WEBVTT 00:00:00.418 --> 00:00:11.529 - Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the most enjoyable thing to do on a Wednesday night, City Council 00:00:11.529 --> 00:00:22.323 - in Bloomington, Indiana. Hooray. Today's meeting, oh, I'm sorry, will the Honorable Clerk please call 00:00:22.323 --> 00:00:27.614 - the roll. Oh, I am. Councilmember Flaherty? Here. 00:00:31.650 --> 00:00:41.776 - I didn't, I just didn't hear him. That's all. Oh, it didn't hear. Okay. Let me try that. Council member 00:00:41.776 --> 00:00:51.707 - Flaherty here. Can you all hear me? Okay. His volume's not working, but we'll note it. Stasberg here. 00:00:51.707 --> 00:01:01.054 - Piedmont Smith. Zulick here. Sorry. Here. Daily here. Rollo rough here. Rosenbarger. Thank you. 00:01:01.602 --> 00:01:09.579 - All right, today we have a handful of reports, including a letter to the Redevelopment Commission, reports 00:01:09.579 --> 00:01:17.109 - from the Commission on Aging and Commission on Status of Women. We have two things for first reading 00:01:17.109 --> 00:01:25.310 - and two things for second reading. I'll just make a note about Ordinance 2026-12, which is to amend Title 15. 00:01:25.474 --> 00:01:32.072 - of the Bloomington Municipal Code that we're not able to pass that today. So we will be discussing it 00:01:32.072 --> 00:01:38.930 - should the body desire to discuss it, but we're not able to pass it today because we haven't yet received 00:01:38.930 --> 00:01:45.722 - a statutorily required report from the Transportation Commission. But other than that, we will be taking 00:01:45.722 --> 00:01:52.385 - all of those other things up for discussion, assuming that the body wants to do that. With that, there 00:01:52.385 --> 00:01:55.102 - will also be two times of public comment. 00:01:55.650 --> 00:02:02.385 - The rules as they usually are agendas are posted. Oh Theoretically the agendas are posted on the door, 00:02:02.385 --> 00:02:09.054 - but they are they are under okay fantastic And there's and there's ones here as well if you'd like to 00:02:09.054 --> 00:02:15.723 - follow along. Do we have any minutes for approval? We do not so we will move right on to reports from 00:02:15.723 --> 00:02:22.654 - council members and I'll start with councilmember Piedmont Smith if you'd like to go first Yes, thank you 00:02:22.914 --> 00:02:29.948 - As my report this evening, I'd like to read a letter addressed to the members of the Redevelopment 00:02:29.948 --> 00:02:37.052 - Commission. And well, I'll just read it and then we can say a few more words after the letter. Dear 00:02:37.052 --> 00:02:44.299 - members of the Redevelopment Commission, we the undersigned members of the Bloomington Common Council 00:02:44.299 --> 00:02:50.622 - are writing to clarify our position regarding the disposition of the College Square site 00:02:51.170 --> 00:02:57.228 - currently owned by the RDC and identified by the capital improvement board as the ideal location for 00:02:57.228 --> 00:03:03.466 - a new convention center hotel. In a May 6th, 2024 letter to you signed by eight of nine council members 00:03:03.466 --> 00:03:09.944 - and a December 15th, 2025 letter to you signed by four council members, members of the council communicated 00:03:09.944 --> 00:03:16.242 - to you that the college square property should only be used for the convention center project, including 00:03:16.242 --> 00:03:17.022 - a new hotel, 00:03:17.570 --> 00:03:24.396 - if the RDC recouped the monies it spent acquiring the site, which came to a total of $6,895,000. We 00:03:24.396 --> 00:03:31.358 - wish to state clearly that we are not opposed to the RDC's disposition of the site for an amount less 00:03:31.358 --> 00:03:38.252 - than the purchase price if significant public benefit can be gained, such as the preservation and or 00:03:38.252 --> 00:03:43.166 - provision of low-income housing. As the December 15th letter indicated, 00:03:43.266 --> 00:03:49.148 - There are multiple ways to leverage this property to advance affordable housing and enable downtown 00:03:49.148 --> 00:03:55.266 - residency for those who otherwise could not afford it. These options include one, developing affordable 00:03:55.266 --> 00:04:01.442 - housing on the site, two, exchanging the property for nearby land owned by the Monroe County government, 00:04:01.442 --> 00:04:07.324 - now the CIB, and then developing or preserving existing affordable housing there, or three, selling 00:04:07.324 --> 00:04:12.030 - the property at market rate and reinvesting the proceeds in affordable housing. 00:04:12.610 --> 00:04:18.801 - So that all is talking about the College Square site. In regard to option two, we recommend that the 00:04:18.801 --> 00:04:24.930 - May 18th proposal by Bloomington Homes for All and the Bloomington Democratic Socialists of America 00:04:24.930 --> 00:04:31.182 - Housing Working Group be considered, which would entail an exchange of property with the CIB to allow 00:04:31.182 --> 00:04:37.495 - a hotel on the College Square site. Creative solutions should be considered to maximize public benefit 00:04:37.495 --> 00:04:42.398 - and also facilitate the best location for a convention center hotel. Sincerely, 00:04:42.882 --> 00:04:52.817 - members of the common council who choose to sign on to this letter. So I think we have we have an exciting 00:04:52.817 --> 00:05:02.473 - opportunity here to do things differently than the status quo. We have multiple parts of this city lost 00:05:02.473 --> 00:05:12.222 - affordable housing to new development and this is an opportunity to preserve affordable housing and it's 00:05:12.354 --> 00:05:21.439 - In my view it's worth not recouping the amount of money that the RDC spent on the College Square site. 00:05:21.439 --> 00:05:30.259 - They would certainly the site of the Seminary Point housing is certainly worth something. We're not 00:05:30.259 --> 00:05:39.344 - sure how much it is no doubt worth a little bit less than College Square or the amount less is unclear 00:05:39.344 --> 00:05:41.726 - but but I still think that 00:05:41.954 --> 00:05:52.740 - The vision of preserving Seminary Point as affordable housing affordable business commercial property 00:05:52.740 --> 00:06:03.738 - and a community space is something that should be given a chance. And the only way that that can happen 00:06:03.738 --> 00:06:10.718 - at this point is if the CIB swaps the Seminary Point property for 00:06:11.138 --> 00:06:18.811 - the College Square property owned by the RDC. So that's what this letter intends to support. And I welcome 00:06:18.811 --> 00:06:26.341 - any other comments from council members if they'd like to chime in on this. I think there are a majority 00:06:26.341 --> 00:06:33.871 - who would sign on to this letter. I'm not sure of the structure this evening. I think that it's probably 00:06:33.871 --> 00:06:40.254 - not a vote. It's just whoever wants to sign on unless somebody wants to call for a vote. 00:06:40.834 --> 00:06:47.586 - So that is my report tonight. Excellent. Thank you so much, Councilmember. Any comments, additions, 00:06:47.586 --> 00:06:54.609 - anything that are any responses to that? Councilmember Dailey. Yeah, I just want to thank Councilmember 00:06:54.609 --> 00:07:01.294 - Piedmont-Smith for putting this letter together. I know there was a lot of work on it and several, 00:07:01.294 --> 00:07:04.670 - you know, a few different versions that went out. 00:07:04.994 --> 00:07:12.383 - Former version I did not sign on to because I did not think it went far enough. I think it has to be 00:07:12.383 --> 00:07:20.137 - a full land swap in order for it to be valuable. So I'm thankful for putting that full land swap language 00:07:20.137 --> 00:07:27.526 - back in there. So I support this and I'm happy to sign it. So thank you very much. I second that and 00:07:27.526 --> 00:07:33.598 - I also think that we should vote on it to send as a full body. Any other thoughts. 00:07:33.954 --> 00:07:40.514 - Folks, a hug. Council Member Flaherty. Thank you. First, can you hear me now? Yes, we can. Excellent. 00:07:40.514 --> 00:07:46.946 - Hey. Yeah. I'll echo the thanks to Council Member Piedmont-Smith and also to Blue Mission Homes for 00:07:46.946 --> 00:07:53.763 - All and the Blue Mission Democratic Socialists of America, who I think Isabelle, or sorry, Council Member 00:07:53.763 --> 00:07:59.166 - Piedmont-Smith said it very well, that the vision here is really quite laudable and 00:07:59.586 --> 00:08:05.381 - and something I'm excited to support. I think I want to speak a little bit to some of the reservations 00:08:05.381 --> 00:08:11.063 - I've had in this conversation, which is, I think, not new. In general, my view for many, many years, 00:08:11.063 --> 00:08:16.858 - since before we've been taking office, was that the food and beverage tax is the city's public subsidy 00:08:16.858 --> 00:08:22.652 - and contribution for the convention center project, including all things like a host hotel. And we've, 00:08:22.652 --> 00:08:28.222 - of course, talked about this in the past. And my concern here is that we're not just talking about 00:08:28.546 --> 00:08:34.121 - public expenditure to preserve affordable housing, which, of course, is terrific and something I've 00:08:34.121 --> 00:08:39.752 - wished that the RDC did more of, frankly. But we're also talking about public subsidy for convention 00:08:39.752 --> 00:08:45.327 - center that's TIF revenues. And how much is a little bit unknown because the properties were bought 00:08:45.327 --> 00:08:51.125 - at different times and, you know, we don't know, I don't think yet, their exact market values. But I've 00:08:51.125 --> 00:08:56.923 - had some reservations about, let's say, the Bunker Robertson property, former Bunker Robertson property 00:08:56.923 --> 00:08:57.982 - in College Square, 00:08:58.178 --> 00:09:03.264 - which were considerably more than the Seminary Point property, that we would just be subsidizing not 00:09:03.264 --> 00:09:07.998 - only the affordable housing, but also the convention center, which is something that I'm sort 00:09:07.998 --> 00:09:13.135 - of philosophically opposed to, because I think we set boundaries and we've sort of exceeded them. I'm 00:09:13.135 --> 00:09:18.171 - worried about future requests to exceed them. So all that said, again, I really support the vision. 00:09:18.171 --> 00:09:23.710 - And something Pastor Robert Piedmont-Smith said at the very end, that this is the only way to make it happen. 00:09:24.226 --> 00:09:31.220 - I'm not sure I fully agree with that notion. We had some really thoughtful emails from Bryce Green sharing 00:09:31.220 --> 00:09:38.018 - his views on this and also his conversations with the, I guess what the CIB has stated, but also I take 00:09:38.018 --> 00:09:44.619 - it with John Weikert, who is heading the CIB, essentially saying they're not interested in a half or 00:09:44.619 --> 00:09:51.221 - partial parcel at College Square, which is something I had pitched as perhaps viable if those values 00:09:51.221 --> 00:09:53.182 - were similar. In other words, 00:09:53.314 --> 00:09:59.366 - pay to subsidize affordable housing, we should not pay twice. And all of the hotels in downtown Bloomington 00:09:59.366 --> 00:10:05.194 - are on a half city block, totally viable in my mind. The CIB would still get the subsidy for land value 00:10:05.194 --> 00:10:10.910 - they wanted, but they essentially said, no, we don't want that. We want twice the subsidy. And absent 00:10:10.910 --> 00:10:16.851 - of a deliberative conversation and a negotiation of what's realistically on the table and what's fiscally 00:10:16.851 --> 00:10:21.726 - prudent, I don't take that at face value. The idea that the CIB simply wouldn't accept 00:10:22.018 --> 00:10:28.008 - a subsidy in the form of land of a half block rather than a full block. So that's the only thing that 00:10:28.008 --> 00:10:33.880 - gave me pause with all this, that I still have some reservations about. I would urge the, you know, 00:10:33.880 --> 00:10:39.811 - if deliberations and negotiations are entered into, I would just urge the RDC to be thoughtful about 00:10:39.811 --> 00:10:45.566 - fiscal stewardship and not unnecessarily giving away additional subsidy to the Convention Center. 00:10:45.826 --> 00:10:51.347 - But again, absent an actual conversation, which hasn't really been able to take place yet between the 00:10:51.347 --> 00:10:57.030 - relevant parties and decision-makers, you know, who exactly knows what that is. So just to say my piece, 00:10:57.030 --> 00:11:02.659 - those are the reservations still definitely opposed in general to us continuing to spend public dollars 00:11:02.659 --> 00:11:08.287 - from the city of Bloomington on the Convention Center project. But again, very much support the vision. 00:11:08.287 --> 00:11:13.700 - And without more details, you know, it's a little limited what we can really know at this time, and 00:11:13.700 --> 00:11:15.486 - I'm happy to support the letter. 00:11:15.586 --> 00:11:26.230 - Thank you. Thank you so much. Councilmember. Yes, thanks. I agree with my colleague, Councilmember Flaherty. 00:11:26.230 --> 00:11:36.289 - I think that in spirit, I would like to see this negotiation happen in terms of the specifics. I think 00:11:36.289 --> 00:11:45.566 - it's up to the RDC to negotiate that. And perhaps they can arrive in the middle somewhere, but 00:11:46.178 --> 00:11:55.279 - I think that it's important to try to save seminary point and maintain it for affordability. So that's 00:11:55.279 --> 00:12:04.646 - my main priority here and let the RDC you know negotiate from here. Thanks. Thank you so much. Councilman 00:12:04.646 --> 00:12:14.366 - Rallo. Any others comments. Anything else. Any motions. I move to allow public comment on this issue. Second. 00:12:14.946 --> 00:12:23.605 - There's a motion the second to have public comment on the letter to the Redevelopment Commission Any 00:12:23.605 --> 00:12:32.436 - kind any discussion Please councilman just a reminder that it'll take two-thirds majority because it's 00:12:32.436 --> 00:12:41.438 - a suspension of the rules In which case seeing no other discussion will the clerk please call the roll I 00:12:44.354 --> 00:12:58.604 - Councilmember Flaherty. Yes. Stasberg. Yes. Piedmont Smith. Yes. Zulek. Yes. Sorry. Yes. Daily. Yes. 00:12:58.604 --> 00:13:07.070 - Rallo. Yes. Ruff. Yes. All right. That motion passes eight. 00:13:07.170 --> 00:13:13.296 - Zero, so we'll now have a time of public comment. Can I just see a show of hands if people wanted to 00:13:13.296 --> 00:13:19.724 - make public comment on this letter? Okay, fantastic. If it's okay with you, just so we can keep it going, 00:13:19.724 --> 00:13:25.911 - you have the three minutes, but yield them back if you can. All right, so if you'll sign in, say your 00:13:25.911 --> 00:13:32.521 - name or alias for the record, and if there's anybody online, you can raise your hands, and we'll acknowledge 00:13:32.521 --> 00:13:34.462 - you shortly, first in chambers. 00:13:49.122 --> 00:13:55.630 - Good to go? All right. Hi, I'm Bryce Green. I represent Bloomington DSA, and I work with Bloomington 00:13:55.630 --> 00:14:02.461 - Homes for All. And I'd just like to thank everybody involved in getting this letter to where it is today, 00:14:02.461 --> 00:14:08.904 - and I thank you all for being as concerned about the prospects of saving Seminary Point as I am and 00:14:08.904 --> 00:14:15.348 - as these activists are. And I want to acknowledge the concerns that have been brought up throughout 00:14:15.348 --> 00:14:16.830 - this process about the 00:14:16.930 --> 00:14:23.674 - precedent it might set for boundary pushing of public subsidies for these major things. However, I think 00:14:23.674 --> 00:14:30.161 - that this case is exceptional enough that no one can really claim that it's a precedent for anything 00:14:30.161 --> 00:14:36.776 - that we can anticipate in the future. Unless there's some other grand bargain to save a bunch of units 00:14:36.776 --> 00:14:43.006 - of affordable housing in the future, no one's really gonna be referring to this as an example of 00:14:43.106 --> 00:14:51.428 - Why we should increase public subsidy to something like the convention senator. I just want to reiterate 00:14:51.428 --> 00:14:59.591 - the You know why this Letter is important the RDC has made it clear that they took the earlier letters 00:14:59.591 --> 00:15:07.595 - from City Council very seriously in determining whether or not to accept a land swap from the CIB in 00:15:07.595 --> 00:15:09.022 - the past our plan 00:15:09.282 --> 00:15:18.846 - our proposal of Homes for All and DSA is to have the CIB put an offer for College Square in which they 00:15:18.846 --> 00:15:28.596 - would be sold College Square at a nominal fee in exchange for them, contingent on them, the CIB, selling 00:15:28.596 --> 00:15:38.718 - Seminary Point to a mission-focused nonprofit for a nominal fee. Effectively doing the land transfer without 00:15:39.170 --> 00:15:46.516 - actually transferring the land, because that would encounter a bunch of bureaucratic hurdles, and time, 00:15:46.516 --> 00:15:53.932 - and time is something that we don't have right now. The leases for Seminary Point are set to be extended 00:15:53.932 --> 00:16:01.137 - to August 31st, but that's coming at us very quickly. And every second that it's unclear that there's 00:16:01.137 --> 00:16:09.118 - a solution on the table, more and more of the people and businesses in Seminary Point are making plans to leave. 00:16:09.474 --> 00:16:17.430 - If they all leave, that imperils the entire project as a whole. And so that makes this time factor extremely 00:16:17.430 --> 00:16:24.729 - important. We hope that in addition to this letter is excellent, and I know that you guys appointed 00:16:24.729 --> 00:16:32.174 - the RDC members with full faith and confidence. But I mean, this isn't done. I don't necessarily know 00:16:32.174 --> 00:16:37.502 - all of the RDC members' explicit positions, especially given this letter 00:16:37.634 --> 00:16:51.020 - But I'm hoping that this conversation doesn't stop with the letter but that you know You poke and prod 00:16:51.020 --> 00:17:04.277 - these people until we get what we need. Thank you so much next in chambers Yeah, go ahead hi, my name 00:17:04.277 --> 00:17:07.006 - is Barry herbers I'm 00:17:07.586 --> 00:17:14.341 - moved recently to the neighborhood near Seminary Square and the Seminary Point Apartments. And it's 00:17:14.341 --> 00:17:21.435 - a really lovely neighborhood in a lot of ways, and it's a really troubled neighborhood in a lot of ways. 00:17:21.435 --> 00:17:28.258 - And since I moved there, I've really fallen in love with the place. I walk to Friendly Beasts a lot, 00:17:28.258 --> 00:17:35.351 - take my dogs around, folks around there, pet them and stuff. But it's such a relief to know that there's 00:17:35.351 --> 00:17:37.310 - people in our government who 00:17:38.274 --> 00:17:44.229 - are as hopeful about keeping that place thriving and beautiful and communally oriented for people of 00:17:44.229 --> 00:17:50.302 - all different income brackets as I feel. So I just really want to say thank you guys for being in such 00:17:50.302 --> 00:17:56.552 - great communication with the activists around here. And it's really wonderful to hear you read the letter 00:17:56.552 --> 00:17:57.790 - out loud. Thank you. 00:18:12.162 --> 00:18:19.478 - My name is Sarah Wolford and I'm the housing solutions director at habitat for humanity I'm also a member 00:18:19.478 --> 00:18:26.932 - of Bloomington homes for all so housing is something that I'm very passionate about and I really appreciate 00:18:26.932 --> 00:18:34.040 - all of your all support and work and all of the conversations that we've had thus far to try to figure 00:18:34.040 --> 00:18:36.318 - out something that ends up being 00:18:36.578 --> 00:18:45.861 - Winnable solution for for everyone I also wanted to kind of announce a save the date for a presentation 00:18:45.861 --> 00:18:54.965 - Bloomington homes for all would like to give on Saturday June 20th Details to follow but just kind of 00:18:54.965 --> 00:19:04.158 - wanted to give an announcement you all will be invited as well as members of the CIB and RDC just so I 00:19:04.226 --> 00:19:11.963 - all of the decision makers and also people of the public can come and kind of have a presentation of 00:19:11.963 --> 00:19:20.236 - what we hope to bring to the community in regards to this incredible property and how we envision improving 00:19:20.236 --> 00:19:28.586 - it and kind of our hopes for the future. So thank you all so much for your support thus far and we continue, 00:19:28.586 --> 00:19:33.182 - we look forward to continuing working with you all. Thanks. 