WEBVTT

00:00:00.258 --> 00:00:08.970
- I'm gonna call to order this meeting of the Bloomington City Council on Wednesday, July 22nd The agendas

00:00:08.970 --> 00:00:17.765
- are printed out on the clerk's desk and there are some posted on the doors We have fairly straightforward

00:00:17.765 --> 00:00:24.734
- meeting today First we'll have some minutes for approval I believe and then reports

00:00:26.082 --> 00:00:36.334
- I'm sorry. I always am I'm even reading it right here The first thing that will happen will be a roll

00:00:36.334 --> 00:00:46.787
- call and so in which case I'm well clerk Bolden, please call roll It's fine councilmember Flaherty Here

00:00:46.787 --> 00:00:55.934
- Stasberg here Piedmont Smith Zulik Asari here Daly here Rallo here rough Rosen barker here

00:00:56.546 --> 00:01:04.016
- Thank you. All right. So back to the agenda summation. Then we have one piece of legislation for first

00:01:04.016 --> 00:01:11.487
- reading and three pieces of legislation for second reading. There will be two times of public comment.

00:01:11.487 --> 00:01:18.014
- All right. So with that, let's go. If there are any minutes for approval, do we have any?

00:01:18.914 --> 00:01:25.861
- I don't think we did, right? Okay, we don't have any minutes for approval, so moving swiftly along.

00:01:25.861 --> 00:01:30.238
- Council members, any reports? Please, Council Member Stasberg.

00:01:31.106 --> 00:01:37.701
- Go ahead and say welcome back to our first meeting after recess I spent my recess traveling to a few

00:01:37.701 --> 00:01:44.296
- different places and it's one of those interesting things when you get out of Bloomington now I look

00:01:44.296 --> 00:01:50.238
- at lots of elements and pieces of the places where I was and sometimes that makes me go oh

00:01:50.530 --> 00:01:57.552
- wow, look at all the things Bloomington has. And sometimes it makes me go, oh, look at all the things

00:01:57.552 --> 00:02:04.436
- Bloomington doesn't have. But I mostly wanted to take a minute to celebrate some of the things that

00:02:04.436 --> 00:02:11.458
- we have in terms of our infrastructure. One of the places that I went to was Belize, and it was very,

00:02:11.458 --> 00:02:17.310
- very interesting. But there was also transportation infrastructure was not the same.

00:02:17.474 --> 00:02:23.490
- And it was really interesting, the elements that I thought to myself, oh, it would be like, we have

00:02:23.490 --> 00:02:26.558
- a lot better infrastructure in some of these ways.

00:02:26.658 --> 00:02:32.907
- in terms of our transportation infrastructure. And then in other ways, they had some sleeping policemen,

00:02:32.907 --> 00:02:38.918
- if you've ever been to Belize, maybe you've heard about the sleeping policemen, they are speed bumps

00:02:38.918 --> 00:02:44.870
- in the middle of 50 mile an hour roads. And you learn to expect them, you learn where they are, and

00:02:44.870 --> 00:02:51.060
- everybody just goes with it. And it is one of those interesting pieces of infrastructure that we wanna,

00:02:51.060 --> 00:02:54.750
- like, I hear lots of complaints about speed bumps, but it is,

00:02:54.882 --> 00:03:01.695
- definitely a tool that slows you down on Belizean highways when you are approaching a bus stop in the

00:03:01.695 --> 00:03:08.508
- middle of a 50 mile an hour road. And it can really be utilized as a tool and people just get used to

00:03:08.508 --> 00:03:15.187
- it. And so that's something that I want to kind of put out there is this general like things change

00:03:15.187 --> 00:03:22.334
- and things are different and there are many different ways to proceed and do things and do things well and

00:03:22.850 --> 00:03:32.435
- People are very, very adaptable, and success can look like a lot of different things. So that's my takeaway

00:03:32.435 --> 00:03:41.753
- from my nice, relaxing summer traveling. Thanks. Thank you very much. Any other comments? Council Member

00:03:41.753 --> 00:03:49.918
- Pima-Smith. Yes. On a slightly less positive note, I did want to express my dismay that the

00:03:50.082 --> 00:04:00.272
- land swap seems to have not occurred that we were supporting for the College Square site that the RDC

00:04:00.272 --> 00:04:10.463
- owns and the Seminary Point site that the CIB owns with different dates for requests for proposals by

00:04:10.463 --> 00:04:15.358
- the two bodies. They seem to be going forward in

00:04:16.898 --> 00:04:26.170
- different directions and further away from any possibility of swapping land, which is unfortunate. So

00:04:26.170 --> 00:04:36.350
- that's all. Thank you. Thank you for bringing that up. Any other comments or reports? I'd like to make just two

00:04:36.610 --> 00:04:46.147
- brief ones. The first is in terms of things to be dismayed by. Many of you may be familiar with the

00:04:46.147 --> 00:04:56.542
- Bloomingtonian, which is a local news organization that recently had its page taken down by Facebook without

00:04:56.674 --> 00:05:04.118
- any sort of process was taken down by an AI bot. I'm particularly concerned about this, something I've

00:05:04.118 --> 00:05:11.418
- often spoken about, but you know, local media of any sort matters a lot and we live, luckily we have

00:05:11.418 --> 00:05:12.574
- people who have

00:05:12.674 --> 00:05:19.128
- you know, dedicated, I think, at a lot of cost of sweat and tears and often financial to themselves,

00:05:19.128 --> 00:05:25.519
- a lot of time to this community and making sure that we stay informed. Obviously, people like the B

00:05:25.519 --> 00:05:31.973
- Square Bulletin and the Bloomingtonian, I think, are pillars of how we stay informed as a community.

00:05:31.973 --> 00:05:36.894
- And so I was obviously dismayed that that happened. Very happy, though, that

00:05:36.962 --> 00:05:43.278
- I mean, luckily, Facebook seems to have responded now and reinstated their account, but it's still at

00:05:43.278 --> 00:05:49.718
- a state where they're not monetized now as an account. And so if any of you feel so compelled, it would

00:05:49.718 --> 00:05:55.973
- be wonderful if you can support the Blue Lintonian, if you care about that type of journalism that's

00:05:55.973 --> 00:05:59.998
- happening in the community. The second thing, I think similarly,

00:06:00.802 --> 00:06:07.842
- not a particularly happy thing to speak about, but there were recent reports of a potential hate crime

00:06:07.842 --> 00:06:14.814
- that happened at People's Market at their greenhouse just two days ago, or just yesterday, I'm sorry,

00:06:14.814 --> 00:06:21.717
- where I don't want to go into all of the details, but the simple fact of the matter is that somebody

00:06:21.717 --> 00:06:27.390
- was attacked based on their identity, and this is something that I think too often

00:06:27.458 --> 00:06:34.171
- we like to act like does not happen in a place like Bloomington. And we like to say, well, we're Bloomington.

