virtual tour, go down Walnut Street to 1900 Block, you guys know where 01:16:42.319 --> 01:16:45.054 - the Herald Times is? 01:16:48.642 --> 01:16:54.936 - What is that in the road? That thing is about 15 feet wide and that thing has been like that for years 01:16:54.936 --> 01:17:01.108 - That is a that is a contractor to commit a bloomington. I know their name, but i'm not going to drag 01:17:01.108 --> 01:17:07.280 - them through the mud right now but you know You hit that thing it's it's bad You know, it's like you 01:17:07.280 --> 01:17:13.390 - you call the mayor's office sometimes to the client. Well, does anybody else complain? No, you know 01:17:13.390 --> 01:17:17.118 - But anyway, i'm gonna go off the rails you that for instance 01:17:17.506 --> 01:17:24.528 - if you go here to Third Street by the car wash, there's a problem over there, and there's a thing in 01:17:24.528 --> 01:17:31.481 - the road. And I asked the mayor, I said, this thing is horrendous. Has anybody called? Not a single 01:17:31.481 --> 01:17:38.711 - person. Why? Why don't people call when there's a problem with the road, right? I'm retired, I got lots 01:17:38.711 --> 01:17:45.803 - of time. I drive Bloomington Roads a lot. But you know, back down there, they should have to come in, 01:17:45.803 --> 01:17:46.846 - the developer, 01:17:48.002 --> 01:17:54.720 - But our contractor, you know not have to come in and fix that That's something that the street department 01:17:54.720 --> 01:18:01.058 - shouldn't have to do but they do fabulous Street Department does fabulous work. They got some great 01:18:01.058 --> 01:18:07.712 - workers Danny Bittner Joe Van Diemen or Ron Arthur All kinds of great guys there but you know Why should 01:18:07.712 --> 01:18:14.177 - they have to go back and fix that if you if you drive down through there and you hit that I guarantee 01:18:14.177 --> 01:18:17.726 - you're gonna say I think I know what he's talking about 01:18:20.770 --> 01:18:29.302 - And that thing's been like that. I'm not gonna call street department. That guy, them people should 01:18:29.302 --> 01:18:37.834 - have to come and fix that. That thing's horrendous. And when people run over stuff like that in the 01:18:37.834 --> 01:18:47.134 - road, it's a utility cut is what it is. They come in, cobbled it in, threw some cold mix on it, and left it. 01:18:50.146 --> 01:18:55.801 - That's unacceptable and they should have to be putting signs out by the road when they're doing them 01:18:55.801 --> 01:19:01.624 - work that jobs of their name of who they are that's doing that stuff and That's like over on 3rd Street 01:19:01.624 --> 01:19:07.279 - by the car wash They left a thing in the road about three feet wide about five feet long For a month 01:19:07.279 --> 01:19:12.878 - called him there. No one's called that in. Well, okay. I called street They come right up there and 01:19:12.878 --> 01:19:15.006 - fixed that man They was right on that 01:19:19.650 --> 01:19:25.883 - Thank you very much, that's your time. Don't forget your drink. Yes, okay, if the next speaker would 01:19:25.883 --> 01:19:32.055 - like to approach the podium, and you'll have three minutes, if you could state your name, that'd be 01:19:32.055 --> 01:19:38.412 - great. Hello, Bryce again. Talking this time about what you guys were talking about at the top of this 01:19:38.412 --> 01:19:44.830 - meeting, which is the land swap that's going on right now, or that we're trying to get going right now. 01:19:44.962 --> 01:19:54.286 - I'm sure you all know the details but one of the issues that came up at the RDC meeting this Monday 01:19:54.286 --> 01:20:02.398 - was the the City Council's letter of I believe May 24 requesting that the the property 01:20:02.850 --> 01:20:09.494 - I always call it across the street from Atlas, but the North property, property north of Convention 01:20:09.494 --> 01:20:16.271 - Center, that that property not be sold for less than its value, than the price that they paid for it. 01:20:16.271 --> 01:20:23.181 - Some of the RDC members were concerned that the land swap would go against that, but based on what I've 01:20:23.181 --> 01:20:29.958 - heard today, at least a number of you are in favor of that land swap, while also being a signatory to 01:20:29.958 --> 01:20:31.486 - that letter asking for 01:20:31.650 --> 01:20:38.943 - That the money to be recouped and so You know, I'm asking that if not in this setting here that your 01:20:38.943 --> 01:20:46.381 - position on the land swap specifically Be made clear. I mean if you want to put it in writing and like 01:20:46.381 --> 01:20:53.963 - a little resolution that would also be cool Is it like no? Well, we didn't want to impede any affordable 01:20:53.963 --> 01:21:00.606 - housing development, please Transfer the land. I think that would go a long way because and 01:21:00.738 --> 01:21:08.088 - This is also a time-sensitive thing. The leases for those tenants ends in July. And bureaucracy 01:21:08.088 --> 01:21:15.820 - is bureaucracy. It'll take a lot to get things settled, to get things through. The best hope for the 01:21:15.820 --> 01:21:24.318 - tenants to stay there is for the CIB, the board that currently owns that south property, to extend the leases. 01:21:24.770 --> 01:21:31.236 - Now, the only reason that they would do that, and they don't wanna be landlords, the only reason that 01:21:31.236 --> 01:21:37.702 - they would do that is if there was some sort of guarantee from the RDC that that property would then, 01:21:37.702 --> 01:21:44.358 - the RDC wouldn't, that they would do something with it. And the tenants and other organizers are putting 01:21:44.358 --> 01:21:48.478 - together a proposal, and there'll be emails going to all of you, 01:21:49.218 --> 01:21:58.303 - soon about presentation of that proposal and an event that'll try and enroll you in the community in 01:21:58.303 --> 01:22:07.477 - ensuring that that Seminary Point property remains affordable. Yeah, so I think that the more you can 01:22:07.477 --> 01:22:13.054 - say today in favor of that and saying that you are willing to 01:22:13.186 --> 01:22:20.159 - offloaded from the RDC's hands onto a either a nonprofit entity or a community land trust or a Cooperative 01:22:20.159 --> 01:22:26.677 - or what have you that would give the RDC? Good reason to go ahead with this transfer and would also 01:22:26.677 --> 01:22:33.389 - give the CIB good reason to extend the leases all those things are necessary for You know these people 01:22:33.389 --> 01:22:37.886 - to stay in affordable housing housing. Thank you. Thank you the next 01:22:38.082 --> 01:22:44.921 - Is there any speaker on zoom? Okay, great. We'll take the next person in chambers and then we'll go 01:22:44.921 --> 01:22:51.350 - to the speaker on zoom You'll have three minutes if you could state your name for the record, 01:22:51.350 --> 01:22:58.394 - that'd be great. Thank you. This is c4th again I'd like to extend appreciation for many of the council 01:22:58.394 --> 01:23:05.644 - members who Expressed a desire to keep the jail in or as close to the Bloomington City limits as possible 01:23:05.644 --> 01:23:07.422 - rather than to North Park 01:23:08.194 --> 01:23:15.443 - If I'm remembering correctly, there was a statement recently. I hate to interrupt you. This is on the 01:23:15.443 --> 01:23:22.620 - agenda, so you will have the opportunity to speak about this later. Absolutely. Thank you very much. 01:23:22.620 --> 01:23:30.082 - Sorry. I had another thing I was going to mention, but now I can't remember it. Thank you. Next speaker. 01:23:30.082 --> 01:23:35.838 - Oh, I'm sorry. On Zoom. If you could unmute yourself, you'll have three minutes. 01:23:40.354 --> 01:23:47.712 - Hi, my name is Sam, I live in Bloomington and have worked in the field of cybersecurity for about eight 01:23:47.712 --> 01:23:54.787 - years now. There's a lot of good discussion we had around data and trust. And I want to just make a 01:23:54.787 --> 01:24:02.215 - few points, give a few examples to make that a little bit more clear. When you're trusting a third party 01:24:02.215 --> 01:24:06.814 - that has control over the computers in which the data is stored. 01:24:07.298 --> 01:24:14.484 - You have to trust, at the end of the day, you have to trust them to guard that data properly. And there 01:24:14.484 --> 01:24:21.462 - are a number of ways that that can fail. The simplest is they break the law. They decide to show the 01:24:21.462 --> 01:24:28.579 - data that they said they weren't going to. Or there could be an insider that has access to the system, 01:24:28.579 --> 01:24:34.590 - either digitally or physically, that can get access to that data. It can be completely 01:24:34.818 --> 01:24:42.974 - Incidentally, there's a security vulnerability, and there are plenty of vendors with a bad record of 01:24:42.974 --> 01:24:51.130 - really simple vulnerabilities, some of which were mentioned today. Or they could be compelled either 01:24:51.130 --> 01:24:59.285 - by a rule order or by law or by a national security letter to give over that data. And so when we're 01:24:59.285 --> 01:25:03.646 - thinking about where we're storing data, I think that 01:25:03.938 --> 01:25:11.610 - Having the physical control of that is very important. And it kind of just got me thinking, what other 01:25:11.610 --> 01:25:19.059 - places are we, there are lots of sensitive data that we should be considering that in, not just the 01:25:19.059 --> 01:25:27.029 - FLOC and LPR that was mentioned earlier. And since I think it's a comment on that when I had my handrails, 01:25:27.029 --> 01:25:32.094 - I'll just say I'm in favor of no more mass surveillance. Thank you. 01:25:33.346 --> 01:25:43.424 - Thank you very much. Next speaker in chambers. Hello. My name is Zach Mueller. I've lived in Bloomington 01:25:43.424 --> 01:25:53.023 - for 20 years now, I think. I'm here to ask the council and the city's government to help me use the 01:25:53.023 --> 01:25:57.918 - property that I've recently purchased less freely. 01:25:58.178 --> 01:26:04.267 - My beloved and I recently purchased the house. It's on the northeast corner of the intersection 01:26:04.267 --> 01:26:10.863 - of Morningside Drive and Smith Road. This is the intersection where, six months ago, a child was struck 01:26:10.863 --> 01:26:17.523 - while on their bicycle, and I had to have their jaw wired shut while they were riding their bike because 01:26:17.523 --> 01:26:23.359 - a distracted driver didn't think that stopping was something they had to do. I came here to 01:26:23.359 --> 01:26:26.974 - the Transportation Committee meeting almost a month ago, 01:26:27.362 --> 01:26:34.856 - And I got to hear a lot of young people who got up and were doing the scary thing of talking to people 01:26:34.856 --> 01:26:38.494 - behind the dais there about their experience with 01:26:38.658 --> 01:26:45.314 - being Girl Scouts and having to go visit a friend in the hospital and how scary it was for them. And 01:26:45.314 --> 01:26:52.101 - I heard a lot of input from members of the city's workforce and our colleagues who've given their time 01:26:52.101 --> 01:26:58.955 - to the Transportation Committee talking about how we need to do something, and maybe we could roll that 01:26:58.955 --> 01:27:05.742 - intersection and gathering some data into a report that's already been done, I think, on South College 01:27:05.742 --> 01:27:08.510 - Mall Road. And that's great. I love data. 01:27:08.834 --> 01:27:15.288 - But I also know that it's been six months and there's a child that is still dealing with the trauma 01:27:15.288 --> 01:27:21.936 - of being struck on their bike. And there's also plenty of things that I'm sure can be done if our city 01:27:21.936 --> 01:27:28.778 - government wants to act in an agile way to, even while we gather that data, make life a little bit safer. 01:27:28.778 --> 01:27:35.490 - And I agree with Councilperson Rosenberger. It's little five. We want people to be doing bicycle stuff, 01:27:35.490 --> 01:27:38.782 - but we really want our whole community to be safe, 01:27:38.946 --> 01:27:45.496 - Here while they're on their bikes or pedestrians, you know not and not just on campus going to and from 01:27:45.496 --> 01:27:51.921 - Armstrong Stadium And that's one thing that like I believe that even though I don't ride my bike very 01:27:51.921 --> 01:27:58.219 - much Somebody should be able to and like I sat here and I don't love mass surveillance But I have I 01:27:58.219 --> 01:28:04.644 - have a camera that looks down so I can figure out where people are not stealing my packages that like 01:28:04.644 --> 01:28:06.974 - looks at my driveway and I can't see 01:28:07.810 --> 01:28:14.474 - I can't see the license plates, but I can see when people roll through a stop on my camera if I pull 01:28:14.474 --> 01:28:21.467 - it up. And I only have a half a minute left. But I sat here, and I counted six people at 6.30 on a Monday 01:28:21.467 --> 01:28:28.131 - that decided to roll through a stop sign. And so please help me use my property less safely, even if 01:28:28.131 --> 01:28:35.454 - it's putting in traffic stuff that only means I can only back out of my driveway one way. Please, please help. 01:28:36.930 --> 01:28:44.395 - Like there are Girl Scouts being struck on bicycles. Come on. Thank you very much. Next speaker, if 01:28:44.395 --> 01:28:51.935 - you would approach the podium, you'll have three minutes. Go ahead. Thank you. I'd like to thank you 01:28:51.935 --> 01:28:59.102 - for letting me have another chance at coming up. I wanted to express support for the land swap. 01:28:59.298 --> 01:29:05.444 - come to meetings here about sort of zoning and about Hopewell, about the prospect of affordable and 01:29:05.444 --> 01:29:11.898 - attainable housing in this community, and the fact that, you know, I have coworkers who have been pushed 01:29:11.898 --> 01:29:18.044 - out of Bloomington and now live in other communities, not in Monroe County, further afield, because 01:29:18.044 --> 01:29:24.313 - it's just more affordable for them, which takes away their tax money, takes away the, you know, money 01:29:24.313 --> 01:29:28.062 - they could have spent at local businesses, things like that. 01:29:28.610 --> 01:29:36.519 - And so I think that providing and, you know, more important than even the short term, but just maintaining 01:29:36.519 --> 01:29:43.984 - our stock of super affordable housing is just essential, right? Like, it's a great location. If it's 01:29:43.984 --> 01:29:51.671 - possible for us to make that swap happen, I can only see, you know, upsides, and it feels like the sore 01:29:51.671 --> 01:29:54.110 - thing that could also, you know, 01:29:54.498 --> 01:30:01.699 - be a good feather in the cap for Mayor Thompson in terms of she's under a lot of fire right now. And 01:30:01.699 --> 01:30:09.256 - I don't know if she's here in the upper gallery or behind me, but if she's looking for a good opportunity 01:30:09.256 --> 01:30:15.102 - to win some points, maybe she could put her weight behind that as well. But yeah. 01:30:15.298 --> 01:30:23.396 - I'm glad to hear that there seems to be support among the council for maintaining the Summit or Seminary 01:30:23.396 --> 01:30:31.724 - Point housing. I'm really glad to hear that, Isabel, that you've been going to all these different meetings 01:30:31.724 --> 01:30:39.436 - and sort of like conferences to get information on different ways that we could approach and tackle 01:30:39.436 --> 01:30:43.678 - this. But one of the things that came up in the Monroe 01:30:43.874 --> 01:30:51.139 - county council meeting that I went to recently was somebody brought up the fact that our super affordable 01:30:51.139 --> 01:30:58.336 - category is super pinched in Bloomington. And you can feel it, right? The way in which Hopewell is going 01:30:58.336 --> 01:31:05.190 - to provide a lot of good potential housing stock, which will be more affordable, but for any of the 01:31:05.190 --> 01:31:11.838 - folks living at Seminary Point or folks like them who are currently priced out of the community, 01:31:12.482 --> 01:31:17.964 - We are desperately missing that stock, so I hope that we can preserve it. I thank y'all for everything 01:31:17.964 --> 01:31:23.500 - you're doing to try and make that happen, and I surrender my time. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next 01:31:23.500 --> 01:31:29.036 - speaker in chambers. You'll have three minutes. Please state your name for the record. Thank you, Madam 01:31:29.036 --> 01:31:34.465 - President. This is Christopher Emge from the Greater Bloomington Chamber of Commerce. I want to thank 01:31:34.465 --> 01:31:40.001 - everybody who went to Let Connect last night at the Waldron Center. I want to thank Constellation Stage 01:31:40.001 --> 01:31:41.438 - and Screen for hosting us. 01:31:41.794 --> 01:31:48.569 - Fabulous venue fabulous event. I want to quickly invite you and the public here on an exciting event 01:31:48.569 --> 01:31:55.949 - We're here to launch the chamber Wednesday, May 6 from 530 to 730 at the International Art Project Foundation 01:31:55.949 --> 01:32:02.590 - will be kicking off Bloomington Rainbow Leadership Network an initiative of the chamber focused on 01:32:02.754 --> 01:32:09.381 - Connecting lgbtq AI professionals business owner and allies across Monroe County You know as chambers 01:32:09.381 --> 01:32:15.943 - been with us in the community for over 110 years we take the responsibility to evolve with the needs 01:32:15.943 --> 01:32:22.505 - of our workforce in our business community seriously and this Effort reflects that the strengthening 01:32:22.505 --> 01:32:28.158 - of connections expanding economic opportunity away. That's welcoming and inclusive and 01:32:28.514 --> 01:32:34.646 - We'll hear some brief remarks. Time to connect, of course. Food, drink, as only the Chamber can bring 01:32:34.646 --> 01:32:41.199 - you. We'll be glad to see members of this body and the public there before your regular session on Wednesday 01:32:41.199 --> 01:32:47.331 - the 6th. The other thing I wanted to offer in my final time is the equity issue on homeownership that 01:32:47.331 --> 01:32:53.704 - was brought up, and I've had multiple conversations with residents here in the community and the business 01:32:53.704 --> 01:32:54.846 - community as well. 01:32:55.138 --> 01:33:01.533 - I'm hearing consistent feedback that that conversation's been a little, I think the word is incomplete, 01:33:01.533 --> 01:33:08.112 - sort of framed the difference between purchase price and the sale price. The lived reality is much broader 01:33:08.112 --> 01:33:14.506 - than that. Real ownership costs, some risks, property taxes that rise with value, increasingly volatile 01:33:14.506 --> 01:33:20.840 - insurance costs, ongoing maintenance and upkeep, major capital investments root HVAC plumbing. So when 01:33:20.840 --> 01:33:23.422 - you factor those in, the picture changes. 01:33:23.714 --> 01:33:31.081 - Say you buy a house in Sunnyslope neighborhood for 118 in 2012. This may or may not be my residence. 01:33:31.081 --> 01:33:38.740 - And let's say next month, I sell that property for $240,000. On paper, you're going, wow, that's double? 01:33:38.740 --> 01:33:46.108 - But after you do the inflation, the interest I paid, the maintenance, the selling costs, the realtor 01:33:46.108 --> 01:33:53.694 - fees, all of that, it's a little bit more modest. Those major upgrades and all those things shrink that 01:33:53.794 --> 01:33:59.507 - Investments significantly my real return investment over that Over that time is 12 to 15 percent. So 01:33:59.507 --> 01:34:05.050 - that's 14 years. That's about 1% a year. That's that's a good investment I don't want to diminish 01:34:05.050 --> 01:34:10.762 - homeownership. It's been great But you know, we continue to have these discussions around equity and 01:34:10.762 --> 01:34:16.644 - affordability We need to encourage more complex view of home ownership where we haven't really had that 01:34:16.644 --> 01:34:22.470 - so because our goals long-term financial success of our residents the full cost structure matters just 01:34:22.470 --> 01:34:23.262 - not the entry 01:34:24.450 --> 01:34:33.431 - Thank you for your time tonight. Appreciate it. Thank you very much. And we have one more member, public 01:34:33.431 --> 01:34:42.498 - comment. Please approach the podium, state your name, and you'll have three minutes. Hi. Joshua Stockton. 01:34:42.498 --> 01:34:49.854 - One thing I noticed this past week, I like to visit the Monroe County Public Library. 01:34:50.626 --> 01:34:58.146 - But I've been accessing the Indiana Room, which is an amazing resource for government documents, state, 01:34:58.146 --> 01:35:05.450 - federal, and local. One thing I noticed this week is that there is no UDO document in that building. 01:35:05.450 --> 01:35:12.970 - There's everything else. There's the CBU reports. There's hand department, planning and transportation. 01:35:12.970 --> 01:35:19.550 - But there's no UDO. So there's no physical way to actually access it unless you go online. 01:35:19.778 --> 01:35:31.086 - However, I did ask the librarian there why, and essentially the answer I received was that it changes 01:35:31.086 --> 01:35:42.282 - so often that we can't keep track, and what's available online is not necessarily up to date in real 01:35:42.282 --> 01:35:48.158 - time, and so coordinating that and then accessing it 01:35:48.450 --> 01:35:54.870 - Has been made impossible if you don't have a computer I guess you can do that at the library But for 01:35:54.870 --> 01:36:01.734 - some people I would like to sit down and just be able to read it and look through it So I guess my question 01:36:01.734 --> 01:36:08.281 - is is is there in a way that we can coordinate that? With the Monroe County Public Library to get that 01:36:08.281 --> 01:36:12.158 - in there because that is a very important document Thank you 01:36:12.674 --> 01:36:19.505 - Thank you very much. That was enlightening. And if there is nobody else who is interested in public 01:36:19.505 --> 01:36:26.541 - comment, speak now or forever hold your peace until general public comment at the end of this meeting. 01:36:26.541 --> 01:36:33.441 - Is there anybody on Zoom? Great. In that case, that concludes reports for the evening. And now we'll 01:36:33.441 --> 01:36:38.974 - move on to appointments to boards and commissions. Councilmember Piedmont-Smith. 01:36:41.058 --> 01:36:49.532 - committee see I Would like to move appointment of Raynard cross to seat c2 of the Historic Preservation 01:36:49.532 --> 01:36:58.088 - Commission and appointment of Rebecca pain to seat c3 of the Commission on sustainability and resilience 01:36:58.088 --> 01:37:06.237 - Okay, great there's been a motion and a second will the clerk please call the roll or any questions 01:37:06.237 --> 01:37:08.926 - or comments first my apologies I 01:37:11.138 --> 01:37:38.046 - Great. Will the clerk please call the roll? Piedmont Smith. Yes Zulek. Yes Sorry, sorry, yes Daily Rallo Ruff. Yes 01:37:39.170 --> 01:37:47.845 - Rosenberger not in the room Flaherty Great, thank you with the vote of 8-0 that passes and now we are 01:37:47.845 --> 01:37:57.115 - moving on to legislation for second reading and Resolutions and I will be passing the gavel to councilmember 01:37:57.115 --> 01:38:06.045 - Rallo because councilmember Daly and I are Co sponsoring this resolution. I Move that resolution 2026-07 01:38:06.045 --> 01:38:09.022 - be read by title and synopsis only 01:38:09.186 --> 01:38:19.601 - second All in favor we have the I guess we need to call roll Will the clerk please call the roll on 01:38:19.601 --> 01:38:30.017 - the introduction of resolution 20 26 07 Yes, just for clarification who made the motion and second. 01:38:30.017 --> 01:38:38.974 - I wasn't thank you very much Councilmember Piedmont Smith. Yes, so like yes, sorry. I 01:38:41.602 --> 01:38:58.532 - Daily yes, Rallo. Yes rough. Yes clarity Yes, Stossburg, yes, thank you Okay, I can get started do we 01:38:58.532 --> 01:39:10.814 - need it to be Yes, I'm so sorry Will the clerk please? Please please read 01:39:14.146 --> 01:39:20.021 - Resolution twenty twenty six dash zero seven a resolution in support of County Council counterparts 01:39:20.021 --> 01:39:26.190 - efforts to keep the county's criminal justice buildings within city limits and close proximity to social 01:39:26.190 --> 01:39:30.302 - services The synopsis is as follows this resolution twenty twenty six 01:39:30.498 --> 01:39:36.294 - 07 authored by council members Sydney Zulek and Courtney daily Supports the Monroe County Council's 01:39:36.294 --> 01:39:42.322 - decision not to fund acquisition of the North Park site for a new criminal justice center and reaffirms 01:39:42.322 --> 01:39:48.293 - the Bloomington Common Council's position that such facility should remain within city limits and near 01:39:48.293 --> 01:39:54.553 - social services This resolution expresses concern about access impacts on low-income residents if relocated 01:39:54.553 --> 01:39:55.422 - outside of the 01:39:55.618 --> 01:40:06.867 - The city and commits to working with county officials to support an expedited permitting process for 01:40:06.867 --> 01:40:18.005 - a justice center located within city limits Thank you, I move that 20 2607 be adopted second, okay. 01:40:18.005 --> 01:40:25.022 - Thank you Point of order, please I think the The synopsis that 01:40:25.122 --> 01:40:32.699 - The clerk read was actually the old synopsis and not the revised Slightly ever so slightly revised synopsis 01:40:32.699 --> 01:40:39.926 - that went with the slightly revised text. Is that possible? It is and if you'll give me just a moment, 01:40:39.926 --> 01:40:47.573 - I'll pull it up. I'm sorry You don't have to read it again. I think it just said it added me as a co-sponsor 01:40:47.573 --> 01:40:54.238 - and it said expedited permitting and zoning for the parcel Thank you for that and my apologies 01:40:56.130 --> 01:41:05.304 - Councilmember Zulek great. Thank you. So just very quickly this is in response to the county who will 01:41:05.304 --> 01:41:14.479 - be building or Potentially renovating but it is looking like they are going down the path of building 01:41:14.479 --> 01:41:23.653 - a new jail so for those of you who may not know the County has been under a settlement agreement with 01:41:23.653 --> 01:41:25.182 - the ACLU protect 01:41:25.410 --> 01:41:33.637 - pertaining to unconstitutional conditions in the jail since 2009 and Just recently the Monroe County 01:41:33.637 --> 01:41:42.191 - council members failed a resolution to fund the purchase of a property outside of city limits a property 01:41:42.191 --> 01:41:50.337 - called North Park a property which does not have access to public transportation or close proximity 01:41:50.337 --> 01:41:52.862 - to many social services and so 01:41:53.058 --> 01:41:59.436 - I believe those are some of the reasons that County Council decided to fail this property and this Resolution 01:41:59.436 --> 01:42:05.235 - I'm it's very short So I'm just going to read that the first the two sections be it resolved by the 01:42:05.235 --> 01:42:11.091 - Common Council of the city of Bloomington Monroe County, Indiana That section one the Common Council 01:42:11.091 --> 01:42:17.005 - stands with its County Council colleagues and their decision not to fund the purchase of the property 01:42:17.005 --> 01:42:21.470 - at North Park section 2 the Common Council will work with the County Council 01:42:22.178 --> 01:42:28.517 - Council and the county commissioners to support an expedited zoning and permitting process 01:42:28.517 --> 01:42:35.554 - for the construction of a new jail within city limits and close proximity to social services. Sorry. 01:42:35.554 --> 01:42:42.868 - I think I'm reading the wrong one too. Okay. Fabulous. Never mind. I was right. And that is what I have. 01:42:42.868 --> 01:42:43.774 - I think that 01:42:44.610 --> 01:42:51.817 - When we talk about the criminal justice system, it is already so inaccessible to so many people and 01:42:51.817 --> 01:42:59.241 - I think it would be a real shame if the county were to build a property or excuse me build a jail that 01:42:59.241 --> 01:43:06.808 - Further took away access from people who need it. Thank you councilmember daily any other thoughts Thank 01:43:06.808 --> 01:43:12.286 - you very much. I just wanted to expand on that a little bit more to explain 01:43:12.866 --> 01:43:19.811 - Thinking and our feelings on this You know, I've heard it argued that at this point because of the lawsuit 01:43:19.811 --> 01:43:26.496 - We have no choice but to accept the North Park location because we've run out of time And you know the 01:43:26.496 --> 01:43:33.246 - lawsuit I'm sorry, but frankly that's that's absurd. I don't think we need to settle Not not only we'll 01:43:33.246 --> 01:43:40.126 - doing that put us need my glasses put us right back in a predicament where we're unhappy with the results 01:43:40.126 --> 01:43:42.398 - and buyers remorse will set in and 01:43:43.042 --> 01:43:48.509 - And when residents can't get out to visit their family members in the jail, for example, because they 01:43:48.509 --> 01:43:53.923 - don't have transportation, or when it's difficult to connect our inmates with the services they need 01:43:53.923 --> 01:43:59.551 - because they're just too far away. And I am aware that one of the terrible difficulties with our current 01:43:59.551 --> 01:44:05.072 - jail is the overcrowding there. I agree that we need adequate space. But this planned expansion is not 01:44:05.072 --> 01:44:07.966 - a realistic need for our current incarceration needs. 