00:19:35.234 --> 00:19:45.360 - Next in chambers. Hi, I'm Matthew. I'm a therapist in town, but then also a part of Homes for All. Yeah, 00:19:45.360 --> 00:19:55.003 - just want to say thank you for your kind of collaborative angle that you wanted to take, keeping in 00:19:55.003 --> 00:20:02.814 - mind the RDC and kind of the ways that they're trying to think about it as well. 00:20:03.106 --> 00:20:11.118 - So just as a reminder, the land that we're trying to save is considered super affordable land. We're 00:20:11.118 --> 00:20:19.765 - talking 30% to 40% AMI being served just by this land alone, as well as four to five flourishing businesses, 00:20:19.765 --> 00:20:27.777 - nonprofits, that really would love to stick around and stay there and keep their communities. We had 00:20:27.777 --> 00:20:30.078 - an event a couple weeks ago. 00:20:30.338 --> 00:20:37.794 - We had almost 100 people come to that event and a couple thousand dollars raised just off of a couple 00:20:37.794 --> 00:20:45.250 - weeks and a couple flyers as well as Friendly Beasts hosting the space. It was a sight to see. It was 00:20:45.250 --> 00:20:52.779 - incredibly beautiful to see a whole community knowing about this issue that's going on as well as then 00:20:52.779 --> 00:20:58.846 - supporting it financially and bringing their friends and their colleagues to that. 00:20:59.554 --> 00:21:06.703 - Well, yes, I do want to say, yeah, we'll be sending an invite to the public meeting. We'd love for any 00:21:06.703 --> 00:21:13.643 - of y'all to be there. I do want to say, at least publicly, I don't think the RDC has spent a lot of 00:21:13.643 --> 00:21:20.792 - time negotiating with the CIB. This is something that the CIB was hoping that they would get with that 00:21:20.792 --> 00:21:26.622 - 30-day period, and then the RDC denied that. So I want negotiations to happen, too. 00:21:26.754 --> 00:21:32.487 - I hope that John Weierkart is bluffing and saying that, oh, I don't want half, you know, half the land, 00:21:32.487 --> 00:21:38.219 - but let's just, you know, that's where the negotiations need to happen to some extent. And I just think 00:21:38.219 --> 00:21:43.897 - that that's not necessarily happening, at least publicly, right? I don't know exactly what's happening 00:21:43.897 --> 00:21:49.629 - behind, but so please, I just, and it seems like y'all have already done so, but please encourage them, 00:21:49.629 --> 00:21:53.598 - make phone calls, like to encourage that negotiation process to happen. 00:21:53.698 --> 00:21:58.988 - because really the time is of the essence. Every day that we push this forward, the lease deadline comes, 00:21:58.988 --> 00:22:03.978 - which means that the businesses are gonna need to find new places and the tenants are gonna need to 00:22:03.978 --> 00:22:09.069 - find new places. Think about yourself if you had to find a new place in a matter of two months. You'd 00:22:09.069 --> 00:22:14.059 - be looking for a new place, and that's definitely the case if you're a business owner too. So if we 00:22:14.059 --> 00:22:18.750 - wanna keep and maintain the people on the land as well as the businesses, we have to act now. 00:22:19.138 --> 00:22:26.829 - So thank you so much for your time and any sort of things you can pull as well as conversations that 00:22:26.829 --> 00:22:34.519 - you can have to make this happen. But yes, appreciate you. Thank you so much. Is there anyone online 00:22:34.519 --> 00:22:42.591 - who would like to comment? Fantastic. All right. Well, we'll come back then. Any other? Please, honorable 00:22:42.591 --> 00:22:48.606 - clerk. No? OK. Any other comments or motions? I move that we vote on this. OK. 00:22:49.602 --> 00:22:56.838 - There's a motion in a second will the clerk please call the roll on the motion I have a question. So 00:22:56.838 --> 00:23:04.145 - please the motion is whether or not we vote or the motion is whether or not we approve the letter I'm 00:23:04.145 --> 00:23:11.667 - happy to just call a vote. How about I think that sounds a whole lot. Yes, unless there's unless there's 00:23:11.667 --> 00:23:12.670 - any objection 00:23:12.994 --> 00:23:18.575 - All right, because there has been a request for us to have a vote and just so that it's clear who's 00:23:18.575 --> 00:23:24.324 - who's saying yes to this Though I think it's already fairly clear But let's let's call a vote, please. 00:23:24.324 --> 00:23:29.905 - Will the clerk through smaller role? Do we need a motion to approve the letter? Okay What would you 00:23:29.905 --> 00:23:35.710 - like? Would you like a motion to approve the letter and then I'll just call what would be best? Well, I 00:23:36.386 --> 00:23:41.576 - Just to clarify, I just want to know exactly what the motion is. You have a motion and a second to take 00:23:41.576 --> 00:23:46.617 - a vote on the letter. It would be nice if it could just be clarified if you're making a vote to sign 00:23:46.617 --> 00:23:51.658 - the letter or if you're taking a vote to vote about signing the letter. That's all I need to know. I 00:23:51.658 --> 00:23:56.699 - will withdraw my motion and defer to President Asari. OK. Then will you make a motion to approve the 00:23:56.699 --> 00:24:01.690 - letter? I move that we approve this letter. Second. All right. There's a motion and a second for us 00:24:01.690 --> 00:24:04.734 - to approve this letter. Will the clerk please call the roll? 00:24:06.850 --> 00:24:16.538 - Yes councilmember Stossberg. Yes Piedmont Smith. Yes, Zulek. Yes. Sorry. Yes daily. Yes Rallo. Yes Resume 00:24:16.538 --> 00:24:25.770 - rough. Sorry. Yes and Flaherty Yes. All right. Thank you. That letter is approved 8-0 Thank you very 00:24:25.770 --> 00:24:34.910 - much for your work and thank you all for your efforts. Are there any other councilmember reports? I 00:24:36.770 --> 00:24:43.729 - Councilman Stossberg, thank you first I want to apologize just a second to Councilman repeat Matt Smith 00:24:43.729 --> 00:24:51.090 - because I got up in the middle of her report and in case you were wondering what I was doing I was relocating 00:24:51.090 --> 00:24:57.915 - a very small jumping spider that was crawling around on the desk and I I I like had a flashback to my 00:24:57.915 --> 00:25:03.870 - nature education days and when I think I'm gonna move this little guy outside, so anyway 00:25:04.674 --> 00:25:10.967 - My report though. I first wanted to say it is June and June is pride month. So happy pride to everybody 00:25:10.967 --> 00:25:17.019 - and Highlighting the pride fest for Bloomington, which is not until August It's August 22nd because 00:25:17.019 --> 00:25:23.433 - we wait until our student population has come back to town but there are lots of other local pride events 00:25:23.433 --> 00:25:25.854 - if or not quite local pride events, but 00:25:26.242 --> 00:25:32.896 - Regional pride events if anybody wants to attend those this month and in addition to that I wanted to 00:25:32.896 --> 00:25:39.745 - highlight I was reading through the Bloomington Volunteer Network Weekly email this week and Bloomington 00:25:39.745 --> 00:25:46.464 - pride is looking for board and committee members So if anybody out there is interested in being on the 00:25:46.464 --> 00:25:53.183 - board of Bloomington pride, which is not It's it's not a city of Bloomington board, right? It is their 00:25:53.183 --> 00:25:54.814 - own organization you can 00:25:54.978 --> 00:26:03.294 - Contact them at info at Bloomington pride org or there is a little short URL that that you can go to 00:26:03.294 --> 00:26:11.938 - it's it's HTTPS Semi-colon backslash backslash be town or bton dot in slash pride 26 So if anybody wants 00:26:11.938 --> 00:26:20.254 - to get involved with that event and that organization, that would be a great thing to do in June and 00:26:20.738 --> 00:26:26.844 - And then I also just wanted to highlight a couple of recent conversations I've had with constituents. 00:26:26.844 --> 00:26:32.889 - I had constituent meetings last weekend and several people talked about need for affordable housing, 00:26:32.889 --> 00:26:39.294 - which we just talked about in livable communities, which one of our other public commenters just mentioned 00:26:39.522 --> 00:26:46.186 - And safe streets and then enforcement of traffic laws So I told them all that I would announce that 00:26:46.186 --> 00:26:53.183 - those are some of the things that that some folks are concerned about over in district three And I think 00:26:53.183 --> 00:26:59.847 - that is all. Thank you fantastic. I'm just gonna extend councilmember comment by Three more minutes 00:26:59.847 --> 00:27:01.246 - council members like 00:27:01.890 --> 00:27:08.407 - Thank you. I just want to say happy pride and a quick reminder that the first pride celebration was 00:27:08.407 --> 00:27:14.990 - a riot. So keep making good trouble and thank you. Thank you so much. Any other comments? All right. 00:27:14.990 --> 00:27:21.898 - We'll move then straight along and thank you all for your incredible work to a report from the Commission 00:27:21.898 --> 00:27:24.766 - on Aging. Thank you so much for being here. 00:27:32.514 --> 00:27:40.910 - Hello my name is Dana Thompson and I'm the chair of the Commission on Aging. I think our slides are 00:27:40.910 --> 00:27:49.894 - going up there. You can see now I don't know how many of you have ever been to Commission on Aging meeting 00:27:49.894 --> 00:27:58.206 - but we tend to be kind of a rowdy bunch and we have had a lot going on the past year. I guess. OK. 00:27:58.402 --> 00:28:05.063 - So we've gone round and about with what we want to do as a commission, how we want to make impact, and 00:28:05.063 --> 00:28:11.530 - how we have really focused on that the last couple of years is in a couple of ways. The biggest way 00:28:11.530 --> 00:28:18.321 - has been advocacy and then some work on awareness, and we've done that in a number of ways. So we really 00:28:18.321 --> 00:28:22.654 - tried to focus on, of course, things like health and wellness, but 00:28:22.882 --> 00:28:29.384 - kind of the bigger picture of that, making sure that people know about the resources that are available 00:28:29.384 --> 00:28:35.636 - to them, making sure that they are engaged in social and recreational things, as well as just those 00:28:35.636 --> 00:28:42.013 - kind of senior needs that might come to mind for some people. So our mission really is to improve the 00:28:42.013 --> 00:28:48.328 - public awareness of the senior and aging community. So again, not just what they need, but also what 00:28:48.328 --> 00:28:51.454 - they are doing and contributing to our community. 00:28:51.650 --> 00:28:58.671 - So we like to celebrate their accomplishments and encourage programming in that area. We also like to 00:28:58.671 --> 00:29:05.692 - explore issues and concerns of older adults as opportunities for our community. So you can see all of 00:29:05.692 --> 00:29:12.644 - our commissioners up there. We've had a little bit of turnover, but we had a really strong board and 00:29:12.644 --> 00:29:17.118 - all of those commissioners were around for a few years at least. 00:29:17.378 --> 00:29:22.658 - One of the big things that we've been working on is our senior resource guides. So this was our 2.0 00:29:22.658 --> 00:29:27.990 - year for that. So we've heard from a lot of seniors in the community that, hey, we don't really know 00:29:27.990 --> 00:29:33.428 - what's available to us. We don't know who to ask. We don't have anything where that's all in one place 00:29:33.428 --> 00:29:38.813 - anymore. The things that people found online were not regularly updated. And so we worked really hard 00:29:38.813 --> 00:29:44.198 - to get a senior health care guide together that had information about different services available in 00:29:44.198 --> 00:29:44.990 - our community. 00:29:45.186 --> 00:29:51.193 - And then what we found from that was that a piece was missing, that it wasn't just about healthcare, 00:29:51.193 --> 00:29:57.259 - they also wanted to know what other opportunities were available for them. So we created what we call 00:29:57.259 --> 00:30:03.385 - our senior resource guide. So you can see they're differently colored but look very, very similar. And 00:30:03.385 --> 00:30:09.452 - these are on the commission page if anybody wants to share them or print them out for themselves. But 00:30:09.452 --> 00:30:15.102 - the resource guide focuses more on non-medical stuff. So where are the senior centers in town? 00:30:15.362 --> 00:30:22.606 - Where can I engage in lifelong learning? What transportation is available to me? Those kinds of things. 00:30:22.606 --> 00:30:29.710 - Myself and Sandra McGow, who some of you may know, who I think did this last year, also did a seminar 00:30:29.710 --> 00:30:36.745 - called Senior Living 101, which is something we will be doing regularly moving forward. So she and I 00:30:36.745 --> 00:30:43.710 - have both worked with seniors for a long time, probably like 40 years between us, I guess, or more. 00:30:43.810 --> 00:30:50.953 - And so this really is just one of those events where we help people tease apart all the mumbo jumbo 00:30:50.953 --> 00:30:58.096 - that's out there. What is assisted living versus nursing home? What is the power of attorney versus 00:30:58.096 --> 00:31:05.310 - a guardianship? Who the heck do I talk to when I wanna start with all that stuff? Woo, that's great. 00:31:05.310 --> 00:31:12.524 - I thought I did something. So we will continue to do that as well. With one of my other hats, I also 00:31:12.524 --> 00:31:13.310 - chair the, 00:31:13.506 --> 00:31:21.853 - dementia friendly Bloomington committee that's here in town. So if you didn't know, we were the first 00:31:21.853 --> 00:31:30.037 - dementia friendly community in Indiana. So go Bloomington. There's a slide before this slide. No, I 00:31:30.037 --> 00:31:38.221 - don't think so. Maybe it's after the slide. But we are also dementia friendly commission and we are 00:31:38.221 --> 00:31:42.558 - really interested in getting increased engagement in 00:31:42.786 --> 00:31:52.188 - dementia awareness in our city. So we are really encouraging city offices, other city commissions, councils, 00:31:52.188 --> 00:32:00.382 - whatever that are interested in that to take part in our dementia aware organization training. 00:32:01.218 --> 00:32:07.892 - through Dementia Friendly Bloomington. So that's one of the big, big things you can do to support our 00:32:07.892 --> 00:32:13.978 - mission. I think just collaborating with us. We really love to collaborate with other groups 00:32:13.978 --> 00:32:20.652 - and organizations in town and then just share our resources and use us as a resource as well. Is this 00:32:20.652 --> 00:32:27.327 - the one you thought was before? Okay. So these are, this is where we're going from here on out. So we 00:32:27.327 --> 00:32:30.206 - will continue to do that Senior Living 101. 00:32:30.530 --> 00:32:36.949 - session that I mentioned we will bring that dementia friendly training to folks at the city who might 00:32:36.949 --> 00:32:43.557 - be interested in that. We are also working on a project to highlight older artists within our community. 00:32:43.557 --> 00:32:49.662 - So I don't know if any of you have been to 50 plus expo over the last few years. There were some 00:32:49.890 --> 00:32:57.071 - really cool art spaces highlighting older artisans in Bloomington. And then we'll continue supporting 00:32:57.071 --> 00:33:04.534 - other efforts in the community and advocating for seniors in those spaces. So things like the Blue Zones, 00:33:04.534 --> 00:33:11.857 - things like Dementia Friendly. Yeah. That's why you thought it was before, because it's in there twice. 00:33:11.857 --> 00:33:18.334 - Any questions? I know I tend to talk fast. Yay, thank you. All right, Council Member Daley. 00:33:18.850 --> 00:33:25.048 - Thank you so much for this. That was really lovely and kind of impressive and awesome. So thank you 00:33:25.048 --> 00:33:31.804 - guys very much for all of that work. Can you tell me a little bit more about the dementia-friendly training? 00:33:31.804 --> 00:33:38.065 - Do you have details, like when, how long? Sure. So when is whenever you want to schedule it with us. 00:33:38.065 --> 00:33:44.263 - So we have several trained trainers that can deliver that. I think we're at around 40 in the Monroe 00:33:44.263 --> 00:33:47.486 - County area, people that can provide that training. 00:33:47.778 --> 00:33:54.146 - depending on conversation that happens in that training, it takes about an hour to an hour and a half. 00:33:54.146 --> 00:34:00.391 - So it's not super lengthy. It goes through a lot of the basics about what is dementia and what isn't 00:34:00.391 --> 00:34:06.882 - it, but also gives some tips on environment, communication, things like that. And when we schedule these 00:34:06.882 --> 00:34:12.941 - with a group, we really try to kind of tailor the conversation to how might this come up for you? 00:34:12.941 --> 00:34:17.022 - So yeah, we've been doing that training I think now a little over 00:34:17.250 --> 00:34:25.721 - 10 years in one format or another. Yeah, and we just updated it too, so you'd get the newest version. 00:34:25.721 --> 00:34:34.358 - Thank you. Yeah. Hi, thank you. I just want to say thank you for keeping the guides up to date, because 00:34:34.358 --> 00:34:42.829 - they are resources that I've passed on to different folks who have different needs in different ways. 00:34:42.829 --> 00:34:47.230 - And so I appreciate that they're updated. Thank you. 00:34:47.394 --> 00:34:56.946 - Glad that you're using them Has your commission talked about the possible closure of Kirkwood Avenue 00:34:56.946 --> 00:35:06.593 - We haven't actually that's That's an interesting topic of conversation for I think because we do talk 00:35:06.593 --> 00:35:16.334 - about transportation and walkability and accessibility Quite a bit, but we haven't talked specifically 00:35:16.334 --> 00:35:17.374 - about that 00:35:18.626 --> 00:35:27.296 - Well, we'd love to hear some feedback on it. Great. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Any other questions 00:35:27.296 --> 00:35:36.052 - online? I had a quick question, then, with the way that our population is increasingly skewed toward 00:35:36.052 --> 00:35:45.502 - older individuals. Obviously, the population is always older, I guess, getting older, but ours particularly. 