00:06:34.171 --> 00:06:40.396
- If any of you ever watched the film about Matthew Shepard, one of the common threads that happened in

00:06:40.396 --> 00:06:46.927
- that film was that people in Laramie, Wyoming would say, well, this is Laramie. This type of thing doesn't

00:06:46.927 --> 00:06:53.152
- happen here. We're a very liberal community. I went to high school in Laramie, Wyoming, so I remember

00:06:53.152 --> 00:06:57.424
- this kind of vividly. But here in Bloomington, we have that same type

00:06:57.424 --> 00:07:03.722
- of approach a lot of the times when we talk about equity when we talk about what it really means to

00:07:03.722 --> 00:07:10.208
- be a resident in this town. It's too often that we think that we can rest on our liberal you know sort

00:07:10.208 --> 00:07:16.254
- of laurels and and forget the fact that the very reason why we still have work to do is that if

00:07:16.322 --> 00:07:22.820
- anyone is oppressed, then we all are. If anybody is under threat, then we all are. And so I just would

00:07:22.820 --> 00:07:29.381
- like to very clearly say that we're against all forms of violence, and that this type of violence needs

00:07:29.381 --> 00:07:36.068
- to be addressed the right way. Through economic means, it needs to be addressed very clearly with policy.

00:07:36.068 --> 00:07:42.503
- And also, again, if anybody is so inclined, the people's market would love your investment. And so if

00:07:42.503 --> 00:07:46.288
- you're able to invest in some way, shape, or form in making

00:07:46.288 --> 00:07:53.715
- is community safer, more accepting. It's just the sort of general call and plea. So again, thank you

00:07:53.715 --> 00:08:01.216
- all for all the work you do. Welcome back. I'm very excited for this portion of our term. Let us move

00:08:01.216 --> 00:08:08.938
- on then. We have reports from the mayor now in which there'll be a presentation of the 2026 Human Rights

00:08:08.938 --> 00:08:11.806
- Award. Who is doing said presentation?

00:08:16.930 --> 00:08:28.899
- There is no wrong side Perfect, thank you So good evening, my name is Emma Williams and I serve as the

00:08:28.899 --> 00:08:37.150
- chair of the Bloomington and Monroe County Human Rights Commission and

00:08:37.346 --> 00:08:43.681
- It's truly an honor to be here tonight, not only in my role as chair, but as a member of this community

00:08:43.681 --> 00:08:49.956
- that continues to show up for one another in really meaningful ways. On behalf of the Commission, it's

00:08:49.956 --> 00:08:56.535
- my honor to welcome and present this year's Human Rights Awards. The Commission exists to promote fairness,

00:08:56.535 --> 00:09:02.748
- dignity, and equal opportunity in our community, and tonight, we're going to recognize the people and

00:09:02.748 --> 00:09:07.134
- organizations who bring those values to life in really meaningful ways.

00:09:07.234 --> 00:09:14.405
- The human rights award was established in 1997 and it honors individuals and groups who have made significant

00:09:14.405 --> 00:09:21.120
- contributions to civil rights human relations and community here in Bloomington and Monroe County Each

00:09:21.120 --> 00:09:27.769
- year the nominees remind us that progress is built day by day through the commitment care and courage

00:09:27.769 --> 00:09:34.354
- of the people in this community It's a privilege to recognize two recipients this evening whose work

00:09:34.354 --> 00:09:36.766
- reflects exactly that first the 2026

00:09:36.866 --> 00:09:55.165
- Individual Human Rights Award is presented to Melanie Davis. Mel's work... Mell's work has been rooted

00:09:55.165 --> 00:10:05.470
- in advocacy, education, and a deep commitment to service.

00:10:05.634 --> 00:10:12.423
- As her nominator shared, she's dedicated her life to expanding opportunities for members of the LGBTQ

00:10:12.423 --> 00:10:19.412
- plus community to grow, thrive, and find safety, and build meaningful connections amongst our community.

00:10:19.412 --> 00:10:26.069
- Her impact can be seen across many spaces, from her work with Protect Our People, helping to ensure

00:10:26.069 --> 00:10:32.925
- access to resources for the transgender community, to her involvement with B-Town PFLAG, and her voice

00:10:32.925 --> 00:10:35.454
- on WFHB's Blooming Out Radio Program.

00:10:36.674 --> 00:10:43.086
- Most recently, Mel became the founding president of the Front Door LGBTIQ Center, which is working to

00:10:43.086 --> 00:10:49.497
- create a safe, sober, and family-friendly space for the LGBTIQ community here in Bloomington. Through

00:10:49.497 --> 00:10:55.343
- all her work, Mel has helped make Bloomington and Monroe County a more welcoming, inclusive,

00:10:55.343 --> 00:11:02.132
- and compassionate place for everyone. Her efforts remind us what it is and what it means to build community

00:11:02.132 --> 00:11:05.086
- with intention and care. Congratulations, Mel.

00:11:13.154 --> 00:11:29.672
- Next, the 2026 Organizational Human Rights Award is presented to Mother Hubbard's Cupboard. Mother Hubbard's

00:11:29.672 --> 00:11:38.462
- Cupboard works every day to increase access and nutrition

00:11:38.690 --> 00:11:44.886
- access to nutritious food in ways that cultivates dignity, agency, and community. Through their food

00:11:44.886 --> 00:11:51.021
- pantry, garden, and educational programs, they create a space where people are treated with respect

00:11:51.021 --> 00:11:57.218
- and where community is actively built. One nominator spoke about their personal experience receiving

00:11:57.218 --> 00:12:02.494
- resources, and they shared a simple but powerful truth. Access to food changes lives.

00:12:03.330 --> 00:12:09.551
- At its core, this work reflects the understanding that having enough to eat is not a privilege, it's

00:12:09.551 --> 00:12:15.957
- a basic human right. Mother Hubbard's Cupboard embodies that principle in action, ensuring that members

00:12:15.957 --> 00:12:22.362
- of our community are supported in meeting immediate needs, and they do so with dignity and empowerment.

00:12:22.362 --> 00:12:26.366
- So join me once again to congratulate Mother Hubbard's Cupboard.

00:12:33.570 --> 00:12:40.875
- Tonight's honorees remind us that human rights work can take the shape of many forms, advocacy, education,

00:12:40.875 --> 00:12:47.838
- service, and care, but at its core, it's about recognizing the inherent worth of every single person.

00:12:47.838 --> 00:12:54.665
- We're grateful for their contributions and for the example they set for all of us. Thank you. Thank

00:12:54.665 --> 00:13:02.174
- you so much. Fantastic. And we'll now move for any reports from council committees. Are there any? All right.

00:13:02.722 --> 00:13:12.905
- Moving on and congratulations again. Moving on to the first best part of the meeting, which is time

00:13:12.905 --> 00:13:14.942
- for public comment.

00:13:15.010 --> 00:13:21.608
- Rules are as they usually are. You have three minutes. Please remember to sign in. State your name or

00:13:21.608 --> 00:13:28.271
- alias for the record, if you will. People online, we'll start with people in the room. And then if you

00:13:28.271 --> 00:13:34.805
- are online, you can raise your hand and we'll acknowledge you for public comment. We'll start in the

00:13:34.805 --> 00:13:38.686
- room. And I see Commissioner Madeira here. So take it away.

00:13:39.938 --> 00:13:46.387
- Good evening. Thank you for the opportunity to address the council on a matter of mutual interest to

00:13:46.387 --> 00:13:53.156
- the county and the city. So at a recent commissioner meeting, we identified time and space as key factors

00:13:53.156 --> 00:13:59.605
- of importance in selecting a jail location. So time, we must proceed as quickly as possible with the

00:13:59.605 --> 00:14:06.054
- construction of a jail facility and unnecessary delays are not acceptable. In space, we need to find

00:14:06.054 --> 00:14:09.566
- a buildable acres sufficient to build a jail facility.