01:44:08.066 --> 01:44:14.195 - I'm deeply uncomfortable with creating vastly more space than we currently need because, hey, that's 01:44:14.195 --> 01:44:20.688 - gotta be filled one way or another, so it will. I would much rather see us invest in preventative services 01:44:20.688 --> 01:44:27.120 - to keep our residents out of jail in the first place. Mental health support, addiction recovery programs, 01:44:27.120 --> 01:44:33.491 - even financial classes would be a much better use of these funds, especially when we are facing perilous 01:44:33.491 --> 01:44:36.222 - and unstable fiscal times ahead for the city 01:44:36.322 --> 01:44:43.014 - and the county. I think we need to be wise and make some wise choices with our spending here and preventative 01:44:43.014 --> 01:44:49.159 - is the best way. I would much prefer to see the county and the city work together to establish a new 01:44:49.159 --> 01:44:55.364 - location by revisiting the Thompson site or the Fullerton sites with expedited permitting in process. 01:44:55.364 --> 01:45:01.570 - If we work together we can create a right size jail that will serve the needs best for our community. 01:45:01.570 --> 01:45:05.950 - And I believe that the North Park location will not do that. Thank you. 01:45:07.330 --> 01:45:14.942 - I forgot I would like to say if if I'm asked personally I would be completely in favor of the Thompson 01:45:14.942 --> 01:45:22.333 - property out of the many prop out of the Several choices that we have in the county has in front of 01:45:22.333 --> 01:45:29.502 - them but I also encourage us to think outside of the box because it's entirely possible that the 01:45:29.890 --> 01:45:36.564 - Solution that is the best for our community has not been even been discussed yet the other the other 01:45:36.564 --> 01:45:43.238 - point that I want to make is When we look toward the future of criminal justice in our community our 01:45:43.238 --> 01:45:49.846 - goal should never be to maximize space The space will be filled if it is created How will we invest 01:45:49.846 --> 01:45:56.521 - in resources that reduce crimes instead of building bigger spaces to confine those that commit them? 01:45:56.521 --> 01:45:59.230 - that is how I ask all of us to move to a 01:45:59.522 --> 01:46:08.172 - As we move forward and I am and look forward to any discussion that we might have as a body. Thank you 01:46:08.172 --> 01:46:17.157 - Thank you councilmember Piedmont Smith do you have anything to add I Appreciate my colleagues for bringing 01:46:17.157 --> 01:46:25.639 - this forward. I kind of jumped on as a co-sponsor recently, but I wanted to just draw a through line 01:46:25.639 --> 01:46:29.502 - here to our letter from October 22nd 2025 and 01:46:29.698 --> 01:46:39.231 - that that unanimously was approved by council members that that asked county officials to not continue 01:46:39.231 --> 01:46:48.578 - with the purchase of the North Park site for a new jail and criminal justice center. So this is kind 01:46:48.578 --> 01:46:57.278 - of reiterating that in a more formal way as a resolution. And I agree with my colleagues that 01:46:57.858 --> 01:47:05.891 - This site is inappropriate for many reasons. One is the size that has been proposed of the jail to be 01:47:05.891 --> 01:47:13.923 - put on this site. If there are vacant beds, you know ICE is gonna come and knock on our door and say, 01:47:13.923 --> 01:47:22.035 - we've got some people to store. And I also agree with my two co-sponsors that this is not the best use 01:47:22.035 --> 01:47:26.366 - of taxpayer money. There is a property that is already 01:47:26.882 --> 01:47:34.934 - belongs to the county that was purchased for a juvenile justice center and that's the Thompson site 01:47:34.934 --> 01:47:43.066 - and even if it would require some Change in utility lines. I think it would still come to less money 01:47:43.066 --> 01:47:51.118 - than What it would cost at North Park And that is in my council district so I speak as somebody who 01:47:51.118 --> 01:47:56.030 - would have that pretty near my house I think that and nobody 01:47:56.546 --> 01:48:05.011 - Everybody thinks that a jail is not a good neighbor, but we have a jail a block away from here, and 01:48:05.011 --> 01:48:13.646 - people pass it every day and don't even realize it. And finally, I want to underline a point that was 01:48:13.646 --> 01:48:22.620 - already made, but bears repeating that we need to invest in prevention. And this $11.375 million purchase 01:48:22.620 --> 01:48:24.990 - of North Park is money that 01:48:25.378 --> 01:48:36.027 - that not available for prevention and that's just A misuse of public funds. Thank you Thank you. We'll 01:48:36.027 --> 01:48:46.573 - now go to questions from council for to for the sponsors guess Thank you, can you just clarify for me 01:48:46.573 --> 01:48:51.742 - the differences between the resolution that we've 01:48:51.874 --> 01:49:00.838 - officially introduced that was in the addendum versus the one that was in the packet was it just the 01:49:00.838 --> 01:49:09.801 - Councilmember Piedmont Smith mentioned in the introduction that the Synopsis was changed at her as a 01:49:09.801 --> 01:49:18.942 - co-sponsor and then the expedited zoning was mentioned in section 2. Were there any other changes? Yes 01:49:19.554 --> 01:49:27.656 - There were some changes to clarify that The the first whereas clause that the county government has 01:49:27.656 --> 01:49:35.921 - been under a settlement agreement I think the previous one just said there had been a threat of legal 01:49:35.921 --> 01:49:44.266 - action since 2009 But there's actually been the settlement agreement Try to remember now The the price 01:49:44.266 --> 01:49:47.102 - tag was mistakenly left off of the 01:49:47.522 --> 01:49:55.697 - Forth whereas clause so we put that in there. Oh, thank you Right and no guarantee we changed the wording 01:49:55.697 --> 01:50:03.409 - about the transportation Not being accessible at North Park. So I mean maybe in the future there'll 01:50:03.409 --> 01:50:11.198 - be public transportation Maybe the county will make some other arrangement, but there's no guarantee 01:50:11.198 --> 01:50:17.214 - of trust public transportation access out there And then just to clarify that 01:50:17.570 --> 01:50:27.275 - Either a jail or Justice Center at North Park one or both Would disproportionately impact low-income 01:50:27.275 --> 01:50:37.173 - residents Impact low-income presidents and then adding zoning as well as permitting as the things that 01:50:37.173 --> 01:50:46.782 - we would seek to expedite for an in-town option Okay, thank you Okay further questions from council 01:50:47.586 --> 01:50:56.058 - the sponsors Okay, seeing none we'll go to the public if the public would like to Have a comment on 01:50:56.058 --> 01:51:04.699 - resolution 20 26 07, please step up to the microphone Please state your name there. There probably is 01:51:04.699 --> 01:51:13.086 - a sign-up sheet I believe there if you would be so kind as to do that and do you have something to 01:51:20.258 --> 01:51:26.722 - Thank you and you have three minutes Good evening, my name is Seth muchler Bloomington resident grateful 01:51:26.722 --> 01:51:33.309 - to the come council for this resolution some of which I've actually Pre-written has already been addressed 01:51:33.309 --> 01:51:36.510 - by council members, which I'm very appreciative and 01:51:36.674 --> 01:51:41.857 - As you work with the county, I would ask you to consider being open to renovation of the existing facility. 01:51:41.857 --> 01:51:46.656 - I know many elected officials have said this is not an option, but please allow me to explain why I 01:51:46.656 --> 01:51:51.935 - and many others feel it's worth considering. The main arguments I've heard against renovation are prohibitive 01:51:51.935 --> 01:51:56.734 - cost, inability to increase bed count within the existing building, and a lack of programming space 01:51:56.734 --> 01:51:58.174 - within the existing facility. 01:51:58.306 --> 01:52:04.864 - Looking at cost first, let me remind you that the new construction cost we were given was the $225 million 01:52:04.864 --> 01:52:11.055 - cost of the original North Park facility. I've given you two renovation estimates from jail experts. 01:52:11.055 --> 01:52:16.510 - The first is from RQAW. They estimated renovation at $62 million with the estimated cost 01:52:16.834 --> 01:52:22.225 - of relocating inmates and services during the two-year renovation at about $16 million, so a total of 01:52:22.225 --> 01:52:27.562 - about $80 million. That same report stated that the construction of just a jail and sheriff's office 01:52:27.562 --> 01:52:33.164 - would be nearly $100 million, not including land purchase, which I know what we're talking about tonight, 01:52:33.164 --> 01:52:38.555 - or construction of courts, as is the current plan if at North Park. Renovation is just simply cheaper 01:52:38.555 --> 01:52:43.998 - than new construction. And the other estimate is from the Kinray study, which admittedly is from 2019, 01:52:44.162 --> 01:52:52.362 - but estimates renovation at a staggeringly low range between 22 and $56 million. So looking to bed count, 01:52:52.362 --> 01:53:00.485 - our current facility has 294 beds. The claim is right that we need the much larger facility with upwards 01:53:00.485 --> 01:53:08.220 - of 500 beds or more. So since 2020, we have not exceeded 233 average daily population. And in 2023, 01:53:08.220 --> 01:53:12.862 - we actually were under 200, 199 inmates on average per day. 01:53:12.930 --> 01:53:18.608 - Can you imagine, right, if we were to invent, instead of dumping money into a new jail, we invested 01:53:18.608 --> 01:53:24.400 - in services, treatment, prevention, like how low could we get those numbers? We don't need more beds, 01:53:24.400 --> 01:53:30.078 - we need to do the work to incarcerate fewer people. And finally, access to services, the other big, 01:53:30.078 --> 01:53:35.756 - in the jail, the other big thing. Services belong in the community, not in jail. When we intertwine 01:53:35.756 --> 01:53:41.888 - mental health and substance use services and incarceration, we intertwine those mental health and substance 01:53:41.888 --> 01:53:42.910 - use services and, 01:53:43.202 --> 01:53:48.970 - Excuse me. We intertwine mental health and substance use and criminality the 2024 jail annual report 01:53:48.970 --> 01:53:54.910 - states that quote the Monroe County Correctional Center is the largest mental health facility in Monroe 01:53:54.910 --> 01:54:00.735 - and surrounding counties That is a shameful statement and something we need to fix not double down on 01:54:00.735 --> 01:54:06.846 - and we know that treatment and services in the community are far more effective than in a carceral setting 01:54:07.042 --> 01:54:12.121 - Even if we decided we needed some treatment in the jail for the people who sort of must be there If 01:54:12.121 --> 01:54:17.404 - we implement the types of changes we're talking about to reduce capacity We could even take cell blocks 01:54:17.404 --> 01:54:22.839 - and convert them into programming spaces if we cut incarceration in half clears up a lot of square footage 01:54:22.839 --> 01:54:27.969 - So hopefully you see now why renovation is a viable option. There's no guarantee It's the option but 01:54:27.969 --> 01:54:33.099 - I would ask that as you work with the county that you put it into consideration. Thank you Thank you 01:54:33.099 --> 01:54:35.486 - for your comment and the materials you offered 01:54:36.290 --> 01:54:47.425 - Next speaker, please state your name and please sign in You have three minutes Yes, my name is Jeff 01:54:47.425 --> 01:54:59.006 - Richardson, I just want to acknowledge that this situation underscores failed leadership this is moving 01:54:59.006 --> 01:55:01.790 - on for over 16 years and 01:55:02.338 --> 01:55:09.581 - And it's not only a failure at the county level, but it really speaks to, I think, city-county cooperation. 01:55:09.581 --> 01:55:16.288 - We need to find a way that we can talk to each other more effectively, not just at meetings, but in 01:55:16.288 --> 01:55:23.397 - between meetings. And I think to characterize this as anything other than failed leadership is a mistake. 01:55:23.397 --> 01:55:30.103 - I don't have a position on Thompson versus Fullerton versus North Park. So I will say I have a very 01:55:30.103 --> 01:55:31.646 - close friend who works 01:55:31.778 --> 01:55:38.952 - who lives, I should say, in the Thompson area. She's part of the Habitat for Humanity neighborhood that's 01:55:38.952 --> 01:55:45.720 - ever growing. As you know, eventually there'll be 64 houses there. A lot of the folks there are not 01:55:45.720 --> 01:55:52.758 - enthused about the jail. They may be wrong about their thinking. They may need to be educated. But it's 01:55:52.758 --> 01:55:59.796 - not fair to say that low income people will embrace this facility because low income people have a need 01:55:59.796 --> 01:56:01.150 - to get to the jail. 01:56:01.698 --> 01:56:09.326 - when appropriate, so I think that's important. I'm also very distressed about how this is being framed 01:56:09.326 --> 01:56:16.880 - that somehow, not by this council, but by somehow the ACLU is the enemy. Somehow they've been rushing 01:56:16.880 --> 01:56:24.583 - us. In fact, one prominent official said, and suddenly the ACLU asked us to do X, and I said, suddenly, 01:56:24.583 --> 01:56:30.878 - after 16 years, you're using the word suddenly? It's really inappropriate, and it's, 01:56:31.010 --> 01:56:38.225 - a shame to frame the ACLU that is doing so much good work nationally as well as statewide as somehow 01:56:38.225 --> 01:56:45.511 - the oppressor in this particular context. And speaking of enemies, I'm reminded of the old pogo, this 01:56:45.511 --> 01:56:52.797 - is for old people, I've been around for a long time, but the old pogo cartoon that says we've met the 01:56:52.797 --> 01:56:57.726 - enemy and the enemy is us. And I feel sometimes we have to step back 01:56:58.082 --> 01:57:04.250 - and have a bit of introspection, self-reflection, and say not only what is the desired outcome, but 01:57:04.250 --> 01:57:10.665 - how could we, maybe we could have done something a little differently along this way. I know, Isabelle, 01:57:10.665 --> 01:57:17.265 - you tried to work with the county on this issue for years, and I'm not blaming anyone, but I am suggesting 01:57:17.265 --> 01:57:23.618 - that this is an opportunity for us to step back and say, can we lower the temperature? Can we stop the 01:57:23.618 --> 01:57:26.270 - finger pointing? In fact, we had more time 01:57:26.370 --> 01:57:35.554 - the county commissioners Screaming at Marta the sheriff and then we did dealing with this problem. Please 01:57:35.554 --> 01:57:44.218 - find a way that we can work together For the betterment of our community and to show people a model 01:57:44.218 --> 01:57:53.056 - behavior how we can work together and get things done Thank you Thank you for your comment, please Oh 01:57:53.056 --> 01:57:55.742 - Do we yes, let's go on to zoom 01:57:56.258 --> 01:58:04.405 - Thank you Friends colleagues and members of our community this isn't a matter of one county 01:58:04.405 --> 01:58:13.615 - body manufacturing pressure against another It's a matter of local government collaborating to confront 01:58:13.615 --> 01:58:19.902 - a dead jail. Could you please state your name before you continue? Yes 01:58:24.258 --> 01:58:30.637 - Would you please state your name and then please continue? My name is Commissioner Jody Madeira. Okay. 01:58:30.637 --> 01:58:36.893 - Thank you. Thank you. At this point, this resolution is rearranging deck chair. Let's speak plainly. 01:58:36.893 --> 01:58:43.396 - 17 years after a lawsuit is too late to complain that you're being rushed into litigation. I was elected 01:58:43.396 --> 01:58:49.342 - in January, 2025 on the county level. No one's taking any responsibility for the 17 year delay. 01:58:49.890 --> 01:58:55.136 - Everyone involved could have done things differently, but there's been an entire lack of introspection 01:58:55.136 --> 01:59:00.280 - from those involved at that time. Well, now someone has to take responsibility. We're in a difficult 01:59:00.280 --> 01:59:05.729 - situation, most of itself inflicted. And right now there are serious human rights violations that outweigh 01:59:05.729 --> 01:59:08.734 - premature concerns about implementation in infrastructure. 01:59:09.442 --> 01:59:14.931 - Although it's framed as support for keeping the jail within city limits, this resolution's practical 01:59:14.931 --> 01:59:20.637 - effect is to urge the county to reject the one site ready to move forward. The city's memo implies we're 01:59:20.637 --> 01:59:26.398 - dealing with legalese and states that a lawsuit, though intimidating, isn't the end of this conversation. 01:59:26.398 --> 01:59:31.941 - This isn't caution or compromise. It's not simply a symbolic expression of preference about geography 01:59:31.941 --> 01:59:37.539 - or social equity. This is an invitation to continue down a path that sends the county off a cliff into 01:59:37.539 --> 01:59:39.006 - a lawsuit it can't defend, 01:59:39.426 --> 01:59:44.762 - And that's the part that the public deserves to hear clearly. You are pushing us through the courtroom 01:59:44.762 --> 01:59:49.995 - doors. So let's talk about the lawsuit. If the settlement agreement is dismissed, our constitutional 01:59:49.995 --> 01:59:55.227 - duty doesn't disappear. It just gets harder and more urgent. We had some leeway under the settlement 01:59:55.227 --> 02:00:00.460 - agreement. Without it, we'll have to run a constitutional jail. So in 2021, the jail transition team 02:00:00.460 --> 02:00:02.014 - produced some cost estimates. 02:00:02.146 --> 02:00:08.031 - There's a cost to remediate the current facility while awaiting a new jail for items not requiring more 02:00:08.031 --> 02:00:13.745 - space. That's between three and 11 million. We have to constitutionally classify prisoners for which 02:00:13.745 --> 02:00:19.460 - there is no space that necessitates setting entire groups like all women in the jail to other County 02:00:19.460 --> 02:00:25.458 - jails away from their families and communities and children at a cost of $75 per day per prisoner. That's 02:00:25.458 --> 02:00:30.494 - a very high human cost. And the transition team suggests 50 inmates as a starting point. 02:00:30.882 --> 02:00:36.976 - That's 1.36 million. We need another van for transport, 105,000, and six new jailers for 500,000 a year. 02:00:36.976 --> 02:00:42.953 - This isn't reform, it's failure. Then come legal fees, monitoring fees, compliance costs, and we still 02:00:42.953 --> 02:00:48.757 - end up at North Park. Litigation isn't a symbolic act of resistance, it's a cash burn. I understand 02:00:48.757 --> 02:00:54.851 - the concerns about North Park and the argument that services are concentrated closer to the city center. 02:00:54.851 --> 02:01:00.190 - I understand the concern about transportation. These are real issues, but they're solvable. 02:01:00.642 --> 02:01:05.682 - This issue destroys the public image of Monroe County and Bloomington, a democratic community publicly 02:01:05.682 --> 02:01:10.918 - divided. That's not the image of effective local government, and it's not the message we should be sending 02:01:10.918 --> 02:01:16.105 - to the rest of Indiana. It makes it look, frankly, like Democrats can't govern. So please, in conclusion, 02:01:16.105 --> 02:01:21.097 - don't pass a resolution that deepens the vision between local governments at the very moment unity is 02:01:21.097 --> 02:01:25.990 - most needed. No amount of rhetoric about principle changes the fact that this resolution points the 02:01:25.990 --> 02:01:28.926 - county down a dark, chaotic, and dangerous road. Thank you. 02:01:29.058 --> 02:01:35.978 - Commissioner Madeira, I allowed the commissioner to continue because I interrupted her So do is there 02:01:35.978 --> 02:01:42.762 - anyone else on zoom at this point one other let's go to The chambers and then we'll go back to zoom 02:01:42.762 --> 02:01:49.342 - in a moment Make sure you sign you probably already signed in but yes, I did earlier. Thanks. Oh 02:01:52.162 --> 02:02:01.544 - Hello, for the final time this evening, my name is C. Forth, and I wish to express support for this 02:02:01.544 --> 02:02:11.395 - resolution. A couple of years ago, I actually walked to the North Park location. I had become interested 02:02:11.395 --> 02:02:21.246 - in it and decided to just see what the experience would be like walking out there and then walking back. 02:02:21.922 --> 02:02:31.622 - you know, along the current sidewalks and infrastructure that is there. And it was a rather inhospitable 02:02:31.622 --> 02:02:41.231 - set of like trek to do to the nearest like bus stop, right? It is far from services. It is removed from 02:02:41.231 --> 02:02:44.926 - our community. I think it does create a 02:02:45.218 --> 02:02:52.585 - a situation in which folks could be released late in the evening, as many folks are from jails or at 02:02:52.585 --> 02:03:00.098 - odd hours, and then they're having to figure out how to get back into Bloomington. How do they get the 02:03:00.098 --> 02:03:07.684 - transportation? If we don't co-locate the jail with the courts and the sheriff, then you also introduce 02:03:07.684 --> 02:03:11.550 - the cost factor of busing those people around, which 02:03:11.746 --> 02:03:19.598 - could be a quite expensive thing over years for every single inmate. So, you know, we were talking about 02:03:19.598 --> 02:03:27.300 - the costs there just a moment ago of, you know, renovation versus locating at, like, Thompson. I think 02:03:27.300 --> 02:03:34.928 - that anything that puts it within the city right-sized for the needs of our community and not putting 02:03:34.928 --> 02:03:37.470 - us in a position where we're just 02:03:37.666 --> 02:03:44.721 - asking to fill it with more beds is the direction we need to take. I think it was Pierre Montsmith who 02:03:44.721 --> 02:03:51.707 - mentioned if the beds are there and we start seeing the federal government swing its weight around in 02:03:51.707 --> 02:03:56.638 - the same way that they have in Minnesota, that is an invitation to just 02:03:57.250 --> 02:04:05.065 - throw people into that jail. And there's also the question of protesters on campus, right? I might be 02:04:05.065 --> 02:04:12.803 - misremembering this, so I do apologize. But I seem to recall that many of the folks who were dragged 02:04:12.803 --> 02:04:20.464 - away during the encampment were taken to our jail. And it feels like that's just opening up a whole 02:04:20.464 --> 02:04:25.214 - can of worms for having all of those extra beds that are just 02:04:25.442 --> 02:04:32.462 - available to either be filled passively by the desire to make use of what is there or filled in moments 02:04:32.462 --> 02:04:39.211 - of, you know, the times we find ourselves in, frankly. Thank you for your time. I hope that we make 02:04:39.211 --> 02:04:46.096 - the right fiscal choice for our community because I do think at the end of the day there is also that 02:04:46.096 --> 02:04:53.183 - just base element. The price tag difference is just astronomical. Thank you. Thank you for your comment. 02:04:53.183 --> 02:04:54.398 - Let's go to Zoom. 02:04:55.170 --> 02:05:00.655 - Our next zoom participant if you would please state your name, you'll have three minutes Hi, this is 02:05:00.655 --> 02:05:06.303 - Julie Thomas Monroe County Commissioner and thank you for the opportunity to speak today We're grateful 02:05:06.303 --> 02:05:11.951 - and lucky that mr. Falk of the ACLU, Indiana agreed to extend the private settlement agreement on their 02:05:11.951 --> 02:05:17.382 - lawsuits against the board of commissioners and the sheriff until the end of May and by the way, we 02:05:17.382 --> 02:05:19.934 - have a great relationship with the sheriff and 02:05:20.098 --> 02:05:25.721 - If the private settlement agreement lapses at the end of May without meeting our obligations, the site 02:05:25.721 --> 02:05:31.452 - selected, funding identified, then we can be sued. It's not a suggestion, it is a real threat. A federal 02:05:31.452 --> 02:05:37.129 - judge can order any number of remedies, but let's be clear, this is a burden borne by all Monroe County 02:05:37.129 --> 02:05:41.278 - taxpayers, whether they live in the city or not. It is not a risk or a cost 02:05:41.378 --> 02:05:47.748 - that the commissioners are willing to accept when a good solution exists. Our bond council has advised 02:05:47.748 --> 02:05:53.933 - us to complete the bond process by July 2026. Any specific site has to be selected before that bond 02:05:53.933 --> 02:06:00.366 - can be initiated. North Park is shovel ready. With a purchase agreement and a bond, we can break ground 02:06:00.366 --> 02:06:07.107 - early next year and the facility can be operational early 2030. We have done our due diligence investigating 02:06:07.107 --> 02:06:10.014 - properties across the county. A few years ago, 02:06:10.306 --> 02:06:15.974 - We brought a petition before the city planning commission and city council to build the justice center 02:06:15.974 --> 02:06:21.696 - on Fullerton Pike. Both bodies rejected the petition. We spent nearly a year on that process. We stated 02:06:21.696 --> 02:06:27.419 - at that time that if Fullerton Pike was rejected by the city, the county would look outside city limits 02:06:27.419 --> 02:06:33.086 - for this facility. Thompson is in the city, yes, and the county owns it. But there are issues with the 02:06:33.086 --> 02:06:38.974 - property. The city planning commission and city council must approve a change to the plan unit development 02:06:39.106 --> 02:06:45.140 - We cannot proceed without that approval. It is a necessary public process that we respect and it cannot 02:06:45.140 --> 02:06:51.058 - be shortened nor avoided. That fact alone makes any project on Thompson impossible to complete either 02:06:51.058 --> 02:06:56.686 - by false deadline of May, the end of May of 2026 or the bond council's deadline of July of 2026. 02:06:56.686 --> 02:07:02.604 - In addition, there are other issues with the Thompson property that need to be resolved before we can 02:07:02.604 --> 02:07:06.782 - move forward. Cars features need to be studied and possibly remediated. 02:07:07.010 --> 02:07:12.468 - We have to remove a large amount of dirt. There's relocation of high voltage power lines that Duke says 02:07:12.468 --> 02:07:17.297 - will take at least a year and a half to complete. And a road needs to be completed from the 02:07:17.297 --> 02:07:22.860 - summit development. Even if everything went well, we would be years away from breaking ground on Thompson 02:07:22.860 --> 02:07:28.160 - and at a significant cost. Mr. Falk and the ACLU are focused on the jail, not a full justice center. 02:07:28.160 --> 02:07:30.942 - We intend to get the jail built as soon as possible. 02:07:31.362 --> 02:07:37.330 - That includes the jail, jail administrative offices, sheriff's office, and a few criminal courts. Once 02:07:37.330 --> 02:07:43.182 - we are able to, we intend to build the remainder of the justice center. Co-location reduces security 02:07:43.182 --> 02:07:49.266 - risks and overall costs in the long term. Yes, transit will be managed. As of 2029, county has to manage 02:07:49.266 --> 02:07:51.294 - transit, so it will be dealt with. 02:07:51.426 --> 02:07:56.690 - If you truly care about creating a jail facility as soon as possible, that can provide constitutional 02:07:56.690 --> 02:08:02.213 - care for people housed there. And if you understand the potential risks and cost of a lawsuit are enormous 02:08:02.213 --> 02:08:07.787 - and will impact every resident in Monroe County, I ask you to vote no or continue this motion indefinitely. 02:08:07.787 --> 02:08:11.038 - Happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Commissioner Thomas. 