00:35:46.178 --> 00:35:54.177 - And I've long thought about how do we how do we make sure that we're centering a significant portion 00:35:54.177 --> 00:35:57.662 - of our population and in our budget and and 00:35:57.762 --> 00:36:03.766 - updates to our UDO and the things that we're doing as a city. And so I'm interested if you had Blue 00:36:03.766 --> 00:36:09.830 - Sky and you could say, guys, do a thing just to sort of understand the sort of spaces where you feel 00:36:09.830 --> 00:36:16.074 - that there's gaps. What type of things would? It's almost always the same ones that we'll keep bringing 00:36:16.074 --> 00:36:22.077 - up. I think transportation is a big one. Not necessarily that it isn't available, but maybe that it 00:36:22.077 --> 00:36:23.038 - isn't available 00:36:24.450 --> 00:36:32.778 - Accessible in the right ways for older adults. I think that's one I think another is that when we think 00:36:32.778 --> 00:36:41.027 - of aging well the conversation tends to go back to medically and we forget that a big part of wellness 00:36:41.027 --> 00:36:49.275 - for all of us is Our ability to be around the people that we want to be around to to do the activities 00:36:49.275 --> 00:36:52.318 - that we want to do, you know to go to 00:36:52.802 --> 00:37:00.532 - to go eat on Kirkwood or to go to our place of worship or to see our grandkids or go to the mall and 00:37:00.532 --> 00:37:08.185 - not just at the prescribed times of Monday to Friday, nine to five or whatever people work on. So I 00:37:08.185 --> 00:37:16.068 - think considering when we're thinking of these big opportunities in Bloomington, whether it's housing, 00:37:16.068 --> 00:37:19.742 - whether it's recreation, whether it's business, 00:37:20.610 --> 00:37:26.716 - how that impacts seniors as well, because a lot of times when we give trainings, we hear back from the 00:37:26.716 --> 00:37:32.704 - people in our audience, oh, this would just improve things for everyone. It's sort of like if we are 00:37:32.704 --> 00:37:38.810 - making things more accessible for people with disabilities, we're probably making them more accessible 00:37:38.810 --> 00:37:44.264 - for the rest of us. I think there's some similar thinking when it comes to the older adults 00:37:44.264 --> 00:37:50.430 - in our population, is that if they are able to access these things, the rest of us most likely will be. 00:37:50.754 --> 00:37:58.125 - Well, right building for one or a hundred That's really helpful. That was really helpful. Thank you 00:37:58.125 --> 00:38:05.716 - so much, of course Thank you for listening. I appreciate it. Thank you for your time and thank you for 00:38:05.716 --> 00:38:13.160 - the work that you've done. Thank you We'll now have a presentation from the Commission on the status 00:38:13.160 --> 00:38:14.782 - of women Good evening 00:38:15.138 --> 00:38:21.186 - Hi, my name is Cece's falling and I'm commissioner on the status of women and thank you for allowing 00:38:21.186 --> 00:38:27.413 - us to present on the annual report for tonight So our Commission is comprised of nine volunteer members 00:38:27.413 --> 00:38:33.760 - with appointments from both the mayor and City Council. I recognize some of you Since 1974 the Commission 00:38:33.760 --> 00:38:39.808 - has been dedicated to advocating for equity and improving opportunities for everybody who identifies 00:38:39.808 --> 00:38:40.766 - as a female and 00:38:41.538 --> 00:38:47.251 - Our main focus area as we plan out our programs and initiatives for the year center around legislation, 00:38:47.251 --> 00:38:52.909 - community partnerships, and communication. We do this by monitoring policies and legislation, building 00:38:52.909 --> 00:38:58.457 - positive programming for the community and our youth, and maintaining strategic partnerships. All of 00:38:58.457 --> 00:39:04.115 - these opportunities allow us to understand the needs of people who identify as female in our community 00:39:04.115 --> 00:39:05.598 - and be advocates for them. 00:39:07.906 --> 00:39:14.499 - Some of our highlights from 2025 included the 2025 Women's History Month Luncheon, the third annual 00:39:14.499 --> 00:39:21.357 - Women's Market, and the largest Young Women's Leadership Summit yet. The Women's History Month Luncheon 00:39:21.357 --> 00:39:28.477 - celebrated our three 2025 Women's Achievement Award winners and a powerful keynote address by the president 00:39:28.477 --> 00:39:33.950 - of the Women's Fund of Central Indiana, Tamara Winfrey Harris. The Women's Market, 00:39:34.370 --> 00:39:40.492 - Had 30 vendors this year hundred of attendees and of those who responded to our feedback survey many 00:39:40.492 --> 00:39:46.795 - of them reported great sales for the day The young women's leadership summit was very special This year 00:39:46.795 --> 00:39:53.159 - both in terms of the number of attendees and the impact of the three sessions that focused on overcoming 00:39:53.159 --> 00:39:59.038 - barriers as we began looking into 2026 we identified several areas of growth and opportunity and 00:39:59.746 --> 00:40:04.936 - The Cost of the Women's History Month luncheon continues to rise each year and is largely funded by 00:40:04.936 --> 00:40:10.333 - sponsorships and ticket sales. We explored some grant opportunities for our luncheon this year in order 00:40:10.333 --> 00:40:15.731 - to help offset the cost, which was a huge help. In order to draw even more people to the women's market 00:40:15.731 --> 00:40:20.973 - later this summer, we will be ramping up our advertising and are also talking about new ways that we 00:40:20.973 --> 00:40:26.526 - could allow more vendors to participate. In addition, we've extended the market hours to 3 p.m. this year. 00:40:27.650 --> 00:40:33.300 - Based on the feedback and ideas we received from the students who attended the Young Women's Leadership 00:40:33.300 --> 00:40:38.788 - Summit in 2025, we look forward to continuing to create an intentional and meaningful program in the 00:40:38.788 --> 00:40:44.275 - fall of 2026. These are some of the ways in which the community can get involved and engage with the 00:40:44.275 --> 00:40:50.252 - commission. We would like to invite anyone with any interest in our mission to attend our monthly commissions 00:40:50.252 --> 00:40:53.566 - meetings and intend an event or program throughout the year. 00:40:55.234 --> 00:41:02.757 - Thank you again for allowing us to present this evening. I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you 00:41:02.757 --> 00:41:10.207 - so much questions and from council Thank you, what kind of cooperation and collaboration do you have 00:41:10.207 --> 00:41:17.730 - with MCC SC with the young women's summit I Think Marissa was better to handle that question Hi there 00:41:17.730 --> 00:41:23.262 - Marissa Parscott city liaison for the Commission on the status of women um 00:41:23.522 --> 00:41:32.955 - We coordinate with MCCSE, of course, and we lean on them to help get the word out to students to register. 00:41:32.955 --> 00:41:41.859 - And then, of course, they also help coordinate the logistics of getting the students from all of the 00:41:41.859 --> 00:41:50.764 - middle schools and both high schools here into council chambers. And they've been fantastic partners 00:41:50.764 --> 00:41:51.998 - in that area. 00:41:53.378 --> 00:42:03.704 - save us on transportation costs when they can by using some of their buses and teacher-driven buses 00:42:03.704 --> 00:42:14.031 - versus some of their bigger modes of transportation. So we certainly lean on them for those sort of 00:42:14.031 --> 00:42:21.982 - logistic purposes. And Lashondra McCoy, who is a resource officer with MCCSC 00:42:22.082 --> 00:42:31.021 - has been a huge help, especially the past two years. And I believe she was extremely instrumental in 00:42:31.021 --> 00:42:39.870 - getting all of the students, as many students as we had in 2025 in the room last year. So I'll give 00:42:39.870 --> 00:42:44.030 - a public shout out to her for that. Thank you. 00:42:44.290 --> 00:42:50.239 - On the question of legislation, and you said, I mean, I think maybe the federal one is maybe a little 00:42:50.239 --> 00:42:56.188 - more obvious, but at the local level, are there particular things that are priorities that we can act 00:42:56.188 --> 00:43:02.137 - on? I will have to probably get back to you a little bit on that, but I can tell you that that is our 00:43:02.137 --> 00:43:08.087 - primary concern, frankly, is working with the state of Indiana on our legislation. Obviously, yes, we 00:43:08.087 --> 00:43:12.286 - know that the federal government affects us as well, but one of our key 00:43:12.610 --> 00:43:18.840 - Items this year in 2026 when our councils in session was to spend that time to read through as many 00:43:18.840 --> 00:43:25.070 - of the Articles as we could regarding things that we felt would affect women disproportionately And 00:43:25.070 --> 00:43:31.300 - so it's a lot of work that is done in a very short amount of time And as we know the things that go 00:43:31.300 --> 00:43:35.038 - before them don't necessarily even make it to a vote and so 00:43:35.298 --> 00:43:42.187 - I think strategically thinking forward is about how can we support Indiana women, particularly Bloomington 00:43:42.187 --> 00:43:48.626 - women, when we have those state legislation come up and how can we support that way is honestly one 00:43:48.626 --> 00:43:50.622 - of our most critical missions. 00:43:51.458 --> 00:43:56.526 - Well, I certainly speak for myself only, but perhaps others feel this way as well. I love lists. And 00:43:56.526 --> 00:44:01.745 - so if you all ever have a here's an agenda, like you all need to pass these type of things, it's really 00:44:01.745 --> 00:44:06.814 - helpful because it gives us something to react to, something to work on. And so we welcome that type 00:44:06.814 --> 00:44:12.284 - of engagement from the commission, all of the commissions for that matter. I'm on the legislation committee, 00:44:12.284 --> 00:44:17.302 - and I'd be happy to send you lists. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Any other 00:44:17.302 --> 00:44:17.854 - questions? 00:44:19.010 --> 00:44:27.245 - All right, we will move swiftly along then. Do we have any reports from council committees? Seeing none, 00:44:27.245 --> 00:44:35.323 - we'll now move to the first of the best parts, which is first period of public comment for things that 00:44:35.323 --> 00:44:39.166 - are not on the agenda. If you'd like to comment. 00:44:39.426 --> 00:44:45.489 - Anybody like to comment if you just raise your hands. I know Okay, fantastic. Okay, so you'll have three 00:44:45.489 --> 00:44:51.379 - minutes Just sign in say your name or alias same thing online and you can take it away We'll start in 00:44:51.379 --> 00:44:53.342 - chambers and then we'll go online 00:45:04.802 --> 00:45:12.605 - Hi, my name's Kathy Berry, and one of my neighbors brought by an announcement of an exhibit of his artwork, 00:45:12.605 --> 00:45:19.902 - which opens this Friday, June 5th, at the Eiffel Gallery's 415 West 4th Street. It's a retrospective 00:45:19.902 --> 00:45:27.416 - called 60 Years of Art Making by Frank Young, and it's sculptures, prints, and paintings. And Mr. Young 00:45:27.416 --> 00:45:33.630 - and I have been neighbors for a long time. I have seen the beautiful things he makes, 00:45:33.762 --> 00:45:41.598 - And I know him to be a person who's contributed to the community in very many ways. He's very talented 00:45:41.598 --> 00:45:49.433 - person. So I just would like to say that any time this month starting Friday till the 30th stop by the 00:45:49.433 --> 00:45:57.345 - I fell gallery and I believe you'll get a treat. Thank you. Is there any comment or online. Anyone else 00:45:57.345 --> 00:45:58.334 - in the room. 00:45:59.010 --> 00:46:06.625 - Mr. M.G., I mean, we're disappointed. All right. Seeing none, we will move along. Are there any appointments 00:46:06.625 --> 00:46:13.681 - to boards and commissions? All right. Seeing none, we're making great progress. This is great. We'll 00:46:13.681 --> 00:46:21.296 - move on to legislation for first reading. Are there any motions? I move that ordinance 2026-13 be introduced 00:46:21.296 --> 00:46:28.702 - and read by the clerk by title and synopsis only. Second. There is a motion and a second. Any discussion? 00:46:30.018 --> 00:46:41.789 - Alright, will the clerk be calls the role in the motion? Yes, my apologies Councilmember Piedmont Smith 00:46:41.789 --> 00:46:53.107 - Yes Zulek. Yes. Sorry. Yes. Daily. Yes, Rallo Yes, Ruff. Yes clarity Yes Stasberg. Yes, that motion 00:46:53.107 --> 00:46:55.710 - carries eight zero. Oh 00:46:58.242 --> 00:47:06.352 - I move to discuss ordinance 2026 dash. Wait, sorry. Will the clerk please read? Oh, I'm so sorry. I 00:47:06.352 --> 00:47:14.543 - stepped on your toes. It's okay. They're sturdy. Um, so ordinance 2026 dash 13 to amend title two of 00:47:14.543 --> 00:47:23.382 - the Bloomington municipal code regarding loans between utilities. The synopsis is as follows. This ordinance 00:47:23.382 --> 00:47:26.302 - follows Indiana code section eight, 00:47:26.402 --> 00:47:33.714 - Dash 1.5 dash 3 dash 11 and allows for the wastewater and water Utilities to issue loans to one another 00:47:33.714 --> 00:47:41.097 - through the creation of a cash reserve fund in each utility Through which such loans can be funded Thank 00:47:41.097 --> 00:47:48.409 - you very much, are there any motions I motion to discuss legislation Second, thank you There's a motion 00:47:48.409 --> 00:47:54.174 - a second to discuss legislation 20 26 13 any discuss any discussion on motion and 00:47:55.298 --> 00:48:01.842 - Seeing none will the clerk please calls the roll Do we don't I forget I don't know I'm sorry This is 00:48:01.842 --> 00:48:08.386 - why we should have meetings every week. I get I get they get rusty All right, so there's a motion in 00:48:08.386 --> 00:48:15.189 - the second for us to discuss. It's now on the table. Is there somebody to present? Hello Katherine Sager 00:48:15.189 --> 00:48:21.863 - director utilities and I'm presenting I think that we do have to vote to discuss it Yeah, I think that 00:48:21.863 --> 00:48:23.742 - that's what we've been doing 00:48:24.002 --> 00:48:31.410 - Attorney Allen, would you like to? Clarify I Believe you introduce that you have the discussion and 00:48:31.410 --> 00:48:38.892 - then you vote on the actual main motion is Is how it's if you give me just a moment. I'll give you a 00:48:38.892 --> 00:48:44.670 - definitive answer. I'm sorry Kirk Bolden, do you have a thought about this? I 00:48:45.922 --> 00:48:52.016 - I honestly don't because this is a recent change and how you actually operated by thought you actually 00:48:52.016 --> 00:48:57.992 - did take a vote on whether or not to discuss it because you needed was it two-thirds people to agree 00:48:57.992 --> 00:49:03.908 - to Discuss I cannot recall. I'm so sorry My recollection was that we have to vote on it because you 00:49:03.908 --> 00:49:09.825 - know in case you don't want to discuss it on first reading Yeah in the the document procedures with 00:49:09.825 --> 00:49:14.558 - discussion of ordinance at first reading. It does not say that a vote is needed 00:49:16.354 --> 00:49:25.222 - Well, let's take a let me just call a vote just to just to make this go faster. So Well, there was a 00:49:25.222 --> 00:49:34.354 - motion and can can the court we call the roll on that, please? Councilmember Zoellick. Yes, sorry. Yes, 00:49:34.354 --> 00:49:43.134 - Daley. Yes, Rallo Yes, Ruff. Yes Flaherty Yes, Stasburg. Yes, and Piedmont Smith. Yes. Thank you. I 00:49:43.266 --> 00:49:51.820 - All right. Thank you. That motion carries. Please take it away with a nice presentation. Yes. Catherine 00:49:51.820 --> 00:50:00.702 - Zager director water utilities CBU. So I'm presenting ordinance twenty twenty six dash 13 to amend Title 2. 00:50:00.866 --> 00:50:09.300 - the Bloomington municipal code regarding loans between utilities specifically this will add a new section 00:50:09.300 --> 00:50:18.052 - to title to chapter 2.24 that follows Indiana code a dash 1.5 dash 3 dash 11 which will allow for municipally 00:50:18.052 --> 00:50:26.407 - owned utilities us to make loans between ourselves essentially so that we may make a loan from our water 00:50:26.407 --> 00:50:27.998 - cash reserve to our 00:50:28.322 --> 00:50:37.269 - Sorry from our wastewater utility to our water utility If you recall last year's budget presentation, 00:50:37.269 --> 00:50:46.831 - we reported a negative ENR indicating a deficit in our water and foreshadowed the need for a loan eventually 00:50:46.831 --> 00:50:57.182 - now here we are we have the need for the loan and in order to make this loan we need to Pass this ordinance amendment 00:50:57.314 --> 00:51:05.003 - to allow for the creation of a cash reserve fund in each utility in which such monies can be loaned 00:51:05.003 --> 00:51:13.308 - between the utilities. I'm happy to take any questions. Thank you. Do we have any council member questions. 00:51:13.308 --> 00:51:21.151 - Council member Stasberg who decides the interest rate for these loans and like whose benefit is it to 00:51:21.151 --> 00:51:25.918 - charge ourselves interest. There's no interest and we decide. 00:51:26.498 --> 00:51:34.105 - Okay, so you guys decide and the intention is to have them be interest free Yes, but it's just because 00:51:34.105 --> 00:51:41.860 - of like the legal bit of the documentation that you have to allow for the concept of interest Yes, okay. 00:51:41.860 --> 00:51:49.762 - Great. Thanks Councilmember Piedmont Smith So Director Zager you went kind of quickly so there's a deficit 00:51:49.762 --> 00:51:55.966 - in the water fund correct and you want to loan the water fund the water utility and 00:51:56.226 --> 00:52:04.271 - Money from the wastewater utility correct very temporarily As you know, we brought a water rate case 00:52:04.271 --> 00:52:12.554 - to council Between the water rate after that water rate case we should we will be able to pay back this 00:52:12.554 --> 00:52:20.997 - loan. It will be The loan will be for less than 12 months Where does that water rate case stand currently 00:52:20.997 --> 00:52:26.174 - We recently had our evidentiary hearing on Tuesday with the IORC 00:52:28.578 --> 00:52:38.463 - So what does that mean in the process? How many more months do you expect it to go? Yeah You know we 00:52:38.463 --> 00:52:48.347 - can still only estimate I don't have a firm date, but we are hope we are still on track to implement 00:52:48.347 --> 00:52:56.862 - rates in the fall Thank you other councilmember questions Councilmember Piedmont Smith 00:52:59.522 --> 00:53:08.008 - Okay. So since both the water and the wastewater utilities are rate payer funded how is it legal for 00:53:08.008 --> 00:53:16.579 - one utility to loan money to the other because not all water customers are also wastewater customers. 00:53:16.579 --> 00:53:25.569 - For example the wholesale water customers. So how is it okay to take the rate payer funds from one utility 00:53:25.569 --> 00:53:28.510 - and loan those to another utility. 00:53:29.698 --> 00:53:38.171 - So it is, in fact, a loan. We're not just moving the money. So because it's a loan, we must pay it back 00:53:38.171 --> 00:53:46.643 - to true it up. It's legal through the Indiana code that we referenced, section 8-1.5-3-11, which allows 00:53:46.643 --> 00:53:54.872 - us to create this cash reserve to take loans in and out of. It just increases flexibility in between 00:53:54.872 --> 00:53:58.782 - rate cases. Yeah, it's not a transfer of funds. 00:53:59.202 --> 00:54:07.748 - A loan that must be paid back. I understand that. Maybe I misspoke. It's a loan. And so I realized from 00:54:07.748 --> 00:54:15.801 - what you said a few minutes ago there is no interest rate. Correct. That helps as well. Yes. Yes. 00:54:15.801 --> 00:54:24.100 - Thank you. Council President sorry. Thank you so much. I was just curious about so. So I get as this 00:54:24.100 --> 00:54:25.086 - is written. 00:54:25.602 --> 00:54:33.080 - procedural, we're allowing something that's allowed in other places. But I'm curious about any risks 00:54:33.080 --> 00:54:40.706 - and then particularly to what happens if let's say utilities gives it to water, CBU gives it to sewage 00:54:40.706 --> 00:54:44.926 - or something like that and then one doesn't pay it back. 00:54:45.122 --> 00:54:52.180 - Does that then essentially become a subsidy that, you know, so I'm trying to understand the risk associated 00:54:52.180 --> 00:54:59.303 - with, because I mean, we're describing this like it is just money transferred between accounts, essentially, 00:54:59.303 --> 00:55:05.773 - that have to be structured as loans. I get that. But is there any risk associated with this? Sure, 00:55:05.773 --> 00:55:12.570 - of course. There's, you know, risk associated with this in that if there was not appropriate oversight, 00:55:12.570 --> 00:55:14.334 - that you could lead to one 00:55:15.906 --> 00:55:23.504 - Fund subsidizing the other I do believe that we have appropriate oversight between both this council 00:55:23.504 --> 00:55:31.252 - here and our USB who also recommended This adoption. Okay, and then and then in terms of the oversight 00:55:31.252 --> 00:55:38.774 - do all of those things come to the USB then when we create a new a new transfer between accounts or 00:55:38.774 --> 00:55:42.686 - what what's the approval process for and yes all of 00:55:43.010 --> 00:55:51.299 - All transfers and claims are approved through our USB. Okay. Awesome. Thank you. Any other council questions. 00:55:51.299 --> 00:55:59.287 - Council member Stasberg. Thank you. This is this might seem like kind of a weird question but I'm looking 00:55:59.287 --> 00:56:06.822 - at the way this is actually supposed to be implemented in our code in terms of that language. And I 00:56:06.822 --> 00:56:10.590 - mean this this is this is the sentence and I just 00:56:10.754 --> 00:56:18.794 - want to say in preface, I feel like this sentence makes zero sense to me. So if I was reading the code, 00:56:18.794 --> 00:56:26.524 - I would be like, what on earth does that mean? And so I don't know if that's my ignorance or if the 00:56:26.524 --> 00:56:27.838 - sentence is just 00:56:28.546 --> 00:56:35.275 - And kind of strange but anyway, it says a cash reserve fund is hereby created for each city-owned utility 00:56:35.275 --> 00:56:41.750 - and the utilities service department by its Bloomington Utilities Service Board shall hereafter carry 00:56:41.750 --> 00:56:48.288 - the same on the records of each city-owned utility by providing for monthly contributions or transfers 00:56:48.288 --> 00:56:52.414 - to the cash reserve fund of surplus earnings of each utility and 00:56:52.610 --> 00:56:58.678 - It's like the first part of the sentence seems like it doesn't go with the second part Like I have no 00:56:58.678 --> 00:57:04.866 - idea what's going on there So can either you explain that or maybe an attorney in the room be like yes, 00:57:04.866 --> 00:57:10.934 - this is the way the code language has to read Yes, I Do believe this is how it needs to read in order 00:57:10.934 --> 00:57:16.943 - to align with the Indiana code I will I believe Chris Wheeler isn't online so he may be able to have 00:57:16.943 --> 00:57:18.430 - a better explanation and 00:57:18.786 --> 00:57:27.494 - That would be great just because I mean, I know that sometimes like legally is is not easily interpreted 00:57:27.494 --> 00:57:35.788 - by non-legal people, but this seemed especially Duma best He's not Well, I mean I think this is the 00:57:35.788 --> 00:57:44.247 - first reading and so it'll go to second reading So if we could maybe just like look into that between 00:57:44.247 --> 00:57:48.062 - now and next week, that would be fantastic. I 00:57:49.090 --> 00:57:57.464 - Thank you. Council President Azari. Just a quick follow-up question about what other cities have done. 00:57:57.464 --> 00:58:05.675 - I think there was that reference to Columbus, for example. Is it normal to write into the code maybe 00:58:05.675 --> 00:58:13.887 - like a cap of interest rates or anything? Again, I'm not questioning what it is that we're trying to 00:58:13.887 --> 00:58:15.838 - do. I totally get that. 00:58:16.002 --> 00:58:21.936 - understand why we need to do that we should do that I'm supportive of it I'm just trying to make sure 00:58:21.936 --> 00:58:27.812 - that you know when we're all not here and you're not here and so many years that this is done in the 00:58:27.812 --> 00:58:32.990 - in the best way so would you would you welcome like an amendment for example that capped 00:58:33.826 --> 00:58:40.122 - let's say the percentage of loans that created a very clear, to Council Member Stasberg's view, a clearer 00:58:40.122 --> 00:58:46.240 - set of guidelines for how it's governed, for who decides at what times, like those type of, that level 00:58:46.240 --> 00:58:52.418 - of specificity? Or do you think that it's better at the level, I mean, maybe as a question for Attorney 00:58:52.418 --> 00:58:58.357 - Wheeler, do you think it's better at the sort of very light level? So yeah, just curious there what 00:58:58.357 --> 00:58:59.486 - your thoughts are. 00:58:59.618 --> 00:59:07.795 - So I do think you know we're open to putting certain like basically guardrails I think is what you're 00:59:07.795 --> 00:59:15.972 - saying you know regarding things like interest rates and caps. I do think that the way it's currently 00:59:15.972 --> 00:59:24.309 - written does provide a fair amount of flexibility for us to be able to especially if this were utilized 00:59:24.309 --> 00:59:28.798 - in order to fund potentially in a an emergency project. 