00:14:09.730 --> 00:14:16.429
- Co location was strongly preferred and space for adequate external circulation So and there is a there

00:14:16.429 --> 00:14:23.127
- should be materials that are being distributed to so that I will not need to elaborate at great length

00:14:23.127 --> 00:14:29.826
- on these So the county considered the hopeful property in 2022-23 Although at the time we had a design

00:14:29.826 --> 00:14:35.614
- that was limited to only a jail. This was understandably problematic for the sheriff and

00:14:35.842 --> 00:14:41.799
- We approached the City Council at that time and requested consideration for the use of that part of

00:14:41.799 --> 00:14:47.815
- the Hopewell property for a jail facility. The Council declined to support the request at that time.

00:14:47.815 --> 00:14:53.594
- We recently reviewed our scoring matrix from years ago and Hopewell came up as a preferred site.

00:14:53.594 --> 00:14:59.610
- At this time, I'd like to turn the podium over to my colleague, Commissioner-President Julie Thomas.

00:14:59.610 --> 00:15:01.278
- Hello, everyone. Thank you.

00:15:01.442 --> 00:15:09.188
- So our architect experts at DLZ designed a combined justice facility. You'll see it on the paper that

00:15:09.188 --> 00:15:16.782
- was handed to you. Because the city has expressed an interest in assisting us, we are returning now

00:15:16.782 --> 00:15:24.376
- to repeat our request for consideration. It is close to downtown and center stone as well. There is

00:15:24.376 --> 00:15:26.654
- an important caveat, however.

00:15:26.786 --> 00:15:33.943
- we cannot utilize this site if it will require a full plan Commission and City Council review because

00:15:33.943 --> 00:15:41.030
- that would mean an additional minimum of Nine months of time that we really do not have so we do ask

00:15:41.030 --> 00:15:47.134
- for your support for this request to go before the city's redevelopment Commission and

00:15:47.234 --> 00:15:56.242
- If you support this we'd also ask for copies of the geotechnical studies of the property And we do ask

00:15:56.242 --> 00:15:59.390
- and request that you respond to our

00:15:59.650 --> 00:16:07.069
- As soon as you possibly can we would be open to considering purchase of the property Or potentially

00:16:07.069 --> 00:16:14.785
- to develop a land swap for the Thompson property, which is considerably more acreage But we'd obviously

00:16:14.785 --> 00:16:22.278
- would need our council approval on that So, please contact us via email if you have questions and or

00:16:22.278 --> 00:16:28.510
- to let us know hopefully that you support this plea Thank you so much for your time

00:16:30.882 --> 00:16:40.432
- That's that was great. Okay. Are there any other comments in the room? Mr. MG Hey, good evening council

00:16:40.432 --> 00:16:49.706
- happy townie summer This is Chris term G from the Greater Bloomington Chamber of Commerce Fresh from

00:16:49.706 --> 00:16:59.806
- the Sherwood Oaks 50th anniversary from the euro award-winning Parks Department a jewel in the city I want to

00:16:59.938 --> 00:17:05.862
- Recognize the city's comprehensive audit of the development review and permitting services conducted

00:17:05.862 --> 00:17:11.728
- by American Structure point plus welcome longtime chamber friend of and friend of the community. Mr

00:17:11.728 --> 00:17:17.711
- Lynn coin his new leadership role at the plan department and important juncture For several years the

00:17:17.711 --> 00:17:23.577
- chambers heard concerns of from our members about Bloomington's review and permitting process Those

00:17:23.577 --> 00:17:25.982
- concerns were never about avoiding rules

00:17:27.010 --> 00:17:33.065
- People wanted to understand what was expecting of them, a straight answer based on the code, and have

00:17:33.065 --> 00:17:39.120
- some sense of how long these things were actually going to last. The audit confirms those experiences

00:17:39.120 --> 00:17:45.116
- are real. It found excessive review time, poor coordination among departments, conflicting comments,

00:17:45.116 --> 00:17:51.230
- and inconsistent interpretations of that code. Perhaps most telling, it found culture of mistrust with

00:17:51.230 --> 00:17:55.742
- stakeholders describing reviewers as gatekeepers rather than collaborators.

00:17:56.514 --> 00:18:02.276
- That finding about culture is one that I would ask the council to just sit on for a little bit. The

00:18:02.276 --> 00:18:08.095
- report recommends helping applicants find a path to yes. Not by overlooking the code, but explaining

00:18:08.095 --> 00:18:13.914
- the requirements clearly and helping compliant projects move forward. The audit also provides useful

00:18:13.914 --> 00:18:19.964
- perspective on staffing, which we've heard from this chamber. Bloomington appears appropriately staffed.

00:18:19.964 --> 00:18:25.726
- The larger opportunity is not simply adding positions. It's improving coordination, accountability,

00:18:25.858 --> 00:18:32.344
- project ownership and consistency. For our members, these problems are especially visible in adaptive

00:18:32.344 --> 00:18:38.893
- reuse. A small business owner may see an older storefront and see an opportunity, but once the process

00:18:38.893 --> 00:18:45.251
- begins, that modest improvements can trigger substantial architectural, engineering, accessibility,

00:18:45.251 --> 00:18:50.974
- and construction costs. Consider the proposed emergency vet clinic on West Second Street.

00:18:51.266 --> 00:18:57.933
- Reusing that building produced roughly $130,000 to $150,000 for the exterior site alone. So that's parking,

00:18:57.933 --> 00:19:04.477
- sidewalks, ADA ramps, landscaping. That doesn't include the interior work or specialized equipment needed

00:19:04.477 --> 00:19:10.836
- in that veterinarian hospital. For a larger develop, those costs are manageable. For a small business,

00:19:10.836 --> 00:19:17.257
- six-figure costs can be death knell for a project, leaving a needed service unrealized and the existing

00:19:17.257 --> 00:19:19.294
- property vacant. We are grateful

00:19:19.458 --> 00:19:25.180
- For the City Commission this audit and made it public but a report alone will not change anyone's experience

00:19:25.180 --> 00:19:30.744
- Implementation will be the real measure of success We welcome Len coins leadership and see an opportunity

00:19:30.744 --> 00:19:36.203
- to build clear more collaborative system one that protects Bloomington standards while giving residents

00:19:36.203 --> 00:19:41.504
- and Businesses confidence they can navigate this process. I thank you for your time tonight, and I'm

00:19:41.504 --> 00:19:46.806
- just under Thank you We'll go online and then see mr. Rousseau here. But um, is there anybody online

00:19:46.806 --> 00:19:47.646
- with a comment?

00:19:48.994 --> 00:19:57.129
- All right, we'll come back to chambers, Mr. Rizzo. Good evening, I'll be very short. I look forward

00:19:57.129 --> 00:20:05.507
- to the conversation that is about to take place with the Bloomington Housing Authority, and I hope you

00:20:05.507 --> 00:20:14.048
- ask a lot of appropriate questions, because I'm confused. I haven't had time to pore over the documents.

00:20:14.048 --> 00:20:15.838
- I would like to know.