02:08:23.298 --> 02:08:30.002 - Somebody left their phone up here. Welcome councilmember crossing. Yes. Thank you so much Jennifer cross 02:08:30.002 --> 02:08:36.386 - Lee Trying to lower it as much as I can here Monroe County Council Council president I just want to 02:08:36.386 --> 02:08:43.026 - thank all of you all for and the co-sponsors for even entertaining this Resolution writing whether it's 02:08:43.026 --> 02:08:49.475 - City County shouldn't be like a resolution sport and it's kind of weird that we have to Do something 02:08:49.475 --> 02:08:51.454 - like this, but yet here we are 02:08:51.586 --> 02:08:58.447 - The other thing that I wanted to say is to councilmember Piedmont Smith. I'm I should say let me back 02:08:58.447 --> 02:09:05.510 - up before I make the comment I'm not new to this. I'm true to this. I've been on County government since 02:09:05.510 --> 02:09:12.439 - December of 21 And this is the same conversation before stepping into my role that we have been having 02:09:12.439 --> 02:09:16.542 - and we continue to have councilmember Piedmont Smith was the 02:09:16.930 --> 02:09:23.379 - the city representative to one of the many acronym meetings that the county used to have, which is the 02:09:23.379 --> 02:09:29.828 - CJRC. You all repeatedly ask, how can we help? How can we do this? And yet, like a thief in the night, 02:09:29.828 --> 02:09:36.465 - those meetings kind of went away with no explanation. And so, yes, I understand that we are at a movement 02:09:36.465 --> 02:09:42.789 - right now. Other people should also have to answer, since they've been in their spots for as long as 02:09:42.789 --> 02:09:44.542 - they have, not me, why that 02:09:44.802 --> 02:09:51.848 - This has continued to continue to manifest year after year after year after year. In 2009, I actually 02:09:51.848 --> 02:09:58.893 - had one child. In 2026, that said child just turned 19 who was actually able to vote. And there's two 02:09:58.893 --> 02:10:03.038 - more people. So let that sit in. But at the end of the day, 02:10:03.138 --> 02:10:08.630 - The question that I have for you all is has anybody talked to you all about the you know We keep talking 02:10:08.630 --> 02:10:14.122 - about the cost has anybody talked about the cost to you of what it would take for public transit I would 02:10:14.122 --> 02:10:19.458 - think that that's something that we the county would have to talk to you in city probably I think the 02:10:19.458 --> 02:10:24.793 - answer to that would be no, but I think we need to have the conversation with you we should be out of 02:10:24.793 --> 02:10:25.630 - this mindset of 02:10:25.986 --> 02:10:32.321 - Approve it now ask questions later and that's kind of what we feel here on the County Council I am a 02:10:32.321 --> 02:10:39.033 - big girl literally and figuratively so I can do all the hard things and I am very much wanting to continue 02:10:39.033 --> 02:10:43.486 - to collaborate with you just like what was mentioned earlier today and 02:10:44.226 --> 02:10:50.069 - Yeah, we can lower the temperature as well But we have to have a common ground and you all need to be 02:10:50.069 --> 02:10:55.912 - included in that because I could tell you one thing We continue to go to North Park Everybody in here 02:10:55.912 --> 02:11:01.927 - can be looking into more taxing because that's is what is going to happen because that's how we're gonna 02:11:01.927 --> 02:11:07.884 - have to pay for that The only other thing that I will say is as I end and I only got a few seconds left 02:11:07.884 --> 02:11:10.462 - I would ask because it keeps being said that 02:11:10.658 --> 02:11:16.902 - Quinn Falk is telling us no we keep hearing that you all will have a 9 to 12 month process On that has 02:11:16.902 --> 02:11:23.086 - anybody talked to you all probably the answer is no I think we need to do that as I finish up here We 02:11:23.086 --> 02:11:29.391 - continue to protest no Kings in our community and no Kings I say we have no Queens in this conversation 02:11:29.391 --> 02:11:35.454 - and with that we continue to work together So with that I go what's left of my time and I thank you 02:11:38.914 --> 02:11:50.605 - Thank you council president crossly Let's go to back to zoom. Is there other no participants on zoom, 02:11:50.605 --> 02:12:02.525 - please step forward and Be sure to sign in state your name and you'll have three Rousseau I Have a very 02:12:02.525 --> 02:12:07.454 - good friend in another state whose son was 02:12:09.186 --> 02:12:17.240 - Convicted in the last year of a six to twelve month sentence in the county jail in another state He's 02:12:17.240 --> 02:12:25.214 - devastated and His mental health is really awful now, so I understand what the previous speaker said 02:12:25.214 --> 02:12:33.268 - about The car serial setting is one of the worst of all for mental health services because just being 02:12:33.268 --> 02:12:37.374 - there Puts you two or three steps down the ladder I 02:12:37.506 --> 02:12:45.174 - The thing that's keeping him sane is visits from his family, and I think that the North Park site strikes 02:12:45.174 --> 02:12:52.480 - me as about the worst case for making it difficult for the kind of visits that one needs when you're 02:12:52.480 --> 02:12:59.713 - in prison. I support the resolution wholeheartedly for all the reasons that are in it. I think it's 02:12:59.713 --> 02:13:04.126 - very well written, and I thank you very much for writing it. 02:13:06.658 --> 02:13:15.723 - Thank you mr. So Please state your name and I think you're signed in Hi, my name is Zach Mueller. Um, 02:13:15.723 --> 02:13:24.966 - just wanted to say that I really hadn't planned on talking about this but um You know, I just feel like 02:13:24.966 --> 02:13:33.854 - You know, I'm not an elected official. I'm not lawyer I've lived in the county for some time. Um, I 02:13:34.242 --> 02:13:42.097 - Actually think I've lived in the county longer than anybody who's currently on county council or county 02:13:42.097 --> 02:13:49.726 - the county commissioners Grouping maybe not We've had so long as a as a as a community right because 02:13:49.726 --> 02:13:57.430 - the county in the city I understand I'm talking before you our city representatives. Well, I've heard 02:13:57.430 --> 02:14:03.774 - you know from our some of our elected officials from the county I Get that we might 02:14:04.578 --> 02:14:12.958 - run into a lawsuit. We've known about this for how long? How all of a sudden is this the problem? I 02:14:12.958 --> 02:14:21.338 - reject patently that, oh no, now, whoa, I got you, it's all good. I reject now that the asteroid is 02:14:21.338 --> 02:14:30.138 - coming directly from Monroe County, and it's been shot from space by the ACLU at us, and a federal judge 02:14:30.138 --> 02:14:31.646 - is gonna be like, 02:14:32.482 --> 02:14:40.865 - and Roe County's gonna get it because they wanna get their jail situation right finally. I understand 02:14:40.865 --> 02:14:49.659 - that maybe we have been talking in circles for years and we need some kind of fix that works. I appreciate 02:14:49.659 --> 02:14:58.782 - the other member of the community who prepared materials and provided them to you, and I hope they're helpful. 02:14:58.946 --> 02:15:07.841 - I hope that that can help kind of foster a dialogue with our friends at the county if it is cheaper 02:15:07.841 --> 02:15:17.002 - to Like renovate the jail we have and have services centrally located then the county can Look at that 02:15:17.002 --> 02:15:20.382 - as savings. This is like when I go to 02:15:20.578 --> 02:15:26.452 - to buy something and I buy it on sale, I look at that as a savings because I didn't have to pay that 02:15:26.452 --> 02:15:32.385 - extra money because if I fix something, I don't have to buy a new one. Come on, man. I just don't see 02:15:32.385 --> 02:15:38.201 - why this is so... Yeah, we're all gonna have to pay more taxes. We already have to pay taxes. Let's 02:15:38.201 --> 02:15:44.308 - do something where people want the outcome. I don't know many people who are like, ooh yeah, let's build 02:15:44.308 --> 02:15:49.950 - a new jail if we can fix the one we have and it serves all the purposes we can. Maybe I'm wrong. 02:15:50.114 --> 02:15:57.732 - Again, I'm not running for office. So Thank you for introducing this legislation or this resolution 02:15:57.732 --> 02:16:05.655 - council people. I really appreciate it and There's 15 seconds for you Thank You mr. Miller Please state 02:16:05.655 --> 02:16:13.653 - your name and you have three minutes My name is Haley tokes and I just want to thank council for putting 02:16:13.653 --> 02:16:17.310 - this resolution forward I strongly support it I 02:16:18.338 --> 02:16:25.061 - For all the reasons mentioned, we don't need more beds. We need more services. And I understand that 02:16:25.061 --> 02:16:31.850 - we're under the gun here, but that doesn't make North Park a good decision. It's a very bad decision. 02:16:31.850 --> 02:16:38.772 - It's fiscally irresponsible. It's going to make people's lives worse. There's not a good reason to rush 02:16:38.772 --> 02:16:45.827 - into it. And I just think that Seth made so many fantastic points about why renovation is a really viable 02:16:45.827 --> 02:16:47.358 - option, that we should 02:16:47.522 --> 02:16:58.001 - Taking very seriously if we're in a rush. Why not go with the building. We already have Thank you Thank 02:16:58.001 --> 02:17:08.278 - you for your comment anyone else in the chambers Okay, anyone else on zoom in that case we're back to 02:17:08.278 --> 02:17:15.230 - counsel for any further questions Thank you, well I heard one of the 02:17:15.682 --> 02:17:25.025 - Commissioners make a comment about how this wouldn't be very Fiscally responsible and that we have to 02:17:25.025 --> 02:17:34.643 - answer to our taxpayers well this is a project that at the North Park property would cost every taxpayer 02:17:34.643 --> 02:17:38.398 - in this county five thousand dollars and 02:17:39.586 --> 02:17:47.424 - Now, I don't know about you, but $5,000 would cover over five months of my rent. Most probably a full 02:17:47.424 --> 02:17:55.108 - year of utilities, like $5,000 is nothing to sneeze at for anyone who has ever worried about money. 02:17:55.108 --> 02:18:03.176 - I would much rather, I'm happy to pay my taxes, but I would much rather those resources be going towards 02:18:03.176 --> 02:18:09.246 - prevention services and keeping people out of jail and in their own homes with 02:18:09.346 --> 02:18:19.175 - their families, thank you. Okay, thank you. Any other questions? Yes, oh, Council Member Asari. Council 02:18:19.175 --> 02:18:28.909 - President Asari. Thank you so much. Do you have a question or a comment? A question, if it's possible. 02:18:28.909 --> 02:18:37.982 - Yes. Will you allow it? And I don't know, is Director Hiddle in the room by chance? Yes, he is. 02:18:38.658 --> 02:18:48.727 - Would you allow me to ask a question of him? If you would allow to receive it. It's not of that complex 02:18:48.727 --> 02:18:58.408 - of a question. I just he is accommodating he's stepping to the microphone Thank you, I'm interested 02:18:58.408 --> 02:19:08.574 - in this I mean this this calls for the council approving a expedited permitting and land use process for 02:19:08.770 --> 02:19:17.295 - whatever property, I guess, in the broadest sense, as long as it fits the category of being in town. 02:19:17.295 --> 02:19:25.903 - And I'm trying to understand first, what does that actually mean in practice? Because obviously, I've 02:19:25.903 --> 02:19:32.318 - long advocated for us just generally having expedited processes for things. 02:19:32.834 --> 02:19:40.551 - Can you maybe give me some thought about the viability of an expedited process? And if so sort of like 02:19:40.551 --> 02:19:48.119 - what it means Well I think as you probably As you probably know we're nearing the end of an audit of 02:19:48.119 --> 02:19:55.911 - our permitting processes which in a very general sense is going to result in a much more expedited much 02:19:55.911 --> 02:19:59.358 - more efficient process but that will apply to 02:19:59.458 --> 02:20:06.321 - Anything that comes through as far as an application for land user development. I'm not sure if there's 02:20:06.321 --> 02:20:12.987 - specific language associated with this resolution that defines what an expedited process would be or 02:20:12.987 --> 02:20:19.586 - if it's just a Pat on the back to encourage something along those lines. So I know I'm not aware of 02:20:19.586 --> 02:20:20.510 - anything that 02:20:20.610 --> 02:20:27.915 - specifically tied with this resolution that would give us more guidance on that wanted to act in some 02:20:27.915 --> 02:20:35.506 - way, you know within a limited way about about the jail transaction or swapping of properties or building 02:20:35.506 --> 02:20:42.740 - out of The Thompson property or something like that Is there a way is there a mechanism available to 02:20:42.740 --> 02:20:49.758 - us as a city? specifically available to us as counsel or to your office where we can where we can 02:20:50.434 --> 02:20:57.065 - Actually commit to the statement that we're making in this resolution. Well, the statement doesn't have 02:20:57.065 --> 02:21:03.441 - any specificity at all So I'm not even sure we could certainly commit to Doing our best to expedite 02:21:03.441 --> 02:21:10.328 - a permit process I think there's probably the capability or I'm sure there's a capability in the department 02:21:10.328 --> 02:21:17.214 - to do that, you know if there were an emergency situation or something along those lines we could certainly 02:21:17.314 --> 02:21:26.791 - Focus our attention commit our resources to getting this particular thing done but The language as I 02:21:26.791 --> 02:21:36.362 - see it doesn't provide us anything more than that. I'm also happy to clarify Thank you, so when I was 02:21:36.362 --> 02:21:39.646 - originally writing this one of the 02:21:39.938 --> 02:21:46.224 - that I had discussed with my Monroe County Council colleagues was that there is this argument being 02:21:46.224 --> 02:21:52.698 - brought up against the Thompson property saying that the process for plan city planning would take too 02:21:52.698 --> 02:21:58.983 - long and so one of the reasons that I included that phrasing in the resolution is to basically just 02:21:58.983 --> 02:22:05.646 - to communicate a spirit of collaboration and that like we want to work on this with County and so there's 02:22:05.646 --> 02:22:08.286 - There wasn't meant to be anything binding 02:22:08.386 --> 02:22:19.873 - But I'm more meant like from the body as a whole to support, you know moving this through with Haste 02:22:19.873 --> 02:22:31.588 - yes Councilmember Azari, do you have anything else? Yeah, thank you so much councilmember Zulek. Yeah, 02:22:31.588 --> 02:22:37.502 - and I think that I I don't I don't question the the 02:22:38.050 --> 02:22:46.929 - I think the moral stance, I think it's exactly right and I support that wholeheartedly. I think the 02:22:46.929 --> 02:22:55.808 - question though here, given the exact context where the ACLU is looking for a clear signal, if this 02:22:55.808 --> 02:22:57.406 - is more than just 02:22:57.538 --> 02:23:04.438 - Well, we generally stand with you. I mean, if we're just standing with you, but we can't follow through 02:23:04.438 --> 02:23:11.338 - with the way that we're standing with them, don't we think that this language needs to be very specific 02:23:11.338 --> 02:23:18.238 - about how we would accomplish it, moving faster, what type of timelines can be committed to, et cetera? 02:23:18.882 --> 02:23:26.158 - But yeah, so some interested sort of in thoughts and thoughts there because otherwise my concern otherwise 02:23:26.158 --> 02:23:33.230 - sorry I'm turning this into a comment, but my concern otherwise is that You know we we we make a stance 02:23:33.230 --> 02:23:40.030 - that I mean otherwise means nothing and You know and I mean I I think if people were watching we're 02:23:40.030 --> 02:23:45.470 - watching you know the way that the city and and us as a council has moved on on 02:23:46.018 --> 02:23:53.734 - things around You know housing developments, etc. I don't know what confidence I would have in that 02:23:53.734 --> 02:24:01.526 - statement, you know without specifics Great unfortunately like the timing We had one council meeting 02:24:01.526 --> 02:24:09.474 - prior to an opportunity to speak on this and so I prioritized a Resolution that would get the majority 02:24:09.474 --> 02:24:15.646 - of support from council members especially given that we have six things on the 02:24:15.842 --> 02:24:26.826 - Agenda tonight. I was prioritizing just the city Reiterating its stance supporting our County Council 02:24:26.826 --> 02:24:38.242 - colleagues That's what I have Councilmember Piedmont Smith I would just say we don't know what the county 02:24:38.242 --> 02:24:42.334 - would ask of us as far as planning or 02:24:42.946 --> 02:24:51.013 - Permitting I mean we don't know exactly the details of that. So it would be hard for us to say exactly 02:24:51.013 --> 02:24:58.923 - what we would do To expedite it it's I think the best we can do at this point in time is to say that 02:24:58.923 --> 02:25:06.754 - we would do our best to You know work with the county to get If they were to select land within the 02:25:06.754 --> 02:25:12.158 - city limits to get the approvals that would be needed I think that's 02:25:12.418 --> 02:25:19.713 - Specific as we could be at this point Council member Stossberg I have a question and I'm not sure that 02:25:19.713 --> 02:25:27.008 - anybody can necessarily answer this and I'm trying to like do research on the fly about it, but I feel 02:25:27.008 --> 02:25:34.515 - like the the understanding that I just got online during the public comment from the county commissioners 02:25:34.515 --> 02:25:41.598 - was of the Thompson site is in part not shovel ready because it's not zoned properly for a jail and 02:25:42.210 --> 02:25:50.826 - but I think it actually is. And I guess I don't want to turn this into a comment at this point, but 02:25:50.826 --> 02:25:59.701 - can anybody actually answer the question publicly right now about whether, because it is part of a PUD 02:25:59.701 --> 02:26:08.576 - and it was, I mean, I'm trying to read an amended PUD from 2002 right now while I'm actually listening 02:26:08.576 --> 02:26:11.678 - to other things that are happening. 02:26:11.778 --> 02:26:18.996 - But it seems to say that jails are added as a conditional use to be reviewed by the Board of Zoning 02:26:18.996 --> 02:26:26.574 - Appeals. And so the argument of, oh, we can't get this done by May. We can't get this done by July might 02:26:26.574 --> 02:26:34.441 - actually not happen. So I don't know if, I mean, 2002 was well before the time of our planning professionals 02:26:34.441 --> 02:26:39.710 - in the room. So I don't know if anybody can answer that publicly or not. 02:26:44.642 --> 02:26:52.309 - Sponsors or director Hittle? Dude, can you answer publicly whether a jail is currently allowed as an 02:26:52.309 --> 02:27:00.127 - allowed use on the Thompson site on that PUD? Did not include locations Because we did not we honestly 02:27:00.127 --> 02:27:08.022 - City Council. We don't have enough research on the different properties in terms of viability for other 02:27:08.022 --> 02:27:14.398 - properties I think that's a conversation that we would need to have with the county 02:27:14.498 --> 02:27:23.300 - but I mean this body's been accused of overstepping before and so I Primarily wanted to make this about 02:27:23.300 --> 02:27:31.848 - this is how it's going to impact city residents. This is our request and Leave it kind of open apart 02:27:31.848 --> 02:27:40.989 - from that Director Hittle, would you like to yeah, I think it would we would have to scour the PUD language 02:27:40.989 --> 02:27:42.174 - to give you a 02:27:42.690 --> 02:27:49.109 - Full and concrete answer wouldn't take too long, but it would take longer than we have right now Probably 02:27:49.109 --> 02:27:55.165 - give you the answer tomorrow as to whether or not current zoning would allow it and what would need 02:27:55.165 --> 02:28:01.342 - to be done if it doesn't allow it Thank you, I actually also got a text from County Council President 02:28:01.342 --> 02:28:07.701 - Jennifer Crosley that said yes, it is currently zoned for jail. Thank you. Oh I need to say that louder. 02:28:07.701 --> 02:28:12.606 - I just got a text from Council President Jennifer Crosley saying it is currently 02:28:12.738 --> 02:28:21.600 - Zoned for a jail Great. Thank you other questions Councilmember sorry You still have I'd be if permitted 02:28:21.600 --> 02:28:30.125 - I'll make my comment my response then and then if permitted noting that Commissioner Thomas is still 02:28:30.125 --> 02:28:39.156 - on the line. So if you all wanted to wanted to hear from from from them, they're still here, but I believe 02:28:39.156 --> 02:28:42.110 - that Commissioner Thomas said that 02:28:42.530 --> 02:28:51.283 - you know, that the issue was both a road that overlaps with the summit PUD question, and that the thing 02:28:51.283 --> 02:29:00.036 - was about rezoning, or not rezoning, but allowing the justice center also to be built there in addition 02:29:00.036 --> 02:29:08.621 - to the jail itself. So I don't know if that is how I heard what was said, but she is still here if we 02:29:08.621 --> 02:29:11.230 - wanted to ask. Are you asking? 02:29:11.810 --> 02:29:22.002 - Are you posing a question? Yes. Yes, I am then I will If Commissioner Thomas would like to Affirm that 02:29:22.002 --> 02:29:32.490 - thing. Yes. Thank you for the opportunity to speak again Yes Yes, I don't think this is directly relevant 02:29:32.490 --> 02:29:38.526 - to the resolution which does not mention the Thompson site I 02:29:40.930 --> 02:29:50.573 - Well, it doesn't mention the Thompson site, but it mentions, I mean, it's a site within the city, and 02:29:50.573 --> 02:30:00.217 - it's probably one of only a couple that are possible. We have a council colleague who would like just 02:30:00.217 --> 02:30:10.238 - a question answered about specifically what it would require. I think it's relevant. Commissioner Thomas? 02:30:10.562 --> 02:30:18.855 - Could you could you answer the question if you've heard it from Council President Asari On the road 02:30:18.855 --> 02:30:27.314 - access and yes, and whether the Justice Center would be co-located Right. The plan is always to build 02:30:27.314 --> 02:30:35.689 - a co-located Justice Center, but What's what's currently permitted is? Yes a jail facility is in the 02:30:35.689 --> 02:30:37.182 - PUD. However, the 02:30:37.282 --> 02:30:45.088 - There's also a requirement to build a very long roadway through the PUD that we would not be able to 02:30:45.088 --> 02:30:52.894 - do. And that city planning has said is not a big deal at this point because of summit's development. 02:30:52.894 --> 02:31:00.623 - And I believe we would have to get probably a height variance for the rest of the justice building, 02:31:00.623 --> 02:31:06.110 - not for the jail. The jail's gonna be one story, but for the remainder 02:31:06.210 --> 02:31:12.279 - of that justice building, we would probably need to also include a height variance. So there are, and 02:31:12.279 --> 02:31:18.407 - obviously we'd have to review the slopes because the state changed the law. We'd have to look at karst 02:31:18.407 --> 02:31:24.358 - and we'd have to do a tree canopy study. I forgot about that too. And those things we have to do no 02:31:24.358 --> 02:31:30.367 - matter what, but the PUD does have to be changed in order to not require us to build a multi tens of 02:31:30.367 --> 02:31:33.342 - millions of dollar road that won't actually work. 02:31:35.362 --> 02:31:46.232 - Thank you for your response councilmember. Sorry is that satisfactory? County council president Jennifer 02:31:46.232 --> 02:31:50.270 - cross Lee has something to yeah. Um, I 02:31:50.466 --> 02:31:56.997 - And I hope I'm not speaking out of term and I say this but a few years ago we had Been told with the 02:31:56.997 --> 02:32:03.527 - Thompson site as we were looking at the Thompson site a few different things and one was the roadway 02:32:03.527 --> 02:32:10.252 - Because there is the Adam Street and I believe there was strong road that was something that was needed 02:32:10.252 --> 02:32:12.062 - or that we needed to do and 02:32:12.226 --> 02:32:19.752 - And from my understanding and from conversations, that's something, once again, that we've heard from 02:32:19.752 --> 02:32:27.278 - city staff is that we can actually work with you all to get that done. So again, the question is, are 02:32:27.278 --> 02:32:34.657 - we wanting to work with you all, or are we just really wanting to just say, it's okay, we just will 02:32:34.657 --> 02:32:41.150 - go to North Park? Again, that's the thing here. And the other thing that I will say is, 02:32:41.250 --> 02:32:48.273 - In order I thought I made a mention of this too when we were saying this but the ACLU literally and 02:32:48.273 --> 02:32:55.787 - and it's no surprise since there was the memo that Council or County legal apparently put out to everybody 02:32:55.787 --> 02:33:02.880 - But the point of the matter is literally we've heard from mr. Falk himself That it doesn't matter if 02:33:02.880 --> 02:33:06.110 - you pass a resolution or whatever the case is 02:33:06.210 --> 02:33:12.754 - They need some timeline because it to me it sounds like they have no faith and my city council colleagues 02:33:12.754 --> 02:33:19.051 - and in the city staff And so I would humbly recommend that if you are going to say this instead of us 02:33:19.051 --> 02:33:25.348 - hearing the hearsay of well It's just going to take a nine month 12 month total process to Figure out 02:33:25.348 --> 02:33:28.990 - how we can really do that together. I don't know if that's 02:33:29.090 --> 02:33:36.307 - whatever we can do to put words to paper, whatever the case is. That's me, Jennifer Crossley. That would 02:33:36.307 --> 02:33:43.249 - be my humble ask, because we just need something. I would think that if we want to keep this in city 02:33:43.249 --> 02:33:50.329 - limits, that this is something that we want to have as a concrete, tangible thing that we can say, not 02:33:50.329 --> 02:33:57.546 - only are we just talking about this, but this is the action that is on the words that are on this paper. 02:33:57.546 --> 02:33:58.302 - Thank you. 02:33:58.658 --> 02:34:07.601 - and thanks to my colleagues for Allowing me in the spirit of communication collaboration as we've been 02:34:07.601 --> 02:34:16.371 - talking about to to have our colleagues in the county Be available to answer questions. So are there 02:34:16.371 --> 02:34:25.662 - any further questions? Comments yes, let's go to comment now Thank you very much. I want to first thank my 02:34:25.762 --> 02:34:31.746 - Co-sponsors on this for all the hard work that you've done and and really appreciate your dedication 02:34:31.746 --> 02:34:37.730 - The the fact of the matter is this North Park project is far far too expensive for our community The 02:34:37.730 --> 02:34:43.773 - commissioners continued with North Park after the October unanimous rejection of that location by the 02:34:43.773 --> 02:34:49.698 - County Council And that feels like being strong-armed into a location that nobody else wanted We're 02:34:49.698 --> 02:34:52.542 - saying that we want to work with the county and 02:34:52.642 --> 02:34:58.915 - But as County Council President Crossley pointed out, we haven't been reached out to or consulted on 02:34:58.915 --> 02:35:05.311 - those adjacent issues such as transportation and so on and so forth. So this resolution tonight before 02:35:05.311 --> 02:35:11.584 - us seeks to protect vulnerable members of our community. We hear a lot about how the current setting 02:35:11.584 --> 02:35:17.918 - of the jailhouse is inhumane and absolutely we need to fix that 100%. An incarcerated person does not 02:35:17.918 --> 02:35:20.030 - deserve to be treated inhumanely. 02:35:20.866 --> 02:35:29.651 - Part of the effects of North Park would be Potentially inhumane if their family can't get out to visit 02:35:29.651 --> 02:35:38.947 - them if they can't receive the services that they deserve And so we're also seeking to protect the taxpayers 02:35:38.947 --> 02:35:47.902 - of Bloomington From having to pay for this jail way out there. Thank you Other comment Consumers Nussmer 02:35:49.762 --> 02:35:58.808 - Thank you. I'll go ahead and and comment on this. I wasn't necessarily planning to comment on this but 02:35:58.808 --> 02:36:07.853 - You know, this is my third year on council and I get a little bit frustrated sometimes when things are 02:36:07.853 --> 02:36:16.811 - brought up from prior to This body is being here because there we are a body of nine and the majority 02:36:16.811 --> 02:36:19.358 - of us were not here when the 02:36:19.458 --> 02:36:25.582 - aforementioned change of zoning was denied and I would really like to be able to move forward from this 02:36:25.582 --> 02:36:31.766 - spot Together and I would have liked to have moved forward from the spot together, you know two or three 02:36:31.766 --> 02:36:37.831 - years ago but as has already been mentioned it, you know, we were not particularly consulted and A lot 02:36:37.831 --> 02:36:43.779 - of how I felt about it, you know as a new council member was well, there's there's a lot of stuff on 02:36:43.779 --> 02:36:45.310 - my plate that's you know, 02:36:45.730 --> 02:36:52.522 - Really on my plate in terms of this is what I need to make an actual decision about I'm just gonna kind 02:36:52.522 --> 02:36:59.118 - of you know, stay a little bit removed from from the county jail issue because I don't get to choose 02:36:59.118 --> 02:37:05.648 - that but as it is dragged on and on and on no no one is choosing that and the biggest choice that I 02:37:05.648 --> 02:37:12.244 - think was made was the County Council last year rejecting that North Park site and I think that they 02:37:12.244 --> 02:37:14.334 - rejected it for good reason and 02:37:14.690 --> 02:37:22.389 - That it's far, far out there. It's not centrally located. It's not convenient on a number of fronts. 