00:59:28.898 --> 00:59:37.044 - This could be used in this way and any guardrails that you would put on it may Inhibit that but I can't 00:59:37.044 --> 00:59:45.111 - predict the future So, you know definitely be open to suggestions. Okay, fantastic. Thank you so much. 00:59:45.111 --> 00:59:53.101 - Thank you councilmember Rallo Yes, I'm looking for the amount of the loan what what is the amount? So 00:59:53.101 --> 00:59:58.270 - the amount of the loan is not in this ordinance. However, we have 00:59:58.594 --> 01:00:07.241 - Anticipating that the loan will be capped at four million dollars So that is like not to exceed four 01:00:07.241 --> 01:00:15.888 - million dollars and we anticipate that we will not need to use all of that Okay, thank you any other 01:00:15.888 --> 01:00:24.534 - questions Okay, I believe we go to council comment now because we're discussing well because I think 01:00:24.534 --> 01:00:26.846 - we do Any council comments 01:00:29.282 --> 01:00:36.548 - In that case, we will go to public comment on this specific ordinance. If anyone would like to, 01:00:36.548 --> 01:00:44.420 - thank you, Director Zager. If anyone would like to speak on this ordinance, please approach the podium. 01:00:44.420 --> 01:00:52.518 - Looks like nobody. Anybody on Zoom? Oh. In that case, if you could state your name for the record, please. 01:00:52.518 --> 01:00:57.438 - You'll have three minutes, and you'll be able to unmute shortly. 01:00:59.746 --> 01:01:09.291 - Good evening, my name's Eric Ost, and I just had a quick question. If the loaned amount is not spent 01:01:09.291 --> 01:01:18.647 - in its entirety, what happens to the balance of the loan? That's my question, or comment, comment. 01:01:18.647 --> 01:01:28.286 - Thank you. Thank you. I think maybe just for next time. Thank you. Okay, it appears that there are no 01:01:28.482 --> 01:01:40.056 - Other comments? Anybody else on Zoom? Chris said he was on Zoom. What's his name on Zoom? Maybe we're 01:01:40.056 --> 01:01:51.631 - having some Zoom difficulties today. Maybe he's on there as like lawyers or something like that. Yes, 01:01:51.631 --> 01:01:56.510 - I bet that's it. I bet that's it. Exactly. 01:01:56.738 --> 01:02:06.337 - But what if a municipal lawyer? Is attorney Wheeler on Zoom? Yes, I'm on Zoom, but I wasn't able to 01:02:06.337 --> 01:02:16.127 - unmute earlier when questions were being asked of me. I'm also unable to turn my video on, but that's 01:02:16.127 --> 01:02:23.326 - all right. You guys don't need to see me. I don't have any public comment. 01:02:24.194 --> 01:02:31.932 - But if the loan doesn't get used up and there's still a balance left, it's going to get used to pay 01:02:31.932 --> 01:02:39.670 - back the remainder of the loan that needs, it'll be used as part of the payback of the loan back to 01:02:39.670 --> 01:02:47.717 - the utility that it loaned from. It's not like the utility will keep the money. Great, thank you. Okay, 01:02:47.717 --> 01:02:49.342 - Council Member Ruff. 01:02:50.786 --> 01:02:58.037 - Yeah, I just had a question for I didn't realize we're gonna have attorney wheeler Accessible to us. 01:02:58.037 --> 01:03:05.360 - So I didn't ask this question earlier and I don't know if he's the best person to ask the question to 01:03:05.360 --> 01:03:12.683 - or But What what does one say as a representative like one of us is someone who might say the purpose 01:03:12.683 --> 01:03:17.278 - of the utility is not for any of the separate utility funds and 01:03:17.506 --> 01:03:26.807 - revenue streams to generate a large amount of excess That's not that's not the purpose of it it's just 01:03:26.807 --> 01:03:36.017 - basically, you know deliver the service cover costs You should be looking at not raising rates rather 01:03:36.017 --> 01:03:41.886 - than Just what what does one say to that? Argument I'm wondering 01:03:46.338 --> 01:03:53.593 - Well, I understand what you're trying to say, Councilman. We're not in the business of making money. 01:03:53.593 --> 01:04:00.849 - We're in the business of having the rate payers pay for the cost of the service provided. But in the 01:04:00.849 --> 01:04:08.033 - way economics is working, when we get a rate case, it increases the amount of the, and we do it, as 01:04:08.033 --> 01:04:16.222 - you recall, we do it staggered. So every other year, a different utility is before the board for a rate increase. 01:04:16.386 --> 01:04:23.805 - When that rate increase comes in necessarily that utility starts to realize more money in its coffers 01:04:23.805 --> 01:04:31.078 - than it is spending. And so it's got an opportunity to help the other one that's lagging behind. So 01:04:31.078 --> 01:04:38.497 - we had a wastewater rate case increased its rates. The water rate has not yet increased and we are in 01:04:38.497 --> 01:04:43.806 - a bind and would like to have a loan paid over from wastewater to water. 01:04:44.354 --> 01:04:51.769 - This statute allows for that kind of flexibility. And so if somebody were concerned about whether this 01:04:51.769 --> 01:04:59.184 - is legal, we would simply direct them to pay pay some mind to the fact that our state legislature felt 01:04:59.184 --> 01:05:06.887 - it was necessary to allow municipalities and their utilities to have this flexibility when it's in between 01:05:06.887 --> 01:05:13.438 - rate cases. Thank you. Thank you for that very clear answer. Thank you. Is there a motion. 01:05:19.234 --> 01:05:26.289 - Would you like to make a comment? Just a brief one. I'll just say, generally, super supportive of this, 01:05:26.289 --> 01:05:33.140 - I think. I mean, it makes sense. I mean, to colleagues, I don't know what the sort of feeling in the 01:05:33.140 --> 01:05:40.060 - room is. I'd like to explore just doing a couple of just very minor cleanup clarifying things. But to 01:05:40.060 --> 01:05:42.366 - be honest, we could also do that. 01:05:42.754 --> 01:05:52.774 - later So I'd be happy to vote for it today if anybody else felt felt that way, but generally generally 01:05:52.774 --> 01:06:02.599 - supportive Councilmember Piedmont Smith Since attorney Wheeler is online, maybe he could clarify the 01:06:02.599 --> 01:06:11.646 - passage that councilmember Stossberg was puzzling over earlier that I also find puzzling and 01:06:12.930 --> 01:06:21.013 - Yeah, what what you're reading there is basically lifting the language from the statute itself and putting 01:06:21.013 --> 01:06:28.870 - it into this ordinance. It's merely following the actual language in the statute. It's trying to define 01:06:28.870 --> 01:06:36.726 - the fact that this ordinance will allow the utilities to create these funds. Each one of them will have 01:06:36.726 --> 01:06:42.014 - their own fund and it's trying to explain that those funds that those 01:06:42.818 --> 01:06:51.754 - funds get populated by specific monies that each utility realizes. It's wordy, it's not easily understood, 01:06:51.754 --> 01:07:00.355 - but that's the way the statute reads, and that's why we decided just simply to use the statute so that 01:07:00.355 --> 01:07:08.038 - we don't find ourselves inadvertently crosswise with it. Thank you. Councilmember Stosberg. 01:07:08.038 --> 01:07:12.798 - On that vein, since Mr. Wheeler's online now, it's like, 01:07:13.602 --> 01:07:22.738 - Could that still align with the language of the statute and perhaps be two sentences instead of one 01:07:22.738 --> 01:07:31.874 - long sentence? I don't see why we couldn't make two sentences if that were to end up making it read 01:07:31.874 --> 01:07:41.101 - easier for everybody. I guess I think that there's the possibility that it could be easier if it was 01:07:41.101 --> 01:07:42.654 - broken down into 01:07:42.978 --> 01:07:50.998 - more sentences than one very long wordy one. And so to that end I guess I would make the motion to move 01:07:50.998 --> 01:07:59.019 - this to second reading at our next meeting on June 10th. Second. OK. There's been a motion and a second 01:07:59.019 --> 01:08:07.193 - to postpone this reading to June 10th our next regularly scheduled council meeting with the clerk. Please 01:08:07.193 --> 01:08:08.350 - call the roll. 01:08:18.882 --> 01:08:29.751 - Yes. Rallo? Yes. Ruff? Yes. Flaherty? Yes. Stosberg? Yes. Piedmont-Smith? Yes. Zulek? Yes. Asari? Yes. 01:08:29.751 --> 01:08:41.043 - Thank you. Thank you. With a vote of 8-0, that passes, and I will give control back over to our president. 01:08:41.043 --> 01:08:47.902 - Thank you so much. All right. We'll keep moving on. Any motions? 01:08:48.002 --> 01:08:58.940 - I move that ordinance twenty twenty six dash fourteen be introduced and read by the clerk by title and 01:08:58.940 --> 01:09:09.878 - synopsis only second. There's a motion and a second any discussion. Seeing none. And the clerk recalls 01:09:09.878 --> 01:09:17.630 - the roll. Yes. Councilmember Rallo. Yes. Ruff. Flaherty. Yes. Stossberg. 01:09:17.762 --> 01:09:32.337 - Yes, Piedmont Smith. Yes, Zulek. Yes. Sorry. Yes, Bailey Yes, thank you Any of them I'm sorry. Will 01:09:32.337 --> 01:09:41.374 - the clerk please read? Eventually, yes ordinance 2026 dash 14 01:09:44.578 --> 01:09:50.761 - to amend Title 2 of the Bloomington Municipal Code entitled Administration and Personnel to require 01:09:50.761 --> 01:09:57.252 - Councilmember sponsorship of legislation under Chapter 2.04. The synopsis is as follows. This ordinance, 01:09:57.252 --> 01:10:03.373 - sponsored by Councilmember Piedmont-Smith, adds a new paragraph to the Bloomington Municipal Code, 01:10:03.373 --> 01:10:09.865 - Section 2.04.270, to require Councilmember sponsorship of each item of legislation except for the annual 01:10:09.865 --> 01:10:12.894 - budget legislation and appropriation ordinances. 01:10:14.146 --> 01:10:23.157 - Thank you so much. Any motions. I move to discuss ordinance twenty twenty six dash fourteen Second, 01:10:23.157 --> 01:10:32.438 - there's a motion in a second with a clerk. We call the roll Yes councilmember rough, yes Flaherty Yes, 01:10:32.438 --> 01:10:39.646 - Stasberg Yes, Piedmont Smith. Yes, Zulek. Yes. Sorry. Yes, Daly. Yes, Rallo Yes 01:10:40.258 --> 01:10:47.198 - Thank you. All right. Who would like to present on this? I assume customer Smith. Go ahead. Yes. 01:10:47.198 --> 01:10:54.640 - Thank you. So this ordinance would add a paragraph in Bloomington Municipal Code that reads as follows. 01:10:54.640 --> 01:11:01.795 - No proposed ordinance or resolution shall be considered by the council unless sponsored by a member 01:11:01.795 --> 01:11:09.308 - of the council. Exceptions no council member sponsorship shall be required for the annual budget related 01:11:09.308 --> 01:11:10.238 - legislation. 01:11:10.370 --> 01:11:17.634 - nor for appropriation ordinances brought forward outside the annual budget process. So currently the 01:11:17.634 --> 01:11:25.186 - mayor's administration can bring forward legislation. It doesn't have to have any council member sponsor 01:11:25.186 --> 01:11:32.450 - it. They present it and that's it. This idea of having a council member sponsor was discussed by the 01:11:32.450 --> 01:11:36.478 - committee on council processes actually I have to think 01:11:36.962 --> 01:11:47.531 - Last year's member of that committee council member Flaherty for bringing it forward and then we discussed 01:11:47.531 --> 01:11:57.607 - it this year with the committee and unanimously approved this ordinance on May 21st. The reasoning is 01:11:57.607 --> 01:12:04.126 - that it it can help prevent misunderstanding and lack of clarity. 01:12:04.322 --> 01:12:11.910 - of legislation if at least one council member has read it first and advise if there's more context needed 01:12:11.910 --> 01:12:19.283 - to understand it or more late laypeople's terms to understand it or if there was some some aspect that 01:12:19.283 --> 01:12:26.513 - the administration from the executive branch perspective did not consider and should have considered 01:12:26.513 --> 01:12:33.886 - before it comes to the legislative branch. So we think that this will this will improve communication. 01:12:34.114 --> 01:12:42.296 - At least one member of council will have their name put on the legislation. It shouldn't change anything 01:12:42.296 --> 01:12:50.245 - as far as who presents the legislation. The sponsor isn't even necessarily committing to vote for it. 01:12:50.245 --> 01:12:57.726 - It would be odd if they didn't but you never know. And in my memo I have more details as to the 01:12:57.986 --> 01:13:06.033 - of many other communities do things this way. Either something comes through a city council committee 01:13:06.033 --> 01:13:14.000 - or a sponsor council members required to sponsor. They kind of just make sense as a legislative body 01:13:14.000 --> 01:13:22.283 - that somebody on this body would sponsor like it's done in the state house and and in the in Washington. 01:13:22.283 --> 01:13:23.230 - And then I. 01:13:23.682 --> 01:13:31.014 - Put a couple of examples from last year in in my memo of items that I think would have benefited from 01:13:31.014 --> 01:13:38.705 - having a council sponsor council member look at them before they came to us because there was some context 01:13:38.705 --> 01:13:45.965 - missing and some some other language that was not clear and that came forward and got messy. So that 01:13:45.965 --> 01:13:50.494 - is the legislation. Happy to take any questions any questions. 01:13:54.402 --> 01:14:05.402 - Councilmember Rallo. Well, yes, I mean, this is kind of more of a comment, Councilmember Piedmont-Smith, 01:14:05.402 --> 01:14:16.087 - but, you know, sponsorship, you know, does generally imply support. However, in this case, that is an 01:14:16.087 --> 01:14:20.382 - adoption of whatever the legislation is. 01:14:21.986 --> 01:14:31.279 - It seems to me another thing to sponsor it for deliberation. So it's, it's rare for me not to vote in 01:14:31.279 --> 01:14:40.573 - the affirmative to introduce an item because I think that in most cases, everything should, you know, 01:14:40.573 --> 01:14:49.502 - even if I don't support it, you know, we're, we're a legislative body and it deserves debate. So. 01:14:50.690 --> 01:15:00.279 - My question is is it really should it should it be considered rare as you were saying not to support 01:15:00.279 --> 01:15:10.058 - what you would sponsor in this case. I don't know if it'll be rare or not. I don't think that's really 01:15:10.058 --> 01:15:19.742 - relevant to whether we pass this legislation or not. I guess time will tell. I mean we can maybe ask. 01:15:20.066 --> 01:15:27.246 - members of or the deputy mayor who's here. But it seems to me that it would make sense that the mayor's 01:15:27.246 --> 01:15:34.218 - administration would approach a council member whom they thought would support the legislation. They 01:15:34.218 --> 01:15:41.122 - have choice of nine people. They probably wouldn't go to somebody who would just grudgingly sponsor 01:15:41.122 --> 01:15:48.094 - it so that it would got discussion. They would probably go to somebody who likes it in some way. But 01:15:49.282 --> 01:15:57.413 - whether it's rare or not for a sponsor to vote against doesn't seem relevant to whether we pass this. 01:15:57.413 --> 01:16:05.624 - Yes. And so you could imagine cases where it fails just because there is no sponsor. So it never comes 01:16:05.624 --> 01:16:13.596 - before the body. I have trouble imagining that but I suppose it could happen. Are there examples of 01:16:13.596 --> 01:16:17.662 - legislation that have been voted down unanimously. 01:16:20.130 --> 01:16:30.458 - Yes and one of them is in my memo that was the city of Bloomington utilities septic disposal rates that 01:16:30.458 --> 01:16:40.587 - all of us voted against largely in my view because it was so confusing and there were outdated and in 01:16:40.587 --> 01:16:48.830 - outdated assumptions were made and the septic haulers were not fully consulted and 01:16:49.218 --> 01:16:56.467 - Other things so I mean that to me that was an instance where it would have been better to have a sponsor 01:16:56.467 --> 01:17:03.992 - Which probably would have delayed it coming to us, but it would have more thoroughly vetted that legislation 01:17:03.992 --> 01:17:10.965 - So are you saying is your concern that something won't even get discussed because there's no sponsor 01:17:10.965 --> 01:17:18.146 - You know, I've always believed that the council should be controlling its own schedule so I'm favorable 01:17:18.146 --> 01:17:18.974 - to this but 01:17:19.234 --> 01:17:27.329 - I guess what I'm thinking is that if there's confusion that one is a sponsor of legislation and yet 01:17:27.329 --> 01:17:35.504 - votes against it, I just wanted to clarify that because I think it might be confusing for, say, just 01:17:35.504 --> 01:17:43.599 - citizens watching it, you know, because it is a departure from what we have been doing in the past. 01:17:43.599 --> 01:17:49.022 - But anyway, unfavorable. So thank you for answering the questions. 01:17:50.594 --> 01:18:02.020 - Thank you so much. Other questions. All right. Any council comment. Seeing none and we'll go to public 01:18:02.020 --> 01:18:13.225 - comment. You'll get another chance. Anybody like to comment on ordinance 20 26 14. Take it away. Hi. 01:18:13.225 --> 01:18:17.662 - I'm speaking as a member of the public. 01:18:17.858 --> 01:18:23.723 - express my concern for the logic and reasoning provided by Councilmember Piedmont-Smith to support the 01:18:23.723 --> 01:18:29.417 - passage of Ordinance 2026-14. I can concede that legislation sponsorship may have its merits in the 01:18:29.417 --> 01:18:35.282 - broader context of governing Class II cities in Indiana and in governing the U.S. Congress and Indiana 01:18:35.282 --> 01:18:41.033 - General Assembly. However, I disagree that sponsorship operates in these contexts as a mechanism for 01:18:41.033 --> 01:18:44.734 - increasing the transparency of information to the general public 01:18:45.890 --> 01:18:51.132 - I disagree that sponsorship procedurally guarantees fewer amendments that will be made on a piece of 01:18:51.132 --> 01:18:56.529 - legislation. I disagree that sponsorship would improve communication between the mayor's administration 01:18:56.529 --> 01:19:01.719 - and members of the council. And I disagree that the sponsorship will benefit the public at large. I 01:19:01.719 --> 01:19:07.324 - also take issue with this assessment that this ordinance is not expected to have a major impact on existing 01:19:07.324 --> 01:19:12.099 - city finances. Without a respect for time, I'm going to limit the depth of my remarks to my 01:19:12.099 --> 01:19:14.590 - first disagreement, because I think it's easily 01:19:14.722 --> 01:19:20.646 - the easiest claim to challenge quickly. I'm skeptical that many people here think that the U.S. Congress 01:19:20.646 --> 01:19:26.626 - utilizes a sponsorship policy to maximize or ensure the transparency of information around their process. 