00:20:16.610 --> 00:20:25.085
- City is city money being used to Mr.. So just just though the rules of the house say that you can't

00:20:25.085 --> 00:20:33.730
- you can't comment during this period about a thing That's already on the agenda so right you are I've

00:20:33.730 --> 00:20:39.070
- completely forgotten. Please ask a lot of questions. Thank you

00:20:40.898 --> 00:20:47.254
- Hello, hi, I'm Megan Betts. I'm here with Mother Hubbard's Cupboard. And I'm so thankful to have extra

00:20:47.254 --> 00:20:53.672
- motivation to be here tonight. But while I was here, I didn't want to pass up on an opportunity to just

00:20:53.672 --> 00:21:00.028
- share a couple of summer invitations that we have over at Mother Hubbard's Cupboard. So I'm just going

00:21:00.028 --> 00:21:06.199
- to run through some upcoming program. As a reminder, every Tuesday from 4.30 to 5.30, we have Kids'

00:21:06.199 --> 00:21:08.606
- Garden, which is a drop-in opportunity

00:21:08.706 --> 00:21:14.282
- To bring the kids out, all ages, older kiddos get an opportunity to lead younger kids in the garden.

00:21:14.282 --> 00:21:19.859
- They'll tend to the space. They'll work on their observation skills. They'll connect with the space.

00:21:19.859 --> 00:21:25.601
- And over time, we really see kids take it on as a space that they have ownership of. So drop into Kids'

00:21:25.601 --> 00:21:31.178
- Garden. You don't have to be there for the whole time. Just come as it works. Wednesday, 430 to 530,

00:21:31.178 --> 00:21:36.478
- we have kids cook. So again, kids of all ages can drop into an opportunity to try out a recipe.

00:21:36.610 --> 00:21:42.153
- We try to keep those seasonal so things that are in the garden will make their way into the kitchen

00:21:42.153 --> 00:21:47.862
- and things that are in the pantry will also make their way into those recipes so that the pantry feels

00:21:47.862 --> 00:21:53.515
- like a more exciting place for families to shop from and have some ideas to take home. Those are open

00:21:53.515 --> 00:21:59.224
- to everyone, no registration required. But we do have a couple of free workshops each month on Tuesday

00:21:59.224 --> 00:22:03.326
- and Thursday evenings if you or anybody in your community are interested.

00:22:03.522 --> 00:22:10.640
- in learning about fermentation or sourdough baking, making your own homemade tortillas, then I encourage

00:22:10.640 --> 00:22:17.759
- you to check out our education page on our website and join in sharing and building your kitchen skills.

00:22:17.759 --> 00:22:24.741
- And then we also have garden work days. We've been monitoring excessive heat and air quality, but when

00:22:24.741 --> 00:22:29.758
- it works out from four to six on Thursday, we are in the garden together.

00:22:29.922 --> 00:22:35.583
- And the last Thursday of the month, those become dig and dine. So we spend some time in the garden and

00:22:35.583 --> 00:22:41.080
- then also share a meal together. So I encourage all of you to drop in, spend some time together, be

00:22:41.080 --> 00:22:46.686
- out in the garden while things are feeling really abundant, and just join in everything that we're up

00:22:46.686 --> 00:22:52.458
- to. So thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you very much. Anybody else like to make comments in chamber?

00:22:52.458 --> 00:22:58.174
- All right. Anybody online? We'll move along then. Are there any appointments to boards and commissions?

00:23:01.602 --> 00:23:11.603
- Seeing none, we will move along to legislation for first readings and any motions. I move that ordinance

00:23:11.603 --> 00:23:21.224
- 2026-15 be introduced and read by the clerk by title and synopsis only. Second. There's a motion and

00:23:21.224 --> 00:23:30.558
- a second. Any discussion? All right. Will the clerk please call the roll? Councilmember Flaherty?

00:23:32.258 --> 00:23:42.970
- Yes. Sasseberg? Yes. Piedmont-Smith? Yes. Asari? Yes. Daly? Yes. Rallo? Yes. Ruff? Yes. Rosenberger?

00:23:42.970 --> 00:23:53.576
- Yes. Thank you. Will the clerk please read. Ordinance 2026-15, amending Title II of the Bloomington

00:23:53.576 --> 00:24:00.894
- Municipal Code regarding establishment of the Fire Merit Commission.

00:24:00.994 --> 00:24:07.226
- Councilsponsors councilmember Zulek the synopsis is as follows this ordinance amends title to of the

00:24:07.226 --> 00:24:13.519
- Bloomington Municipal Code to delineate the duties between the Bloomington Board of Public Safety and

00:24:13.519 --> 00:24:19.998
- the City of Bloomington Fire Merit Commission and to create a new chapter Which identifies the existence

00:24:19.998 --> 00:24:26.414
- of the statutorily created City of Bloomington Merit Fire Merit Commission? Thank you very much. I Move

00:24:26.414 --> 00:24:28.574
- for council to discuss legislation

00:24:31.362 --> 00:24:39.361
- All right. Remind me, we need to vote on that too. Okay, we need to vote on that and will the clerk

00:24:39.361 --> 00:24:47.600
- please call the roll. Council Member Stasberg? Yes. Piedmont-Smith? Yes. Asari? Yes. Daly? Yes. Rallo?

00:24:47.600 --> 00:24:55.759
- Yes. Ruff? Yes. Piedmont, or wow, Rosenberger? Yes. And Flaherty? Yes. Thank you. All right. Is there

00:24:55.759 --> 00:25:00.958
- somebody here to present on that? Are you here to present on it?

00:25:02.178 --> 00:25:09.153
- OK, no. No. Attorney Allen, was Councilmember Zulik supposed to present on this matter? I would have

00:25:09.153 --> 00:25:16.197
- expected the city legal department. I don't know if there's someone online who would like to present.

00:25:16.197 --> 00:25:23.172
- I can give a brief synopsis of the changes, if you would all like, since there appears to be nobody.

00:25:23.172 --> 00:25:30.078
- Is there somebody online? And if not, yes, absolutely, we'll go to you, sir. There's no one online?

00:25:30.818 --> 00:25:38.464
- Interesting. Okay. Well then Please take it away. I'm attorney Allen wonderful This this ordinance

00:25:38.464 --> 00:25:46.419
- essentially just it updates title to you as it said as we heard by the title So state code was changed

00:25:46.419 --> 00:25:52.830
- a few years ago to add in merit board systems as a default for police and fire and

00:25:52.930 --> 00:25:59.374
- The city of Bloomington had a split decision on the merit boards. The police department decided not

00:25:59.374 --> 00:26:06.204
- to adopt the merit board The merit board as part of their and to continue with the Board of Public Safety

00:26:06.204 --> 00:26:12.970
- as its oversight body They affirmatively did that as provided by state law. However, the fire department

00:26:12.970 --> 00:26:15.998
- did go with the merit system in accordance the

00:26:16.098 --> 00:26:21.650
- the Board of Public Safety no longer has that oversight over the fire department. It should be the new

00:26:21.650 --> 00:26:27.094
- merit board system. So what this ordinance essentially does is it updates existing language in Title

00:26:27.094 --> 00:26:32.485
- II to make it clear that the Board of Public Safety no longer has that oversight role over the fire

00:26:32.485 --> 00:26:37.983
- department and then it adds language to add that merit board consideration in accordance with Indiana

00:26:37.983 --> 00:26:43.427
- law and as the city decided for the merit board system for the fire department. Thank you very much.