02:37:22.389 --> 02:37:30.318 - And it would cost the taxpayers of this county a whole lot. And at this point in the financial picture, 02:37:30.318 --> 02:37:38.474 - it's just not reasonable. And I can appreciate this idea that, oh, but it's the only shovel-ready solution 02:37:38.474 --> 02:37:43.582 - right now. Well, you know what? I think that it is possible for us 02:37:43.682 --> 02:37:52.463 - to get together another solution that might include, as Council President Crosley mentioned, some written 02:37:52.463 --> 02:38:00.996 - documentation related to timelines, related to, you know, what exactly would be needed at the Thompson 02:38:00.996 --> 02:38:09.447 - property or another property, you know, that might make good sense in terms of where a jail might go. 02:38:09.447 --> 02:38:12.926 - And I'm totally on board with doing that. 02:38:13.186 --> 02:38:19.177 - Think that that those roadblocks Were bumps in the road. I think they're probably bumps in the road 02:38:19.177 --> 02:38:24.030 - when you're talking about zoning and when you're talking about changes like that 02:38:24.098 --> 02:38:31.209 - those can be overcome they can be overcome on timelines that are relatively predictable if Everybody 02:38:31.209 --> 02:38:38.602 - can commit to getting the materials together that would be needed to present Various bits of information 02:38:38.602 --> 02:38:45.994 - to the different bodies that would need to be presented as to the generalness of this resolution I think 02:38:45.994 --> 02:38:51.838 - that we can you know commit to supporting an expedited process. Oh, that's not the 02:38:52.290 --> 02:38:58.302 - It's not the amendment. I think it still says yep supporting an expedited zoning and permitting process 02:38:58.302 --> 02:39:04.083 - Because we still like I can support that expedited process But I can't necessarily control it right 02:39:04.083 --> 02:39:10.094 - depending on what exactly is needed whether it's something for the BCA whether it's something that goes 02:39:10.094 --> 02:39:12.638 - through planning Commission you know, we're 02:39:13.186 --> 02:39:19.598 - If we're on those bodies, we're only one of a number of people on those bodies We can't say how fast 02:39:19.598 --> 02:39:25.947 - it's going to go through but we can say hey Let's try to do this as quickly as we can and and let's 02:39:25.947 --> 02:39:32.550 - try to do this in a way that is responsible so I'm prepared to support this I don't want that that jail 02:39:32.550 --> 02:39:39.090 - at North Park and I Want to support our County Council colleagues who said that they did not want that 02:39:39.090 --> 02:39:41.566 - jail at North Park last year Thank you 02:39:43.042 --> 02:39:52.704 - Thank you councilman rough Up front I'll say of course, I'm not an expert or I have not spent extensive 02:39:52.704 --> 02:40:02.645 - time comparing the different costs costs of different options, but I do have some background and a college 02:40:02.645 --> 02:40:11.006 - degree that involved Natural resource management a lot of it was full-cost accounting and 02:40:11.810 --> 02:40:23.001 - I know full-cost accounting is difficult to do but I I just skeptical that if we really did full-cost 02:40:23.001 --> 02:40:34.960 - accounting That the renovation of the existing facility wouldn't be The best option and when I say full-cost 02:40:34.960 --> 02:40:39.678 - accounting I'm talking about externalities 02:40:40.802 --> 02:40:48.285 - And this applies to any new look at location that would be in the city anywhere else too as well as 02:40:48.285 --> 02:40:56.441 - North Park but external externalities like the accounting for the impact on Surrounding uses and surrounding 02:40:56.441 --> 02:41:03.998 - properties and surrounding properties wherever this would go to any place other than where it is now 02:41:03.998 --> 02:41:09.086 - where nobody really anymore has a right to make a complaint about a 02:41:09.378 --> 02:41:17.191 - tremendous change in their own property values or quality of life or or land use pressures around them 02:41:17.191 --> 02:41:24.777 - due to the current location so that's that's one example of full cost accounting accounting somehow 02:41:24.777 --> 02:41:32.515 - for the impact of Moving this and other people have talked about the external costs of on on families 02:41:32.515 --> 02:41:34.942 - on visitation on on inmates and 02:41:35.074 --> 02:41:43.140 - are deprived or of potential easier access by loved ones and family members and support and services 02:41:43.140 --> 02:41:51.126 - all those external costs the external externalities of the carbon footprint difference with all the 02:41:51.126 --> 02:41:59.192 - transportation that would occur and not just Moving inmates or inmates around various reasons but of 02:41:59.192 --> 02:42:05.022 - the visitations that occur all the services the carbon footprint of that 02:42:05.602 --> 02:42:13.659 - For a location that's remote and I'm not just talking north. I'm talking anywhere else other than where 02:42:13.659 --> 02:42:21.716 - it is now I just can't help believe that In what we know about the cost of new construction now in this 02:42:21.716 --> 02:42:28.766 - current world compared to renovation and I just I have a really hard time believing that I 02:42:30.850 --> 02:42:38.994 - If you really accounted for full costs all these costs that have been discussed here tonight by members 02:42:38.994 --> 02:42:46.903 - of the audience by council members That the the option with the least overall cost to society to our 02:42:46.903 --> 02:42:54.734 - community as a whole wouldn't be the existing location renovation the existing location and so when 02:42:54.734 --> 02:42:56.222 - I support this and 02:42:56.770 --> 02:43:03.878 - resolutions on which I'm going to and I think very much my colleagues who who brought it forward and 02:43:03.878 --> 02:43:10.986 - I think Sam a Wholeheartedly, but I don't want to my vote to be construed necessarily as well. Let's 02:43:10.986 --> 02:43:18.094 - just find a different location That's a new location. Even if it is in this city would be marginally 02:43:18.094 --> 02:43:25.624 - better Than the farther out it is right. It's gonna all those externalities are gonna increase the farther 02:43:25.624 --> 02:43:26.398 - we move it 02:43:26.498 --> 02:43:34.608 - Away from where it is now, but all of those costs will be greater Anywhere else it's moved So I just 02:43:34.608 --> 02:43:43.281 - wanted to make that clear that I wasn't advocating to go fishing around for another location I'm advocating 02:43:43.281 --> 02:43:51.712 - for full cost accounting of moving in anywhere other than renovating the existing site Thank you further 02:43:51.712 --> 02:43:55.326 - comment from council Council members are you 02:43:57.250 --> 02:44:12.093 - Thank you all and colleagues for drafting this. Thank you to our county colleagues for being here at 02:44:12.093 --> 02:44:27.230 - the meeting and for participating. I think obviously the moral stance that's being said here is clear. 02:44:27.586 --> 02:44:40.112 - And as well as the, I think, sort of strategic and economic arguments that are being made. And I mean, 02:44:40.112 --> 02:44:52.394 - I think they resonate with me. As I expressed in my questions, concerned about our ability to follow 02:44:52.394 --> 02:44:56.286 - through with what we're saying. 02:44:57.570 --> 02:45:08.874 - I wish, I don't know, by way maybe of just general suggestion, I think it interesting, and bear with 02:45:08.874 --> 02:45:20.178 - me, this will not be a long comment, but it's a two-sided comment, that we're in this small city and 02:45:20.178 --> 02:45:24.990 - wonderful small city and wonderful county, 02:45:25.410 --> 02:45:36.838 - that we as elected bodies basically have to talk at each other through process, that we get each other's 02:45:36.838 --> 02:45:48.702 - attention through writing resolutions and speaking in formal ways. And I just think it's interesting because 02:45:50.018 --> 02:45:58.713 - I don't know, in any other context, I just feel like there's a lot more simple ways to go about actually 02:45:58.713 --> 02:46:07.160 - solving the problem before us. And I think perhaps that's why it takes us 17 years to make particular 02:46:07.160 --> 02:46:15.524 - progress. And I think on the flip side, with respect to our commission and council colleagues in the 02:46:15.524 --> 02:46:19.582 - county, there hasn't been any specific ask of us 02:46:19.970 --> 02:46:26.679 - to which we can also act, right? If that makes sense, like with the exception of Council President Crossley, 02:46:26.679 --> 02:46:32.896 - you know, who said sort of in response to some of the things that I was saying, you know, you should 02:46:32.896 --> 02:46:35.358 - be specific in this language. I wonder, 02:46:35.778 --> 02:46:42.905 - But perhaps this is a sort of, you know, historian's fallacy. I do wonder, you know, what happens in 02:46:42.905 --> 02:46:50.032 - this process should the, if the county were to make a rezone request? I mean, that actually gives us 02:46:50.032 --> 02:46:57.158 - something to expedite. And, you know, then perhaps we, you know, can build specifics around that. So 02:46:57.158 --> 02:47:04.638 - I'm in a little bit of a betwixt place. I don't know if, I think I'll, you know, I'd like us to go beyond 02:47:04.898 --> 02:47:12.903 - this resolution and whether that means let's meet tomorrow. I mean, we can't. We have this 48-hour notice. 02:47:12.903 --> 02:47:20.533 - But maybe we need to put together a joint meeting and just actually figure out what we're going to do 02:47:20.533 --> 02:47:28.164 - and actually hammer out the real processes of how we can support, if at all. But I also think that we 02:47:28.164 --> 02:47:30.782 - shouldn't make the mistake of just 02:47:31.138 --> 02:47:40.559 - quickly moving over the significant risks and costs that have been brought up, I think, on all sides 02:47:40.559 --> 02:47:42.238 - of this argument. 02:47:42.338 --> 02:47:50.678 - Anyways, I don't know if that's itself actionable. Well, I guess it is. My call would be that after 02:47:50.678 --> 02:47:59.352 - we vote for this, that we move to either have some joint session or something that we actually can just 02:47:59.352 --> 02:48:07.859 - get around the table and figure out what needs to be done. Thank you again, though, for writing this. 02:48:07.859 --> 02:48:09.694 - Council Member Zulek. 02:48:10.018 --> 02:48:16.236 - My recollection is councilmember daily actually suggested a joint session on the jail with 02:48:16.236 --> 02:48:23.136 - county counterparts several weeks ago And so I will I'll just go on record and say I'm very in favor 02:48:23.136 --> 02:48:30.037 - of that County Council County commissioners We would love to host you to have a deliberation session 02:48:30.037 --> 02:48:36.870 - to hash out how we might be able to expedite the planning process Thank you Other comment before we 02:48:36.870 --> 02:48:37.758 - go to a vote 02:48:37.890 --> 02:48:47.935 - Okay, well just say that I really appreciate my colleagues for bringing this forward It as councilmember 02:48:47.935 --> 02:48:57.503 - sorry said Well, and actually as councilmember Stasberg stated that As I read it as I heard her say 02:48:57.503 --> 02:49:06.974 - She I would agree to expedite the process if required It of course adjusted doesn't fall to us and 02:49:07.074 --> 02:49:15.610 - But the resolution states that we're ready. We're ready to do that I think the council has been consistent 02:49:15.610 --> 02:49:23.747 - with wanting a central location. That's been clear for many years And to be fair the rejection of the 02:49:23.747 --> 02:49:32.203 - Fullerton site was not made by the majority of this council as it stands now, so I want to thank everyone 02:49:32.203 --> 02:49:36.830 - for their comment tonight as well We have another comment 02:49:37.506 --> 02:49:46.655 - Just to say I just want to reiterate that You know the reasons for having it centrally located for central 02:49:46.655 --> 02:49:55.377 - proximity to resources such as mental health addiction support services the economic impact of course 02:49:55.377 --> 02:50:04.270 - and but also Just preventing the social isolation of those incarcerated. I think is an important reason 02:50:04.270 --> 02:50:07.006 - to have it centrally located so 02:50:08.482 --> 02:50:15.040 - Councilman Rosenberger, do you want to have your say I just wanted to add something quickly because 02:50:15.040 --> 02:50:21.598 - I know we have a really long night. I Am really thank you to the all three co-sponsors for bringing 02:50:21.598 --> 02:50:28.222 - this I am in full support. I Used to talk about that's a lot last term, but it sort of lost traction 02:50:28.222 --> 02:50:34.780 - and I am so happy to see County councilmember Crossley here tonight and everyone on council up here 02:50:34.780 --> 02:50:37.534 - speaking in favor of keeping the jail and 02:50:38.114 --> 02:50:44.527 - Centrally located close to everything that it is close to right now and I would just like to add that 02:50:44.527 --> 02:50:51.003 - the Another property that I had always talked about is a county-owned property Across the beeline from 02:50:51.003 --> 02:50:54.398 - the Convention Center. So right now that is a surface 02:50:54.498 --> 02:51:00.912 - Lot and it seems like it might not be used for the Convention Center But also just a couple blocks from 02:51:00.912 --> 02:51:07.202 - transit and a couple a few blocks from where it is now in case it does need an entirely New location, 02:51:07.202 --> 02:51:13.678 - but I also appreciate looking at renovation costs because where it is now also is connected to a parking 02:51:13.678 --> 02:51:20.030 - garage That was built for this purpose. Thank you Thank you. If there are no other comments, then will 02:51:20.030 --> 02:51:23.422 - the clerk please call the roll on resolution 20 26 0 7 02:51:23.778 --> 02:51:41.050 - Councilmember Zulek. Yes, sorry Yes Daily Yes, Rallo. Yes rough. Yes Rosenberger. Yes clarity Yes, Stossberg. 02:51:41.050 --> 02:51:52.670 - Yes Piedmont Smith. Yes Thank you. Thank you. That is unanimously adopted 02:51:55.010 --> 02:52:07.739 - Thank you resuming control Thank you, I I move that resolution 20 2608 be read by clerk by title and 02:52:07.739 --> 02:52:19.838 - synopsis only Okay, there's been a motion and a second would the clerk please call the roll and 02:52:26.050 --> 02:52:38.249 - Councilmember, sorry. Yes Bailey. Yes, Rallo. Yes, Ruff. Yes, there is some burger. Yes clarity Yes, 02:52:38.249 --> 02:52:50.448 - Stasburg. Yes Piedmont Smith. Yes, and Zulick. Yes. Thank you. Great. Thank you with a vote of nine. 02:52:50.448 --> 02:52:55.038 - Oh that passes And I move I move that 02:52:58.562 --> 02:53:05.130 - So sorry, please if the clerk could read by title in synopsis only that would be fabulous and also Yes 02:53:05.130 --> 02:53:11.507 - Resolution 2026-08 a resolution of the Common Council of the city of Bloomington, Indiana approving 02:53:11.507 --> 02:53:18.266 - certain matters in connection with the formation of a certain economic Development area that the synopsis 02:53:18.266 --> 02:53:24.962 - is as follows this resolution originated from the Bloomington rate redevelopment Commission to establish 02:53:24.962 --> 02:53:26.110 - the new summit of 02:53:26.242 --> 02:53:32.577 - district economic development area, the summit district EDA and a part of that area Shasta Meadows as 02:53:32.577 --> 02:53:38.911 - an allocation area having a residential housing program. Assuming the statutory process is completed, 02:53:38.911 --> 02:53:45.308 - this will establish what is commonly referred to as a residential tax increment financing area for the 02:53:45.308 --> 02:53:51.643 - Shasta Meadows allocation area. Allocation areas for the remainder of the summit district EDA will be 02:53:51.643 --> 02:53:54.686 - created as development plans for future advance. 02:53:57.602 --> 02:54:07.369 - I move that resolution 2026 dash 08 be adopted Thank you and thank you that's been motioned and seconded 02:54:07.369 --> 02:54:16.951 - whoever is here from the city to present on resolution 2026 oh eight, please approach the podium state 02:54:16.951 --> 02:54:22.718 - your name and go ahead and Thank you for being here Thank you 02:54:23.234 --> 02:54:31.400 - My name is Dana Kerr I'm assistant city attorney and I one of my assignments is with the Redevelopment 02:54:31.400 --> 02:54:39.646 - Commission and I'm here tonight to present to you the resolution that was read before you and what this 02:54:39.646 --> 02:54:47.495 - does is I'm sure you're all familiar with the summit PUD this would create a TIF district economic 02:54:47.495 --> 02:54:50.270 - development area the entire summit 02:54:50.626 --> 02:54:57.523 - PUD area, and that is made of five different neighborhoods, and the first neighborhood that's planned 02:54:57.523 --> 02:55:04.487 - for development is Shasta Meadows, and it would make it the first allocation area. Now, we have Justin 02:55:04.487 --> 02:55:11.249 - Chang from Reedy Financial who's gonna explain that a little bit, but to put this in some sort of a 02:55:11.249 --> 02:55:18.078 - context, there was discussion earlier that mentioned Adams Street, and Adams Street has a gap in it. 02:55:18.562 --> 02:55:27.330 - and that gap is located in the Summit PUD area. There's also plans for a road in the Summit PUD that 02:55:27.330 --> 02:55:36.012 - goes from Weimar to Adams Street, a connection there. So Adams, in this development, Adams would go 02:55:36.012 --> 02:55:45.214 - from Bloomfield Road all the way down to TAP, and you would have a connection over the Weimar, and as you 02:55:45.314 --> 02:55:53.696 - You probably all know Weimar Road has a one lane bridge on it on the southern portion and is in a flood 02:55:53.696 --> 02:56:01.835 - plain. So there's in the PIC development below there, there would be trying to work out construction 02:56:01.835 --> 02:56:10.136 - of Vanguard Way which would straighten out Weimar Road. So in addition to the construction of Vanguard 02:56:10.136 --> 02:56:15.294 - Way, Sudbury and Adams that would interconnect all of this area 02:56:15.746 --> 02:56:23.450 - there would be need to be intersections that would need upgrades. So that's a lot of infrastructure 02:56:23.450 --> 02:56:31.462 - that needs to be done. And that Sudbury road is very important because as part of that Sudbury project, 02:56:31.462 --> 02:56:39.243 - there is a donation of land for a fire station. So that would allow fire equipment to rapidly get to 02:56:39.243 --> 02:56:43.326 - the areas that they need to get to. And so that's a, 02:56:43.458 --> 02:56:51.620 - Another point of this So, you know, there's there's a strong need of infrastructure there again that 02:56:51.620 --> 02:56:59.782 - was mentioned earlier tonight and so one way to try to help facilitate that is the creation of a TIF 02:56:59.782 --> 02:57:08.025 - district and a Allocation area in Chastal Meadows is a residential area. So it would be a residential 02:57:08.025 --> 02:57:13.278 - allocation area. And so I'd like to invite Justin Chang from yes 02:57:13.410 --> 02:57:21.484 - from reading financial to kind of explain a little bit more about the financial aspects of that Good 02:57:21.484 --> 02:57:29.478 - evening, everyone. I'm Justin Chang 3d financial group It's good to see some of you all again about 02:57:29.478 --> 02:57:37.552 - a met a couple of you at the fiscal committee meeting about a month ago So it's great to see you all 02:57:37.552 --> 02:57:39.550 - again before I dive into 02:57:39.746 --> 02:57:46.923 - Areas specific details and what a residential tiff is. I'll just quickly go over. So what a traditional 02:57:46.923 --> 02:57:54.169 - what we call a commercial tiff is because really they're Very similar in most ways. There's just certain 02:57:54.169 --> 02:58:01.069 - nuances that makes them different so tiff allocation or a tiff stands for a tax increment financing 02:58:01.069 --> 02:58:06.590 - and tiff allocation area essentially a way for a city or city town or county to 02:58:07.074 --> 02:58:13.423 - capture on tax dollars that they wouldn't have been able to otherwise. And that's especially true for 02:58:13.423 --> 02:58:19.835 - a community like Bloomington where we have really low circuit breaker impact. In the state of Indiana, 02:58:19.835 --> 02:58:26.309 - what we have is called, we're in a levy-based state, so our levy is set, our tax levy, how much dollars 02:58:26.309 --> 02:58:32.658 - we can get is set by the state, and we cannot change that other than 4% or whatever percent the state 02:58:32.658 --> 02:58:35.646 - tells us every year. So even if we were to dump 02:58:36.802 --> 02:58:44.747 - a lot of assessed value into the city of Bloomington's base assessed values, tax levy would not change, 02:58:44.747 --> 02:58:52.540 - tax rates would just go down. So let's say $100 million gets thrown into the city, the city would not 02:58:52.540 --> 02:59:00.180 - get any benefits from the $100 million. What a TIF allocation allows for is for those dollars to be 02:59:00.180 --> 02:59:06.750 - set aside from the base into what is called a TIF area and the entire taxing district 02:59:07.138 --> 02:59:14.515 - Tax rate can be applied on those on those parcels and those dollars will be Funneled into the city's 02:59:14.515 --> 02:59:21.893 - RDC. So instead of the city and their underlying units getting zero to no benefit They're really the 02:59:21.893 --> 02:59:29.343 - only benefit would be circuit breaker reduction, which the city has None essentially the city can now 02:59:29.343 --> 02:59:36.574 - capture and utilize these dollars through the TIF allocation area controlled by the city's own RDC 02:59:37.218 --> 02:59:44.436 - Now, very important key detail here is that the RDC is not taking any money from the city or the underlying 02:59:44.436 --> 02:59:51.320 - taxing units. What's a very important piece to creating a TIF allocation area is called the BUT4 test, 02:59:51.320 --> 02:59:58.004 - which means BUT4, whatever is provided by the RDCs, this development will not happen. And like Dana 02:59:58.004 --> 03:00:04.286 - mentioned earlier, if not for the infrastructure and the potential fire station that we could 03:00:04.610 --> 03:00:11.222 - put in for this area, this development by the summit, this summit EDA would not have happened. So let's 03:00:11.222 --> 03:00:17.771 - say we didn't set up a TIF allocation area and then provide the infrastructure, this development would 03:00:17.771 --> 03:00:24.129 - not have happened anyways and all of these assessed values would not have came in. So these dollars 03:00:24.129 --> 03:00:30.551 - are only available to the city now because we are utilizing the TIF allocation area. Now, to go into 03:00:30.551 --> 03:00:34.302 - the difference between residential TIF and commercial TIF, 03:00:34.562 --> 03:00:42.034 - very similar in most ways. The way we collect dollars is the same. The way we, what we call neutralize 03:00:42.034 --> 03:00:49.289 - the AVs, how to determine what goes to base and what goes to the TIF incremental AV, that stays the 03:00:49.289 --> 03:00:57.269 - same. There's really three key differences. Number one is in a commercial TIF, a allocation area's expiration 03:00:57.269 --> 03:01:02.782 - date is 25 years from the issuance of a bond. Whereas in a residential TIF, 03:01:02.946 --> 03:01:10.307 - The expiration is 20 years from the issuance of a bond. So let's say we issue a bond on the TIF August 03:01:10.307 --> 03:01:17.811 - 1st of 2026. This TIF will expire or go away in August 1st of 2046. I'm not saying we're issuing a bond, 03:01:17.811 --> 03:01:25.172 - just giving an example. Number two, there's just extra steps to a residential TIF. For example, we had 03:01:25.172 --> 03:01:32.318 - to do a notice to the HOA. That's just an extra notice that we have to provide for residential TIF. 03:01:32.642 --> 03:01:39.596 - Not for a commercial TIF and then finally the most important part a residential to residential TIF in 03:01:39.596 --> 03:01:46.823 - its name It allows that TIF area to collect on residential part Residential properties whereas the city's 03:01:46.823 --> 03:01:53.982 - current TIF allocation area if we think of the consolidated tap road Adam crossing those are traditional 03:01:54.402 --> 03:02:01.448 - allocation areas they cannot capture anything from residential residential parcels so any growth and 03:02:01.448 --> 03:02:08.493 - residential parcels in those areas is Given back to the base, but that will not be the case for this 03:02:08.493 --> 03:02:15.469 - Shasta Meadows Allocation area and so that is really the big difference here in this tip that we're 03:02:15.469 --> 03:02:22.445 - creating versus the previous tips that the city already has So there are there any questions for me 03:02:22.445 --> 03:02:23.422 - Any questions 03:02:23.618 --> 03:02:30.677 - Councilmember Stossberg Well, I have questions. I'm not sure if they're best for you or not. I'll start 03:02:30.677 --> 03:02:37.600 - with the one that you Actually, I'm gonna start further back in the beginning So is this TIF district 03:02:37.600 --> 03:02:44.523 - being created for all of summit or just for? the Shasta area because there's five different areas and 03:02:44.523 --> 03:02:47.102 - I feel like I'm a little confused and 03:02:47.810 --> 03:02:54.862 - Yes, so this resolution will create the summit EDA, which the difference between EDA and the TIF allocation 03:02:54.862 --> 03:03:01.783 - area is EDA is where we can spend the money on. So let's say the Shasta Meadows allocation area generates 03:03:01.783 --> 03:03:08.312 - $100,000. This $100,000 doesn't need to be spent in the Shasta Meadows allocation area. It could be 03:03:08.312 --> 03:03:13.470 - spent in the whole summit EDA to benefit that whole economic development area. 03:03:13.826 --> 03:03:20.737 - At the same time, we're also creating the Shassa Meadows allocation area to generate those TIF dollars, 03:03:20.737 --> 03:03:27.382 - but we're not creating the other allocation areas that will go into this economic development area. 03:03:27.382 --> 03:03:34.160 - I hope that's clear as mud. If that's not clear. Clear as mud, yeah. I could try explaining it again. 03:03:34.160 --> 03:03:40.606 - Well, so I'm just gonna rephrase and we can see if I actually understand. Yes. So we're creating 03:03:40.770 --> 03:03:49.187 - Okay, so the properties in Shasta Meadows the residential properties in Shasta Meadows their tax dollars 03:03:49.187 --> 03:03:57.363 - will go into this TIF, right and That money can be spent anywhere in any of the five areas to benefit 03:03:57.363 --> 03:04:05.540 - That but the other areas aren't gonna have the residential TIF Yes, I actually use this this scenario 03:04:05.540 --> 03:04:10.590 - last time we think of an EDA and an allocation area as a pizza 03:04:10.914 --> 03:04:15.891 - the entire pizza will be the economic development area, and that's where we can spend the TIF dollars 03:04:15.891 --> 03:04:20.819 - on. If we put a pepperoni on there, that will be the TIF allocation area, and we're only putting one 03:04:20.819 --> 03:04:25.991 - pepperoni in there right now. Every TIF dollar generated from that pepperoni can be spent on their entire 03:04:25.991 --> 03:04:30.871 - pizza. And throughout the next couple years, we'll put four more pepperonis on that pizza to create 03:04:30.871 --> 03:04:35.262 - the entire area. Okay, that was actually gonna be my next question, is whether there's... 03:04:36.802 --> 03:04:44.574 - As a vegetarian, I think that I have to comment on the pepperoni analogy. Maybe we can have peppers 03:04:44.574 --> 03:04:52.578 - or mushrooms instead. We'll put an entire onion on there if you like. All right. I'm just going to let 03:04:52.578 --> 03:05:00.350 - that go on. So there is the intention in future years to make the others into TIF allocation areas. 03:05:01.570 --> 03:05:07.644 - Yes, but not from my understanding is that not all of them will be residential allocation areas, 03:05:07.644 --> 03:05:14.282 - okay Okay, which might follow up on on one of the last things you said it was that one of the differences 03:05:14.282 --> 03:05:20.606 - is that in a residential TIF of course you can collect on Residential properties and commercial TIFs 03:05:20.606 --> 03:05:27.118 - can't collect on residential properties can residential TIFs collect on commercial properties Very good 03:05:27.118 --> 03:05:29.310 - question. And the answer is yes. I 03:05:29.474 --> 03:05:35.126 - So residential tip could collect on everything whereas commercial is only commercial not residential 03:05:35.126 --> 03:05:41.058 - Okay, but Shasta I can't remember it also like zoning allowances Shasta is gonna be like all residential, 03:05:41.058 --> 03:05:46.878 - right? Yeah, okay. I'm seeing nods from the people in the back. All right So are the other areas you're 03:05:46.878 --> 03:05:52.642 - intending to also do residential tips because the other ones are gonna be a combination of residential 03:05:52.642 --> 03:05:58.462 - Well, actually at least one of them has some combination of residential and commercial Or should I like 03:05:58.626 --> 03:06:04.651 - Wait on that and that's not really relevant to tonight Going to see as it develops out and the time 03:06:04.651 --> 03:06:10.676 - frame that develops out over what's going to be best It may be that within those five neighborhoods 03:06:10.676 --> 03:06:16.761 - We might even want to carve out a little smaller pieces where this little piece, you know This piece 03:06:16.761 --> 03:06:22.907 - will be the residential and this piece will be commercial to take advantage of that So we're not sure 03:06:22.907 --> 03:06:28.510 - exactly how the layout is going to look yet. We're not that far down the road. So that's why 03:06:28.898 --> 03:06:36.408 - We felt it would better to look at this one area that we know is going to be developed first and take 03:06:36.408 --> 03:06:44.139 - the other ones as they come to make sure that we don't Choose a path that doesn't end up being the right 03:06:44.139 --> 03:06:51.134 - one. So it's just keeping the flexibility there to Move as the development moves. Okay, great. 