01:19:26.626 --> 01:19:31.422 - Sponsorship mechanically operates as a form of permission. It's a simple logic gate. 01:19:31.810 --> 01:19:37.095 - In context where legislators must make priority decisions about how to spend their time wisely, they 01:19:37.095 --> 01:19:42.485 - rely on sponsorship to discriminate against legislation that no member is willing to champion. So it's 01:19:42.485 --> 01:19:48.032 - a simple strategy for ensuring popular legislation is heard first, if at all. Especially as the ordinance 01:19:48.032 --> 01:19:53.370 - is written, sponsorship is prefigured as a non-standardized black box with no warrants or guidelines. 01:19:53.370 --> 01:19:59.022 - Council members are allowed to fill in the blank and self-determine their own unique standards for allowing 01:19:59.022 --> 01:20:00.958 - proposals on the legislative agenda. 01:20:01.730 --> 01:20:07.660 - As such, before legislation can become official business, it must be discussed behind closed doors where 01:20:07.660 --> 01:20:13.308 - the standards for the public release and organization of information differ from those enshrined by 01:20:13.308 --> 01:20:18.956 - open door law. While council members may experience discomfort when asking questions for the public 01:20:18.956 --> 01:20:24.322 - record, it is conceivable that legislative proponents rely on the function of public discourse 01:20:24.322 --> 01:20:25.790 - for educational purposes. 01:20:26.114 --> 01:20:31.275 - asking fewer questions about legislation because council members have a privileged perspective of it 01:20:31.275 --> 01:20:36.588 - will only diminish the resulting discussion for their constituents. Council members want to demonstrate 01:20:36.588 --> 01:20:41.647 - a good faith effort to increase transparency behind the legislative process. They could do better, 01:20:41.647 --> 01:20:46.603 - I think, by following the example laid out by the Transportation Commission, where their council 01:20:46.603 --> 01:20:52.019 - commissioners hold staff and staff hold each other to a minimum standard of preparation before presenting 01:20:52.019 --> 01:20:52.990 - cases for hearing. 01:20:53.602 --> 01:20:59.528 - Staff maintain a standard reporting structure to ensure that when commissioners take action their fulfilling 01:20:59.528 --> 01:21:05.019 - requirements explicitly outlined in BMC title to section 2 subsection 100 paragraph D item 2 The end 01:21:05.019 --> 01:21:10.565 - result is more documented material relevant to the legislative process for public review and not less 01:21:10.565 --> 01:21:16.056 - As a closing remark, I want to observe that the materials for this ordinance have not demonstrated I 01:21:16.056 --> 01:21:21.547 - think a good faith engagement with city staff to clarify the particular details of the stated burden 01:21:21.547 --> 01:21:22.526 - that the proposal 01:21:22.626 --> 01:21:28.599 - Ordinance would lay upon them. That's your time. Thank you so much. Thank you If you want to also send 01:21:28.599 --> 01:21:34.513 - your comments to us by email, though, that would be very helpful. Thank you Good evening council Dave 01:21:34.513 --> 01:21:40.312 - Askins with a B square bulletin. I have seven questions tonight question one the City Council rules 01:21:40.312 --> 01:21:46.169 - in Terre Haute Carmel and Fishers have been cited as examples of what Bloomington is now considering 01:21:46.169 --> 01:21:49.822 - but on their face the rules in those three cities appear to be 01:21:50.018 --> 01:21:56.223 - Counter-examples could we get a breakdown of why rules in those three cities are analyzed in support 01:21:56.223 --> 01:22:02.674 - of this proposal? Question two is there anything currently written in Bloomington City code or elsewhere 01:22:02.674 --> 01:22:08.818 - that would prohibit a rank-and-file resident from draft drafting and ordinance Submitting it to the 01:22:08.818 --> 01:22:14.654 - council president who would then place it on the agenda sponsored by the named resident if not 01:22:14.978 --> 01:22:21.169 - Then doesn't this proposed legislation on sponsorship erect a new barrier to council agenda access by 01:22:21.169 --> 01:22:27.541 - the public? Question three last year the administration chose not to bring the routine annual interlocal 01:22:27.541 --> 01:22:34.036 - agreements with Monroe County on animal care and building code enforcement before the City Council Instead 01:22:34.036 --> 01:22:40.287 - the administration sent them directly to the Indiana Attorney General's office which is one option for 01:22:40.287 --> 01:22:42.654 - the administration under state law and 01:22:42.850 --> 01:22:49.789 - Does the council sponsorship requirement affect those situations in a positive way under this proposal? 01:22:49.789 --> 01:22:51.390 - Oh, sorry question four 01:22:52.034 --> 01:22:57.874 - Under this proposal, suppose four councilmembers agree to sponsor a piece of legislation, but when it 01:22:57.874 --> 01:23:03.714 - appears on the agenda for a meeting, at that meeting, five members vote against the motion to read it 01:23:03.714 --> 01:23:09.840 - by title and synopsis. In that case, the legislation would still not be considered. So the council already 01:23:09.840 --> 01:23:15.738 - has a much higher threshold than the sponsorship of a single councilmember for the council to consider 01:23:15.738 --> 01:23:20.318 - legislation. Why isn't that higher threshold already sufficient? Question five. 01:23:20.578 --> 01:23:26.716 - Controlling whether legislation gets considered is a different concept than controlling access to the 01:23:26.716 --> 01:23:32.735 - council's agenda. If the idea is to control access to the agenda, why does the proposal not mention 01:23:32.735 --> 01:23:39.114 - the word agenda? Question six. Two examples from last year were described as problematic in the committee 01:23:39.114 --> 01:23:45.192 - chair's memo. The villain in those two stories was the administration and its failure to make things 01:23:45.192 --> 01:23:49.886 - clear. A different approach from fighting the villain would have been to give 01:23:50.018 --> 01:23:56.189 - an advantage to the potential civic heroes, the public. That approach would recruit the public's 01:23:56.189 --> 01:24:02.806 - participation earlier, just after the required materials are filed in the council office 10 days before 01:24:02.806 --> 01:24:09.422 - a meeting by posting the materials online 10 days before the meeting and providing a way for the public 01:24:09.422 --> 01:24:15.911 - to submit written questions. Did the rules committee consider this approach to solving the identified 01:24:15.911 --> 01:24:17.502 - problem? Question seven. 01:24:17.666 --> 01:24:24.056 - Did the rules committee consider as a solution to the identified problem a return to one previous function 01:24:24.056 --> 01:24:30.087 - of City Council work sessions now called deliberation sessions which was to allow council members to 01:24:30.087 --> 01:24:36.059 - get an oral briefing from city staff about upcoming Legislation a month or two in advance of formal 01:24:36.059 --> 01:24:39.582 - presentation on the agenda Well perfectly timed. Thank you 01:24:47.010 --> 01:24:52.340 - Hi there, Zach Ammerman. I wasn't planning on speaking on this, but to me it seems incredibly uncontroversial 01:24:52.340 --> 01:24:57.234 - that a member of the body should sponsor legislation that it's being considered in favor of. I would 01:24:57.234 --> 01:25:02.080 - be in favor of this. I think this is a good idea. I also think that council should be asserting its 01:25:02.080 --> 01:25:06.974 - authority more and flexing its muscle more with the mayor and the administration. For that reason, I 01:25:06.974 --> 01:25:11.965 - think this is a good thing. You should control your own agenda and what comes before your body. To me, 01:25:11.965 --> 01:25:13.758 - it seems incredibly uncontroversial. 01:25:15.906 --> 01:25:27.135 - Thank you. Is there anyone online? No one online. We'll come back to council. Any other comments? 01:25:27.135 --> 01:25:38.592 - Seeing none, any motions? I motion to move ordinance 2026-14 to June 10th. Second. There's a motion 01:25:38.592 --> 01:25:44.894 - in the second. Any discussion? All right, seeing none. 01:25:45.474 --> 01:26:03.647 - Will the clerk please call the roll? Councilmember Flaherty. Yes. Stasberg. Yes. Piedmont Smith. Yes. 01:26:03.647 --> 01:26:12.734 - Zulek. Yes. Sorry. Yes. Daily. Yes. Rollo. No. No. 01:26:15.234 --> 01:26:25.688 - And Rosenberger. I'm not voting on that. Sorry about that. I just I just popped on. I don't know what 01:26:25.688 --> 01:26:31.838 - you guys are doing. Okay. Abstain. I abstain. Thanks. Okay. 01:26:31.970 --> 01:26:39.032 - But that is thank you six six to one with with one. So six to with one abstention That motion carries 01:26:39.032 --> 01:26:45.955 - that will be on our agenda for the 10th of June. Thank you so much We'll now move on to legislation 01:26:45.955 --> 01:26:53.016 - for second readings and resolutions I move that ordinance 2026-12 be introduced and read by the clerk 01:26:53.016 --> 01:26:59.870 - by title and synopsis only Second there's a motion a second any discussion Council member Stasberg 01:27:00.994 --> 01:27:07.568 - That's not what the agenda says in the packet addendum that was released. Oh, yeah, that's right. 01:27:07.568 --> 01:27:14.343 - I mean, that's fine if we want to do that one. It's up to you. That may be the thing you want to do. 01:27:14.343 --> 01:27:17.630 - All right. I withdraw my motion. Would you like. 01:27:28.066 --> 01:27:37.662 - Move that resolution 2026-09 be read introduced and read by the clerk by title and synopsis only second 01:27:37.662 --> 01:27:45.598 - There's a there's a motion and a second is there a discussion councilmember Stossberg 01:27:46.082 --> 01:27:52.551 - Sorry, I just wanna say that this resolution got added to our packet yesterday and it included like 01:27:52.551 --> 01:27:59.537 - 120 pages almost of reading material. And I find it extremely frustrating. It's really clear when something 01:27:59.537 --> 01:28:06.394 - like this gets added as an addendum that it did not get given to our council staff and our council office 01:28:06.394 --> 01:28:12.734 - according to the timelines in our code. So I'm gonna vote no on introduction for this, thank you. 01:28:16.034 --> 01:28:30.653 - All right. There's there's there's any other discussion. All right. We'll record please call the roll. 01:28:30.653 --> 01:28:45.982 - Yes. Council. Council member Stasberg. No Piedmont Smith. No. Zulek. Yes. Sorry. No. Daily. Yes. Rollo. No. 01:28:47.810 --> 01:28:59.607 - No Rosenberger no Flaherty That motion does not carry so you have somebody else to ask sorry where he 01:28:59.607 --> 01:29:11.404 - said no But did you say did it you said no, correct? I said no. Thank you. Thank you That motion does 01:29:11.404 --> 01:29:16.030 - not carry are there any other motions I 01:29:18.754 --> 01:29:29.688 - I move that ordinance 2026 dash 12 be introduced in red by the clerk by title and synopsis only second 01:29:29.688 --> 01:29:40.303 - There's a motion to second any discussion Seeing none will the clerk we call the roll Councilmember 01:29:40.303 --> 01:29:48.158 - Piedmont Smith. Yes Zulek. Yes. Sorry. Yes, Daley. Yes Rallo Yes Ruff yes 01:29:48.962 --> 01:30:01.680 - Rosenberger Yes clarity, yes Stasberg yes. Thank you. All right that motion carries Will the clerk please 01:30:01.680 --> 01:30:14.399 - read Ordinance 20 26-12 to amend title 15 of the Bloomington Municipal Code entitled vehicles and traffic 01:30:14.399 --> 01:30:18.238 - to seasonally provide a carless 01:30:18.434 --> 01:30:25.072 - Kirkwood the synopsis is as follows this ordinance seeks to codify streets and alleys in Bloomington 01:30:25.072 --> 01:30:31.776 - that disallow vehicular traffic specifically this ordinance codifies the seasonal carless schedule of 01:30:31.776 --> 01:30:38.939 - specific blocks incur of Kirkwood Avenue with this ordinance businesses and residents can expect a permanent 01:30:38.939 --> 01:30:45.577 - seasonal carless Kirkwood allowing businesses the predictability to invest in outdoor infrastructure 01:30:45.577 --> 01:30:46.366 - for guests. 01:30:46.498 --> 01:30:52.672 - The city administration has provided valuable operational feedback in its 2026 a memorandum identifying 01:30:52.672 --> 01:30:58.845 - important challenges regarding regarding infrastructure sanitation public safety and accessibility That 01:30:58.845 --> 01:31:05.078 - naturally arise as temporary programs transition toward permanent city fixtures With that this ordinance 01:31:05.078 --> 01:31:10.302 - aims to provide the necessary legal and budgetary certainty for the city to move beyond 01:31:10.402 --> 01:31:18.687 - Incomplete solutions and invest in more permanent infrastructure such as more ADA compliant features 01:31:18.687 --> 01:31:26.891 - and high quality seating recommended by staff Thank you very much any motions I move that ordinance 01:31:26.891 --> 01:31:35.258 - 20 26-12 be adopted second. There's a motion in a second. Oh, we don't this is yeah, there you go All 01:31:35.258 --> 01:31:39.934 - right Who would like to talk about this councilmember? I 01:31:40.674 --> 01:31:46.903 - Rosenberger point point of order vote for this. Sorry. No President Asari at the start of this meeting 01:31:46.903 --> 01:31:53.193 - today. You said that we're not allowed to vote on this to adopt this tonight because of some statutory. 01:31:53.193 --> 01:31:59.422 - That is my understanding. And so we have a motion but I guess we can postpone. Correct. Correct. Yeah. 01:32:01.410 --> 01:32:07.368 - And I'll just clarify, in case you weren't here at the beginning of the meeting, and Attorney Allen, 01:32:07.368 --> 01:32:13.327 - please correct me if I'm wrong, but because this is a change to Title 15, we're statutorily required 01:32:13.327 --> 01:32:19.521 - to have a statement from the Transportation Commission. And so we do not have that yet. They're meeting, 01:32:19.521 --> 01:32:25.539 - I think, next week. And so we cannot vote on this until we have that. Or this week. I don't know when 01:32:25.539 --> 01:32:30.494 - they're meeting. Next Monday. Next Monday. So they'll meet before our next meeting. 01:32:33.410 --> 01:32:41.109 - So with that, Council Member Daley. All right, I'll kick it off. Thank you. So yeah, we talked about 01:32:41.109 --> 01:32:48.732 - this last week, the idea of making it a fixture where everybody can expect and understand that it's 01:32:48.732 --> 01:32:56.507 - just going to happen every summer, that Kirkwood will be pedestrian only. We're not closing Kirkwood. 01:32:56.507 --> 01:33:02.910 - We're just closing it to cars for a few months to make it very pedestrian friendly. 01:33:03.042 --> 01:33:11.380 - One thing that we didn't talk about last time that I think is worth bringing into the conversation is 01:33:11.380 --> 01:33:19.882 - that we're looking at economics of this as well. We have a $71 million convention center expansion that 01:33:19.882 --> 01:33:28.547 - will be finishing early in 2027. It's projected to bring in up to $18 million annually, as well as 50,000 01:33:28.547 --> 01:33:32.062 - annual hotel room nights in our city core. 01:33:32.162 --> 01:33:41.073 - So that is a huge advantage that could really draw more people downtown to hang out in a nice pedestrian 01:33:41.073 --> 01:33:49.730 - walkway area in those warmer months. On top of that, a single IU Athletics sellout home game can pump 01:33:49.730 --> 01:33:58.472 - $7 million into our local economy, and it can push downtown hotel occupancy to 95%. So Kirkwood is the 01:33:58.472 --> 01:34:00.254 - literal front porch. 01:34:00.386 --> 01:34:09.301 - to all of this. So I think this is just a wonderful opportunity to help centralize a destination area 01:34:09.301 --> 01:34:18.041 - for Bloomingtonians and visitors to our beautiful town. Thank you so much. Council member Rosenberg 01:34:18.041 --> 01:34:25.470 - would you like to add. I will. I just wanted to say to sort of also kick it off that 01:34:25.570 --> 01:34:32.827 - We do have to also hear this at the next meeting. So for me, I was thinking here to answer questions 01:34:32.827 --> 01:34:40.013 - and do some discussion and then potentially like the meat and potatoes can also be on our June 10th 01:34:40.013 --> 01:34:47.270 - meeting potentially because like that is when we do have the opportunity to vote on it. Just so, and 01:34:47.270 --> 01:34:51.294 - this kind of feels to me like an opportunity to discuss 01:34:51.874 --> 01:35:02.084 - Whatever and like any questions that we might need to get answered prior to June 10th Thank you so much 01:35:02.084 --> 01:35:11.999 - council members any comments or questions, please councilman Sasberg Thank you. Um, I noticed in The 01:35:11.999 --> 01:35:19.166 - ordinance that is in the packet this week that there are three blocks of 01:35:19.266 --> 01:35:27.362 - Listed as being closed but in the ordinance from two weeks ago, there were five So we we already read 01:35:27.362 --> 01:35:35.537 - it into the record last week So I don't I don't know why we can change that without having an official 01:35:35.537 --> 01:35:43.474 - amendment on it But I'm I just wanted to bring that to somebody's attention the sponsors perhaps or 01:35:43.474 --> 01:35:46.014 - and or the attorney Just I mean 01:35:46.274 --> 01:35:52.177 - I guess as sponsors if you've decided to potentially alter the blocks that you're interested in having 01:35:52.177 --> 01:35:58.022 - read in then it needs to have an amendment I think as opposed to just changing it, but I Was a little 01:35:58.022 --> 01:36:03.868 - bit confused Councilmember Stossberg. I don't think that was an intentional amendment I believe there 01:36:03.868 --> 01:36:09.599 - were two different versions of the previous one. It was updated to include all five blocks This was 01:36:09.599 --> 01:36:14.814 - unfortunately a previous version that was included in this packet. So it was a mistake and 01:36:15.202 --> 01:36:21.695 - It should have the schedule X should have all five blocks listed as it was last week as that was the 01:36:21.695 --> 01:36:28.446 - amended version But of course the sponsors can correct me if I'm mistaken on that Okay, is that correct? 01:36:28.446 --> 01:36:35.003 - Council members Rosenberger daily Yeah, yeah, okay. Thank you So I hope the public hears that because 01:36:35.003 --> 01:36:41.625 - I did hear from somebody earlier this week who thought that it was only then three blocks because they 01:36:41.625 --> 01:36:42.782 - were reading this 01:36:43.138 --> 01:36:50.196 - This ordinance and I was like wait, I'm confused now. So Yeah, I don't know if if we need to make sure 01:36:50.196 --> 01:36:57.255 - to issue some kind of a public statement or if this is enough But that definitely made things a little 01:36:57.255 --> 01:37:04.313 - confusing Councilmember Zulek. Yes. Thank you. Well, I am blessed to serve on the downtown Bloomington 01:37:04.313 --> 01:37:10.686 - incorporated board and our president is in the audience tonight I know he plans to speak but 01:37:11.490 --> 01:37:19.748 - Just to give you the feedback from the downtown businesses, they're pretty overwhelmingly against this. 01:37:19.748 --> 01:37:27.689 - And so I just want to raise that a lot of the at least on the for the businesses that are a part of 01:37:27.689 --> 01:37:35.788 - downtown Bloomington. The majority of the feedback that I hear is that they are not in favor of this. 01:37:35.788 --> 01:37:37.694 - There are a couple just 01:37:38.818 --> 01:37:45.149 - I guess details that I'd like to see hammered out if this is the route that people want to go down, 01:37:45.149 --> 01:37:51.733 - one of which is the library block, which is not very easily activatable because there's no shade during 01:37:51.733 --> 01:37:58.127 - the summertime, but also feedback that I've gotten from organizations like Stone Belt who transfer a 01:37:58.127 --> 01:38:04.458 - lot of people at the same time with maybe different disabilities or different needs. They can't use 01:38:04.458 --> 01:38:05.534 - the library when 01:38:05.698 --> 01:38:13.268 - Kirkwood is shut down because their buses can't get into the north-facing parking lot. And when the 01:38:13.268 --> 01:38:21.066 - street is shut down, there is no way for them to take advantage of the library services. And so that's 01:38:21.066 --> 01:38:28.788 - just one of the things that I would like, I guess, in the record when we're making this decision. The 01:38:28.788 --> 01:38:33.406 - other thing is when we think about pedestrianizing Kirkwood, 01:38:35.106 --> 01:38:42.547 - I would like to see that happen, but I also know how much money needs to be invested in Kirkwood to 01:38:42.547 --> 01:38:50.138 - make it the beautiful pedestrian street that we'd all like to see it. And I'm not sure that right now 01:38:50.138 --> 01:38:57.877 - in a time that we're not exactly like overflowing with money that this is the right moment to make that 01:38:57.877 --> 01:39:04.574 - investment. And those are my comments. Thank you. Thank you. Other comments or questions? 