00:26:43.427 --> 00:26:44.990
- Any questions or discussion?

00:26:48.514 --> 00:26:55.900
- Seeing none, we'll go to public comment. Hi there. My name is Wes Martin. I'm the president of Local

00:26:55.900 --> 00:27:03.360
- 586 Political Action Committee. We are the local firefighters union, and I'm here to speak in support

00:27:03.360 --> 00:27:11.331
- of the ordinance. And yeah, just say that this is a system that we are excited to be a part of. I understand

00:27:11.331 --> 00:27:15.134
- that the police did not want to go ahead with this.

00:27:15.234 --> 00:27:22.299
- but it's something that our membership looks forward to and it's nice to have kind of additional oversight

00:27:22.299 --> 00:27:28.902
- over both promotions and disciplinary action within our department and to have some union buy-in in

00:27:28.902 --> 00:27:35.768
- that process. So again, Local 586 and our local firefighters union recommend passage of this ordinance.

00:27:35.768 --> 00:27:42.503
- I know this is first reading, but yeah, that's our position. Thank you very much. Are there any other

00:27:42.503 --> 00:27:44.286
- commenters in the chamber?

00:27:45.218 --> 00:27:51.953
- All right, moving online, is there anybody online who'd like to comment? Okay, well back to council,

00:27:51.953 --> 00:27:59.422
- any comments or questions or motions? Councilmember Slasberg. I'll just say that I'm supportive of this change.

00:28:00.450 --> 00:28:07.012
- reminding hopefully not necessarily my colleagues but the public that we discussed this probably about

00:28:07.012 --> 00:28:13.511
- a year ago at this point when it was first established and it feels just kind of like an oversight at

00:28:13.511 --> 00:28:20.392
- the time that it didn't get worked into code. I'm delighted to hear that the fire department union supports

00:28:20.392 --> 00:28:26.763
- this change because that says to me that it's been working well for the last year. So yeah, I don't

00:28:26.763 --> 00:28:29.694
- have any questions and I guess I'll move that

00:28:29.922 --> 00:28:40.538
- We move it to second reading at our meeting next week, right? Next week. Next week. Second. Second.

00:28:40.538 --> 00:28:51.366
- Second. OK. There's a motion and a second to move this to our July 29th meeting. Can the clerk please

00:28:51.366 --> 00:28:52.958
- call the roll?

00:28:59.234 --> 00:29:12.431
- Piedmont Smith. Yes. Sorry. Yes. Daily. Yes. Rallo. Yes. Ruff. Yes. Rosenberger. Yes. Flaherty.

00:29:12.431 --> 00:29:22.878
- I'm sorry. I'd missed it. We didn't get Councilman Flaherty. Stasberg. Yes.

00:29:24.002 --> 00:29:33.388
- All right, so that'll be on the agenda for next week. We're now moved to second readings and resolutions.

00:29:33.388 --> 00:29:42.686
- I'll just make a quick procedural note here. If you note, we hadn't put item A on the agenda originally.

00:29:42.882 --> 00:29:50.649
- namely because right before winter break, we had a lot of feedback that continued to receive throughout

00:29:50.649 --> 00:29:58.417
- the time. We did not have time within the window to action all of that. And so I'm asking that we don't

00:29:58.417 --> 00:30:06.259
- introduce this and postpone it. But of course, that's to you all to decide. But all right, so if there's

00:30:06.259 --> 00:30:08.126
- any motions, 20, 26, 12.

00:30:12.226 --> 00:30:26.137
- move to I move Sorry, I forgot my words. I move that ordinance 2026-12 be introduced and read by the

00:30:26.137 --> 00:30:37.982
- clerk by title and synopsis only or We can say no Okay, I move that we postpone no, I

00:30:38.306 --> 00:30:44.960
- There's no second there was no second so I know I would like to hear from attorney Allen how we should

00:30:44.960 --> 00:30:51.744
- So if there's no second that it doesn't get introduced but so Potentially it just fails to be considered

00:30:51.744 --> 00:30:58.398
- at this meeting However, I mean the cleaner way is potentially to go ahead and read this on the agenda

00:30:58.398 --> 00:31:05.182
- and move to my understanding from Councilmember sorry, of course, I don't want to say anything different

00:31:05.282 --> 00:31:11.442
- President sorry, but if you wanted to reintroduce a new resolution The way to do this is be to table

00:31:11.442 --> 00:31:17.663
- this particular version of the resolution so that it could only be brought back up by a majority vote

00:31:17.663 --> 00:31:23.761
- of council But it wouldn't be necessarily postponed to a different time at this point That actually

00:31:23.761 --> 00:31:29.921
- is a better idea. So we don't to do lots of amendments So yes, do we in order to do that? Do we need

00:31:29.921 --> 00:31:35.166
- to introduce it so we can discuss it so we can have that motion? Yeah, I believe okay

00:31:35.298 --> 00:31:43.997
- So would you like to make the motion again I Move that ordinance 2026-12 be introduced in red by the

00:31:43.997 --> 00:31:52.782
- clerk by title and synopsis only Second there's motion a second. Will the clerk please call the roll?

00:31:52.782 --> 00:32:01.653
- Councilmember, sorry. Yes, Daley. Yes, Rallo. Yes, Ruff. Yes, Rosenberger. Yes, clarity Yes Stossburg.

00:32:01.653 --> 00:32:03.806
- Yes, Piedmont Smith. Yes

00:32:04.578 --> 00:32:12.096
- All right, thank you very much. Will the clerk please read? Resolution 2026-12, establishing rules and

00:32:12.096 --> 00:32:19.394
- guidelines for alcohol permit districts. The synopsis is as follows. Resolution 2026-12 establishes

00:32:19.394 --> 00:32:26.693
- rules, procedures, and public interest guidelines for alcoholic beverage permits for which the City

00:32:26.693 --> 00:32:29.758
- of Bloomington has authority, discretion,

00:32:29.954 --> 00:32:38.721
- Influence to recommend support condition object to monitor or otherwise participate in the alcohol beverage

00:32:38.721 --> 00:32:46.838
- permitting process. I Move that ordinance 2026 dash 12 be adopted Second. All right, will the clerk

00:32:46.838 --> 00:32:54.955
- please call the roll? Oh, we don't need to sorry. Sorry. Sorry move that we withdraw Should we vote

00:32:54.955 --> 00:32:59.582
- for it? Somebody has to move to table and it can't be me

00:32:59.714 --> 00:33:10.512
- And it yeah, I'll go ahead and move Resolution 2026 12 be tabled indefinitely. I second Thank you very

00:33:10.512 --> 00:33:20.996
- much motion in a second. Will the clerk please call the roll unless sorry, is there any discussion?

00:33:20.996 --> 00:33:29.278
- All right, will the clerk please call the roll? Councilmember daily Yes, Rallo

00:33:29.378 --> 00:33:38.234
- Yes, rough Rosenberger. Yes Flaherty Yes Stasburg, yes Piedmont Smith. Yes. Sorry. Yes Thank you.