03:06:51.134 --> 03:06:58.718 - Thank you. I have other questions to you, but I'll let my colleagues go Councilmember Rallo I guess my 03:06:59.234 --> 03:07:07.438 - I have two questions. One is, besides road construction, could a fire station be funded? So statutorily, 03:07:07.438 --> 03:07:15.330 - yes. That was actually a change recently, two years ago, where fire and police capital operating can 03:07:15.330 --> 03:07:23.925 - be paid for by TIF dollars, yes. Does that include capital expenses? I mean, fire engines are very expensive, 03:07:23.925 --> 03:07:28.926 - for instance. Yes, that would include capital expenses as well. 03:07:29.442 --> 03:07:37.770 - And who is the discretion for spending the revenues from this? Tiff does it come to council that would 03:07:37.770 --> 03:07:46.260 - be the redevelopment Commission the redevelopment Commission has sole authority to To allocate the funds 03:07:46.260 --> 03:07:54.345 - for a particular purpose within the TIF. Is that right? I thought I came to council for some reason 03:07:54.345 --> 03:07:59.358 - so for Commission that controls the funds that is captured by 03:07:59.522 --> 03:08:10.365 - Okay, so it's going to be their decision about where what it's spent on they're going to be making decisions 03:08:10.365 --> 03:08:21.308 - of Infrastructure for this area. Yes, correct, which is how it's been done. Yes Okay, thank you councilmember 03:08:21.308 --> 03:08:23.198 - Flaherty Thank you 03:08:25.282 --> 03:08:33.577 - In short, I guess, are the TIF revenues intended to be spent primarily on developing like roads and 03:08:33.577 --> 03:08:41.956 - related infrastructure in the Summit PUD area and the EDA that's being created, is that right? There 03:08:41.956 --> 03:08:49.671 - is a statutory list of what can be done. The only discussions I have heard have been related 03:08:49.671 --> 03:08:52.574 - to infrastructure because that is, 03:08:52.674 --> 03:09:01.138 - significant need and I Not sure if there would be any excess money beyond infrastructure that's needed 03:09:01.138 --> 03:09:09.765 - because those are significant completing Vanguard there's going to have to be a significant bridge there 03:09:09.765 --> 03:09:18.065 - There's going this, you know Sudbury and Adams also has Some unique features that they have to cross 03:09:18.065 --> 03:09:21.598 - Then you have I believe it's at least five 03:09:22.114 --> 03:09:31.611 - Intersections that need to be upgraded for safety purposes in traffic flow purposes and so so that's 03:09:31.611 --> 03:09:41.295 - a lot of design work the RDC out of current funding sources has already earmarked five million dollars 03:09:41.295 --> 03:09:43.646 - to go towards design and 03:09:43.746 --> 03:09:52.660 - because there's no way to know how much cost there's going to be involved until they actually can get 03:09:52.660 --> 03:10:01.574 - out there and start designing the work. So we're moving forward on that. So doing the TIF will enable 03:10:01.574 --> 03:10:10.750 - there to be a generation of funds to where those who are most benefited from that infrastructure will be 03:10:11.010 --> 03:10:19.890 - that funds will be able to be generated from that area. Thank you. I have a few follow-ups if that's 03:10:19.890 --> 03:10:28.769 - okay. It's been a minute since we approved the summit PUD. Is the infrastructure that, so I'm trying 03:10:28.769 --> 03:10:37.736 - to just remember the full range of infrastructure that's anticipated to be built there. Is the intent 03:10:37.736 --> 03:10:40.286 - here to have the RDC pay for 03:10:40.546 --> 03:10:49.492 - all of or the vast majority of the public infrastructure in this summit PUD area, is that correct? No, 03:10:49.492 --> 03:10:58.786 - the intent is Sudbury and Adams. Those are the main city streets that are connecting the network together. 03:10:58.786 --> 03:11:07.646 - Those are the streets that are important to the RDC and important to that development of that area in 03:11:07.646 --> 03:11:08.862 - those, those, 03:11:09.346 --> 03:11:16.804 - Intersections are going to be very significant as well cost associated with them. So those 03:11:16.804 --> 03:11:25.737 - that infrastructure is really the focus that That we've you know been talking about The developer themselves 03:11:25.737 --> 03:11:34.260 - are going to build are still building a lot of the infrastructure there as well as that. Is that right? 03:11:34.260 --> 03:11:38.686 - What I'm understanding? Yes, so as far as any streets 03:11:39.266 --> 03:11:46.534 - You know where houses might be on the I guess they could be on the main streets, but any of the extra 03:11:46.534 --> 03:11:53.731 - streets or whatever That's not being considered Okay as part of part of that there's no design money 03:11:53.731 --> 03:12:00.286 - been set aside for any of those streets. It's only Sudbury Adams Vanguard and intersections 03:12:01.890 --> 03:12:07.576 - That's helpful. And just what I'm getting at here is I think our general policy for decades has been 03:12:07.576 --> 03:12:13.206 - when we have a large development like this, the developer pays the costs of the infrastructure. And 03:12:13.206 --> 03:12:18.836 - I was trying to suss out to what extent that's still happening, how much of a policy shift this is, 03:12:18.836 --> 03:12:24.465 - if any, or if we feel like the types of infrastructure we're going to be spending the money on here 03:12:24.465 --> 03:12:30.208 - are outside the scope of what a developer could reasonably be expected to contribute in bringing this 03:12:30.208 --> 03:12:31.390 - development to life. 03:12:31.522 --> 03:12:45.460 - Follow-up Comments based on that further Elaboration of like what my questions are trying to tease out 03:12:45.460 --> 03:13:01.022 - I welcome it, but I think your answers already have helped on that front. Thank you Councilmember Piedmont Smith I 03:13:01.122 --> 03:13:09.790 - On behalf of Summit Development, I think I can add a little clarity to that. The PUD, unlike most PUDs, 03:13:09.790 --> 03:13:18.874 - required that Sudbury and Adams be constructed before any other unit could be occupied. That's not typically 03:13:18.874 --> 03:13:20.958 - how development is done. 03:13:21.570 --> 03:13:27.664 - Block a road. We occupy some houses. We build a block a road, but in this PUD We required those two 03:13:27.664 --> 03:13:34.002 - infrastructures to be done first So when you approve the PUD it required a humongous outlay and I think 03:13:34.002 --> 03:13:40.279 - we had lots of discussion about that would require public Input in the form of dollars to pay for that 03:13:40.279 --> 03:13:46.860 - infrastructure Because we wanted it up front. We wanted those improvements to come ahead of the development 03:13:46.860 --> 03:13:50.334 - So I don't think this is really a change in policy. It's 03:13:50.466 --> 03:13:59.047 - Change in prior or it's a it's a way to get the priority of the city To fund that infrastructure that 03:13:59.047 --> 03:14:07.544 - isn't coming from the general budget but coming from the capturing of that Increment that helps Yes, 03:14:07.544 --> 03:14:16.377 - thank you and also to mr. Rollins question as well We say that the RDC determines what it would be spent 03:14:16.377 --> 03:14:19.742 - for in the event that there needs to be 03:14:19.842 --> 03:14:28.205 - Bonds issued to pay for infrastructure Those bonds would have to come to council We you know, the RDC 03:14:28.205 --> 03:14:36.405 - cannot issue bonds. So that would come to council to be able to do so Honestly in all likelihood to 03:14:36.405 --> 03:14:44.768 - pay for such large infrastructure It would likely have to be bonded that the RDC would not be able to 03:14:44.768 --> 03:14:47.966 - pay as they go along so to that extent 03:14:48.194 --> 03:14:57.716 - As far as tiff funds would be used. Yes that there would it would come to council So I wanted to clarify 03:14:57.716 --> 03:15:07.329 - that point Councilmember Piedmont Smith Yeah, first I just wanted to clarify what is this Vanguard Street 03:15:07.329 --> 03:15:16.670 - that you keep talking about I went back to the PUD plants and I didn't see any street with that name I 03:15:17.058 --> 03:15:25.633 - Vanguard has a little stub right now on the just off of tap road and if you would take Weamer Road straight 03:15:25.633 --> 03:15:33.811 - down from Bloomfield Road And then skip it Go through the fields then right there where it if you keep 03:15:33.811 --> 03:15:41.831 - that straight and maybe go a little bit to the west you'll see there's a little stub of a road right 03:15:41.831 --> 03:15:45.086 - there and that's called Vanguard Way, so 03:15:45.346 --> 03:15:56.269 - Vanguard way Would be in pick owns Public Investment Corp owns that property and so we the RDC is working 03:15:56.269 --> 03:16:06.779 - on trying to work out a memorandum of understanding where you know if we pay for the RDC pays for the 03:16:06.779 --> 03:16:13.374 - design that pick will donate the right-of-way to be able to put 03:16:13.506 --> 03:16:23.040 - Vanguard way and so that that jog that goes out and comes down It goes over the bridge on Weimar Could 03:16:23.040 --> 03:16:32.389 - be turned into a trail part of the trail system and Vanguard would be more of a straight north south 03:16:32.389 --> 03:16:40.350 - road So it straightens up Weimar Road It would really be helpful to have a map yes, I 03:16:45.922 --> 03:16:58.153 - Google Maps, okay. I have a, I'll look at it. I have another question, but should I wait? Okay. My other 03:16:58.153 --> 03:17:10.151 - question is about the estimated TIF revenues. So the development, it's estimated that development will 03:17:10.151 --> 03:17:15.742 - create over $477 million in new assessed value. 03:17:15.938 --> 03:17:24.851 - Do we have any sense of how much tiff revenue that would create? Like I guess it would be on an annual 03:17:24.851 --> 03:17:33.591 - basis. Um, it's not 477 million dollars from the PUD on the PUD. Is that where the estimate is from? 03:17:33.591 --> 03:17:42.331 - Would you know so um, if we're looking at just Shasta Meadows the allocation just the Shasta Meadows 03:17:42.331 --> 03:17:44.062 - allocation area not 03:17:44.194 --> 03:17:52.366 - the entire summit EDA, we were actually, we had a estimated increase of about $50 million, so 477, that 03:17:52.366 --> 03:18:00.694 - might be, I'm not sure, I haven't looked at the other allocation areas yet, that might be for the entire, 03:18:00.694 --> 03:18:08.630 - all five allocation areas, but if we're looking at $477,000, it really depends on what the breakdown 03:18:08.630 --> 03:18:13.502 - of one versus two percents are, but let's say we're in quote, 03:18:14.050 --> 03:18:20.678 - Worst-case in terms of revenue wise worst-case scenario. We're all looking at all one percents. That 03:18:20.678 --> 03:18:27.699 - would be four point seven and it was all two percent then we're looking at nine point four million dollars 03:18:27.699 --> 03:18:34.523 - a year plus but Pending with broad strokes and just thinking of numbers in my head as I'm seeing yours. 03:18:34.523 --> 03:18:41.085 - So I wouldn't quote me For the whole development once it's done with the four hundred seventy seven 03:18:41.085 --> 03:18:43.710 - million dollar Increased assessed value 03:18:45.218 --> 03:18:54.537 - That's not, so the 4.7 million is for the whole thing. Not just Shasta Meadow. Yes, so the 4.7 million 03:18:54.537 --> 03:19:02.590 - is based on the $477 million increase in assessed value that you sent. If we're looking, 03:19:02.882 --> 03:19:09.041 - Just Shasta Meadows we expect about four hundred and forty three thousand four hundred forty three thousand 03:19:09.041 --> 03:19:14.745 - dollars a year in tiff revenues And that's there's a breakdown of one and two percent. I don't have 03:19:14.745 --> 03:19:20.562 - that with me right now, but Just to clarify the difference between one and two percent one percent is 03:19:20.562 --> 03:19:26.379 - what we're thinking about as Residential homes, so that's your single-family home that you live in on 03:19:26.379 --> 03:19:28.318 - your own two percent. It would be 03:19:28.642 --> 03:19:35.381 - Well, number one would be agricultural land, but also if we look at apartments, apartments, they look 03:19:35.381 --> 03:19:42.054 - like residential, but they're technically 2% non-residential in terms of property taxes. And also if 03:19:42.054 --> 03:19:49.058 - you, let's say you buy a house, but you rent it out, that would also count as 2%. But $443,000 for Shasta 03:19:49.058 --> 03:19:55.929 - Meadows, there's a combination of both 1% and 2% within that. I just don't have that breakdown in front 03:19:55.929 --> 03:19:57.118 - of me. Thank you. 03:20:00.898 --> 03:20:12.741 - Questions Councilmember rough Two questions first of all on the Decision-making on the use of the tip 03:20:12.741 --> 03:20:24.700 - future tiff revenues You explained that anything this by any bond proposed bond bonding would you have 03:20:24.700 --> 03:20:30.622 - to come to council for approval but Let's just say 03:20:31.554 --> 03:20:44.056 - Down-the-road 10-15 years the TIF is kind of semi flush with funds and Would the would a future RDC 03:20:44.056 --> 03:20:56.558 - Be able to Use the funds allocate funds to the side streets or You know you said that right now the 03:20:56.558 --> 03:20:58.558 - plan is for the 03:20:58.658 --> 03:21:07.141 - The major road streets at the city and improvements that the city wanted to see mainly right but not 03:21:07.141 --> 03:21:15.708 - the residential smaller streets, etc, but in the future Would it be completely up to the RDC? To just 03:21:15.708 --> 03:21:24.275 - to what what it got spout on in the end it is but it also has to pass a but for test that but for the 03:21:24.275 --> 03:21:28.222 - spending of those funds in that particular way 03:21:28.450 --> 03:21:38.356 - the economic development would not happen so It's not supposed to replace private funds it's supposed 03:21:38.356 --> 03:21:48.457 - to be used in a way that encouraged the ability for private private funds to be used so okay, I'll just 03:21:48.457 --> 03:21:55.838 - say to that what we've seen that kind of Nebulance or fudgy argument where? 03:21:55.938 --> 03:22:05.591 - Well, yeah, we build the road and that will enable that into some construction or some economic activity 03:22:05.591 --> 03:22:14.877 - that Becomes then the but for right there, but you know, but my the question I really then wanted to 03:22:14.877 --> 03:22:24.254 - get at is The I'd like a little more elaboration on the state tax this current state of tax laws that 03:22:24.674 --> 03:22:37.745 - I'm understanding in the earlier part of the presentation That the way they worked now The amount of 03:22:37.745 --> 03:22:50.946 - additional revenue that the city would get If absent the this economic development area this this tip 03:22:50.946 --> 03:22:53.534 - Would be negligible 03:22:53.922 --> 03:23:02.041 - It would really manifest itself in the form of lower taxes for the average property owner the average 03:23:02.041 --> 03:23:10.160 - resident not in terms of a large amount of new additional revenue unless we do this which then allows 03:23:10.160 --> 03:23:18.518 - the city to capture Revenue that state law otherwise would have capped and said you don't get to collect 03:23:18.518 --> 03:23:23.294 - any more revenue as a result of this additional development 03:23:23.394 --> 03:23:32.671 - You just get to lower, your residents will enjoy lower taxes. If someone could talk about that a little 03:23:32.671 --> 03:23:41.680 - more. I'll try and then I'll let Justin, because I like the pizza analogy. Think about it that right 03:23:41.680 --> 03:23:50.778 - now, at some, there's a crust. And the crust is only worth so much all by itself. And so if you don't 03:23:50.778 --> 03:23:52.830 - do anything out there, 03:23:52.994 --> 03:24:00.701 - provide a way to get any toppings on there, to get any pizza sauce on there, nothing's going to happen, 03:24:00.701 --> 03:24:08.926 - and it's just going to stay a crust. It won't increase in assessed value, so it won't generate any more funds. 03:24:09.378 --> 03:24:18.413 - If you put mechanisms in there where you can get the pizza sauce and the mozzarella cheese and the vegetarian 03:24:18.413 --> 03:24:26.791 - toppings and all piled on there, now you've got a lot more assessed value and you've made that happen 03:24:26.791 --> 03:24:35.169 - by creating the TIF and using and capturing all those toppings and cheese and sauce. The value of all 03:24:35.169 --> 03:24:39.358 - of that, you're capturing those dollars and paying 03:24:39.490 --> 03:24:48.748 - that infrastructure that allowed you to get those but you wouldn't have got those had you not Created 03:24:48.748 --> 03:24:58.732 - the ability to to get those toppings in the first place But if you if we if you did though if the development 03:24:58.732 --> 03:25:05.630 - happened Absent the diff as a mechanism to capture increased assessed value 03:25:05.954 --> 03:25:14.987 - It wouldn't manifest itself that way to the community. It would be capped and we would Not really see 03:25:14.987 --> 03:25:24.019 - it see the benefits in terms of increased revenues to fund services right, but we would see it rather 03:25:24.019 --> 03:25:33.406 - in terms of lowered taxes because of the caps So you actually the scenario just pointed out it's actually 03:25:33.634 --> 03:25:39.683 - Monday we sent out what we call a tax impact statement and that statement essentially what it does is 03:25:39.683 --> 03:25:46.028 - point out that scenario that you just you just mentioned is what if this development was to happen without 03:25:46.028 --> 03:25:51.959 - Us putting that infrastructure. Let's say developer like okay We don't we'll put the infrastructure 03:25:51.959 --> 03:25:57.889 - ourself and will so do the development in the city So what if that was to happen? So the answer the 03:25:57.889 --> 03:26:03.582 - answer to what will happen in that scenario is yes, you we will see a tax rate decrease without 03:26:03.682 --> 03:26:10.949 - a whole lot of additional revenues to coming to the city, but You one key point I point out is that 03:26:10.949 --> 03:26:18.434 - the residents of in of Bloomington will see a see a decrease in their tax bill, but that's technically 03:26:18.434 --> 03:26:25.847 - not true because Most of the residents are already capped at one are at the 1% cap given our tax rate 03:26:25.847 --> 03:26:31.806 - is to add over two dollars for the most part most of us already capped so even if 03:26:31.906 --> 03:26:38.856 - The tax rate goes up or it goes down. It has to go down significantly For I'm I live in Bloomington. 03:26:38.856 --> 03:26:45.738 - So it'll affect my taxable as well It'll have to go the tax rate will have to go down significantly 03:26:45.738 --> 03:26:52.825 - for me to see a decrease in my property taxes Whereas for the summit fifty million dollars if we threw 03:26:52.825 --> 03:26:59.294 - fifteen million dollars into into the city's basis value that would not have an effect on the 03:26:59.778 --> 03:27:07.002 - on most residential parcels. The larger tax savings, if that was to happen, would actually be on the 03:27:07.002 --> 03:27:14.155 - 3% commercial. So we're looking at the businesses. They would reach most of that tax savings. Can I 03:27:14.155 --> 03:27:21.380 - also just give you one quick? Jeff McKim, City Controller. I just want to make sure that in our kind 03:27:21.380 --> 03:27:28.747 - of discussion of the weeds here, we don't miss the major point that I think Dana and Justin are trying 03:27:28.747 --> 03:27:29.534 - to get at. 03:27:29.634 --> 03:27:36.647 - that with the TIF and with the constraints that Andy mentioned, which are absolutely true, 03:27:36.647 --> 03:27:44.585 - but with the TIF, we can actually bring in more revenue, more tax revenue for city infrastructure than 03:27:44.585 --> 03:27:52.292 - we could without the TIF. It's not simply a shift from city to TIF. It is literally we can bring in 03:27:52.292 --> 03:27:59.614 - more money because of the constraints and the way that Indiana property taxes work. Thank you. 03:28:00.706 --> 03:28:07.142 - Thank you. Council Member Flaherty. Thank you. And thank you, Comptroller McKim, for that follow-up 03:28:07.142 --> 03:28:13.643 - point. I do understand that. And I guess what I wanted to ask with greater specificity, because yes, 03:28:13.643 --> 03:28:20.143 - if we were going to build the infrastructure anyway, doing it this way makes sense relative to doing 03:28:20.143 --> 03:28:26.644 - it through, you know, general fund or other kind of non-TIF funding sources for the reasons you just 03:28:26.644 --> 03:28:28.510 - outlined. I understand that. 03:28:28.866 --> 03:28:34.509 - that assumes that we were intending to build this infrastructure. And I guess I kind of got at that 03:28:34.509 --> 03:28:40.152 - in my first question, but I wanted to ask just more clearly, because I can't find it, you know, the 03:28:40.152 --> 03:28:45.908 - materials right now, but when we approved the Summit PUD, was the plan at that time, and did the city 03:28:45.908 --> 03:28:51.664 - agree at that time that we were going to fund these streets? Or alternatively, was it planned at that 03:28:51.664 --> 03:28:57.758 - time that the developer was gonna, you know, pay for these streets? Do you know? Travis Wenzel with Summit. 03:28:57.954 --> 03:29:06.301 - First I would say with the previous administration and with this administration dating back to February 03:29:06.301 --> 03:29:13.845 - of 2022 when we brought this forward in original discussions, there was always the discussion 03:29:13.845 --> 03:29:22.433 - that significant public infrastructure, money would be necessary to build Sudbury and Adams and to improve 03:29:22.433 --> 03:29:26.526 - the intersections around that area that fail today 03:29:27.138 --> 03:29:33.757 - without any new development, significant public money would be required. The PUD specifically states 03:29:33.757 --> 03:29:40.377 - those roads need to come first and that the city understands that significant public money for those 03:29:40.377 --> 03:29:46.996 - infrastructures or those main roads would be required. That's in the PUD. It's always been discussed 03:29:46.996 --> 03:29:51.518 - as part of the process. That's why those roads are tied to be first. 03:29:52.194 --> 03:29:58.268 - All part of that original PUD and the original discussion with the previous administration as well as 03:29:58.268 --> 03:30:04.342 - this administration was That's that's what it was going to take to build that infrastructure that was 03:30:04.342 --> 03:30:10.475 - necessary Thank You mr. Bensel is anyone from the administration able to confirm the same that the PUD 03:30:10.475 --> 03:30:16.073 - materials themselves that we voted on in 2024 specified that the city was planning to pay for 03:30:16.073 --> 03:30:17.502 - this infrastructure and 03:30:22.242 --> 03:30:28.574 - I just don't recall, honestly. So I'm just trying to understand if this is consistent with, 03:30:28.574 --> 03:30:35.800 - because it feels, this is a unique context and it's a large area, but historically, if I'm not mistaken, 03:30:35.800 --> 03:30:42.957 - we have not spent public dollars on this type of thing. And so I'm trying to just be very clear if this 03:30:42.957 --> 03:30:50.046 - is a policy change that's being proposed relative to what was planned and communicated to the council, 03:30:50.402 --> 03:30:57.304 - when the PD was voted on in 2024, could someone from the administration speak to that, please? 03:30:57.304 --> 03:31:04.642 - Kerry Thompson, Mayor. It's my understanding that while there wasn't a tangible agreement to pay for 03:31:04.642 --> 03:31:12.052 - the infrastructure at that point, part of trying to get this done, because one of the conditions that 03:31:12.052 --> 03:31:14.014 - was put on this was to put 03:31:14.530 --> 03:31:22.158 - the significant roads in before the developer would have any income coming in to actually pay for them. 03:31:22.158 --> 03:31:29.786 - So part of the package that has been put together is this TIF package so that we can get them paid for. 03:31:29.786 --> 03:31:37.121 - We have a challenge in the community. We need housing, right? I think we all agree to that. And the 03:31:37.121 --> 03:31:40.862 - city has to use its best tools available to try to 03:31:41.602 --> 03:31:51.735 - leverage what we have to get the housing that we need. And infrastructure is inordinately expensive. 03:31:51.735 --> 03:32:01.969 - And so getting to a place where we can work out for 4,200 units, getting TIFF to come in and help pay 03:32:01.969 --> 03:32:09.694 - for that infrastructure that's gonna benefit the city is helpful. Thank you. 03:32:10.914 --> 03:32:19.465 - Other questions. Council Member Stosberg. Thank you. I have some other questions, but I also want to 03:32:19.465 --> 03:32:28.015 - address Council Member Flaherty's question because I don't recall that being a discussion at council 03:32:28.015 --> 03:32:36.905 - when we passed the summit PUD and I actually recall there being kind of the implication that the private 03:32:36.905 --> 03:32:39.614 - developer was gonna manage that 03:32:39.810 --> 03:32:49.337 - and I think that this is part of the private developer managing that and It feels like a surprise now, 03:32:49.337 --> 03:32:58.772 - which I don't really love but I wanted to Follow up a little bit on what councilmember Piedmont Smith 03:32:58.772 --> 03:33:08.670 - was asking Justin I think about the actual like dollar amounts because I think that those got a little bit 03:33:08.962 --> 03:33:18.727 - combined in my mind it says in the Redevelopment Commission Like purpose and introduction program that 03:33:18.727 --> 03:33:28.208 - the construction of the dwelling units So it's estimated that the development will create over four 03:33:28.208 --> 03:33:37.310 - hundred and seventy seven million in new assessed value but then in the fiscal impact statement 03:33:37.538 --> 03:33:47.045 - it seemed to imply that this TIF alone, just the Shasta Meadows, would have an increase in TIF revenue 03:33:47.045 --> 03:33:56.552 - collections by the 443,000 per year. And so I'm a little confused because I thought that you're basing 03:33:56.552 --> 03:34:05.598 - that 400 and some thousand off of just for the Shasta area, but the 477 million in assessed value 03:34:05.730 --> 03:34:15.072 - was off of the development for all of it. So can you clarify exactly how much this TIFF is worth just 03:34:15.072 --> 03:34:24.322 - the Shasta Meadows part, or do you not really know that? So when we came up with the estimates, it's 03:34:24.322 --> 03:34:32.382 - using what was provided on the PUD, which from what we saw, there wasn't a whole lot of 03:34:33.026 --> 03:34:39.964 - Specific details on the development itself How many bedrooms square footage so we use sort of what we've 03:34:39.964 --> 03:34:46.637 - seen in other communities with similar developments and use that as a Tool to come up with an assess 03:34:46.637 --> 03:34:53.245 - estimated assess value for the Shasta Meadows itself Not the entire summit EDA. So the four hundred 03:34:53.245 --> 03:34:59.852 - forty three thousand annual TIF revenues that would be looking at just the Shasta Meadows I'm using 03:34:59.852 --> 03:35:01.438 - our using our estimates 03:35:02.274 --> 03:35:12.319 - Okay, so is the four hundred and seventy seven thousand and new assessed about or four hundred and seventy 03:35:12.319 --> 03:35:21.707 - seven million and new assessed value Just set Shasta Meadows, or is it the whole thing? That's just 03:35:21.707 --> 03:35:32.222 - Shasta Meadows According to okay. Okay, that's not clear in that document Okay Thank you I Think I have we have 03:35:32.482 --> 03:35:41.914 - 4,000 units, 477 million into 4,000, that would be very low value if you think about it, right? So the 03:35:41.914 --> 03:35:51.437 - assessed value of the entire, the new assessed value would be much higher than 477 million. 477 million 03:35:51.437 --> 03:36:00.594 - just would be the maximum assessed value that Shasta could potentially produce. If I can go back on 03:36:00.594 --> 03:36:02.334 - page A to the PUD, 03:36:02.434 --> 03:36:09.552 - It states the above schedule is necessary the above schedule which is talking about the number of units 03:36:09.552 --> 03:36:16.396 - over the 138 acres Necessary depends on the city of Bloomington support concerning utility capacity 03:36:16.396 --> 03:36:23.445 - and expansion as well as the developing fund sources including tax increment financing to support road 03:36:23.445 --> 03:36:30.494 - and related infrastructure Completion I think that's pretty specific in the PUD that was approved that 03:36:31.266 --> 03:36:40.711 - City was going to participate in utility capacity and developing funding sources including TIF to pay 03:36:40.711 --> 03:36:50.063 - for related roads and infrastructure Great, thank you. Yep any other council questions Councilmember 03:36:50.063 --> 03:37:00.990 - Piedmont Smith Yeah, I'm sorry to keep going back to this but Following up with what councilmember Stossberg asked so 03:37:01.666 --> 03:37:11.079 - If the total estimated new assessed value in Chasta Meadows four hundred seventy seven million dollars 03:37:11.079 --> 03:37:20.126 - then how come the estimated annual tiff revenue is only four hundred forty three thousand dollars. 