01:39:06.978 --> 01:39:15.178 - Seeing none, Council Member Flaherty, go ahead, sorry. Thank you, I had a comment. I thought, so by 01:39:15.178 --> 01:39:23.788 - way of additional input from businesses, Council Member Rosenberger circulated the memo, gotten articles 01:39:23.788 --> 01:39:32.644 - here from the Kirkwood Business Association, which is in support of this permanent conversion to pedestrian 01:39:32.644 --> 01:39:35.678 - and all other users except cars use. 01:39:36.098 --> 01:39:43.314 - And I think it had some good things to say, including that there's a lot of valid questions and concerns, 01:39:43.314 --> 01:39:50.393 - which Councilmember Zulich has raised a couple, and we hear them from constituents as well. And I think 01:39:50.393 --> 01:39:57.405 - they're all really good questions, and they can all be figured out. That, to me, is an important piece 01:39:57.405 --> 01:40:04.825 - of this. And I guess in looking to what's possible, we should look to what's already been done, specifically 01:40:04.825 --> 01:40:05.982 - in lots of other 01:40:06.274 --> 01:40:11.527 - liberal, wonderful communities like ours that have had this vision from 50 years ago to more recently 01:40:11.527 --> 01:40:16.677 - solving all the challenges that we're raising. And so I think it's just really important for us all 01:40:16.677 --> 01:40:22.084 - to look to those communities that are doing this successfully and they're throughout the country because 01:40:22.084 --> 01:40:27.388 - it's like the vision piece that we need. And I guess just one more element of that, which is this kind 01:40:27.388 --> 01:40:32.641 - of like cart horse question. I believe Mr. MG raised it when he spoke about this a few weeks ago. And 01:40:32.641 --> 01:40:35.422 - I kind of said something similar then, which is that, 01:40:37.090 --> 01:40:43.375 - Theoretically, yes, lining up the budget first, all these other things would be nice, but that kind 01:40:43.375 --> 01:40:49.722 - of requires a level of leadership from the executive that we just aren't seeing or won't see. If the 01:40:49.722 --> 01:40:56.447 - mayor wanted to do this, she would have done it already. And so the question is whether or not the council 01:40:56.447 --> 01:41:02.794 - wants to use its legislative authority and budget authority to direct a visionary and transformative 01:41:02.794 --> 01:41:06.942 - change to our downtown. And we certainly have the power to do so. 01:41:07.042 --> 01:41:11.821 - Again, taking all the questions and concerns very seriously, it's not to suggest they aren't meaningful. 01:41:11.821 --> 01:41:16.463 - They don't need to be figured out. They do. But really, it's up to us to do that. And again, it's not 01:41:16.463 --> 01:41:21.151 - like we're trying something that's never been done. We're trying something that's been done very, very 01:41:21.151 --> 01:41:25.976 - well in lots of places where, honestly, the pedestrian malls they have, again, I named a number of places 01:41:25.976 --> 01:41:30.709 - last week, Ithaca, Charlottesville, Boulder, et cetera, really make the town. I think we have that kind 01:41:30.709 --> 01:41:34.942 - of opportunity here. So I'm excited for that. And it's a comment, not a question. Thank you. 01:41:36.002 --> 01:41:45.876 - Thank you so much. Which I think was invited. Yes, yes, yes, yes. Council Member Piedmont-Smith. Yes. 01:41:45.876 --> 01:41:55.654 - So in principle, I'm in favor of Carlos Kirkwood. I think that we could, it's already a great space, 01:41:55.654 --> 01:42:02.430 - but it could certainly be improved if there's a lot of investment of, 01:42:02.722 --> 01:42:11.939 - events and infrastructure like to provide shade and to provide places to sit where you don't have to 01:42:11.939 --> 01:42:21.339 - buy something at the restaurant, but you can sit and And I you know buskers and people selling flowers 01:42:21.339 --> 01:42:30.648 - out of baskets and I have these great visions And I think we do need to take a step in that direction 01:42:30.648 --> 01:42:32.382 - Probably this body 01:42:32.610 --> 01:42:43.166 - would need to push it up on the agenda of the mayor's budget and use of staff time. However, I think 01:42:43.166 --> 01:42:54.036 - that the way it's written now, it seems to implement these closures immediately. And I don't think that 01:42:54.036 --> 01:43:00.830 - is feasible. I don't think it's feasible to do this before 2027. 01:43:01.378 --> 01:43:09.720 - The city has already invested money to activate some blocks of Kirkwood to have they've already scheduled 01:43:09.720 --> 01:43:17.668 - events. They had a consultant in as to how to, you know, do these things. There are plans, you know, 01:43:17.668 --> 01:43:25.616 - the restaurants that wanted to already have their parklets operating. I just think it's not feasible 01:43:25.616 --> 01:43:29.630 - to start to implement this before next year. Also, 01:43:30.786 --> 01:43:39.684 - Yeah, it is a car before the horse. I'm not sure. It's a tricky situation, because what do you do first? 01:43:39.684 --> 01:43:48.328 - Say, we shall do this, and then hope that the mayor's budget proposal has the funds needed to pay for 01:43:48.328 --> 01:43:57.056 - the activation and the public infrastructure next year? Or do we wait and see when we will have money? 01:43:57.056 --> 01:44:00.446 - Remember, we have SCA WAN to deal with. 01:44:00.610 --> 01:44:09.018 - when we will have money to spend on the staff and infrastructure to activate the space and only then 01:44:09.018 --> 01:44:17.592 - put this in Title 15, which is permanent. So I definitely would not support this being activated right 01:44:17.592 --> 01:44:25.916 - away or being in effect right away. And I'm a little bit hesitant to vote for this without any kind 01:44:25.916 --> 01:44:29.662 - of funding commitment to go with it as well. 01:44:31.042 --> 01:44:42.374 - So that's where I am. Thank you, Councilman Borrello. Well, I had similar question about the effective 01:44:42.374 --> 01:44:53.485 - date. I think we discussed that a little bit last time. The memo from Deputy Mayor Knapp had that as 01:44:53.485 --> 01:44:59.646 - a concern or a request that the effective date be 2027. 01:45:00.066 --> 01:45:09.951 - I wondered how the sponsors felt about that. Were you intending it for the remainder of the summer, 01:45:09.951 --> 01:45:19.341 - or is this acceptable for a later date? Would you like to take that then, Councilmember Daley, 01:45:19.341 --> 01:45:29.918 - or Councilmember Spicer? I mean, I know I would love to see it open. It was supposed to be open this year. 01:45:30.050 --> 01:45:39.470 - flexible on Talking about not doing it this year I think I know councilmember Rosenberger really had 01:45:39.470 --> 01:45:48.797 - had strong feelings wanting to get it open this year I'm more Agnostic on that myself councilmember 01:45:48.797 --> 01:45:58.590 - Rosenberger. Did you want to weigh in on that? Yeah first I would say we did anticipate an amendment for 01:45:58.882 --> 01:46:06.655 - for a different start date. And that's why the ordinance, I mean, I think unless they say it, they are 01:46:06.655 --> 01:46:14.353 - effective immediately. But so we did anticipate setting a start date with all of you. So I think that 01:46:14.353 --> 01:46:22.050 - would happen next week. With some of the downtown businesses, I talked about, I floated in August one 01:46:22.050 --> 01:46:27.710 - start date to have the summer to sort of prepare, re-prepare, recalibrate. 01:46:28.098 --> 01:46:37.107 - I think I took a look at the activations that the consultant did with ESD. And those can happen in a 01:46:37.107 --> 01:46:46.384 - street as opposed to just on the sidewalk. So I think they're not wasted. They can still get used. When 01:46:46.384 --> 01:46:55.304 - I met with some of the business owners, too, they talked about a hybrid option that was closing for 01:46:55.304 --> 01:46:57.534 - major Bloomington dates. 01:46:57.666 --> 01:47:04.295 - every home football game, all the festivals, of course, that happen. And at that time, this was a lot 01:47:04.295 --> 01:47:10.989 - earlier. So we're talking about graduation and, like, Little Five. So a lot of closures. And there are 01:47:10.989 --> 01:47:17.747 - so many home football games this upcoming year. I think we have an extra, obviously, national champion. 01:47:17.747 --> 01:47:24.766 - So I think it's sold out every game already. If we were to do that, that would look like, I think, like 12. 01:47:25.410 --> 01:47:34.492 - Weekends, it would be closed. So it's probably easier to look at the full closure. I know no one was 01:47:34.492 --> 01:47:44.025 - asking this exact question, but just talking about other options that we have discussed with some people. 01:47:44.025 --> 01:47:53.377 - So I like the idea of trying to get it done for this fall or late summer and fall. And it's just, yeah, 01:47:53.377 --> 01:47:54.366 - debatable. 01:47:56.162 --> 01:48:03.286 - Yes, thank you. Well, this is primarily executed by the Department of Public Works And so I'm just going 01:48:03.286 --> 01:48:10.206 - to say this in the meeting that I will be following up with them to find out what projects would need 01:48:10.206 --> 01:48:17.194 - to be Deprioritized if we did go through with this because obviously we have limited staff and limited 01:48:17.194 --> 01:48:24.318 - time and if We're doing this something is going to be sacrificed. And so I'm curious What that might be? 01:48:27.202 --> 01:48:36.326 - Any other comments or questions? Okay, in which case I'll go ahead I need to find it. I'm sorry In which 01:48:36.326 --> 01:48:45.277 - case I'll say what I'll say and then I'll pass to you. I think very similarly to to counselor Piedmont 01:48:45.277 --> 01:48:54.227 - Smith First let me say this that You know if we've really And maybe I'll be a little provocative which 01:48:54.227 --> 01:48:57.182 - is I think we spend a lot of time 01:48:57.666 --> 01:49:06.480 - Trying to be a city that we're not and not leaning into the city that we really are and we are a university 01:49:06.480 --> 01:49:14.804 - town really great one and if you look I think to councilmember Flaherty's point at awesome university 01:49:14.804 --> 01:49:23.537 - towns that across the country, I mean they have these type of Things that they've invested in that they've 01:49:23.537 --> 01:49:25.822 - leveraged heavily for their 01:49:26.018 --> 01:49:32.130 - plan all across economic development for their plan for tourism. And I think that as the sponsors have 01:49:32.130 --> 01:49:38.301 - said very clearly, we're making all of these investments in other spaces around this. And if we do this 01:49:38.301 --> 01:49:44.354 - right, this really could be a thing that we could leverage to continue to make Bloomington everything 01:49:44.354 --> 01:49:49.813 - that it can be. And I share Council Member Piedmont-Smith's view. I've been sending Council 01:49:49.813 --> 01:49:55.984 - Member Rosenberger and Daley pictures of fountains that I would really like to be able to bring my kids 01:49:55.984 --> 01:50:00.992 - downtown for example I mean I don't know we also a lot of the times there's there's a lot of people 01:50:00.992 --> 01:50:06.051 - who get left out of a lot of our conversations I'll tell you one group of people that we hardly ever 01:50:06.051 --> 01:50:11.259 - talk about in our city which is like people with kids and This city sucks to have small kids in because 01:50:11.259 --> 01:50:12.862 - there's nowhere to go with them 01:50:12.962 --> 01:50:19.516 - And there's all these parks, and none of them have any fences. So there's no place for us to just go 01:50:19.516 --> 01:50:26.070 - and be with our kids that isn't a full-time job. And I would love to be able to go downtown after we 01:50:26.070 --> 01:50:32.559 - go out to eat and just stay downtown. I love the fact that if we had more Jacob students performing 01:50:32.559 --> 01:50:39.373 - downtown, I would love the fact that we had more places for public art, and so on and so forth. I really 01:50:39.373 --> 01:50:42.942 - think that this is a great opportunity to connect city 01:50:42.946 --> 01:50:49.854 - with university, there's just so many reasons why I think we should do this, but we have to do it right. 01:50:49.854 --> 01:50:56.433 - And so I think that the way that we did it in the past sort of resulted in it often being empty and 01:50:56.433 --> 01:51:03.341 - it being under-leveraged and it being under-taken care of. And so my feeling is much like Council Member 01:51:03.341 --> 01:51:10.249 - Piedmont-Smith's that I think that we set a really good target. We say we want this, this will be closed 01:51:10.249 --> 01:51:11.038 - permanently 01:51:11.170 --> 01:51:18.849 - in 2027 and then that way all of the things that are about to happen, these corridor studies, the engagement 01:51:18.849 --> 01:51:25.965 - of consultants, the thinking about activation are all happening knowing that it's going to be closed 01:51:25.965 --> 01:51:31.390 - rather than sort of trying to catch up to the fact that it's already closed. 01:51:31.458 --> 01:51:37.934 - And then the other thing that I will say just to maybe balance out these comments is that, you know, 01:51:37.934 --> 01:51:44.602 - we are the, you know, budgetary branch of our government. And if we as a body really want to prioritize 01:51:44.602 --> 01:51:46.526 - that being done, then I mean, 01:51:46.658 --> 01:51:53.282 - We could push for that to be in the budget. I think, though, the rub, again, is not only SEA 1, but 01:51:53.282 --> 01:51:59.906 - what we're not talking about is where this fits in amongst all of our other priorities. And when we 01:51:59.906 --> 01:52:06.662 - thought about our list of priorities for this year's budget, economic development has sort of emerged 01:52:06.662 --> 01:52:13.551 - as one of them. And I just think that it'll be really good for us to have a very solid idea about where 01:52:13.551 --> 01:52:14.942 - we're wanting to put 01:52:15.106 --> 01:52:20.620 - You know our weight if that's something that we say. Hey, this is what we as a council really want I 01:52:20.620 --> 01:52:26.133 - think that we should push for that but we're gonna have to do that in some type of unified a fashion 01:52:26.133 --> 01:52:31.702 - because I think that a big failure state would be that you close the road and it basically just turns 01:52:31.702 --> 01:52:37.161 - into a sort of under leveraged ghost town in the center of town, so Councilmember P wants it that I 01:52:37.161 --> 01:52:43.166 - give you enough time to find your comment. I'll pass to you Thank you, and then we'll go to public comment So 01:52:43.362 --> 01:52:51.518 - In the whereas clauses for this ordinance, it does talk about the public's desire for a Carlos Kirkwood. 01:52:51.518 --> 01:52:59.597 - And I think that we should be careful about making statements like that because, I mean, has there been 01:52:59.597 --> 01:53:07.753 - a referendum? Has there been a survey? Which public are we talking about? I think I can't, I don't think 01:53:07.753 --> 01:53:12.958 - anybody here can say a majority of the public in Bloomington wants 01:53:13.378 --> 01:53:22.223 - cars not to go on Kirkwood. I don't think anybody has the data to say that. So we just need to be careful 01:53:22.223 --> 01:53:30.985 - when we say broad make broad statements of that sort. The other thing I wanted to mention is and council 01:53:30.985 --> 01:53:39.330 - member Zulek might not like this but I represent district one and we have I said that about council 01:53:39.330 --> 01:53:42.334 - member Zulek because she represents 01:53:42.530 --> 01:53:50.150 - the Kirkwood corridor district. But I mean South Walnut Street is in my court in my district and it's 01:53:50.150 --> 01:53:57.920 - much more bleak than Kirkwood. I mean it's nobody wants to walk there. Kirkwood is already pretty good. 01:53:57.920 --> 01:54:05.391 - I mean yeah it can be better and I'm not. And I think that you know as I said at the outset I think 01:54:05.391 --> 01:54:11.966 - this is a good idea. Let's work towards it. But there are other quarters in Bloomington 01:54:12.738 --> 01:54:19.709 - that are awful for it. I mean, I wouldn't want to walk on South Walnut. I wouldn't want to bike on South 01:54:19.709 --> 01:54:26.614 - Walnut. It's, it's, you know, five lanes of asphalt, no separation between the sidewalk and the street, 01:54:26.614 --> 01:54:33.253 - very little shade. So if we're going to prioritize where to spend money, there might be other parts 01:54:33.253 --> 01:54:37.502 - of the city that need that have a greater need for improvement. 01:54:39.618 --> 01:54:47.516 - Thank you so much, Councilmember Zulek, and then we are going to go to public comment after this comment. 01:54:47.516 --> 01:54:55.265 - I'll just second everything that Councilmember Piedmont-Smith said, and the feedback that I have gotten 01:54:55.265 --> 01:55:02.716 - from staff at Public Works is very similar, in that we invest a lot of money in Kirkwood, and there 01:55:02.716 --> 01:55:06.590 - are a lot of other streets that need some TLC, too. 01:55:07.106 --> 01:55:13.206 - Councilmember Piedmont Smith, I would love to go into your district and invest in South Walnut Bravo, 01:55:13.206 --> 01:55:19.187 - okay, and we'll go now to public comment same rules as always so I won't recite them please take it 01:55:19.187 --> 01:55:25.168 - away and And people I will just say one comment. I know there's lots of city staff here We actually 01:55:25.168 --> 01:55:31.328 - should have given you some time So don't feel like you need to use public comment if you'd like to say 01:55:31.328 --> 01:55:34.558 - something you can also I'll be really quick. Go ahead 01:55:45.378 --> 01:55:53.610 - So Jim, my name is Jim during I'm a business owner downtown Bloomington and and I am the current board 01:55:53.610 --> 01:56:01.682 - president of downtown Bloomington. So, you guys brought up a whole lot of points. We, we were a poor 01:56:01.682 --> 01:56:05.438 - opposed to this, this Kirk was Kirkard Carlos. 01:56:05.858 --> 01:56:13.107 - So yeah, I don't know what else to say because you've just you've you brought it all to point to the 01:56:13.107 --> 01:56:20.285 - point here So yeah, we are there are other things we can be doing we are working with city the city 01:56:20.285 --> 01:56:27.677 - right now with a with a plan to Regenerate a four-year plan to to get Kirkwood back up and going again 01:56:27.677 --> 01:56:35.070 - That's what we're working out with them right now as well. So yeah, just I'm not wasting your time but 01:56:35.234 --> 01:56:44.002 - We're not in favor of that. So Yeah, that's all I got for you. Thank you so much next in chamber council 01:56:44.002 --> 01:56:52.854 - chambers Hello again, my name is Zach Ammerman I'm here as vice chair of the Commission on sustainability 01:56:52.854 --> 01:56:58.366 - and resilience we passed a resolution during our last meeting and 01:56:58.754 --> 01:57:03.293 - About Kirkwood that I authored as a sponsor and I just wanted to read the recommendations to you You 01:57:03.293 --> 01:57:07.787 - should already have a copy of it as well. I have physical copies if you'd like I can give it to you 01:57:07.787 --> 01:57:12.281 - But basically we basically said our recommendations There's a whole bunch of whereas clauses before 01:57:12.281 --> 01:57:16.865 - and they go in the background I don't need to rehash all that but the recommendations are the meat of 01:57:16.865 --> 01:57:21.359 - it Number one at a minimum continue the seasonal closure of Kirkwood Avenue That's the bare minimum 01:57:21.359 --> 01:57:26.302 - number two is I think what we're more passionate about and more excited about this possibility of permanently 01:57:26.434 --> 01:57:32.160 - year-round closure to Kirkwood Avenue, like they have in, like the cities that Councilmember Flaherty 01:57:32.160 --> 01:57:38.111 - mentioned, Charlottesville, Virginia, Boulder, Colorado, Burlington, Vermont, that have really successful 01:57:38.111 --> 01:57:43.781 - streets like this, that are the center of their civic life, that they spent a lot of time and effort 01:57:43.781 --> 01:57:49.900 - and commitment on, and it takes a vision and commitment to get there. And so we need to make that commitment 01:57:49.900 --> 01:57:53.886 - a vision. So that's number two. Number three is to study those cities. 01:57:54.018 --> 01:57:59.191 - to see what they've done and quit trying to reinvent the wheel, just copy and paste. They have already 01:57:59.191 --> 01:58:04.214 - solved a lot of the questions that people are bringing up. Just copy and paste. Quit trying to redo 01:58:04.214 --> 01:58:09.387 - things our own special way. They've already answered the questions. Look at what they've done and just 01:58:09.387 --> 01:58:14.510 - repeat them. Prioritize investment in permanent streetscape improvements. Like some of you mentioned, 01:58:14.510 --> 01:58:19.632 - I know that's gonna cost money, but I think it's worth it. This is the center of our civic life. It's 01:58:19.632 --> 01:58:23.550 - worth the money. Next, move administration of the Kirkwood pedestrianization. 