00:33:38.234 --> 00:33:47.452
- All right. Thank you very much. Any other motions. I Move that ordinate no resolution 2026-13 be read

00:33:47.452 --> 00:33:55.134
- by title and synopsis only motion and a second will the clerk be called the roll and

00:34:01.570 --> 00:34:16.293
- Member Rollo. Yes. Ruff. Yes. Rosenberger. Yes. Flaherty. Yes. Stosberg. Yes. Piedmont-Smith. Yes. Asari.

00:34:16.293 --> 00:34:30.878
- Yes. Daly. Yes. Will the clerk please read. Resolution 2026-13 authorizing issuance of bonds for the BHA

00:34:31.298 --> 00:34:38.309
- For the BHA, council sponsor is Council Member Zulek. The synopsis is as follows. Resolution 2026-13

00:34:38.309 --> 00:34:45.250
- authorizes the Bloomington Housing Authority or BHA to issue up to $100 million in bonds to acquire

00:34:45.250 --> 00:34:52.261
- five properties from Hometown Group. The properties include 924 units of affordable housing for rent

00:34:52.261 --> 00:34:59.410
- at or below 100% of the area median income. The bonds will be issued at an interest rate not to exceed

00:34:59.410 --> 00:35:00.382
- 9% and a term

00:35:01.826 --> 00:35:09.332
- to maturity of 45 years. This bond issuance is not an obligation of the city of Bloomington and does

00:35:09.332 --> 00:35:17.508
- not count against the city's bond limit. The bonds are to be repaid from revenue from the acquired properties

00:35:17.508 --> 00:35:24.791
- and any surplus revenue of the BHA. Thank you. I move that resolution 2026-13 be adopted. Second.

00:35:24.791 --> 00:35:30.142
- All right. Do we have someone here to present? I assume that fantastic.

00:35:31.394 --> 00:35:38.868
- Take it away. Good evening. My name is Nathan Ferrer. I'm the executive director of the Bloomington

00:35:38.868 --> 00:35:46.717
- Housing Authority. Thank you for having us tonight. We've got a great opportunity ahead of us and hoping

00:35:46.717 --> 00:35:54.266
- to answer your questions about that. With me is Chris Cashman from Ice Miller. They are representing

00:35:54.266 --> 00:35:58.302
- BHA as bond attorneys. And we did send a presentation

00:36:00.706 --> 00:36:07.772
- So Chris is gonna start us off. Thank you. Good evening, and thanks for including us on the agenda this

00:36:07.772 --> 00:36:14.907
- evening. We can wait for the presentation to be loaded. Also, even though we've prepared a presentation,

00:36:14.907 --> 00:36:22.177
- really, you know, feel free to hop in with questions any time, because we'd like to address your questions

00:36:22.177 --> 00:36:29.175
- more so than kind of force feed you this presentation. But we can go to the first slide, which is kind

00:36:29.175 --> 00:36:30.398
- of an overview of

00:36:31.010 --> 00:36:37.755
- The bonds initially and then we'll dive in a little bit deeper after you hear more about the project

00:36:37.755 --> 00:36:44.701
- But the authorities put together a nice Working group. So ice Miller our public finance team will serve

00:36:44.701 --> 00:36:51.579
- as bond council on the transaction the authorities Hired a financial advisor and call yours will serve

00:36:51.579 --> 00:36:57.790
- as an underwriter on this proposed project Should you vote to move the resolution forward? I

00:36:58.402 --> 00:37:04.751
- I think it's important to note, and we'll say it a few times just to drive the point home, that the

00:37:04.751 --> 00:37:11.227
- bonds would be secured by the revenues of the project and other surplus funds of the BHA. It will not

00:37:11.227 --> 00:37:17.702
- be an obligation of the city. Right now, the authority is working diligently to obtain a bond rating,

00:37:17.702 --> 00:37:24.241
- which will help market the bonds, and the bonds will be kind of offered on a limited public basis with

00:37:24.241 --> 00:37:26.654
- an offering document, so unlike maybe

00:37:26.978 --> 00:37:33.296
- Prior housing bonds that you've seen in the past these these bonds would be issued under the local housing

00:37:33.296 --> 00:37:39.201
- authority statute and Just to put the context as as to why we're here, you know before you with the

00:37:39.201 --> 00:37:45.105
- resolution That statute requires the fiscal body of the unit to approve the project So a little bit

00:37:45.105 --> 00:37:51.246
- different than perhaps you may be used to seeing with with other housing projects Let me go to the next

00:37:51.246 --> 00:37:54.494
- slide and talk about the properties if you're ready. I

00:37:59.394 --> 00:38:07.389
- That's right So the hometown group properties consist of five Apartment complexes around town. Those

00:38:07.389 --> 00:38:15.622
- are highlighted in the map Woodland Springs Basswood Northcrest Kingston Manor and Summit Point totally

00:38:15.622 --> 00:38:23.934
- 924 units if you'll skip to the next one you'll see that these average rents if you're familiar with the

00:38:24.098 --> 00:38:32.279
- what the rents are right now. These are definitely in the more affordable range. There's a little more

00:38:32.279 --> 00:38:40.301
- detail. If you've heard anything about these properties, you may know that at least a couple of them

00:38:40.301 --> 00:38:48.244
- are fairly well run down. There's regular complaint calls about the quality and how they're managed

00:38:48.244 --> 00:38:51.262
- to hand and to the police department.

00:38:51.778 --> 00:39:01.451
- Excited about this project for a number of reasons first and foremost Preservation of workforce housing

00:39:01.451 --> 00:39:10.751
- of naturally occurring affordable rents are is our primary goal here We will put in you can skip to

00:39:10.751 --> 00:39:18.750
- the next one This will include nine million in capex for immediate repairs those will

00:39:19.234 --> 00:39:25.392
- focus on code violations resurfacing resurfacing interiors roof and exterior replacement at a couple

00:39:25.392 --> 00:39:31.490
- of the properties and additional repairs as needed to get them up to our standard. These apartments

00:39:31.490 --> 00:39:37.648
- will utilize am I's that are consistent with workforce housing. I didn't catch the whole description

00:39:37.648 --> 00:39:39.294
- but I want to clarify that

00:39:39.426 --> 00:39:47.559
- that 100% AMI was an average. That's what we're shooting for. We are usually in the business of creating

00:39:47.559 --> 00:39:55.537
- affordable housing, and this is workforce housing. So this is about preservation. I would say the next

00:39:55.537 --> 00:40:03.592
- primary reason we wanna do this is to create a pipeline for future LIHTC, low income housing tax credit

00:40:03.592 --> 00:40:09.246
- deals, or other deals that might use HUD tools as they become available.

00:40:09.378 --> 00:40:18.632
- To create deeper affordability much more like our rad properties at Crestmont and walnut woods and lastly

00:40:18.632 --> 00:40:27.711
- why this is really critical for us is our Our revenue from HUD has become less dependable we have faced

00:40:27.711 --> 00:40:32.862
- cuts in the form of no inflationary increase this year and

00:40:33.282 --> 00:40:39.528
- And a freeze on issuing any new vouchers. So that means when a voucher gets retired somebody doesn't

00:40:39.528 --> 00:40:45.774
- need anymore We are not issuing new ones since last July. So we're we're stuck in a pretty difficult

00:40:45.774 --> 00:40:52.019
- financial spot We estimate that bringing on these properties post construction will generate about a

00:40:52.019 --> 00:40:57.214
- million dollars of revenue per year and in the next five to ten years, we would put

00:40:57.698 --> 00:41:04.670
- Hopefully at least one of these in five years through a light tech or a rat like conversion so that

00:41:04.670 --> 00:41:11.643
- we can create deeper affordability. Yeah, I think that covers all my points. Next slide please. I'm

00:41:11.643 --> 00:41:18.615
- gonna leave this one to the bond lawyer. Thank you attorney Allen. So I think half of my colleagues

00:41:18.615 --> 00:41:25.727
- think visuals like this are helpful and I'm in the bucket that think these are a little bit of a head

00:41:25.727 --> 00:41:26.494
- scratcher.