03:37:31.010 --> 03:37:40.024 - So, I don't have the document in front of you that you're looking at. I believe the $444.7 million of 03:37:40.024 --> 03:37:49.303 - new potential is for the entire area. Then you talk about how much Shasta will generate over the 15-year 03:37:49.303 --> 03:37:52.926 - period of the TIF. So, it's not a direct 03:37:54.690 --> 03:38:00.466 - Don't I think we're getting way in the weeds of the analysis of what might happen with so many units 03:38:00.466 --> 03:38:06.470 - that might be built there does that make sense a Few minutes ago. You just said the four hundred seventy 03:38:06.470 --> 03:38:12.303 - seven million dollars in new assessed value is for the whole Four hundred forty seven billion or four 03:38:12.303 --> 03:38:18.193 - hundred seventy seven million. I don't have the document Four hundred seventy seven million. Okay four 03:38:18.193 --> 03:38:23.454 - hundred seventy seven million of what new assessed value new assessed value or market value 03:38:24.738 --> 03:38:33.115 - Assessed value Which would be the base don't I don't I think a new assess value Assessment being something 03:38:33.115 --> 03:38:41.100 - different than market. I think is referring to the entire EDA So so going back so 477 million dollars 03:38:41.100 --> 03:38:49.086 - will be for the entire EDA So all of those five allocate five or six allocation areas that you see in 03:38:49.086 --> 03:38:53.470 - front of you. That's four hundred seventy seven million 03:38:54.082 --> 03:39:03.023 - The $443,000 in TIF incremental revenue that the RDC will see every year, that's the estimated amount 03:39:03.023 --> 03:39:12.489 - for Shasta Meadows. But $447 million in newly assessed value, that's for all the allocation areas combined. 03:39:12.489 --> 03:39:21.342 - And that's where you got the minimum 4.7 million in TIF revenue per year. From the 477, you took 1%. 03:39:21.570 --> 03:39:29.512 - Yes, that's without me looking at the actual development itself or looking at any comparables. If it 03:39:29.512 --> 03:39:37.376 - were all 1%. Yes, correct, correct. That's what I understood like 10 minutes ago. Yes. And then you 03:39:37.376 --> 03:39:45.632 - said something different to me. Yeah. I'm sorry about that. Okay, other questions? Council Member Rallo. 03:39:45.632 --> 03:39:51.294 - Yes, just to remind me, I can't remember if maybe a planner would know, 03:39:51.490 --> 03:39:59.476 - The streets are are they city Bloomington streets? They're not the developer the infrastructure is is 03:39:59.476 --> 03:40:07.540 - Ours correct. Yes, Eric Grulick development services mayor So the majority of the streets at least all 03:40:07.540 --> 03:40:15.605 - the streets that are laid out in the transportation plans that being Sudbury and Adams would be public 03:40:15.605 --> 03:40:18.110 - in terms of streets within each 03:40:18.306 --> 03:40:24.497 - The sub area, you know, we didn't necessarily get to that level You know some of them were multifamily 03:40:24.497 --> 03:40:30.568 - don't have to be If some of them were single-family than those would have to be based on our current 03:40:30.568 --> 03:40:36.759 - subdivision requirements So I don't think that we got to that level beyond roads that are shown in the 03:40:36.759 --> 03:40:43.070 - transportation plan So but we're are we responsible for building the roads or is the developer? well, so 03:40:43.490 --> 03:40:50.522 - And I think as it's been discussed, you know with the PUD they were required to build Sudbury and Adams 03:40:50.522 --> 03:40:57.350 - with the first phase You know beyond that as each phase develops then those internal roads are built 03:40:57.350 --> 03:41:04.314 - when that particular phase develops So there was only the requirement for Sudbury and Adams to be done 03:41:04.314 --> 03:41:11.616 - before any or with the first phase Okay, do you happen to know if as we proceed there'll be a bond required 03:41:11.616 --> 03:41:13.374 - of the developer prior to 03:41:13.602 --> 03:41:20.728 - To the construction correct to make sure that it's completed as per you know Yes, so there will be a 03:41:20.728 --> 03:41:27.924 - bond for all public improvements sidewalks tree trees roads. Okay terrific. Thank you Other questions 03:41:27.924 --> 03:41:35.120 - councilmember Stasberg Kind of along that vein so when we have to when we're saying we're gonna build 03:41:35.120 --> 03:41:38.718 - say Adam Street or Vanguard does that include like 03:41:38.978 --> 03:41:46.417 - All of the sidewalks and all of that kind of stuff associated with that street or is it just the street 03:41:46.417 --> 03:41:54.142 - itself? Yeah, so that that would include all the infrastructure in that right away. So storm water sanitary 03:41:54.142 --> 03:42:01.653 - water curbs pedestrian facilities street trees Everything within that right away. Thank you and in terms 03:42:01.653 --> 03:42:08.734 - of What right now is kind of being agreed to in terms of what this TIF money is gonna pay for it's 03:42:08.834 --> 03:42:17.202 - I guess I'm wondering about the multi-use trail that's supposed to Attach this development essentially 03:42:17.202 --> 03:42:25.490 - to the beeline is that on the list of things that the TIF money is gonna pay for or is that something 03:42:25.490 --> 03:42:33.614 - that the developer has Yeah, I can't answer that I will have to let somebody else deal with that. I 03:42:33.614 --> 03:42:38.814 - don't think so that would be on the developer as I would expect 03:42:40.226 --> 03:42:47.079 - It's my understanding that by statute there's certain things that the TIF can pay for and those are 03:42:47.079 --> 03:42:54.548 - all public infrastructure curbs sidewalks roads water lines sewer lines that are public if they're privately 03:42:54.548 --> 03:43:01.675 - owned privately maintained where it comes on to an individual lot or services a specific lot that can't 03:43:01.675 --> 03:43:07.774 - be paid for a trail Probably could be paid for but we haven't designed it yet one of our 03:43:08.002 --> 03:43:14.126 - goals in this is to design the entire right of way so that we're not paying for a road to come back 03:43:14.126 --> 03:43:20.373 - and dig it up and put a sewer line down the middle of it or a water line down the middle of it later. 03:43:20.373 --> 03:43:26.497 - We're not building a road and then coming in later and trying to build a path. We're doing that all 03:43:26.497 --> 03:43:32.867 - together. So we're working with the city to design to their standards to the transportation plan within 03:43:32.867 --> 03:43:37.950 - that existing right of way so that we can get all that infrastructure in up front. 03:43:38.178 --> 03:43:44.220 - This is not the way we normally develop. This is the largest PUD ever approved We usually don't come 03:43:44.220 --> 03:43:50.321 - in and put all the major roads that connect it first, but we want to do that We want to do it, right? 03:43:50.321 --> 03:43:56.423 - So in this scenario Adams and Sudbury would be designed Fully will know exactly what they're going to 03:43:56.423 --> 03:44:02.046 - cost. They would be built full out by the time the first occupancy moves in so it wouldn't be 03:44:03.266 --> 03:44:09.727 - driving on pavement that isn't the top code. It wouldn't be later the sidewalks. That would all be there 03:44:09.727 --> 03:44:15.941 - ahead of time. Not the way we used to develop and not the way we typically develop. Then each one of 03:44:15.941 --> 03:44:22.402 - the five parcels, they will develop in a traditional sense. Might build two blocks of road, build houses 03:44:22.402 --> 03:44:28.862 - on it, build the next two blocks of road. That's a traditional way of development. But those major roads 03:44:28.862 --> 03:44:32.062 - would be conceptually designed and funded and built 03:44:32.674 --> 03:44:40.699 - prior to anyone occupying any of the dwellings. So I think what could be spent on is RDC, a statutory 03:44:40.699 --> 03:44:48.724 - regulator, what they can spend on. It's gotta be area-serving public infrastructure. Okay. I have one 03:44:48.724 --> 03:44:56.907 - more question that's different. Thank you. Just kind of as an interest, I mean, I think it's clear that 03:44:56.907 --> 03:45:01.470 - this TIF and this process would end up yielding money for 03:45:01.570 --> 03:45:08.182 - The RDC and thus the city but what does it do to other? Taxing entities that would generally get some 03:45:08.182 --> 03:45:15.184 - tax dollars from that I'm thinking specifically of schools for example that usually get a share of property 03:45:15.184 --> 03:45:21.731 - taxes So what would what would the impact be on those other entities? So we're going back to this is 03:45:21.731 --> 03:45:28.603 - assuming this development was to not if this development never happened without the infrastructure That's 03:45:28.603 --> 03:45:31.326 - very important to this whole but for test 03:45:31.426 --> 03:45:37.939 - this development only could happen because of the infrastructure that the RDC is providing. So that 03:45:37.939 --> 03:45:44.582 - was to happen, but we still tipped it anyways. Again, we're in such a low circuit breaker environment 03:45:44.582 --> 03:45:51.486 - that the only gain from the underlying units will be a reduction in circuit breaker, a slight increase in 03:45:51.746 --> 03:45:58.183 - in net levy, so we're looking at the school, for example, we're seeing absolute worst case scenario 03:45:58.183 --> 03:46:04.813 - for the schools, they would lose out on $16,000 a year in circuit breaker impact, but if we're looking 03:46:04.813 --> 03:46:11.507 - at a school specifically, since at least my district, Monroe Community Schools, they have a referendum, 03:46:11.507 --> 03:46:17.944 - and referendum can actually still capture antithesis value, so a school, for example, will actually 03:46:17.944 --> 03:46:18.910 - come out ahead 03:46:18.978 --> 03:46:26.966 - Because of the referendum tax rates, but that's going into a whole nother sidebar So without the referendum 03:46:26.966 --> 03:46:34.362 - though, they would lose $16,000 a year for just Shasta Meadows Yes in circuit breaker and reduction 03:46:34.362 --> 03:46:42.275 - in circuit breaker. It would be it would not be an increase in tax levy again It would just be a reduction 03:46:42.275 --> 03:46:48.414 - in their school circuit breaker. Yes Thank you other questions Councilmember Rallo 03:46:48.706 --> 03:46:55.843 - Yeah, I just want I forgot to ask is this This area lies within the unified TIF doesn't it the consolidated? 03:46:55.843 --> 03:47:02.456 - Yeah It is not it'll be a new that's why we're setting up a new EDA as well with it because it's not 03:47:02.456 --> 03:47:09.069 - currently with it It doesn't overlap at all. No, I'm not done I thought it was overlap. So it's it's 03:47:09.069 --> 03:47:12.670 - it's carving out a new area. There's part of it that I 03:47:12.770 --> 03:47:20.297 - Overlap but it's carving that out of the consolidated and there's a part of it that Isn't in any TIF 03:47:20.297 --> 03:47:27.749 - so it's creating a new area, but it's coming out Okay, I guess my question then is the area that is 03:47:27.749 --> 03:47:35.275 - part of the consolidated TIF is does this obviate revenues from that In other words do that does the 03:47:35.275 --> 03:47:42.206 - any commercial development there does it are we losing money for the consolidated TIF we are 03:47:43.746 --> 03:47:51.568 - Would possibly it would move money from the consolidated TIF but Monies can be used in anything that 03:47:51.568 --> 03:47:59.391 - would serve this EDA. So those extra areas outside of the infrastructure Areas the intersections and 03:47:59.391 --> 03:48:07.445 - things like that are outside the EDA, but they serve that EDA They're actually in the consolidated TIF, 03:48:07.445 --> 03:48:11.550 - but this money can be used for them. Okay, so it's a 03:48:12.354 --> 03:48:22.294 - It's a way to keep this area together And be able to create these allocation areas together in this 03:48:22.294 --> 03:48:32.233 - one package to Yeah to keep it a package deal and also want to make one thing clear the I mentioned 03:48:32.233 --> 03:48:41.278 - earlier that there is a mo you with the summit folks for design and that donation of rogue 03:48:41.474 --> 03:48:49.997 - the right-of-way There is no agreement regarding any payment towards infrastructure You know that we 03:48:49.997 --> 03:48:58.605 - needed to get through this tiff process Which includes after tonight should you pass this resolution? 03:48:58.605 --> 03:49:05.694 - It goes back to the RDC. The RDC will have a public hearing that's been noticed and 03:49:05.826 --> 03:49:13.623 - There would be a confirmatory resolution after the public hearing so there is nothing been promised 03:49:13.623 --> 03:49:21.654 - of anything to go towards infrastructure and for the Public Investment Corp property Working on an MOU 03:49:21.654 --> 03:49:29.918 - for design and right-of-way, but that's not done yet. There has not been any funds That has been promised 03:49:29.918 --> 03:49:35.454 - for anything at this point. I just wanted to make sure you knew that I 03:49:35.650 --> 03:49:43.845 - Okay, I think I understand. Oh, did mr. Vinson. Did you want it or Sure, if you want to add anything 03:49:43.845 --> 03:49:52.201 - I I Think so. No, but with with the current zoning that's in place with the PUD the type of commercial 03:49:52.201 --> 03:50:00.396 - development that's loud is neighborhood serving so the consolidated tip only captures commercial not 03:50:00.396 --> 03:50:01.694 - residential and 03:50:01.890 --> 03:50:07.476 - no commercial will come there because the only thing that's allowed is residential serving until we 03:50:07.476 --> 03:50:13.173 - have the residence. So by carving it out, it's not losing because it's never gonna happen. By carving 03:50:13.173 --> 03:50:19.038 - it out, you capture not only that commercial, this residential serving, but you could commercial capture 03:50:19.038 --> 03:50:22.110 - the residential around it. Okay, very good, thank you. 03:50:22.370 --> 03:50:28.112 - Just a quick follow-up on the two previous questions number one was on the impact on the schools So 03:50:28.112 --> 03:50:34.026 - I mentioned yes $16,000 circle breaker annual impact on the schools, but especially with a residential 03:50:34.026 --> 03:50:40.227 - TIF They bring in a lot of new residents and therefore a lot of new students We actually had a conversation 03:50:40.227 --> 03:50:41.950 - with the rural summit schools 03:50:42.210 --> 03:50:49.531 - Executive director last month and they see about four residential tips about 50% of that equates to 03:50:49.531 --> 03:50:57.073 - new students to the school to that area so we look at a I believe this area has four to let's just say 03:50:57.073 --> 03:51:04.394 - 400 New units we're looking at 200 additional students and each additional students Generates about 03:51:04.394 --> 03:51:10.910 - seven thousand to eight thousand dollars to this school corporation. So we're looking at 03:51:11.394 --> 03:51:18.194 - That that number is way larger than the circuit breaker reduction in itself and to and just a follow-up 03:51:18.194 --> 03:51:24.995 - on the carve on the tiff overlapping we're not Creating two tips on one single parcel We're essentially 03:51:24.995 --> 03:51:31.795 - removing that parcel from the consolidated tiff and adding it to the new one So that parcel technically 03:51:31.795 --> 03:51:38.334 - is no longer part of the consolidated tiff. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you and councilmember Asari 03:51:40.418 --> 03:51:50.130 - Thank you. Maybe a question for the accountant. Just sort of three questions in sequence, and I'll just 03:51:50.130 --> 03:52:00.309 - ask them all in one go. But if I recall correctly, this was 4,000 or so units that was the sort of estimated 03:52:00.309 --> 03:52:02.270 - build out at summit. 03:52:02.370 --> 03:52:14.486 - and given SEA 1, where we're moving more of city finance to income tax, what is, I know we're discussing 03:52:14.486 --> 03:52:23.486 - here this sort of like exchange, I guess, between opportunity cost of funding 03:52:24.034 --> 03:52:32.695 - with public funds, though I agree with Mr. Vensel that this was actually talked at length during the 03:52:32.695 --> 03:52:41.271 - time that we passed the PUD. But that aside, have you all done calculations of how it would benefit 03:52:41.271 --> 03:52:49.846 - the city budget to have, I don't know, 4,000, let's just say it was 4,000, I mean, more likely it's 03:52:49.846 --> 03:52:53.534 - gonna be like eight, but 4,000 more adults 03:52:53.794 --> 03:53:00.830 - possibly living in the city. Does that have a positive impact on the city's budget in the context of SEA 1? 03:53:01.858 --> 03:53:08.257 - So the answer definitely is yes, because with SCA-1 local income tax is based on where the taxpayer 03:53:08.257 --> 03:53:14.784 - lives. So as more residents are in Bloomington City itself, that would increase the late distribution 03:53:14.784 --> 03:53:21.375 - to the city. We're talking when SCA-1 local income tax actually comes into effect. We're looking a few 03:53:21.375 --> 03:53:27.774 - years down the road, right? But the answer is for whether we have an actual specific dollar amount, 03:53:27.774 --> 03:53:29.566 - it's no. For one, we don't. 03:53:29.954 --> 03:53:38.004 - Like you mentioned, 4,000 to 8,000 units. We don't know what our tax rate is going to be in three years. 03:53:38.004 --> 03:53:45.824 - So we provide an estimate right now. It could potentially be drastically wrong just because there are 03:53:45.824 --> 03:53:53.491 - just so many moving pieces before we get to 2029. But would you agree with the assumption that even 03:53:53.491 --> 03:53:58.398 - if we think it unusual to spend money on public money on a PUD, 03:53:58.498 --> 03:54:05.253 - that this could be viewed as us investing to, investing to increase possibilities of city funds in the 03:54:05.253 --> 03:54:12.205 - future. So there is a return on investment. There could be a return on investment directly to the cities. 03:54:12.205 --> 03:54:19.091 - Yes? Yes, 100%. I think this is why we're seeing a lot of residential-related to allocation areas around 03:54:19.091 --> 03:54:25.650 - the state in general as well. It's because a lot of communities are trying to get as many people as 03:54:25.650 --> 03:54:27.486 - possible for live purposes. 03:54:27.650 --> 03:54:34.835 - So I'm sure that's one of the considerations. Thank you. Thank you. Other questions? Great. Let's move 03:54:34.835 --> 03:54:41.880 - to public comment. Would anyone in the public like to speak on this? If you're on Zoom, please raise 03:54:41.880 --> 03:54:48.925 - your hand. Great. You'll have three minutes. Please state your name and go ahead. Travis Fensel with 03:54:48.925 --> 03:54:56.109 - the Summit Development Group. We just are in favor of this. This has been a long process of us working 03:54:56.109 --> 03:54:57.086 - with the city 03:54:57.218 --> 03:55:03.905 - This administration previous administration to get here. This is a great opportunity to fund infrastructure 03:55:03.905 --> 03:55:10.468 - Bring residents to Bloomington, which has lots of benefits to us in many ways And we'd ask you to support 03:55:10.468 --> 03:55:17.217 - this resolution tonight and move this back to the RDC. Thank you Great. Thank you. Next speaker in chambers, 03:55:17.217 --> 03:55:23.656 - please. Please state your name for the record and you'll have three minutes Good evening again council. 03:55:23.656 --> 03:55:24.894 - My voice is calling 03:55:24.994 --> 03:55:31.070 - late Krista Ramsey from the Greater Bloomington Chamber of Commerce and I want to my hats off 03:55:31.070 --> 03:55:37.922 - to councilmember sorry even No, we don't know where he is presently, but that was my point. I just wanted 03:55:37.922 --> 03:55:43.998 - to bring up which Was the investment that this is we need to increase our tax base that? 2029 03:55:44.162 --> 03:55:51.133 - Year of SP one is is looming where we're going to be income tax The lit is going to be that much more 03:55:51.133 --> 03:55:57.968 - important. So bringing people in is is vital to increasing that you know, who else could use people 03:55:57.968 --> 03:56:05.008 - MCC SC Dr. Winston the superintendent has been on the circuit speaking on their situation and the best 03:56:05.008 --> 03:56:11.979 - thing the the best remedy for what ails the schools is more students the one thing that that that mr. 03:56:11.979 --> 03:56:13.278 - Vince mentioned is 03:56:13.730 --> 03:56:20.101 - how long he's been working on this. February of 2022, that's... we're nearing five years. I don't believe 03:56:20.101 --> 03:56:25.571 - they've probably seen a check or anything, but a lot of work has gone into this, and I've, 03:56:25.571 --> 03:56:31.641 - over the past year, have heard, you know, I've gotten some calls on this, which made me worried, and 03:56:31.641 --> 03:56:37.832 - this residential TIF is a path forward. We've had regular TIFs, spider TIFs. Why not residential TIFs? 03:56:37.832 --> 03:56:43.422 - I know the RDC and the company's been contemplating that, and this is really a great way to, 03:56:43.682 --> 03:56:49.934 - Really enhance that revenue with very expensive infrastructure and this is public good infrastructure. 03:56:49.934 --> 03:56:56.307 - I don't we're kind of getting on a little bit of That subdivision roads, but that's where the petitioner 03:56:56.307 --> 03:57:02.558 - is going to take care of that So I you know and as far as the Sudbury Adams Road that was talked about 03:57:02.558 --> 03:57:08.628 - quite a bit I mean we've I mean Litigated this the summit PUD when it came before you quite a bit I 03:57:08.628 --> 03:57:10.206 - don't know how many times 03:57:10.338 --> 03:57:16.572 - We had that same presentation, but it was it was a couple times if you look at your notes, so I would 03:57:16.572 --> 03:57:22.745 - just Recommend passing this resolution. Let's send it back to the RDC and Move this process forward. 03:57:22.745 --> 03:57:26.046 - Thank you. Thank you next speaker in chambers, please 03:57:27.682 --> 03:57:36.258 - Good evening. I'm Julie how big with regional opportunity initiatives ROI We also would respectfully 03:57:36.258 --> 03:57:45.173 - ask for your approval this evening and just as a point of information So ROI is one of 15 regional ready 03:57:45.173 --> 03:57:53.664 - administrators so the state ready program and we of the 30 million dollar total Ready allocation we 03:57:53.664 --> 03:57:56.126 - got for ready 2.0 for the 10 03:57:56.226 --> 03:58:04.828 - Uplands regional counties we have obligated four million dollars towards about five hundred thousand 03:58:04.828 --> 03:58:13.600 - dollars in design and engineering costs and then 3.5 million of those ready funds would go towards the 03:58:13.600 --> 03:58:22.201 - sanitary sewer build out of the infrastructure so state dollars Will also be here to support some of 03:58:22.201 --> 03:58:25.182 - that important infrastructure work 03:58:25.666 --> 03:58:33.387 - So thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else in chambers who would like to speak? Great. Please approach 03:58:33.387 --> 03:58:40.380 - the podium. You'll have three minutes. Is there anyone who's raising their hand on Zoom? Great. 03:58:40.380 --> 03:58:47.882 - Thank you. Paul Rousseau. Oh, my goodness. I remember the summit hearing two years ago, and I remember 03:58:47.882 --> 03:58:55.166 - a lot of talk about the costs of growth, but those would be taken care of by an increased taxation. 03:58:55.298 --> 03:59:02.969 - But now we're gonna use some of the taxation to build the roads, it doesn't seem right. I strongly encourage 03:59:02.969 --> 03:59:10.147 - you to postpone this until you're sure. If you're not sure about what was said and what was agreed to 03:59:10.147 --> 03:59:17.185 - two years ago, then I would suggest a postponement on this. Because it feels like a bait and switch 03:59:17.185 --> 03:59:24.574 - to me. I thought that the taxes would go to accommodate the growth. That's my only statement, thank you. 03:59:25.986 --> 03:59:40.206 - Thank you anyone else Great council comment or excuse me public comment has concluded on Resolution 03:59:40.206 --> 03:59:55.422 - 20 2608 now we can go back to council comment Councilmember Rallo, thank you Well, I think mr. Rousseau is 03:59:55.906 --> 04:00:04.400 - Thank you for observing that and and insisting we be careful I actually I think that I'll go ahead and 04:00:04.400 --> 04:00:12.811 - support this. I think that this is one way of capturing taxes that is useful But I would say it comes 04:00:12.811 --> 04:00:21.470 - with a kind of a caveat and that is with the concurrency in mind that I think a number of us have talked 04:00:21.470 --> 04:00:23.614 - about in the past that is 04:00:23.874 --> 04:00:33.752 - to make sure that infrastructure is at least keeping pace with the development as it proceeds, if not 04:00:33.752 --> 04:00:43.920 - in place before. And frankly, we've needed a fire station on Tapp Road in that location since the 1990s. 04:00:43.920 --> 04:00:52.926 - In fact, it was in the 2002 growth policies plan. And it was never developed, and meanwhile, 04:00:53.026 --> 04:01:01.143 - housing has and and some commercial development has occurred there and Still the no-fire station and 04:01:01.143 --> 04:01:09.340 - I appreciate that. I'm happy that the developer donated land for that purpose. So So it's ready to go 04:01:09.340 --> 04:01:16.894 - and I would just implore that the RDC make that a primary priority as we as we go forward and 04:01:17.122 --> 04:01:26.107 - Just as the road infrastructure and all the other infrastructure that's that's needed for this development 04:01:26.107 --> 04:01:34.505 - that should be on the top of the list and That's all thanks. Thank you councilmember Flaherty Thank 04:01:34.505 --> 04:01:43.155 - you I'm sort of two minds one is I find mr. Russo's comments I'm sympathetic to them because I do feel 04:01:43.155 --> 04:01:45.758 - like I have open questions and 04:01:45.954 --> 04:01:51.910 - still about what was agreed to, what wasn't. I feel like I've gotten actually a range of answers to 04:01:51.910 --> 04:01:57.926 - those questions tonight, things that weren't promised, things that, you know, it wasn't promised, it 04:01:57.926 --> 04:02:03.643 - wasn't committed, this wasn't the understanding two years ago, but we think it's justified now, 04:02:03.643 --> 04:02:09.718 - and you know, that was sort of the thrust of the mayor's comments. I may well agree, like it might be 04:02:09.718 --> 04:02:15.198 - the right time to change policy course from what we've done historically and choose to make 04:02:16.034 --> 04:02:22.903 - public investments in infrastructure that we have traditionally required private developers to build. 04:02:22.903 --> 04:02:29.705 - I'm thinking of the PUD at the Trinitas built off of Arlington and 17th, it's quite large, there's a 04:02:29.705 --> 04:02:36.439 - lot of infrastructure there, thinking of Renwick, others, I'm not certain, but I think we've always 04:02:36.439 --> 04:02:41.086 - required developers of those PUDs and of other subdivisions to build 04:02:41.346 --> 04:02:47.687 - infrastructure like so that that is the long-standing policy the city of Bloomington I think and I think 04:02:47.687 --> 04:02:53.908 - this is a big policy change it matters not because you know it's a very easy argument to make that yes 04:02:53.908 --> 04:02:59.947 - this is a small investment we're gonna you know get all these TIF dollars we need all this you know 04:02:59.947 --> 04:03:06.288 - additional income tax revenue yes yes of course I get it but again it is a big policy shift we had those 04:03:06.288 --> 04:03:10.878 - policies of requiring developers to pay for infrastructure for a reason and 04:03:12.674 --> 04:03:19.345 - The fact that that wasn't front and center in this resolution, I guess, is frustrating and a little 04:03:19.345 --> 04:03:25.416 - bit of a struggle for me as well. When we have to really dig and work on the fly to try to 04:03:25.416 --> 04:03:32.154 - get the information we need to make a sound decision, that's challenging. So again, I'm a little bit 04:03:32.154 --> 04:03:39.092 - of two minds. I'd be fine with postponing to actually have more time to actually dig into some of those 04:03:39.092 --> 04:03:41.694 - questions that I feel like I had mixed 04:03:41.826 --> 04:03:47.302 - responses to and to examine more fully what our policy on this has been in the past, why we're changing 04:03:47.302 --> 04:03:52.725 - it now, what the justification for it is, do we plan to pay for the infrastructure for all future PUDs 04:03:52.725 --> 04:03:58.201 - and subdivisions, only really big ones, only when we think it's really important, like how are we gonna 04:03:58.201 --> 04:04:03.519 - make those decisions? Because those, what we're being asked tonight sort of begs all those questions 04:04:03.519 --> 04:04:08.837 - and there's really no discussion about any of it. So in that case, I'd be fine postponing, even if I 04:04:08.837 --> 04:04:10.206 - would ultimately probably 04:04:10.658 --> 04:04:20.764 - may support this, but if we vote tonight, I'll make a decision. So that's where I'm at. Thanks. Great. 