01:58:23.650 --> 01:58:27.942 - pedestrian program from the Department of Economic and Sustainable Development to the Department of 01:58:27.942 --> 01:58:32.491 - Planning and Transportation, which is better equipped to handle questions of public space and sustainable 01:58:32.491 --> 01:58:36.868 - transportation. And that follows directly into the next one, which is reframe the program from one of 01:58:36.868 --> 01:58:41.246 - outdoor dining and economic development exclusively, which I think was a mistake to frame it that way 01:58:41.246 --> 01:58:45.537 - from the beginning, instead to one of public space and sustainable transportation, which is what it 01:58:45.537 --> 01:58:49.915 - is about. It's not about economic development, although that's important. That's not what it's about. 01:58:49.915 --> 01:58:52.318 - It's about sustainable transportation and public space. 01:58:52.450 --> 01:58:57.495 - The next one is already in this resolution, but it's repealing the ability of the city administration 01:58:57.495 --> 01:59:02.589 - to unilaterally end the program. The council should have to have a say. And finally, cease framing the 01:59:02.589 --> 01:59:07.584 - Kirkwood program in terms of parking revenue versus dining permit revenue, which was one of the city 01:59:07.584 --> 01:59:12.579 - examples. And that was, I calculated, we're talking 0.0004% of the city's 2025 budget that they were 01:59:12.579 --> 01:59:17.723 - talking about. There was a difference between the parking revenue lost versus the dining permit revenue 01:59:17.723 --> 01:59:20.542 - gained. We're talking pennies, it's nothing, it's silly. 01:59:20.674 --> 01:59:26.722 - And finally ending with a statement of values, which I'm just gonna read verbatim and I'll end The Commission 01:59:26.722 --> 01:59:32.220 - affirms that sustainable cities prioritize people over cars Especially in their most central public 01:59:32.220 --> 01:59:38.048 - spaces and that Bloomington's identity as a walkable bikeable community should be reflected in the design 01:59:38.048 --> 01:59:43.601 - If it was the most prominent and iconic pedestrian quarter. Thank you Thank you so much. I'm next in 01:59:43.601 --> 01:59:45.470 - chambers and then we'll go online 01:59:45.794 --> 01:59:53.288 - My name is Hillary Martel my husband and I own Hartzell's ice cream that's located at 107 North Dunn 01:59:53.288 --> 02:00:00.930 - and we are here in opposition of having Kirkwood closed to vehicle traffic I Understand the vision and 02:00:00.930 --> 02:00:08.721 - I've been to those cities that do have that but what we saw last year was nothing compared to what those 02:00:08.721 --> 02:00:15.102 - cities have putting up ballards and putting picnic tables in Kirkwood and eating up a 02:00:15.394 --> 02:00:21.644 - Incredible amount of parking spaces isn't going to create what those cities have that create that success 02:00:21.644 --> 02:00:27.599 - When the students like when students are in session It's so frustrating the lack of parking downtown 02:00:27.599 --> 02:00:33.613 - to begin with between employees of restaurants and business downtown and then I use students that are 02:00:33.613 --> 02:00:36.030 - coming to Park to attend class on campus 02:00:36.162 --> 02:00:41.588 - at 9 a.m. You can go downtown and you can't find a metered parking space because and none of the businesses 02:00:41.588 --> 02:00:46.662 - are even open yet and When you take away all that parking on Kirkwood your customers people that are 02:00:46.662 --> 02:00:51.685 - going to breakfast people are they're going to build jelly They're going to so much they can't even 02:00:51.685 --> 02:00:57.011 - find parking spaces to run in and give you know grab and go coffee or meet a friend for breakfast because 02:00:57.011 --> 02:00:59.422 - all that parking is occupied by people that are 02:00:59.874 --> 02:01:05.544 - Either are attending classes at campus or their employees that are working in those restaurants and 02:01:05.544 --> 02:01:09.854 - that is extremely frustrating at all hours of the day when IU is in session 02:01:10.018 --> 02:01:15.634 - To go to my business in the middle of the day is the biggest nuisance and to drive around and see no 02:01:15.634 --> 02:01:21.306 - one in Kirkwood Sitting and I think it honestly really only benefits a handful of restaurants the way 02:01:21.306 --> 02:01:27.034 - it operates now I see the vision and I think that could bring a lot of people downtown But last summer 02:01:27.034 --> 02:01:32.817 - I saw picnic tables that were unoccupied I saw teenagers on electric bikes popping wheelies and I don't 02:01:32.817 --> 02:01:37.822 - know who that benefits I mean it's just as a small business owner the lack of parking and 02:01:38.242 --> 02:01:43.253 - It's really really frustrating and that's my biggest issue with it I think it has a lot of potential 02:01:43.253 --> 02:01:48.512 - but the way it's structured now I mean you need shade you need seating, you know What makes bolder bolder 02:01:48.512 --> 02:01:53.523 - is that there are those people selling flowers in the street their street performers There's artists 02:01:53.523 --> 02:01:58.584 - there's musicians like that's what you have to have to make this a success And if you don't have that 02:01:58.584 --> 02:02:03.644 - it's nothing except taking up parking spaces for people to shop at their local businesses and I don't 02:02:03.644 --> 02:02:04.190 - understand 02:02:04.290 --> 02:02:10.089 - Why you know, I feel like it's a cart before the horse if there's not funding in place to do those things 02:02:10.089 --> 02:02:15.779 - What's the point of closing the street like in summer? It's it's struggle downtown. I mean just driving 02:02:15.779 --> 02:02:21.468 - here. There's no one downtown right now really I mean, it's it's if you have those parking spaces taken 02:02:21.468 --> 02:02:27.486 - We really depend on people that are coming into Bloomington for campus tours for orientation for sports camps 02:02:27.714 --> 02:02:33.149 - They don't know downtown. There's a bunch of one-way streets It's confusing as it is and then you're 02:02:33.149 --> 02:02:38.584 - gonna block off the main thorough way to get from one into town to the other They want to be able to 02:02:38.584 --> 02:02:44.019 - find a parking space quickly to get an ice cream or get a coffee or get a sandwich or whatever And I 02:02:44.019 --> 02:02:49.401 - think that the way it's structured now, it really only benefits a very small Handful of people it's 02:02:49.401 --> 02:02:55.105 - it has potential but you have to have that funding. Thank you so much Is there anybody online? All right, 02:02:55.105 --> 02:02:57.150 - there's two people online You're next 02:02:57.538 --> 02:03:06.305 - And then we'll come back to chambers. Chris, Chris Sturbom here. Go ahead. We can hear you. 02:03:06.305 --> 02:03:16.216 - Can you hear me? Okay. Yes, we can. Okay. Boulder, Colorado, Pearl street. They just had this very same 02:03:16.216 --> 02:03:24.126 - discussion about extending West Pearl two more blocks. The businesses all opposed. 02:03:24.962 --> 02:03:35.571 - closing off the next two blocks of Pearl Street. And the original designers, the geniuses who started 02:03:35.571 --> 02:03:46.077 - this in 1977, also opposed closing another two blocks of Pearl. They got lucky. Pearl Street worked. 02:03:46.077 --> 02:03:54.398 - But since 1977, 400 municipalities have done this. There are only a dozen left. 02:03:55.682 --> 02:04:04.355 - Muncie failed twice, closing their downtown. They almost killed it. Evansville failed. These are historic 02:04:04.355 --> 02:04:12.702 - facts. There was a desire when businesses were going to the suburbs to try and make the downtown more 02:04:12.702 --> 02:04:21.048 - active. And they tried all kinds of things. And a handful of them have succeeded. They need a certain 02:04:21.048 --> 02:04:25.630 - level of parking. They need a certain level of density. 02:04:25.954 --> 02:04:33.321 - The idea of the Paris street, those are eight-story apartments. Nobody drives. They walk down and they 02:04:33.321 --> 02:04:40.544 - go to their coffee. But everyone drives into town. And in the summer, one, we don't have sports with 02:04:40.544 --> 02:04:47.839 - IU, so people aren't coming then. In the summer, we don't have students, so it's almost a ghost town. 02:04:47.839 --> 02:04:55.134 - And the woman who spoke before described exactly what I see when I go down Saturday with my grandson. 02:04:55.330 --> 02:05:03.081 - bare tables in the sun. It's not a pleasant sight. So we have this myth that the cool towns are doing 02:05:03.081 --> 02:05:11.060 - it. The truth is this has failed and failed again and failed again. And the people who actually designed 02:05:11.060 --> 02:05:18.963 - West Pearl spoke against closing off more streets because it was harming the businesses who were almost 02:05:18.963 --> 02:05:25.118 - unanimously against this. And I'm afraid you're seeing that here too. They know. 02:05:25.378 --> 02:05:32.116 - the value of a parking spot that turns over and turns over and turns over. And new urbanists have actually 02:05:32.116 --> 02:05:38.728 - calculated the value of those parking spots. And it's kind of phenomenal. Without those, the place dies. 02:05:38.728 --> 02:05:45.025 - And people come to town from out of town, and they get here not on bicycles. They get here in cars. 02:05:45.025 --> 02:05:51.449 - They want to come downtown. And it's true that one-way streets make it even harder to find how do you 02:05:51.449 --> 02:05:53.086 - park close enough to walk 02:05:53.442 --> 02:06:05.069 - onto Kirkwood and enjoy that myth. So it's a pleasant dream, but I'm afraid it's a myth for this community. 02:06:05.069 --> 02:06:16.049 - We don't have the density, and let's do it right. Let's leave it open. Thank you so much. Next person 02:06:16.049 --> 02:06:23.262 - online, and then we'll come to Mr. MG. Am I up already? Hello? OK. 02:06:23.554 --> 02:06:32.377 - I thought I was third. Paul Russo. The way I see it is the primary reason to restrict Kirkwood to pedestrians 02:06:32.377 --> 02:06:40.718 - and bicycles for even part of the summer is momentum. There's momentum, currently momentum for seasonal 02:06:40.718 --> 02:06:49.380 - car-free Kirkwood. I don't think the street needs to get back to anything, especially not the 20th century. 02:06:49.380 --> 02:06:53.310 - Kirkwood needs to fully embrace the 21st century 02:06:54.178 --> 02:07:00.714 - of urban design that gets people back on their feet. I don't understand why the ordinance would require 02:07:00.714 --> 02:07:07.251 - any significant funding above what was spent last summer, but I did join the meeting a little bit late. 02:07:07.251 --> 02:07:13.535 - I don't understand why the ordinance would interfere with street events because it seems to me that 02:07:13.535 --> 02:07:19.883 - maintaining the momentum for a car-free Kirkwood would enable street events. I'm also baffled by all 02:07:19.883 --> 02:07:24.094 - the talk about the importance of parking, especially for students. 02:07:26.530 --> 02:07:34.225 - This is a section of street that is right next to the iconic entrance to campus. There are probably 02:07:34.225 --> 02:07:42.074 - tens of thousands of IU students within a mile of the street, living within a mile of the street. And 02:07:42.074 --> 02:07:50.000 - walking a mile when you're 19 is nothing. And one final comment is that I once worked for an ice cream 02:07:50.000 --> 02:07:54.078 - store several years ago, for several years actually. 02:07:54.818 --> 02:08:01.257 - So I'm very familiar with that product and serving it and how it's used and all the ins and outs. And 02:08:01.257 --> 02:08:07.571 - I saw over and over in my years, people prefer to walk with their ice cream cones, not sit in a car 02:08:07.571 --> 02:08:14.073 - with them. So I'm a little bit baffled by some of the earlier comments. I encourage you to have vision 02:08:14.073 --> 02:08:20.702 - and I encourage you to keep the momentum because it's right now going in the right direction. Thank you. 02:08:21.698 --> 02:08:28.265 - Thank you so much. Now I understand there's one more commenter online. No, that's it. Okay. Well, then 02:08:28.265 --> 02:08:34.704 - we'll come back to council change. Yes. Good evening, Mr. President. This is Krister mg representing 02:08:34.704 --> 02:08:41.079 - the greater Bloomington chamber of commerce on a personal note. I have never worked in an ice cream 02:08:41.079 --> 02:08:47.582 - shop, but the chamber does support downtown. We've been really active with the planners, the cleanup, 02:08:48.002 --> 02:08:54.202 - And the amazing job they've done with the sidewalks. I mean, it's important for the day-to-day operations 02:08:54.202 --> 02:09:00.226 - for that street to look. It's a vital part of our community. But a seasonal closure that's April 1 and 02:09:00.226 --> 02:09:06.250 - November 15th is not a short pilot nor a special event. It's a seven and a half month operating model. 02:09:06.250 --> 02:09:12.333 - And the change is the burden proved quite a bit. Before the council codifies this permanently, the city 02:09:12.333 --> 02:09:17.246 - should look what the cost benefit analysis is, how it's funded, evaluated, managed. 02:09:17.442 --> 02:09:22.693 - Street closure is not the same as public space. Courier closing does not automatically create a successful 02:09:22.693 --> 02:09:27.649 - pedestrian district. We've heard this a lot today. A successful public space needs two things, daily 02:09:27.649 --> 02:09:33.048 - management and clear accountability. This means someone has to own the experience, not just put up barricades 02:09:33.048 --> 02:09:37.955 - and make the space work, but make the space work for everyone. Without that structure, this risk is 02:09:37.955 --> 02:09:43.108 - becoming what it has last summer, which is under management street closure rather than a downtown asset. 02:09:43.108 --> 02:09:46.494 - It became a pedestrian asphalt desert, as we've heard very well from 02:09:46.626 --> 02:09:53.301 - tool business owners and This is just adding another public space space when existing assets and need 02:09:53.301 --> 02:10:00.042 - attention. I think Councilmember Piedmont Smith brought that up Bloomington already has a large public 02:10:00.042 --> 02:10:06.847 - space system a lot of great parks. Many of those need serious Investment Brian Park pool requires major 02:10:06.847 --> 02:10:14.046 - innovations Frank Southern ice arena might be on its last winner Winslow Sports Park needs basic upgrades and 02:10:14.146 --> 02:10:20.120 - These are not side issue, but core quality of life for a lot of people. Before creating long-term space 02:10:20.120 --> 02:10:26.094 - to maintain, the city should ask whether it's fully caring for its public assets its own. And if you've 02:10:26.094 --> 02:10:31.954 - toured the restrooms at Winslow Sports Park, you would know it is not. It's been mentioned as well by 02:10:31.954 --> 02:10:37.813 - Councilmember Piedmont-Smith. Corkwood's kind of working. It's one of Bloomington's most recognizable 02:10:37.813 --> 02:10:43.902 - and successful streets, and it's improved over the last few years. That doesn't mean we should ignore it, 02:10:44.066 --> 02:10:50.362 - but it does mean that we need to look at where our resources are best met. Other corridors, North College 02:10:50.362 --> 02:10:56.600 - and Walnut, near the stadium district, have greater redevelopment potential and stronger case for public 02:10:56.600 --> 02:11:02.718 - attention. The city shouldn't prioritize investments where public action can unlock private investment 02:11:02.718 --> 02:11:08.658 - and long-term economic growth. And we support practical downtown measures like downtown Bloomington 02:11:08.658 --> 02:11:12.222 - Inks propose a free parking after four o'clock during July. 02:11:12.642 --> 02:11:18.229 - This kind of targeted support is more useful to downtown businesses than codifying a long-term closure 02:11:18.229 --> 02:11:23.816 - before an operating plan is in place. The chamber is not asking the city to abandon correctly, no, but 02:11:23.816 --> 02:11:29.295 - we ask the city to sequence this correctly. Bring forward a measure of funding, a plan, identify how 02:11:29.295 --> 02:11:34.720 - this is going to work. Until then, we should not codify this. Thank you for your time. Thank you so 02:11:34.720 --> 02:11:39.710 - much. Is there anybody else in chambers who would like to make comment? Anyone else online? 02:11:41.634 --> 02:11:51.216 - Would Heart Souls like to do a rebuttal on, oh no, I'm joking. Okay, so I'm joking. Nobody else online 02:11:51.216 --> 02:12:01.171 - will come back to council. I saw Council Member Rallo had his hand up. Thank you. So I just had a question 02:12:01.171 --> 02:12:10.846 - I should have asked before, President. Sorry, I wanted to circle back on this because you had said that 02:12:11.330 --> 02:12:20.261 - We were not holding a vote on this tonight. I'm not certainly in favor of holding a vote on this tonight, 02:12:20.261 --> 02:12:29.023 - but I think the reasons that you stated were that it was required to have a deliberation by the Traffic 02:12:29.023 --> 02:12:38.206 - Commission. Is that the case? I think it's not required. I think the Traffic Commission is an advisory body. 02:12:39.074 --> 02:12:46.673 - Sorry, I misspoke, it was the Transportation Commission, but Council Attorney Allen, could you speak 02:12:46.673 --> 02:12:54.197 - to this a little bit? I'm sorry, can you restate the question just for me? I think his question was 02:12:54.197 --> 02:13:01.947 - clarification on why we can't vote on it tonight. I see. Yes, so I was referring to the Transportation 02:13:01.947 --> 02:13:05.182 - Commission in code 2.02.100 under purpose. 02:13:05.282 --> 02:13:12.966 - States that the commission shall provide recommendations and guidance to the mayor and common council 02:13:12.966 --> 02:13:20.876 - In the pursuit of developing and implementing citywide policy, etc It's not a requirement Yeah, so under 02:13:20.876 --> 02:13:28.409 - under bloomington municipal code 2.0 to 100 subsection d2 It does provide that the commission shall 02:13:28.409 --> 02:13:30.142 - essentially review all 02:13:30.466 --> 02:13:36.181 - Transportation projects proposed changes to title 15 vehicles and traffic relevant proposed changes 02:13:36.181 --> 02:13:42.068 - to title 12 Etc, etc to make sure that those are consistent with the comprehensive plan and other city 02:13:42.068 --> 02:13:48.070 - adopted plans to make sure they're consistent with best practices That they're consistent with advancing 02:13:48.070 --> 02:13:53.328 - sustainable transportation system and equitable access to all transportation facility users 02:13:53.328 --> 02:13:55.614 - while prioritizing non automotive modes 02:13:55.714 --> 02:14:00.990 - and has adequately conducted public engagement and considered community-centric design tied to targeted outcomes. 02:14:01.090 --> 02:14:06.929 - My specific advice here was that originally this was not actually on the agenda is my understanding 02:14:06.929 --> 02:14:13.119 - of the Transportation Commission for their previous meeting. It was raised to them through public comment 02:14:13.119 --> 02:14:19.250 - by the council members the sponsoring council members. However I did suggest because you all have passed 02:14:19.250 --> 02:14:25.148 - that portion subsection D2 of the municipal code it would be wise to have them formally review it in 02:14:25.148 --> 02:14:30.462 - accordance with how the municipal code is going since it is a proposed change to Title 15. 