00:41:26.658 --> 00:41:33.908
- To me this is meant to be kind of a flow of funds and how the project is going to be or would be financed

00:41:33.908 --> 00:41:40.815
- which is To show that we have our bond underwriter in the middle And they're gonna go out and market

00:41:40.815 --> 00:41:47.654
- the bonds and sell them to a bond invest investor those purchase proceeds Will flow to the project?

00:41:47.654 --> 00:41:54.562
- You know about eight or nine million will be used for capital expenditures there'll be some used for

00:41:54.562 --> 00:41:55.998
- cost of issuance and

00:41:56.546 --> 00:42:04.331
- And then the majority of the rest or the bulk of the funds would go to acquisition. The bottom part

00:42:04.331 --> 00:42:12.271
- of the graph or the picture here is meant to show that the property, that the actual rental income is

00:42:12.271 --> 00:42:20.290
- what secures the bonds. So as our tenants pay or as their subsidized rents pay, that flows through the

00:42:20.290 --> 00:42:26.206
- indenture and pays the bondholders with any surplus funds of the authority.

00:42:26.530 --> 00:42:33.351
- Should any surplus funds be needed and we can go to the next slide, please And this is meant to show

00:42:33.351 --> 00:42:40.171
- a timeline of kind of where we are in the process It's not really kind of like a hard delineated set

00:42:40.171 --> 00:42:47.059
- of buckets here So some of this overlaps, but I would say we're around step four. So The BHA has gone

00:42:47.059 --> 00:42:53.812
- to the EDC They've gone through the inducement process. So they've gone before their board for like

00:42:53.812 --> 00:42:55.838
- initial approvals as well and

00:42:56.482 --> 00:43:03.261
- And then they started putting together a working group including folks to market the bonds bond council

00:43:03.261 --> 00:43:09.974
- including ice Miller Financial advisors. We've started drafting documents for approval as well And now

00:43:09.974 --> 00:43:16.557
- we're here before you as the fiscal body For approval by resolution which is required by the Housing

00:43:16.557 --> 00:43:22.814
- Authority statute and then they'll go back before their board again next week and then you know

00:43:23.010 --> 00:43:29.559
- Once hopefully the resolution moves forward and receives your your up votes We'll go out and market

00:43:29.559 --> 00:43:36.436
- the bonds rate lock and then proceed to closing and there's still a lot of work left to do but you know,

00:43:36.436 --> 00:43:43.051
- we're pretty lucky in the city to have a housing authority like Bloomington's and They've done a lot

00:43:43.051 --> 00:43:48.094
- of great work so far to get to this point. So we can go to the next slide. I

00:43:49.474 --> 00:43:56.239
- And this is kind of driving some points that we already mentioned home a little bit more. But the bonds

00:43:56.239 --> 00:44:02.809
- will be issued pursuant to the local housing authority statute 36-7-1830. And they're payable solely

00:44:02.809 --> 00:44:09.314
- from project revenues and surplus funds of the BHA. They're not payable from taxes, and they're not

00:44:09.314 --> 00:44:15.820
- a general obligation of the city. And issuing these bonds will have no effect on the constitutional

00:44:15.820 --> 00:44:18.942
- debt limit or bank-qualified limit of the city.

00:44:19.618 --> 00:44:28.179
- We mentioned here that the City Council as Fiscal body of the unit is required to approve the project

00:44:28.179 --> 00:44:37.411
- by resolution and The interest is meant to be tax-exempt. So the holders of the bonds will receive tax-exempt

00:44:37.411 --> 00:44:46.139
- interest at the federal and state level And I think that's where we'll open it up to any questions that

00:44:46.139 --> 00:44:47.902
- we can address about

00:44:48.514 --> 00:44:58.327
- Fiscal body approval and anything regarding the project as well Thank you so much Councilmembers questions

00:44:58.327 --> 00:45:07.681
- Councilmember Pima Smith So a hundred million dollars, that's a lot of money what is the timeline for

00:45:07.681 --> 00:45:17.310
- repaying the bonds We're looking at eight years at the moment and The the model we have at the moment is

00:45:17.410 --> 00:45:25.572
- Includes potentially selling the properties at the end. We don't intend to do that. So as we As the

00:45:25.572 --> 00:45:33.816
- model gets more specific the bond payment may take longer The one that we're utilizing at the moment

00:45:33.816 --> 00:45:41.978
- is for eight years with a contemplated sale at the end Wait, you said you might sell the properties

00:45:41.978 --> 00:45:45.406
- at the end, but you don't know know what?

00:45:45.698 --> 00:45:53.931
- It the pro forma that we have contemplates a sale at the end. We don't intend to do that That is not

00:45:53.931 --> 00:46:02.572
- our intent. We will keep these and we will redevelop them But that'll impact how the the bonds get repaid

00:46:02.572 --> 00:46:11.131
- back paid back. So I actually I don't know how long it the sale is Yeah, so let me I think it's a little

00:46:11.131 --> 00:46:15.614
- bit longer maybe like a 10-year wham at the moment But

00:46:17.794 --> 00:46:27.859
- We can get some more specifics regarding the pricing as we get closer in time as well. But right now,

00:46:27.859 --> 00:46:37.727
- it's considered to be a 10-year term for the general revenue bonds. So you expect to earn back $100

00:46:37.727 --> 00:46:47.102
- million in 10 years? No. How does this work? How does the math work? Sorry. You want me to go?

00:46:47.426 --> 00:46:56.091
- So hometown group holds a $65 million, oh, sorry, hometown group holds a $65 million Fannie Mae loan.

00:46:56.091 --> 00:47:04.671
- We are working with Fannie Mae to assume that loan. So that's part of this as well. We do not intend

00:47:04.671 --> 00:47:13.251
- to pay this all back. Like I said, the pro forma we're contemplating just has a land sale as part of

00:47:13.251 --> 00:47:16.734
- the current model, which we will not do.

00:47:16.866 --> 00:47:23.891
- I can already see I've created more confusion. So next week, I will get a more detailed response about

00:47:23.891 --> 00:47:30.779
- how long it will take to pay back both the Fannie Mae and the bonds that will be paying back as part

00:47:30.779 --> 00:47:37.054
- of this project. OK, so you'll be assuming that debt. That is the goal is for us to assume.