04:04:20.764 --> 04:04:30.673 - Thank you. Any other comments? Councilmember Piedmont-Smith. Yes, I think that I am ready to support 04:04:30.673 --> 04:04:40.190 - this tonight. This land has been surrounded by developments and yet has sat vacant for 30 years. 04:04:40.482 --> 04:04:48.328 - there are reasons for that because of the cost of the infrastructure needed to put this in. And I, 04:04:48.328 --> 04:04:56.411 - for one, think that we need this development. I mean, this is something that I discussed, that we all 04:04:56.411 --> 04:05:02.910 - discussed in depth two years ago when the PUD came forward. We need this housing. 04:05:03.074 --> 04:05:10.081 - And I really don't think it's going to be built and I didn't at the time think it would be built without 04:05:10.081 --> 04:05:16.954 - subsidies And I think that was pretty clear During the course of those discussions that the city would 04:05:16.954 --> 04:05:23.626 - need to provide some subsidies for this infrastructure. So I Appreciate what councilmember Flaherty 04:05:23.626 --> 04:05:30.366 - said that this you know, let's recognize this is a change in policy but I think for this property is 04:05:31.618 --> 04:05:39.583 - It's you know, there have been various proposals over the last 30 years and they just haven't haven't 04:05:39.583 --> 04:05:47.392 - panned out until we were willing to To you know give some indication that yes, the city is going to 04:05:47.392 --> 04:05:55.279 - help fund the infrastructure So I will be supporting it tonight. Thank you. Thank you other comments 04:05:55.279 --> 04:06:01.214 - councilmember Stasberg Yeah, I think that councilmember Piedmont Smith said 04:06:01.474 --> 04:06:07.926 - Something very similar to what I was gonna say in terms of I really appreciate councilmember Flaherty's 04:06:07.926 --> 04:06:14.254 - words and this idea of like is this a new precedent that we're setting and how are we gonna make this 04:06:14.254 --> 04:06:20.520 - decision but you know, I spent a lot of time with the summit PUD a few years ago and one of the huge 04:06:20.520 --> 04:06:26.723 - issues were these roads that you know develop this this was in a PUD before and development of that 04:06:26.723 --> 04:06:30.942 - PUD stopped as soon as the developer had to build these roads and I 04:06:31.682 --> 04:06:38.856 - At the time, I think that we all were like, well, it's really important that this go on. And I don't 04:06:38.856 --> 04:06:46.029 - think in the council format it was highly discussed that what that would mean is some kind of public 04:06:46.029 --> 04:06:53.132 - subsidy for those roads. I think that that was glossed over. For this body, perhaps that discussion 04:06:53.132 --> 04:06:55.902 - happened far more behind the scenes or 04:06:56.130 --> 04:07:02.034 - You know with the developer and other parties that was not council because councils and really have 04:07:02.034 --> 04:07:08.055 - to decide that until like now And then similarly we'll have to kind of have similar discussions again 04:07:08.055 --> 04:07:14.018 - when We're asked to approve a bond related to what it is that we're gonna pay for and that is one of 04:07:14.018 --> 04:07:19.981 - the reasons why I was asking some of those detailed You know questions about like how much money are 04:07:19.981 --> 04:07:23.582 - we actually expected to get from this TIF? to try to kind of 04:07:23.714 --> 04:07:32.066 - Preface that just a wee bit in terms of the bond That is going to come to us next but I am prepared 04:07:32.066 --> 04:07:40.585 - to support this tonight in large part because I do want this development to be able to proceed and it 04:07:40.585 --> 04:07:49.271 - can't proceed without these roads and these roads are Going to be a huge piece of connectivity For that 04:07:49.271 --> 04:07:52.862 - area, you know south southwest ish side so 04:07:53.410 --> 04:08:01.072 - I do also appreciate mr. Russo's words. So it I mean it does feel a little bit at least in this format 04:08:01.072 --> 04:08:08.512 - For this body as a bait and switch. I suspect that it was talked a lot more about Behind the scenes 04:08:08.512 --> 04:08:16.621 - a couple of years ago than it was spoken about with this body. Thanks Thank you. Anybody else? councilmember 04:08:16.621 --> 04:08:17.662 - Rosenberger I 04:08:18.658 --> 04:08:24.795 - I guess from the beginning I've been a little bit on the same in the same boat as councilmember Flair. 04:08:24.795 --> 04:08:30.813 - Do you just that usually when we have a resolution or something we get a memo with it. And so I mean 04:08:30.813 --> 04:08:36.830 - today with even a council created resolution we had a memo with that which I appreciated. So I think 04:08:36.830 --> 04:08:40.286 - there were so many questions today too because city legal 04:08:40.578 --> 04:08:47.431 - did not provide a memo, so hopefully in the future that would be great. I just spent a lot of time up 04:08:47.431 --> 04:08:54.352 - here combing through 2024 packets looking for what was actually said around the summit PUD back in the 04:08:54.352 --> 04:09:01.137 - day. And yeah, I think it just took a lot longer because the packet was pretty sparse about what was 04:09:01.137 --> 04:09:02.750 - actually going on here. 04:09:03.970 --> 04:09:11.427 - Because I'm if everyone is supporting this like I'm happy to get on board. I think it is unclear if 04:09:11.427 --> 04:09:18.884 - this was Agreed on or not even tonight the the developer said it is in the PUD Thank you for saying 04:09:18.884 --> 04:09:26.564 - that and the mayor said it is not in the PUD. So I That gave me pause as well. I would say But thanks. 04:09:26.564 --> 04:09:31.486 - Thanks for this. It is exciting to have the things move along and 04:09:32.194 --> 04:09:40.539 - Hopefully we can have a broader conversation about it later. Thanks Thank you. Anybody else? Councilmember 04:09:40.539 --> 04:09:48.651 - Ruff Yeah, overall, I mean I don't recall that well the earlier meetings where the Beauty was approved. 04:09:48.651 --> 04:09:56.606 - I know I voted against it at that time But I'm persuaded by the comments tonight and I think I recall 04:09:56.606 --> 04:10:01.598 - pretty well from that meeting that there was a good argument to 04:10:01.826 --> 04:10:12.430 - to be made that there was an indication of partnership understanding of partnership between the city 04:10:12.430 --> 04:10:22.928 - and the developers on developing infrastructure these roads I I Sense I had that's my sense So I Do 04:10:22.928 --> 04:10:26.078 - want to say one related thing 04:10:31.394 --> 04:10:40.618 - At this point in my life after being in this town over 60 years The it's been said tonight By more than 04:10:40.618 --> 04:10:49.575 - one individual You know, this will bring lots of residents of Bloomington which benefits benefits us 04:10:49.575 --> 04:10:58.621 - in so many ways We never ask ourselves where does that end what's the yield what's the ideal size for 04:10:58.621 --> 04:10:59.774 - Bloomington? 04:11:01.314 --> 04:11:09.486 - 200,000 500,000 a million. Where does it stop? I can't see people who I often hear making this argument 04:11:09.486 --> 04:11:17.579 - ever coming to a point where they'd say oh, no, no, we don't we don't need anymore and I'm telling you 04:11:17.579 --> 04:11:25.829 - I've seen a lot of growth in this community over the last 60 some years and Not everything is good about 04:11:25.829 --> 04:11:30.622 - it. There are many downsides and there's a lot of people who 04:11:30.754 --> 04:11:43.420 - Just as many people who who don't want to see an expansion as do They're not generally speaking of a 04:11:43.420 --> 04:11:56.212 - having a strong voice strong economic influence or in prominent positions a lot of times but You know 04:11:56.212 --> 04:12:00.350 - The place sure as hell has grown 04:12:00.674 --> 04:12:08.283 - But wages are as much of a problem or more of a problem now than they were 40 years ago when RCA was 04:12:08.283 --> 04:12:15.892 - saying whatever I was here and I know that's not just a local problem, but Growth hasn't solved that 04:12:15.892 --> 04:12:23.502 - housing housing causes Even there aren't even as many good music venues in this town as I used to be 04:12:23.502 --> 04:12:28.926 - And there's certainly more crowds and just more and and that's not just 04:12:29.890 --> 04:12:36.607 - No, I don't know if we can talk about I don't know the stats well enough on On crime and other things 04:12:36.607 --> 04:12:43.192 - that come along with growing and growing growing into bigger city But I'm really tired of just this 04:12:43.192 --> 04:12:50.107 - denial that there are downsides and that there are a lot of people who don't agree with just the pursuit 04:12:50.107 --> 04:12:57.153 - of growing the community and that it automatically results in economic benefits I don't think is evidence, 04:12:57.153 --> 04:12:59.326 - you know big fast growing cities 04:12:59.650 --> 04:13:08.843 - Aren't places where a lot of people can be or want to be But again I voted against this PUD but I do 04:13:08.843 --> 04:13:17.944 - think a commitment or understanding there was that if it was approved the city would participate in 04:13:17.944 --> 04:13:27.774 - this infrastructure And that PUD has been approved Of course, so I'm going to go ahead and support this and 04:13:30.466 --> 04:13:39.129 - Thank you. Any other comments. Councilmember Piedmont Smith. Just a second bite at the apple here it'll 04:13:39.129 --> 04:13:47.543 - be short. There are thousands of people who commute into Bloomington from surrounding counties every 04:13:47.543 --> 04:13:55.956 - day for work and giving them a place to live within Bloomington will benefit us. Any other comments. 04:13:55.956 --> 04:13:59.038 - Will the clerk please call the roll. 04:14:01.698 --> 04:14:16.847 - Councilmember daily. Yes Rollo. Yes Ruff. Yes Rosenbacher. Yes clarity Yes Stossburg. Yes Piedmont Smith. 04:14:16.847 --> 04:14:27.422 - Yes Zulik. Yes, and it's sorry Yes, great with a vote of 9o that passes I 04:14:33.506 --> 04:14:45.915 - Move that ordinance 2026-06 be read by clerk by title and synopsis only There's been a motion and a 04:14:45.915 --> 04:14:58.572 - second will the clerk please call the roll I'm sorry was distracted. What's the motion? The motion on 04:14:58.572 --> 04:15:02.046 - the table is to introduce a 04:15:02.210 --> 04:15:21.771 - by title and synopsis only ordinance twenty twenty six oh six Okay, yes Rough no Rosenberger no clarity 04:15:21.771 --> 04:15:28.542 - Yes Stossberg No Piedmont Smith yes 04:15:31.938 --> 04:15:41.097 - Was that a yes? Sorry, that was a yes. Thank you. Sorry about that. Zulek? Yes. Asari? Yes. Great. With 04:15:41.097 --> 04:15:49.815 - a vote of six. Oh, I'm so sorry. Daly? Go ahead. Where am I? I thought you went first. Yes. Great. 04:15:49.815 --> 04:15:58.709 - Thank you. With a vote of six, three, that passes. Is there anyone from the administration who would 04:15:58.709 --> 04:16:00.030 - like to speak? 04:16:00.610 --> 04:16:11.382 - on ordinance twenty twenty six oh six Any updates madam chair? Yes. I'm so sorry. There were several 04:16:11.382 --> 04:16:22.474 - other things that needed to happen. Yes. Thank you for that Take it away a councilman. I Move that 2026 04:16:22.474 --> 04:16:30.046 - dash 060 red no, it already passed. No, I know I was confirming I know 04:16:30.178 --> 04:16:38.315 - Apologies everyone. It is late been working for 15 hours at this point Will the clerk please read by 04:16:38.315 --> 04:16:46.533 - title and synopsis only? Absolutely ordinance 2026-06 to amend the city of Bloomington zoning maps by 04:16:46.533 --> 04:16:55.154 - rezoning the 6.3 acre property from residential urban lot and residential multifamily within the transform 04:16:55.154 --> 04:16:56.926 - redevelopment overlay 04:16:57.026 --> 04:17:04.339 - to planned unit development and to approve a district ordinance and preliminary plan. The synopsis is 04:17:04.339 --> 04:17:11.795 - as follows. This ordinance amends the zoning of the property from residential urban lot and residential 04:17:11.795 --> 04:17:19.179 - multifamily within the transform redevelopment overlay to plan unit development. I move that ordinance 04:17:19.179 --> 04:17:22.334 - twenty twenty six oh six be adopted. Great. 04:17:22.466 --> 04:17:31.772 - Thank you now that that has officially been taken care of is there anyone from the administration who 04:17:31.772 --> 04:17:41.351 - would like to speak on this If okay if if the answer is no we can get started with reasonable conditions 04:17:41.351 --> 04:17:51.934 - Would anyone like to bring forward a reasonable condition to discuss? I Have a motion. Okay councilmember. Sorry. I 04:17:52.866 --> 04:18:02.830 - I'd like to move, but if you could give me a second to do it very correctly, I'm sorry. I'll just say 04:18:02.830 --> 04:18:13.381 - it this way. I'd like to move that we vote as one on every reasonable condition that we still have pending, 04:18:13.381 --> 04:18:16.702 - and that we vote to approve them. 04:18:21.538 --> 04:18:27.645 - Is that a motion that we can make counselor Allen? Yeah, I believe councilmember sorry is Trying to 04:18:27.645 --> 04:18:33.691 - make a motion to consider them as a whole which the board can do So if you would like to entertain 04:18:33.691 --> 04:18:39.858 - considering them as a whole in their present form as one discussion You can do that Thank you. Thank 04:18:39.858 --> 04:18:45.965 - you There's a motion on the floor to consider the reasonable the remaining reasonable conditions as 04:18:45.965 --> 04:18:47.614 - a whole is there a second? 04:18:56.674 --> 04:19:04.922 - separate the question if we get into an issue afterwards. I think we've discussed them just arguing 04:19:04.922 --> 04:19:13.252 - for the point here. Yes. Council member Flaherty. I'm not seconding the motion. I would support. The 04:19:13.252 --> 04:19:21.665 - reason why I didn't is because there are some reasonable conditions that are still in the packet that 04:19:21.665 --> 04:19:26.366 - I authored that I do not intend to move to adopt at all. 04:19:26.722 --> 04:19:34.434 - namely reasonable conditions seven and 11. And so we don't need to vote on those. I would be up for 04:19:34.434 --> 04:19:42.301 - voting on reasonable conditions eight, nine, 10 and 12 as collectively if folks were up for that. And 04:19:42.301 --> 04:19:50.321 - I think it could be relatively quick and we could always divide the question if needed. So I could make 04:19:50.321 --> 04:19:56.414 - that motion. I withdraw my motion and second council member Flaherty's motion. 04:19:57.506 --> 04:20:06.861 - Great, could you specify? I move adoption of reasonable conditions eight, nine, 10, and 12. Okay, is 04:20:06.861 --> 04:20:16.494 - there a second? Second. Great, thank you. Council Member Flaherty, would you like to take it away? Yes, 04:20:16.494 --> 04:20:26.590 - I'm glad to. So first, just a clarifying note, there was a packet of denim this afternoon that had a version 04:20:27.618 --> 04:20:34.166 - B and sorry, 8C and 9C and then updated the version 12. I think it was labeled 12C that probably, the 04:20:34.166 --> 04:20:40.843 - accounting got a little, as we had some good versions, you know, a little messy. So apologies for that. 04:20:40.843 --> 04:20:47.583 - But reasonable conditions eight, nine and 12 were in the packet addendum from this afternoon. Reasonable 04:20:47.583 --> 04:20:54.131 - condition 10 is unchanged from the packet addendum that went out yesterday. I will briefly cover each 04:20:54.131 --> 04:20:57.598 - of them and kind of where we landed and their impact. 04:20:58.658 --> 04:21:05.064 - Reasonable conditions eight and nine are about sidewalks. They are two paragraphs. So this is eight 04:21:05.064 --> 04:21:11.662 - and nine C. Paragraph eight says that the PUD standards and street sections will be updated to reflect 04:21:11.662 --> 04:21:18.132 - a six foot minimum sidewalk for all streets except Rogers and the lanes. And right of way dedication 04:21:18.132 --> 04:21:24.538 - will be increased as necessary to accommodate those changes. Additionally, what would be reasonable 04:21:24.538 --> 04:21:28.254 - condition nine is that the sidewalks bisecting block nine 04:21:28.514 --> 04:21:34.570 - in the East West and North South directions will be updated or reflect a minimum width of eight feet. 04:21:34.570 --> 04:21:40.686 - And that these sidewalks can be either within the public right of way or in a pedestrian and bicyclist 04:21:40.686 --> 04:21:46.623 - easement. And similarly, right of way dedication would be increased as necessary to accommodate the 04:21:46.623 --> 04:21:52.620 - change. This is based significantly on the conversations with the RDC last week. And I had, as noted 04:21:52.620 --> 04:21:57.310 - in the synopsis confirmation earlier this week from the planning director that 04:21:58.018 --> 04:22:06.177 - this change will not entail losing or forgoing any developable lots that are planned currently in the 04:22:06.177 --> 04:22:14.256 - PUD. Reasonable condition 10, I'll take questions on them at the end if that's all right. Reasonable 04:22:14.256 --> 04:22:22.655 - condition 10 is about tree plots. It says that all of the streets in the PUD need to include tree plots, 04:22:22.655 --> 04:22:27.614 - including the Wiley Street and Jackson Street cross-sections. 04:22:27.714 --> 04:22:34.529 - which would need to be updated to reflect a tree plot with a minimum width of five feet, which is consistent 04:22:34.529 --> 04:22:41.031 - with the transportation plan and the UDO. And there are specific allowances made for block eight, which 04:22:41.031 --> 04:22:47.408 - is the easternmost block on the north side of Wiley Street where the sidewalk may be basically a tree 04:22:47.408 --> 04:22:53.660 - plot. We may forego a tree plot as necessary to accommodate the sidewalk there because the existing 04:22:53.660 --> 04:22:56.286 - building gets pretty close to the street. 04:22:56.546 --> 04:23:02.263 - And again, right of way dedication as necessary to accommodate the changes. Finally, reasonable condition 04:23:02.263 --> 04:23:07.764 - 12 is on Rogers Street. It would call for the same right of way dedication we have planned in the PUD 04:23:07.764 --> 04:23:13.212 - now, but updating the street cross section to show a five foot tree plot and 10 foot sidewalk, where 04:23:13.212 --> 04:23:18.875 - currently it shows a five foot tree plot and five foot sidewalk. The 10 foot sidewalk is what's required 04:23:18.875 --> 04:23:24.430 - of general urban streets, which is what Rogers is classified as, and it's what we built further to the 04:23:24.430 --> 04:23:25.886 - north in the PUD. Finally, 04:23:26.050 --> 04:23:31.789 - The update that went out this afternoon on that condition gives extra flexibility in the immediate proximity 04:23:31.789 --> 04:23:37.211 - to the stairwell of the existing building. Technically there is room for a 10 foot sidewalk and a five 04:23:37.211 --> 04:23:42.476 - foot tree plot, but there's some grading issues. And as they actually get into it, it was requested 04:23:42.476 --> 04:23:47.846 - to the city engineer that they have some flexibility to reduce the width of the tree plot or sidewalk 04:23:47.846 --> 04:23:53.216 - in that immediate vicinity if necessary. So those four conditions regarding sidewalks and tree plots, 04:23:53.216 --> 04:23:55.006 - essentially in the PUD updated to 04:23:55.394 --> 04:24:02.289 - fit with the requirements of the transportation plan and the UDO requirements for subdivisions and rezones. 04:24:02.289 --> 04:24:09.057 - I believe these were consistent with conversations we had last week. They've had been reviewed and vetted 04:24:09.057 --> 04:24:15.506 - by the planning director and the city engineer who both confirmed that these would not have negative 04:24:15.506 --> 04:24:22.018 - impacts on the number of planned lots for housing in this PUD. That's all covered in the synopsis for 04:24:22.018 --> 04:24:23.742 - these regional conditions. 04:24:23.970 --> 04:24:30.812 - I'll stop there. And, oh, just I mentioned that reasonable condition 11 was being withdrawn. That was 04:24:30.812 --> 04:24:37.922 - the one that was about lanes, which I was initially bringing with the intent of making sure we had enough 04:24:37.922 --> 04:24:45.032 - space to do this, but ultimately it wasn't needed. And for other reasons, it didn't make sense to persist 04:24:45.032 --> 04:24:51.807 - with that reasonable condition. So, happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Council Member Rosari. 04:24:51.807 --> 04:24:53.886 - I move that we vote to approve 04:24:54.338 --> 04:25:03.715 - I forget the numbers all of these reasonable conditions on the basis that we've discussed them at length 04:25:03.715 --> 04:25:13.003 - and the and the changes reflect those discussions second The motion is already on the table what you're 04:25:13.003 --> 04:25:23.006 - doing is calling the question I call the question then Second which means nobody else can discuss anything That 04:25:23.586 --> 04:25:36.064 - There is a motion to call the question on the floor This is not debatable correct will the clerk please 04:25:36.064 --> 04:25:49.502 - call the roll That has to pass by two-thirds majority to right yes, it does Will the clerk please call the roll 04:25:53.378 --> 04:26:03.570 - Councilmember rough Motion to call the question To reasonable conditions to approve the package of reasonable 04:26:03.570 --> 04:26:13.114 - conditions to approve that reasonable conditions eight Yeah, the ones that Matt. Yes for councilmember 04:26:13.114 --> 04:26:22.750 - Flaherty worked so hard on that is the most compromised a lot on and I appreciate everything he did and 04:26:23.170 --> 04:26:29.378 - I will, I don't like this, but I like what he did and I'll vote yes for that reason. Point of order, 04:26:29.378 --> 04:26:35.954 - the motion, if I'm not mistaken, is whether or not we will have the vote on the merits of those reasonable 04:26:35.954 --> 04:26:42.101 - conditions. So this is just saying, are we ending debate, ending public comment, and then voting on 04:26:42.101 --> 04:26:47.817 - the merits? This is not itself the vote on the merits of the reasonable conditions, correct? 04:26:47.817 --> 04:26:52.734 - That is correct. Okay, just confirming, making sure we're all on the same page. 04:26:53.474 --> 04:26:59.838 - We're so confused. I think that I thought that right now we're voting on those reasonable conditions. 04:26:59.838 --> 04:27:04.830 - No, we we are voting to We're voting to vote. We're voting to call the question 04:27:05.154 --> 04:27:11.141 - A motion? I withdraw the motion. I withdraw the motion. I don't want to waste time. All I want is to 04:27:11.141 --> 04:27:17.068 - say we've already discussed these. So as quickly as we can, I think we should vote to approve them. 04:27:17.068 --> 04:27:23.055 - And then I'm going to make the same motion on every other reasonable condition that we have. I think 04:27:23.055 --> 04:27:29.220 - we should just approve them all and move on. But I'll withdraw the motion to avoid us having to discuss 04:27:29.220 --> 04:27:34.910 - procedures or to rob you from the opportunity to tell Councilmember Flaherty that he's awesome. 04:27:35.362 --> 04:27:43.676 - Great thank you council questions for councilmember flow actually first off. Does the petitioner have 04:27:43.676 --> 04:27:52.153 - any response to the updated? Reasonable conditions you can just shake your head if no We will interpret 04:27:52.153 --> 04:27:55.006 - that as you're cool with it though 04:28:16.898 --> 04:28:25.303 - Anna Killian Hansen Director of Housing and Neighborhood Development the one thing that I want to call 04:28:25.303 --> 04:28:33.626 - to your attention our consultant flagged that on the north pathway through the north-south trail that 04:28:33.626 --> 04:28:41.867 - runs through the middle of the PUD on block 9 if that council member Flaherty's Reasonable condition 04:28:41.867 --> 04:28:46.110 - is adopted Of course, it's a lot better than it was 04:28:46.242 --> 04:28:54.778 - We do end up losing three accessible parking lot parking spaces just FYI Not saying anything either 04:28:54.778 --> 04:29:02.631 - way, but just for your information. We are gonna lose three accessible parking spaces Thank 04:29:02.631 --> 04:29:10.142 - you councilmember, sorry Sorry, my hand was up by accident, okay councilmember Stasberg 04:29:12.994 --> 04:29:20.803 - This was discussed last time and the reasonable condition wasn't actually updated to it to reflect it 04:29:20.803 --> 04:29:28.688 - But there there I think is an issue with having a tree plot along Wiley Street because Wiley currently 04:29:28.688 --> 04:29:36.650 - has a 12 foot setback so I would like to Add an amendment to reasonable condition 10 be adding a number 04:29:36.650 --> 04:29:42.622 - four to say setbacks along Wiley in block 9 may be decreased as necessary and 04:29:42.882 --> 04:29:50.416 - Should say front setbacks Along Wiley in block 9 maybe decreased as necessary to accommodate the additional 04:29:50.416 --> 04:29:57.531 - right-of-way dedication And I'm sorry that We didn't manage to coordinate that earlier to put that in 04:29:57.531 --> 04:30:03.390 - there But I think that the intention with those setbacks was to give more space for 04:30:03.906 --> 04:30:11.546 - That side of Wiley between the street and where the houses start and the tree plot will do the same 04:30:11.546 --> 04:30:19.186 - thing as the setback would do but we need to give an allowance to The petitioner in order to reduce 04:30:19.186 --> 04:30:26.902 - that setback as part of this. So do I need to move to amend reasonable condition 10b? Attorney Allen 04:30:26.902 --> 04:30:33.854 - Yeah Councilmember Flaherty is that okay with you because that's your reasonable condition 04:30:36.034 --> 04:30:46.879 - Okay, so I would like to officially then move to amend reasonable condition 10b to include item number 04:30:46.879 --> 04:30:57.725 - four front setbacks along Wiley in block 9 May be decreased as necessary to accommodate the additional 04:30:57.725 --> 04:31:01.726 - right-of-way dedication Okay, there's 04:31:01.826 --> 04:31:09.849 - A motion and a second. Is this available as an amendment form in writing? I Think that we've amended 04:31:09.849 --> 04:31:18.190 - like this before and I was about to send I don't I don't know what we need to do to prepare that I Could 04:31:18.190 --> 04:31:26.292 - prepare it for you I mean if everybody's clear on the full text of what it is as amended and votes on 04:31:26.292 --> 04:31:31.614 - it It does need to be reduced to writing note. No doubt about that 04:31:31.746 --> 04:31:39.063 - But as long as everybody has notice about exactly what the text is going to be and how it's amended 04:31:39.063 --> 04:31:46.379 - and what you're voting on that we can Moralize that to writing as soon as possible Great. Thank you 04:31:46.379 --> 04:31:53.696 - in that case councilmember Stossberg. Could you please repeat the wording? Yep Front setbacks along 04:31:53.696 --> 04:32:01.598 - widely in block 9 may be decreased as necessary to accommodate the additional right-of-way dedication Great 04:32:01.762 --> 04:32:09.012 - Thank you. And just to make sure everybody's clear about that currently front setbacks along Wiley are 04:32:09.012 --> 04:32:16.051 - 12 feet and Front setbacks anywhere else in the development are to zero feet Great. Thank you. Does 04:32:16.051 --> 04:32:23.372 - anyone have any questions about this amendment? Okay Seeing there is no council questions. Would anyone 04:32:23.372 --> 04:32:30.270 - like to speak? Would anyone from the public like to speak on the proposed amendment specifically? 04:32:31.458 --> 04:32:40.415 - Sorry, we'll get there Not seeing anyone in chambers is there anyone on zoom Okay, great in that case 04:32:40.415 --> 04:32:49.460 - any council comments on this amendment councilmember rough Just like to agree with councilmember sorry 04:32:49.460 --> 04:32:56.222 - that councilmember Flaherty was awesome on this Great. Thank you Anyone else 04:33:05.218 --> 04:33:18.672 - Sorry, we passed Bob. Great. Thank you Okay, and in that case, will the clerk please call the roll? 04:33:18.672 --> 04:33:32.798 - On amendment one for reasonable condition 10 be Councilmember Ruff. Yes Rosenberger. Yes clarity Yes Yes 04:33:36.066 --> 04:33:48.496 - Yes, sorry Yes Yes Yes Great. Thank you that passes 9. Oh and now we are back to reasonable conditions 04:33:48.496 --> 04:34:00.564 - 8 9 10 and 12 Are there any more questions for councilmember Flaherty? Councilmember Piedmont Smith 04:34:00.564 --> 04:34:05.150 - This is a question for the petitioner 04:34:06.946 --> 04:34:15.122 - the Statement has been made by director of planning transportation that this change these changes will 04:34:15.122 --> 04:34:23.139 - not reduce the number of developable lots in Hopewell South Is it your contention that these changes 04:34:23.139 --> 04:34:31.077 - will decrease the number of units? And if so by how much oh I see Ali Thurman there Great. Hi guys. 04:34:31.077 --> 04:34:35.998 - I Thanks for your patience being with us late this evening. I 04:34:36.322 --> 04:34:42.453 - I can confirm that as far as we have reviewed, we think that we are good with the current conditions, 04:34:42.453 --> 04:34:48.764 - not removing any units. We think we may have a few units that we need to modify to be slightly different 04:34:48.764 --> 04:34:55.136 - units, but we think we can make that work. And I think as noted, we're gonna lose some accessible parking 04:34:55.136 --> 04:35:01.327 - spaces, and so we may need to do some work with engineering to see where those can be relocated, which 04:35:01.327 --> 04:35:03.070 - I think is something that we 04:35:03.202 --> 04:35:08.847 - We discussed, you know, it's that north south section. That's our only one we could narrow it at the 04:35:08.847 --> 04:35:14.436 - parking spaces. Um, we're, we're just very tight on those community parking spaces, which is one of 04:35:14.436 --> 04:35:20.137 - the places we're doing, um, our accessible spaces just for grading. Um, so that would be probably our 04:35:20.137 --> 04:35:25.502 - only comment, which I think, uh, Anna brought up. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Other questions. 04:35:27.266 --> 04:35:35.884 - Okay, we will move now to public comment on reasonable conditions eight, nine, 10. Oh, sorry, Council 04:35:35.884 --> 04:35:44.925 - Member Flaherty. Did have a question or comment. So I appreciate that feedback that received from Director 04:35:44.925 --> 04:35:53.543 - Killian. That is not feedback I'd gotten before this moment. I am happy to amend reasonable condition 04:35:53.543 --> 04:35:55.486 - nine to add a sentence 04:35:55.586 --> 04:36:03.387 - that would allow for that narrowing for the purpose of accessible parking spaces. So I think I would 04:36:03.387 --> 04:36:11.111 - like to do that. So I move that we amend reasonable condition 9C to add the following sentence. The 04:36:11.111 --> 04:36:18.835 - sidewalk running north south may be narrowed as necessary to accommodate accessible parking spaces. 04:36:18.835 --> 04:36:25.246 - Council Member Flaherty, I believe you cut out. Would you please repeat that? Yes. 04:36:26.242 --> 04:36:33.553 - Yes, I move that we amend reasonable condition 9C to add the following sentence. The sidewalk running 04:36:33.553 --> 04:36:40.864 - north south may be narrowed as necessary to accommodate planned accessible parking spaces. Thank you. 04:36:40.864 --> 04:36:48.533 - There's a motion on the table. Is there a second? Second. Thank you. Is there any discussion for amendment 04:36:48.533 --> 04:36:53.694 - two? Is there public comment on amendment two? This could be your time. 04:36:55.234 --> 04:37:03.076 - I am Kristen Weida. I am the CEO of Indiana Uplands Realtor Association And I just wanted to speak briefly 04:37:03.076 --> 04:37:10.552 - and very clearly about Hopewell and what your zoning and your amendment choices will actually produce 04:37:10.552 --> 04:37:18.027 - So if Hopewell is built under the current UDO requirements the site would support 29 homes because of 04:37:18.027 --> 04:37:24.990 - those requirements those homes are going to be large and costly with an average sale price and 04:37:25.218 --> 04:37:35.290 - of $700,000. If Hopewell is built under the proposed PUD without any of your amendments, the same land 04:37:35.290 --> 04:37:45.459 - would support 98 homes. Those homes are smaller, they're more efficient, and the average price of those 04:37:45.459 --> 04:37:53.086 - homes, $200,000. Nothing about the land changes. The difference is the rules. 04:37:54.594 --> 04:38:04.645 - Every additional requirement that you add to the development adds cost. The cost is passed directly 04:38:04.645 --> 04:38:14.797 - to the buyer, your constituent. Where requirements mean fewer homes and higher prices. So the choice 04:38:14.797 --> 04:38:23.742 - before you guys is simple. You can build 29 homes for $700,000 or you can build 98 homes 04:38:24.002 --> 04:38:33.187 - for $200,000. And I also want to address the conditions of requiring permanent affordability. While 04:38:33.187 --> 04:38:42.463 - affordability requirements are often well-intentioned, they can have unintended consequences because 04:38:42.463 --> 04:38:50.270 - those resale prices are capped. Homeowners will be unable to build meaningful equity 04:38:50.914 --> 04:38:57.428 - Even after years of mortgage payments and costly repairs, they may leave with very little money to put 04:38:57.428 --> 04:39:03.815 - into the next property. These homes can be harder to sell. They can be limiting families' ability to 04:39:03.815 --> 04:39:10.708 - move for jobs. Their health needs are changing circumstances. In practice, permanent affordability functions 04:39:10.708 --> 04:39:15.198 - much like long-term renting, restricting wealth building and mobility. 04:39:16.994 --> 04:39:22.965 - So the most effective way to help lower income starter families is not to lock them into permanent 04:39:22.965 --> 04:39:28.997 - restrictions, but to increase housing supply at all levels. So I urge you guys to accept the PUD as 04:39:28.997 --> 04:39:35.511 - proposed and give all your constituents a realistic chance to own a home and to build wealth for themselves 04:39:35.511 --> 04:39:41.964 - and future generations. Please do not add additional requirements that increase costs, that reduce supply, 04:39:41.964 --> 04:39:46.910 - and unintentionally harm the very families that these policies are meant to help. 04:39:47.938 --> 04:39:55.653 - The best path to affordability is allowing more homes to be built at all price points so families can 04:39:55.653 --> 04:40:03.218 - enter the markets they can move up over time and Share in the stability and opportunities that home 04:40:03.218 --> 04:40:10.933 - ownership provides Thank you very much would anyone else like to speak on amendment to Okay anyone on 04:40:10.933 --> 04:40:16.606 - zoom Great in that case we will go back to council comment on amendment to 04:40:17.826 --> 04:40:35.526 - Would anyone like to speak? Okay, in that case, will the clerk please call the roll on amendment two? 04:40:35.526 --> 04:40:47.326 - Sorry, Councilmember Rosenberger? Yes. Clarity? Yes. Stasberg? Yes. 04:40:48.322 --> 04:40:59.870 - Yes. Yes. Sorry. Yes. Daily. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. With a vote of nine oh amendment 04:40:59.870 --> 04:41:11.196 - to passes and now we will come back to council questions for reasonable conditions eight nine ten and 04:41:11.196 --> 04:41:18.302 - twelve. Are there any more questions. Great. Then we will go to 04:41:18.594 --> 04:41:24.027 - public comment on reasonable conditions 8, 9, 10, and 12. Would anyone in public chambers like to speak? 04:41:24.027 --> 04:41:29.356 - Please approach the mic. You will have three minutes. And if you could state your name for the record, 04:41:29.356 --> 04:41:34.996 - that'd be great. Yes, Jeff Richardson. I just want to say that with you folks meeting with the redevelopment 04:41:34.996 --> 04:41:40.429 - commission was modeling the best kind of behavior. That was one of the best meetings I've attended ever. 04:41:40.429 --> 04:41:45.965 - And I've been to a lot of meetings. And I just want to compliment you and really demonstrates that working 04:41:45.965 --> 04:41:48.190 - together, you can accomplish great things. 04:41:48.386 --> 04:41:55.730 - I hope the county takes notice of that, but I just want to acknowledge this is why tonight it ran so 04:41:55.730 --> 04:42:03.073 - smoothly. It was beautiful. This is beautiful. Thank you. Thank you for the kind words. Would anyone 04:42:03.073 --> 04:42:10.344 - else like to speak on reasonable conditions? Eight, nine, 10 and 12. Anybody on zoom? Great. And we 04:42:10.344 --> 04:42:17.470 - will come back to council comment. Would anybody like to speak? Great. Oh, council member. Sorry. 04:42:18.626 --> 04:42:28.427 - Just thanking council member Flaherty and the entirety of the mayor's office, the administration for 04:42:28.427 --> 04:42:38.325 - working so diligently on these. Thank you also to Ali. But really for making it, I mean, we've worked 04:42:38.325 --> 04:42:42.110 - through these now, I think over almost 04:42:42.402 --> 04:42:48.911 - going on three months, two and a half months. And just, I just really wanted to, I mean, I think a lot 04:42:48.911 --> 04:42:55.294 - of work has gone into getting these right, getting these in a way that's acceptable without lowering 04:42:55.294 --> 04:43:01.993 - the number of houses. We've just made amendments even to deal with the issue of parking. So I just really 04:43:01.993 --> 04:43:08.629 - wanted to thank Council Member Flaherty and all of you for all of your contributions to this and looking 04:43:08.629 --> 04:43:10.398 - forward to voting for this. 04:43:11.106 --> 04:43:18.447 - Thank you, anybody else? Council Member Flaherty. Yes, also just briefly, thank you to city staff who 04:43:18.447 --> 04:43:25.644 - were able to give feedback on these, especially recently, we were able to work quickly through some 04:43:25.644 --> 04:43:32.697 - outstanding questions and get to, I think, a stronger place and mutually agreeable place, thanks. 04:43:32.697 --> 04:43:39.390 - Thank you, any other comments? Will the clerk please call the roll? Council Member Flaherty. 04:43:41.058 --> 04:43:53.269 - Yes Stasburg. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Thank you. With a vote 04:43:53.269 --> 04:44:05.360 - of nine oh reasonable conditions eight nine ten and twelve pass. Yay. Would anyone like to introduce 04:44:05.360 --> 04:44:09.310 - any other reasonable conditions. 04:44:11.106 --> 04:44:18.729 - Councilmember Stasberg, I guess I'll move reasonable condition number 14. Okay reasonable condition 04:44:18.729 --> 04:44:26.810 - Oh, and there's been a second. So reasonable condition has been moved and seconded with the clerk. Please 04:44:26.810 --> 04:44:34.814 - call the roll. Oh my bad Go ahead Councilmember Stasberg This this is a reasonable condition that is new 04:44:34.914 --> 04:44:42.550 - It was mentioned last week kind of in the context of Councilmember Flaherty removing any of the lane 04:44:42.550 --> 04:44:50.186 - narrowing from his consideration. One of the things that I had brought up at the Planning Commission 04:44:50.186 --> 04:44:58.048 - level was a concern with the speed of the lanes being high, especially given that there's no sidewalks, 04:44:58.048 --> 04:45:03.038 - that these lanes would be shared by multiple types of road users. 04:45:03.138 --> 04:45:08.729 - And that there would also be people pulling out of parking spaces and things like that, that there could 04:45:08.729 --> 04:45:14.213 - just be the potential offender benders. So reasonable condition number 14 requests the petitioner work 04:45:14.213 --> 04:45:19.591 - with planning and transportation and engineering to design the lanes with a target speed of 10 miles 04:45:19.591 --> 04:45:25.182 - an hour, utilizing design elements intended to create low speed, high comfort environment for vulnerable 04:45:25.314 --> 04:45:37.185 - I did consult with planning transportation department and engineering department about the wording of 04:45:37.185 --> 04:45:49.289 - this and they approved that wording Great does the petitioner have any response to reasonable condition 04:45:49.289 --> 04:45:53.246 - 14? Fabulous council questions. I 04:45:57.474 --> 04:46:04.196 - Okay. Public comment on a reasonable condition 14. Anybody please approach the podium if you'd like 04:46:04.196 --> 04:46:10.380 - to speak. Please raise your hand on zoom if you'd like to speak. Looks like we got nothing. 04:46:10.380 --> 04:46:17.236 - Council comment. Would anybody like to share. Okay. Well in that case would the clerk please call the 04:46:17.236 --> 04:46:19.454 - roll on reasonable condition 14. 04:46:32.706 --> 04:46:49.285 - Sorry y'all councilmember Stasberg. Yes Piedmont Smith. Yes Zulik. Yes, I'm sorry Yes Nearly yeah. 04:46:49.285 --> 04:46:59.166 - Yes Rallo. Yes, rough. Yes Rosenberger. Yes and flirty Yes 04:47:02.146 --> 04:47:11.043 - Sorry, I didn't hear that Yes, thank you yay with a vote of nine zero that passes would anyone else 04:47:11.043 --> 04:47:20.829 - like to introduce reason a reasonable condition I Move to introduce reasonable condition for Okay, reasonable 04:47:20.829 --> 04:47:29.726 - condition for has been moved to introduce is there a second Sorry, I didn't think it was the second 04:47:35.874 --> 04:47:44.932 - This it didn't get updated It's really hard to get around to talking to everyone about it. I mean obviously 04:47:44.932 --> 04:47:53.403 - we can all talk about it here We are still working on a definition of permanent affordability to add 04:47:53.403 --> 04:48:02.125 - into this reasonable condition Councilmember Piedmont Smith and I met yesterday about it and then asked 04:48:02.125 --> 04:48:04.222 - I don't interim attorney 04:48:04.482 --> 04:48:15.552 - Allen for some definitions. So we got some things today. Well I can we can I think follow anyone's lead. 04:48:15.552 --> 04:48:26.200 - It could kind of go the way it is. It could wait and get amended. It's just it's been a lot I guess. 04:48:26.200 --> 04:48:31.998 - Questions comments. I'll add to that as a sponsor that 04:48:32.226 --> 04:48:39.571 - We also met with director Killian Hansen last week to try to figure out wording around selling second 04:48:39.571 --> 04:48:46.916 - mortgages and some other stuff and that wording just Doesn't have finality yet So I I am not sure how 04:48:46.916 --> 04:48:54.117 - much it's worth talking about now versus I mean we're just gonna I think have to postpone the whole 04:48:54.117 --> 04:48:59.518 - ordinance for another meeting to finish off the permanent affordability so 04:49:02.978 --> 04:49:09.665 - Councilmember, sorry Question are we not comfortable in seeing particularly that we've just amended 04:49:09.665 --> 04:49:16.419 - a couple of things by Doing it and speaking Can we not are we not comfortable to arrive at that type 04:49:16.419 --> 04:49:23.307 - of a conclusion tonight? with reasonable condition for I'm not comfortable with that I've talked about 04:49:23.307 --> 04:49:30.462 - it a couple different times with councilmember Rosenberger after the last over the last few days and if we 04:49:31.138 --> 04:49:37.827 - didn't have language over the last few days, I don't think that we're going to suddenly appear with 04:49:37.827 --> 04:49:44.516 - language at 11.25 at night. I would also chime in. That question makes me laugh a little, because I 04:49:44.516 --> 04:49:51.406 - think you encouraged us to push it if we needed to. So I thought it was totally OK to say we can't get 04:49:51.406 --> 04:49:58.430 - it done. Of course, we'd do it in one. I'm just saying, if we have the language, we can also just do it. 04:50:02.434 --> 04:50:12.547 - Move that we postpone reasonable condition for until May 6 Okay, there's been a motion and a second 04:50:12.547 --> 04:50:22.863 - on the table to postpone reasonable condition for until May 6th Would the clerk please call the roll? 04:50:22.863 --> 04:50:31.358 - It's just a procedural motion to postpone Would anybody like to make a comment then 04:50:34.050 --> 04:50:58.442 - Great. Will the clerk please call the roll? Councilmember Piedmont Smith. Yes Zulek no Sorry No Daily 04:50:58.442 --> 04:51:01.790 - yes Rallo yes 04:51:03.234 --> 04:51:20.311 - Yes Rosenberger. Yes clarity. Yes Stossburg. Yes Okay with the vote of seven to that passes So, I guess 04:51:20.311 --> 04:51:33.118 - ordinance 2026-06 will be continued in its entirety on mace We just continued 04:51:34.082 --> 04:51:39.978 - reasonable condition for with that motion. How would you suggest we vote on the entire thing that I 04:51:39.978 --> 04:51:45.932 - think I just have to move to continue ordinance twenty twenty six oh six to our next regular session 04:51:45.932 --> 04:51:52.064 - on May 6th. Okay. Council member Flaherty has his hand up. I was going to share a little bit more about 04:51:52.064 --> 04:51:58.313 - reasonable conditions for folks awareness. I think I anticipate there's a motion to postpone the adoption 04:51:58.313 --> 04:52:01.438 - of the ordinance until our next regular session. But 04:52:01.794 --> 04:52:08.329 - Just for clarity on a few things that are in the packet, reasonable conditions six, which we already 04:52:08.329 --> 04:52:14.929 - adopted. I anticipate bringing a motion to rescind reasonable conditions seven, which is about energy 04:52:14.929 --> 04:52:21.399 - efficiency. I anticipate not moving as I mentioned before. And in lieu of reasonable conditions six 04:52:21.399 --> 04:52:27.934 - and seven, I'm seeking a written commitment covering those topics of electrification and efficiency. 04:52:28.354 --> 04:52:34.910 - of which there was a draft in the most recent packet addendum that came out today. I would rather not 04:52:34.910 --> 04:52:41.465 - vote on that today though, since we are seemingly postponing until a future meeting because there was 04:52:41.465 --> 04:52:48.021 - still at least one substantive question I would like to dig into further in conjunction with staff or 04:52:48.021 --> 04:52:54.577 - in collaboration with staff. But I wanted folks to be aware of that additional context and anticipate 04:52:54.577 --> 04:52:57.662 - the procedural steps when we next take this up. 04:52:59.458 --> 04:53:08.674 - Thank you Well, I guess we have the full ordinance before us are there any other motions Councilmember 04:53:08.674 --> 04:53:17.800 - Stasberg Once again try to move to continue ordinance 2020 606 to our next regular session on May 6th 04:53:17.800 --> 04:53:26.926 - second Okay, there's been a motion and a second any comments councilmember Asari Just to two comments 04:53:26.926 --> 04:53:29.342 - on it. Um, one one is that 04:53:30.114 --> 04:53:38.351 - I assume that there's people in the room waiting. I can't see them, so maybe they're not. And who might 04:53:38.351 --> 04:53:46.904 - want to give public comment? So just that as a consideration. And then just to address the earlier comment, 04:53:46.904 --> 04:53:55.141 - and I know we already voted for it, but partially why I thought we could move forward with a reasonable 04:53:55.141 --> 04:53:58.942 - condition for or even without the reason that I 04:53:59.650 --> 04:54:06.262 - over this meeting came to the realization of it is because of the clause at the end of it that requires 04:54:06.262 --> 04:54:12.620 - the administration to come back. But I mean, if there's substantive things for reasonable condition 04:54:12.620 --> 04:54:19.041 - seven, I mean, I guess that gives a lot of reason not to. But yeah, but that was sort of my thinking 04:54:19.041 --> 04:54:25.590 - is that it's sort of the same function at the end of the day that way. So that was sort of why I moved 04:54:25.590 --> 04:54:29.214 - in that way, Councilmember Rosenberger. Yeah. Thank you. 04:54:29.410 --> 04:54:37.216 - Happen because I do see somebody in chambers who would like to make a comment great Let's go to public 04:54:37.216 --> 04:54:44.871 - comment if you'd like to speak on Ordinance 20 2606 as a whole, please approach the podium and state 04:54:44.871 --> 04:54:52.449 - your name. You'll have three minutes Thank you, thank you Paul Russo again I thought we'd be having 04:54:52.449 --> 04:54:56.542 - public comment on amendment for just really wanted to 04:54:56.642 --> 04:55:05.694 - what I wanted to talk about. No surprise, I'm here to talk about land trusts again. And what I would 04:55:05.694 --> 04:55:14.657 - really like to do is have a clerk distribute this if possible. You may have seen this by email, but 04:55:14.657 --> 04:55:23.709 - this is a much improved version. And what I would like to say is that... I'll abbreviate my comments 04:55:23.709 --> 04:55:25.950 - in the interest of time. 04:55:26.242 --> 04:55:34.185 - We've been told that the best method to create permanently affordable housing Is by using silent second 04:55:34.185 --> 04:55:41.898 - mortgages with first rights of refusal? That was told to you a week ago As I've demonstrated in this 04:55:41.898 --> 04:55:49.841 - chart before you such a method fails in fewer than ten years while in comparison a community land trust 04:55:49.841 --> 04:55:53.278 - would succeed under identical conditions and 04:55:54.946 --> 04:56:02.057 - If you have any questions about this, you have my email. We'll probably be talking with the director 04:56:02.057 --> 04:56:09.098 - of housing development about this as well. In my research about community land trusts over the last 04:56:09.098 --> 04:56:16.279 - month or so, I guess, including conversations with CLT executive directors, it has become clear to me 04:56:16.279 --> 04:56:23.038 - that Hopewell offers Bloomington a golden opportunity that is the envy of other similar cities. 04:56:24.834 --> 04:56:34.109 - The two largest obstacles to land trust homes are land acquisition and mortgage lending. And yet here 04:56:34.109 --> 04:56:43.384 - we have, what is it, 25 acres? And we paid, the city paid six, six and a half million for it I think. 04:56:43.384 --> 04:56:53.204 - And I think by today's prices it's probably worth 25 million. We own the land. That big hurdle is overcome. 04:56:53.204 --> 04:56:54.750 - And Summit Hill, 04:56:55.074 --> 04:57:02.488 - Community Development Corporation has been working with two local lenders now to secure loans for buyers 04:57:02.488 --> 04:57:09.903 - with incomes between 50 and 80% AMI, whereas hopeful homes would be easier to finance because the buyers 04:57:09.903 --> 04:57:17.317 - would have incomes between 80% and 120% AMI under a community land trust. Once you get something started 04:57:17.317 --> 04:57:23.390 - with some momentum, every time there's an opportunity for land to build a land trust, 04:57:24.258 --> 04:57:30.226 - If you're ready to go, you can jump on that opportunity. That's what all these other people have been 04:57:30.226 --> 04:57:36.136 - telling me when I have conversations with them. There are some land trusts that get started with one 04:57:36.136 --> 04:57:42.162 - parcel, and they don't have philanthropic money to expand their land holdings, and they just sit there 04:57:42.162 --> 04:57:48.014 - for five or 10 years not growing. But the ones that are a little bit bigger to start with, which is 04:57:48.014 --> 04:57:49.886 - what HOPE will allow you to do, 04:57:51.938 --> 04:57:58.310 - would allow you to rival other places, such as State College, Ithaca. I can go on and on. Thank you. 04:57:58.310 --> 04:58:04.807 - There are other college towns all over the place that have done this. And we're way behind. Thank you. 04:58:04.807 --> 04:58:07.646 - Thank you. Would anybody else like to speak? 04:58:15.330 --> 04:58:21.242 - Wendy goodlet CEO at Habitat for Humanity of Monroe County I sent an email today, but I want to read 04:58:21.242 --> 04:58:27.153 - some of the remarks from that for the public as the only developer slash builder offering affordable 04:58:27.153 --> 04:58:33.182 - homeownership opportunities for households between 35 and 80 percent AMI in our community I would like 04:58:33.182 --> 04:58:39.152 - to provide some insights regarding the challenges of creating affordability at the Hopewell South PUD 04:58:39.152 --> 04:58:40.030 - and beyond and 04:58:40.898 --> 04:58:46.815 - First, permanent affordability restrictions can lead to several unintended consequences, the greatest 04:58:46.815 --> 04:58:52.790 - of which is limiting the equity a household can realize. Given that home equity represents the largest 04:58:52.790 --> 04:58:58.649 - proportion of wealth for U.S. households and that U.S. homeowners have an average net wealth that is 04:58:58.649 --> 04:59:04.566 - 400% greater than renters, we should allow homeowners at Hopewell the same opportunities as others in 04:59:04.566 --> 04:59:06.654 - our community to grow their equity. 04:59:07.586 --> 04:59:14.467 - The housing market in Bloomington is so supply-constrained that it is nearly impossible for an average 04:59:14.467 --> 04:59:21.281 - household, let alone a severely income-constrained household, to move out of a starter home. Locally, 04:59:21.281 --> 04:59:28.429 - 80% of the homes built by Habitat and sold are still owned by Habitat family. Rarely does Habitat family's 04:59:28.429 --> 04:59:34.174 - household income improve to such a degree that they can afford a more expensive home. 04:59:34.722 --> 04:59:40.517 - This is mostly attributed to Monroe County housing costs far outpacing incomes Due to the investments 04:59:40.517 --> 04:59:46.425 - both public and private that are required to keep habitat houses affordable Habitat implements measures 04:59:46.425 --> 04:59:52.106 - to ensure that those dollars are not transferred to the homeowner should they decide to sell during 04:59:52.106 --> 04:59:57.844 - their during the term of their mortgage the tools to achieve this are a second mortgage a forgivable 04:59:57.844 --> 05:00:01.310 - second promissory note and a grant of right of first refusal 05:00:01.826 --> 05:00:08.582 - Utilizing these tools habitat has successfully purchased fixed up and resold 19 homes to a second qualified 05:00:08.582 --> 05:00:15.213 - habitat family Thus maintaining affordability for the next family This process also maintains the quality 05:00:15.213 --> 05:00:21.719 - of the home Which is something that will not automatically happen with a deed restriction in most cases 05:00:21.719 --> 05:00:27.974 - due to the lack of equity Deed restricted properties are in need of expensive repairs when they are 05:00:27.974 --> 05:00:31.102 - sold to the next buyer affordability necessitates 05:00:31.266 --> 05:00:38.143 - Prioritizing outcomes if you want the highest number of low-income earners to have access to homeownership 05:00:38.143 --> 05:00:45.020 - Then as decision makers you need to reduce the barriers to building affordable units From an affordability 05:00:45.020 --> 05:00:51.704 - standpoint more asphalt and concrete mean higher development costs, which then push up the price points 05:00:51.704 --> 05:00:58.195 - of houses. I Also talk about our energy efficiency Commission councilmember Flaherty I'd be happy to 05:00:58.195 --> 05:01:00.766 - talk to you about about that as well as 05:01:00.962 --> 05:01:07.213 - But the number one issue affecting affordability in Bloomington is lack of supply. It is imperative 05:01:07.213 --> 05:01:13.840 - that you make it easier to build housing of all types. This is the most effective way to ensure long-term 05:01:13.840 --> 05:01:20.279 - affordability. Increasing supply eases demand, which drives down costs. Please be thoughtful about the 05:01:20.279 --> 05:01:26.655 - consequences of your decisions regarding permanent affordability. Thank you. Thank you. Would anybody 05:01:26.655 --> 05:01:29.406 - else like to speak? Anybody on Zoom? Great. 05:01:29.666 --> 05:01:37.458 - We will come back to council comment. Are there any motions councilmember Stasberg? I'll move to postpone 05:01:37.458 --> 05:01:45.177 - consideration of ordinance 20 2606 until our next regular session on May 6th Okay, there's been a motion 05:01:45.177 --> 05:01:52.675 - in a second to postpone ordinance 20 2606 to our next regularly scheduled session on May 6th Is there 05:01:52.675 --> 05:01:59.070 - anyone who would like to discuss anything? Great, will the clerk please call the roll? 05:02:00.610 --> 05:02:26.736 - No. Sorry. No. Daily. Yes. Rallo. Yes. Ruff. Yes. Rosenberger. Yes. Clarity. Yes. Stasberg. Yes. Piedmont 05:02:26.736 --> 05:02:29.694 - Smith. Yes. 05:02:31.458 --> 05:02:39.543 - Thank you with a vote of 7 to that passes an ordinance 20 2606 will be heard for I don't know fifth 05:02:39.543 --> 05:02:47.871 - or sixth time on May 6th, which is the day after election day. So don't forget to vote Okay, are there 05:02:47.871 --> 05:02:53.854 - any other motions on the floor There are two others but you don't have to 05:02:56.034 --> 05:03:07.473 - Just say there is a clerk's note that resolutions 20 2605 and 20 2606 will be referred to the next regular 05:03:07.473 --> 05:03:18.378 - session unless anyone is Feeling really passionate about introducing either of them going once Not if 05:03:18.378 --> 05:03:22.334 - they're not introduced If there's no 05:03:23.362 --> 05:03:30.225 - Objection I will move to additional public comment general public comment if you've already spoken in 05:03:30.225 --> 05:03:37.222 - a period of general public comment You may not speak but anyone who has spoken on a legislative related 05:03:37.222 --> 05:03:44.084 - Public comment you are more than welcome to speak during general public comment. Would anyone like to 05:03:44.084 --> 05:03:46.910 - approach the podium? anyone on zoom great 05:03:47.170 --> 05:03:56.567 - Going last time. Okay council or public comment has concluded last thing items on council schedule as 05:03:56.567 --> 05:04:06.240 - we said earlier the next regularly scheduled council meeting will be held on May 6th in council chambers 05:04:06.240 --> 05:04:13.886 - at 630 that is a Wednesday and there is a council hiring committee tomorrow at 530 05:04:13.986 --> 05:04:20.370 - In the allison conference room. So if you would like to watch us try to find new lawyers Please come 05:04:20.370 --> 05:04:27.071 - on down and hang out with us in allison conference room at city hall tomorrow Anything else councilmember 05:04:27.071 --> 05:04:33.392 - stossberg? There's a fiscal committee meeting on friday at 8 30 also in allison conference room And 05:04:33.392 --> 05:04:39.840 - it's also available on zoom if you want to zoom in in your pajamas Friday morning. Thank you fabulous 05:04:39.840 --> 05:04:42.558 - friday morning plans. Love it anybody else 05:04:44.226 --> 05:04:47.390 - Great I adjourn this meeting