02:14:33.314 --> 02:14:41.687 - Um, I- I- I don't have a trouble in, uh, in receiving the recommendation for proceeding, but I- I'm 02:14:41.687 --> 02:14:49.474 - not sure I follow that this is a requirement. That the council is required to re- to receive 02:14:49.474 --> 02:14:57.848 - a recommendation. Am I wrong? I mean, I guess it depends what you mean by requirement. I think the- 02:14:57.848 --> 02:15:00.862 - the danger that you run, of course, 02:15:01.026 --> 02:15:06.949 - The council can choose to ignore my advice and go forward as they wish The danger you run is that that 02:15:06.949 --> 02:15:12.815 - review would essentially be meaningless, right? Because you essentially would pass a rule already and 02:15:12.815 --> 02:15:19.084 - then the review happens after the fact which doesn't allow for For instance if the transportation Commission 02:15:19.084 --> 02:15:24.892 - did recommend further public engagement then it wouldn't allow for further public engagement because 02:15:24.892 --> 02:15:27.710 - the rules already adopted and we've moved on and 02:15:27.874 --> 02:15:34.893 - That's why I was just trying to give effect to all of the language and into the council's prior language 02:15:34.893 --> 02:15:41.578 - now Let me let me just clarify really quickly. I don't mean to be overly verbose But if the council 02:15:41.578 --> 02:15:48.731 - wanted to make an amendment to this legislation to say suspend the requirement Under Bloomington Municipal 02:15:48.731 --> 02:15:54.814 - Code, then you could also do that Thank you so much. I'm a councilman Flaherty. Can I just 02:15:55.298 --> 02:16:01.121 - So, okay, yeah, go ahead, Councilor Morello, and then we'll go to Councilor Flaherty. Yeah, 02:16:01.121 --> 02:16:07.641 - just to say, I think, you know, I don't have the Environmental Commission purpose to enabling language 02:16:07.641 --> 02:16:14.223 - in front of me, but I think that it also states that it is it develops recommendations for the Planning 02:16:14.223 --> 02:16:20.363 - Commission. Would it be true that the Planning Commission should always wait on a matter before, 02:16:20.363 --> 02:16:24.414 - you know, to to allow the Environmental Commission to come to a 02:16:25.570 --> 02:16:31.836 - a conclusion about, you know. Yeah. And I'm happy to review that particular part of code council member 02:16:31.836 --> 02:16:38.282 - and give you advice on that as well. I think in this, in this case, for certain this code, anytime there's 02:16:38.282 --> 02:16:44.367 - going to be a proposed change to title 12, title 15 or transportation project, it should be reviewed 02:16:44.367 --> 02:16:50.392 - by the transportation commission. Okay. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you so much. Council member 02:16:50.392 --> 02:16:53.886 - Flaherty. Yeah. Just a question for the sponsors and what 02:16:55.106 --> 02:17:01.931 - I got fuzzy on the details here. I was on a work trip and had to miss the transportation commission 02:17:01.931 --> 02:17:08.961 - meeting. I'm a representative on that commission. I had to miss the meeting where this was brought up, 02:17:08.961 --> 02:17:16.059 - but my recollection is, I guess, did the sponsors request that it be added to the agenda at some point? 02:17:16.059 --> 02:17:21.246 - And could you tell me more about that, please? Yes. So we wanted to get it, 02:17:21.666 --> 02:17:31.713 - to transportation commission for the previous meeting that was when you were gone, but materials needed 02:17:31.713 --> 02:17:41.374 - to be received two weeks before that meeting to be on the agenda. So the chair decided to add it as 02:17:41.374 --> 02:17:51.614 - a discussion item at last month's meeting. And then from their schedule, if need be a special session to, 02:17:52.098 --> 02:17:59.426 - to hear it on the agenda and make a recommendation before our last meeting, before recess. Got it. And 02:17:59.426 --> 02:18:06.825 - the two week timeline, was that a staff request? Is it in the commission's bylaws? Do you know, I could 02:18:06.825 --> 02:18:14.153 - look it up, look into it, but. I think it's in the bylaws. Okay. Thank you. That's helpful. Thank you. 02:18:14.153 --> 02:18:21.694 - I'll go to council member Zulek and then council member Rosemar. Do you have a further point beyond that? 02:18:22.370 --> 02:18:29.289 - I did just want to clarify what happened at the Transportation Commission right and just explain why 02:18:29.289 --> 02:18:36.140 - it wasn't on wasn't an agenda item last time. Okay tremendous. Thank you so much. I Just think this 02:18:36.140 --> 02:18:43.059 - part of the conversation is a little bit redundant based on the feedback that we've heard from other 02:18:43.059 --> 02:18:50.047 - council members I don't think that anyone plans on Casting a vote tonight on the way that the current 02:18:50.047 --> 02:18:51.486 - ordinance is written 02:18:52.418 --> 02:18:59.440 - I'm happy to take feedback from sponsors, but that's what I'm getting. So I do suggest at this time 02:18:59.440 --> 02:19:06.603 - that we figure out what questions need to be answered by June 10th, get our response from the mayor's 02:19:06.603 --> 02:19:13.977 - administration if they would like to give their piece and move this to next meeting. I think that sounds 02:19:13.977 --> 02:19:21.139 - great. I think council member Raul was making a point about plan commission and not trying to vote on 02:19:21.139 --> 02:19:21.982 - it tonight, 02:19:22.114 --> 02:19:30.230 - I don't think that was happening. I did want to also just reiterate or clarify that the Transportation 02:19:30.230 --> 02:19:38.110 - Commission, they have created a special session and that is June 8th at 7 p.m. if anyone would like 02:19:38.110 --> 02:19:46.226 - to come watch and or participate. Thank you very much. Are there any motions? Deputy Mayor Knapp would 02:19:46.226 --> 02:19:51.742 - like to make some comments. So unless there's any opposed, all right. 02:19:52.386 --> 02:19:58.807 - Deputy mayor Matt Knapp First of all, I'm I want to be sure everybody understands that the administration 02:19:58.807 --> 02:20:05.046 - including the mayor's office Really wants to have a vibrant exciting Kirkwood and we are all very much 02:20:05.046 --> 02:20:11.103 - looking forward to the corridor study next year Which I think is going to provide a really exciting 02:20:11.103 --> 02:20:15.646 - beautiful vision and I think there are a lot of ways to make Kirkwood be a 02:20:15.874 --> 02:20:22.416 - Exciting and accessible to everyone pedestrians bicyclists people with limited mobility people who need 02:20:22.416 --> 02:20:28.329 - to park That run between the gamut of fully closed to fully open that I think there are a lot 02:20:28.329 --> 02:20:34.808 - of possibilities there and it will Most likely require a significant infrastructure investment to make 02:20:34.808 --> 02:20:41.288 - the street look and feel different in places I guess one of the things that I wanted to ask this group 02:20:41.288 --> 02:20:43.678 - to think about is there been a lot of 02:20:43.874 --> 02:20:50.366 - Comparisons made to the really beautiful pedestrian malls and some other cities and often what I hear 02:20:50.366 --> 02:20:56.857 - is well, that's a college city, too So why can't we be like them? So what I ask you to do is when you 02:20:56.857 --> 02:21:02.776 - talk about? Boulder Charlottesville Burlington, whatever the place is I'd ask you to Google. 02:21:02.776 --> 02:21:09.204 - What is the MSA? what are what is the average income and house price and What is the city budget and 02:21:09.204 --> 02:21:13.150 - how many police officers do they have because I can tell you? 02:21:13.314 --> 02:21:19.723 - All of those cities are considerably larger MSAs than ours, two times. Charlottesville is a suburb of 02:21:19.723 --> 02:21:26.069 - DC, essentially. It is incredibly wealthy. They have a Whole Foods and a Trader Joe's, and as all of 02:21:26.069 --> 02:21:32.353 - us who've lived here a long time know, Bloomington has never succeeded in attracting those. We have 02:21:32.353 --> 02:21:38.762 - never succeeded in attracting high-end retail, which is what is all along Pearl Street. That's what's 02:21:38.762 --> 02:21:42.846 - along Burlington. Boulder's budget is three times the size bars. 02:21:43.106 --> 02:21:49.960 - Charlotte has a hundred million dollars more a year to spend they all have many more officers per capita 02:21:49.960 --> 02:21:56.488 - than Bloomington does we're authorized for 1.2. I think Boulder is around two officers per thousand 02:21:56.488 --> 02:22:03.147 - people Charlottesville even though it's a smaller city has the same amount of police officers that we 02:22:03.147 --> 02:22:09.740 - do Burlington authorized for the same amount that we have even though it's half the size look at the 02:22:09.740 --> 02:22:10.654 - proportion of 02:22:10.914 --> 02:22:17.016 - When you look at the population of the city, what proportion is students versus residents? We have a 02:22:17.016 --> 02:22:23.239 - much larger proportion of students. So I'm not saying that these dreams are impossible at all, but I'm 02:22:23.239 --> 02:22:29.461 - saying our situation is not the same. And the vision we need to develop needs to take all of that into 02:22:29.461 --> 02:22:35.563 - account. We can't copy and paste because we are not the same community. What worked there won't work 02:22:35.563 --> 02:22:40.638 - here. And just as a final note, it's important to do it right because historically, 02:22:41.058 --> 02:22:48.879 - 89% of pedestrian malls fail There's a study on that you can google it. It's not a secret So it can 02:22:48.879 --> 02:22:56.778 - work but it has to be very carefully done and we don't have a careful plan and the corridor study is 02:22:56.778 --> 02:23:04.677 - the right Opportunity to create that vision not legislation right now. Thanks Thank you so much. I'm 02:23:04.677 --> 02:23:06.398 - the director seaborne 02:23:10.050 --> 02:23:16.293 - Good evening, Andrew Seaborg. Just wanted to share a few things for reference and future consideration 02:23:16.293 --> 02:23:22.536 - of this group and anybody watching. I mostly came to help answer questions, didn't hear any questions, 02:23:22.536 --> 02:23:28.658 - appreciate some of the questions to clarify what the ordinance is, because as I was writing a report 02:23:28.658 --> 02:23:34.780 - for the Transportation Commission, I thought it only included two and a half blocks. I verified that 02:23:34.780 --> 02:23:38.174 - it is five blocks, so just appreciate that and the lack 02:23:38.434 --> 02:23:45.534 - on what was intended here. Appreciate the intent of this body to wait for the Transportation Commission 02:23:45.534 --> 02:23:52.429 - to advise and provide their recommendation. I hope that this body listens to that body. I don't know 02:23:52.429 --> 02:23:59.460 - how they will act. I don't know what they will say. I think they may already have an impression of how 02:23:59.460 --> 02:24:07.038 - some of you may feel about it, but hope that they just, everybody comes to this with an open and curious mind. 02:24:07.234 --> 02:24:14.153 - As I'm preparing for the Transportation Commission meeting next Monday at 7 p.m There's there's a couple 02:24:14.153 --> 02:24:20.874 - of framings of the topic. I just wanted to share so there's there's one question We're all looking at 02:24:20.874 --> 02:24:27.793 - it. It's a single ordinance, but there's really two questions within it The way I'm seeing it. The first 02:24:27.793 --> 02:24:33.790 - question is should Kirkwood be closed for some period of time to motor vehicle traffic and 02:24:34.274 --> 02:24:40.531 - We've got opinions. Yes or no, the Commission has very strict criteria that they should be evaluating 02:24:40.531 --> 02:24:46.972 - these kinds of things on And just the reports being drafted But there are some of those criteria I think 02:24:46.972 --> 02:24:53.106 - are not met Is likely what the staff report will share? We'll see how that if the Commission agrees 02:24:53.106 --> 02:24:59.241 - or not But that that's one of the fundamental questions. The other fundamental question is if it is 02:24:59.241 --> 02:25:00.222 - to be closed is 02:25:00.386 --> 02:25:06.530 - Is this the right way to do it? Is this the right ordinance? Is it a traffic ordinance or is it a use 02:25:06.530 --> 02:25:13.035 - of a street that belongs in title 12? Like other uses of streets and I think that is would be my suggestion 02:25:13.035 --> 02:25:19.059 - is if it is to be closed Is there is this the right ordinance or is there a more appropriate way to 02:25:19.059 --> 02:25:20.926 - write an ordinance to do that? 02:25:21.058 --> 02:25:28.499 - So those are the main questions in my mind looking forward to the Transportation Commission's discussion 02:25:28.499 --> 02:25:35.727 - and Hopeful recommendation to help aid in your discussion. So just wanted to share that. Thank you so 02:25:35.727 --> 02:25:42.884 - much Are there any further comments motions? councilmember rough I Appreciate hearing from everybody 02:25:42.884 --> 02:25:49.758 - tonight staff the members of public council, there's a lot to think about here, but I also share 02:25:50.850 --> 02:25:59.128 - view that comparisons with I Generally don't like comparisons with other communities for bulletin in 02:25:59.128 --> 02:26:07.325 - any circumstance But this one Particular particularly As has been pointed out, they're not the same 02:26:07.325 --> 02:26:15.603 - as these other communities in terms of where we are and what we are now, but furthermore those small 02:26:15.603 --> 02:26:18.718 - those pedestrian I went to school and 02:26:18.882 --> 02:26:26.678 - University of Colorado in Boulder. I Went to school in Ithaca, New York Which actually I'll tell I mentioned 02:26:26.678 --> 02:26:33.972 - in the deputy mayor is actually a smaller community that Bloomington and they have a Pedestrian mall, 02:26:33.972 --> 02:26:41.339 - but those were created in the mid 70s in the mid 1970s Things were very different students didn't have 02:26:41.339 --> 02:26:45.630 - cars anywhere near at the rate they do now Not even close I 02:26:47.746 --> 02:26:55.859 - In the mid-1970s when those were created, I was at school in those places in the 80s, but in the mid-1970s, 02:26:55.859 --> 02:27:03.671 - my family would come downtown Bloomington, the square in Kirkwood, to basically do all of our shopping. 02:27:03.671 --> 02:27:11.182 - Our hardware stores were down here, the drugs, everything we needed was here. And that was the time 02:27:11.182 --> 02:27:17.342 - when they were establishing these pedestrian closed streets in these other towns. 02:27:17.602 --> 02:27:26.336 - I just don't think we can really compare we need to listen to We need to pay attention what the experience 02:27:26.336 --> 02:27:34.661 - and what the reality is now we need to listen to our current mix of merchants and businesses downtown 02:27:34.661 --> 02:27:42.823 - For for for their input And The other thing I'll say real quick is I'm a little bit concerned about 02:27:42.823 --> 02:27:43.966 - the tenth and 02:27:45.090 --> 02:27:52.047 - We just forwarded the utilities loan issued at the 10th. We're moving this to the 10th. We have the 02:27:52.047 --> 02:27:59.351 - AI resolution that Councilmember Rollins bring forward on the 10th It started to look like a Problematic 02:27:59.351 --> 02:28:06.725 - meeting potentially to me. Anyway, thank you Thank you so much councilmember Zulek, I move that ordinance 02:28:06.725 --> 02:28:12.638 - 20 26-12 be postponed to the next regular scheduled council meeting on June 10th and 02:28:14.754 --> 02:28:20.598 - There's a motion a second a discussion But councilmember Stossberg I have a comment before that motion 02:28:20.598 --> 02:28:26.386 - about the general ordinance I think that one thing that we kind of danced around a little bit tonight 02:28:26.386 --> 02:28:32.230 - But didn't specify was the fiscal impact and there is a fiscal impact statement Attached to this which 02:28:32.230 --> 02:28:38.187 - basically is there's no fiscal impact But I think to do it right there is a fiscal impact and so I guess 02:28:38.187 --> 02:28:44.542 - I just want that to be Thought about a little bit next week and at the Transportation Commission meeting things 02:28:45.442 --> 02:28:57.042 - Councilmember Rosenbacher Sorry, yes, I sometimes the mic goes away So this is it I just there are some 02:28:57.042 --> 02:29:07.749 - things I would just kind of like to respond to you as a co-sponsor before we postpone it. Okay? 02:29:07.749 --> 02:29:13.214 - Parliamentarian I'm okay with it, but I think we 02:29:13.314 --> 02:29:25.757 - there's a motion and we should discuss the motion yeah but but are you so that's my discussion of the 02:29:25.757 --> 02:29:32.222 - motion okay well that's do I yes go for it go for it 02:29:33.922 --> 02:29:41.905 - So there's an ordinance for the outdoor dining program that is separate than this. So the outdoor dining 02:29:41.905 --> 02:29:49.584 - program can cost money. And doing Kirkwood like a pedestrian mall can also cost money. But this is a 02:29:49.584 --> 02:29:57.263 - Title 15 change that says vehicle travel is not allowed on Kirkwood. So the fiscal impact of that is 02:29:57.263 --> 02:30:03.422 - zero. I mean, it's putting up bollards. So that is what this ordinance would do. 02:30:05.602 --> 02:30:14.660 - I did a quick Google. Ithaca, New York has a smaller MSA. It has a smaller budget. It has a very successful 02:30:14.660 --> 02:30:23.046 - pedestrian mall. So it is doable in communities that have the same metrics as ours. It does happen. 02:30:23.046 --> 02:30:30.762 - I was going to respond more to the administration's memo, but I can just do it next time. I 02:30:30.762 --> 02:30:33.278 - had a conversation today with 02:30:33.666 --> 02:30:41.373 - Council Attorney Allen about whether or not this should be in title 12 or title 15. It should be in 02:30:41.373 --> 02:30:49.312 - title 15 because this is about streets. We are the legislative body. We have the authority to do that. 02:30:49.312 --> 02:30:57.019 - Doesn't need to go before Board of Public Works. Another point in there was that would council have 02:30:57.019 --> 02:31:03.262 - to approve every street closure for construction projects or anything like that? 02:31:03.458 --> 02:31:10.541 - Uh, the administration called it a street closure multiple times. We are not closing a street. We are 02:31:10.541 --> 02:31:17.484 - restricting. We are attempting to restrict vehicle traffic. So, um, the board of public works would 02:31:17.484 --> 02:31:24.844 - still be responsible for, uh, closing streets to everyone, restricting a hundred percent of access except 02:31:24.844 --> 02:31:25.886 - for the person 02:31:26.498 --> 02:31:33.395 - or the people or the company working on something like a construction project where they're putting 02:31:33.395 --> 02:31:40.775 - up fences and they're blocking access. So I just want to say, if you have read the memo or if you haven't, 02:31:40.775 --> 02:31:48.638 - those things are different. I guess that's most of my notes for right now. Thank you so much. Any other comments? 02:31:49.314 --> 02:32:01.780 - Okay, there's a motion on table. Will the did I miss? Did I miss hands online or was that just motion? 02:32:01.780 --> 02:32:14.489 - Okay. Good. Will the clerk please call the roll? Councilmember Zula. Yes. Sorry. Yes. Daily. Yes. Rallo. 02:32:14.489 --> 02:32:18.846 - Yes. No. Rosenberger. Yes. Clarity. 02:32:19.746 --> 02:32:29.308 - Yes, Stasberg. Yes, Piedmont Smith. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. That motion carries. We'll now move on 02:32:29.308 --> 02:32:39.058 - to the last period of public comment for things that were not on the agenda. Would anybody like to make 02:32:39.058 --> 02:32:45.246 - a public comment? Seeing none. Is there anyone online? Fantastic. 02:32:45.474 --> 02:32:53.347 - There's almost still sunshine in terms of notes on council schedule. I'm just just a quick one with 02:32:53.347 --> 02:32:59.646 - clerk and Just for everybody's awareness and there's a couple of things sort of 02:32:59.778 --> 02:33:07.710 - We do need to probably schedule a hiring committee before we break next week. So I'll send around a 02:33:07.710 --> 02:33:15.641 - survey for that tonight. And then there's as you all saw, some of you still haven't responded about 02:33:15.641 --> 02:33:20.638 - possible availability for a joint session with county council. 02:33:21.154 --> 02:33:26.391 - There's some other dynamics there. But but if you have not yet responded with your availability, if 02:33:26.391 --> 02:33:31.785 - you could just let me know, that would be fantastic. All right. Any other things for council schedule? 02:33:31.785 --> 02:33:32.990 - I'm councilor Sasberg. 02:33:33.794 --> 02:33:39.619 - I'll go ahead and announce even though it's kind of a week early that the next fiscal committee meeting 02:33:39.619 --> 02:33:45.221 - is the 12th of June which is not two days from now but the Friday after that and one of the reasons 02:33:45.221 --> 02:33:51.326 - why I'm announcing it now is the last fiscal committee meeting before summer recess and we are going to have 02:33:51.522 --> 02:33:57.695 - Adam Weiss and sanitation presentation about sanitation rates and so that might be of interest to the 02:33:57.695 --> 02:34:03.929 - public Also may be of interest to other council members and so that's something that you can check out 02:34:03.929 --> 02:34:09.981 - the packet He's gonna just kind of be be floating some possibilities that they've considered if you 02:34:09.981 --> 02:34:16.275 - recall we had to transfer about one and a half million of general fund money to make sanitation solvent 02:34:16.275 --> 02:34:19.422 - this year Thanks anyone else comments for schedule? 02:34:19.554 --> 02:34:24.062 - Going once, going twice, we sit adjourned. Thank you very much.