00:47:37.378 --> 00:47:44.852
- Yeah, there's so there were the the goal the resolution is kind of set outside parameters as it stands

00:47:44.852 --> 00:47:52.327
- now We've we've tried to build in some optionality But the approach now the structure is contemplating

00:47:52.327 --> 00:47:59.656
- assuming about 65 million dollars of existing mortgage debt on the properties which would mean if if

00:47:59.656 --> 00:48:01.470
- that's the approach that

00:48:01.858 --> 00:48:07.911
- Ultimately, we end up executing on and it's still subject to Fannie approval because it's existing

00:48:07.911 --> 00:48:14.087
- outstanding Fannie debt Then the bond issuance is going to be far less than the hundred million. But

00:48:14.087 --> 00:48:20.507
- what we didn't want to do is is present you know a much smaller dollar amount and then and then if works

00:48:20.507 --> 00:48:26.805
- if the Existing mortgage loans were then ultimately paid off if we pivoted away from assuming the debt

00:48:26.805 --> 00:48:30.046
- and paying it off then we'd have to come back with a

00:48:30.626 --> 00:48:38.711
- kind of a larger bond issuance request. So as it stands now, what we're modeling is assuming the existing

00:48:38.711 --> 00:48:45.651
- debt and then a smaller bond issuance amount somewhere around, it depends on what the debt

00:48:45.651 --> 00:48:53.507
- service requirements can handle, but somewhere around 32 million of a bond issuance if we go the route

00:48:53.507 --> 00:48:57.854
- where the existing debt is assumed. And it's older debt.

00:48:58.434 --> 00:49:05.179
- No one can predict where you know interest rates are going but we do know where interest rates have

00:49:05.179 --> 00:49:11.991
- been right? So it's it could be potentially lower cost of debt because it's a little bit of a it was

00:49:11.991 --> 00:49:18.736
- you know issued a few years ago, so Maybe more favorable to the authority to proceed that way Yeah,

00:49:18.736 --> 00:49:25.278
- so to follow up on that a little bit so that hundred million dollars is kind of like the maximum

00:49:25.762 --> 00:49:32.853
- Possible and so you're asking us in terms of approval to approve the maximum potential But really you

00:49:32.853 --> 00:49:39.945
- expect the actual bond to be lower than that As long as we get Fannie approval and the execution goes

00:49:39.945 --> 00:49:47.106
- into place where the existing debt is assumed Then it would be a much smaller bond amount So so by the

00:49:47.106 --> 00:49:51.486
- existing debt being approved so that basically means like that

00:49:51.618 --> 00:49:57.859
- You get turned over as the mortgage payer so you don't have to pay that entire thing back at once You

00:49:57.859 --> 00:50:03.978
- just start paying those mortgages, right? And so then it's like BHA still owes that money, but it's

00:50:03.978 --> 00:50:10.097
- not in the form of a bond, right? So in another way of thinking about it is the project is assuming

00:50:10.097 --> 00:50:16.216
- you know 80 to 100 million of new debt or is incurring a hundred eighty million hundred eighty to a

00:50:16.216 --> 00:50:18.174
- hundred million of new debt and

00:50:18.658 --> 00:50:25.917
- It's either going to be all bond financed or it's going to be partially financed by assuming the existing

00:50:25.917 --> 00:50:33.177
- debt and then the Delta between that would be bond finance. So I think the existing debt somewhere around

00:50:33.177 --> 00:50:40.163
- 65 million and maybe the purchase price, which is still perhaps being negotiated under PSA, but would

00:50:40.163 --> 00:50:47.422
- be something like 62 million for the properties. So sorry, 72 million for the properties assuming six and

00:50:47.906 --> 00:50:54.633
- So you know right now the seven million Delta would be would be debt finance and the the existing debt

00:50:54.633 --> 00:51:01.163
- would be assumed Okay And then the nine percent interest rate which also seems kind of high is that

00:51:01.163 --> 00:51:07.890
- also a maximum and what kind of interest? Yeah, would you actually expect? So right now we're much and

00:51:07.890 --> 00:51:14.878
- it is and just to reiterate the resolution is meant to kind of set outside parameters almost like you know

00:51:15.362 --> 00:51:24.052
- Bumpers at a bowling alley, right? So it's meant to be kind of the outside Parameters and we wouldn't

00:51:24.052 --> 00:51:32.827
- expect it to be around there. I think we're modeling Currently somewhere around in between 475 and 675

00:51:32.827 --> 00:51:41.602
- on on the bond piece, but it depends on pricing and and a few other Kind of to be finalized deal terms

00:51:41.602 --> 00:51:43.902
- Is that a fair assessment?

00:51:45.794 --> 00:51:52.240
- I appreciate that interest rate a little bit more. So I'm glad that we're not actually looking at 9%.

00:51:52.240 --> 00:51:58.876
- And then in the same with the 45-year term, it's kind of an outside parameter that's allowed by statute.

00:51:58.876 --> 00:52:05.259
- So we approve that. And we don't intend or expect to go there. Right now, we're modeling on the bond

00:52:05.259 --> 00:52:12.148
- piece with the loan assumption somewhere around a 10-year term. And then we can report back on the remaining

00:52:12.148 --> 00:52:13.854
- term of the existing loan.

00:52:14.722 --> 00:52:22.527
- that the housing authority can help gather that information prior to second reading. Council Member

00:52:22.527 --> 00:52:30.488
- Flaherty. Thank you. It was a helpful presentation about some of the multiple, I guess, dimensions of

00:52:30.488 --> 00:52:38.527
- the rationale for this proposal. Some understanding the context of the revenue creation in the context

00:52:38.527 --> 00:52:42.430
- of maybe eroding support from federal government.

00:52:43.906 --> 00:52:50.186
- the opportunity to convert some of these through LITECH or RAD in the future makes sense to me. I think

00:52:50.186 --> 00:52:56.527
- the first reason mentioned was kind of like stabilizing or helping, you know, preserve workforce housing

00:52:56.527 --> 00:53:02.988
- in the community. I guess maybe two questions related to that. Like one is, are these properties generally

00:53:02.988 --> 00:53:09.449
- or any of them in particular like at risk for losing that workforce housing now under existing conditions?

00:53:09.449 --> 00:53:10.174
- Like is it,

00:53:10.818 --> 00:53:18.340
- some window that the BHA is or there's some particular need the BHA is trying to address that that isn't

00:53:18.340 --> 00:53:25.720
- being addressed currently with current owners and Do you anticipate the rents will stay about the same

00:53:25.720 --> 00:53:32.884
- as what they are now or are you trying to deliver? More affordable rents than these properties have

00:53:32.884 --> 00:53:40.478
- right now Thanks so I'll try to answer all that and let me know if I didn't So yes, we know that at least

00:53:40.578 --> 00:53:47.871
- A couple of these properties are in very poor condition. We actually conduct inspections because we

00:53:47.871 --> 00:53:55.238
- have vouchers at several of these. And we've had to address many issues with the current landlord at

00:53:55.238 --> 00:54:02.604
- several of these properties. We know that two, Kingston Manor and Summit Point are at locations that

00:54:02.604 --> 00:54:09.022
- would be prime for redevelopment. Given their locations, we would assume those would be

00:54:09.154 --> 00:54:16.688
- demoed and redeveloped as student housing like what you've seen around town. Our goal here in terms

00:54:16.688 --> 00:54:24.447
- of preservation would be to do the needed fixes and then do a much larger rehab through the light tech

00:54:24.447 --> 00:54:29.118
- or rad in the five to 10 year range and save those properties

00:54:29.282 --> 00:54:38.125
- We project rents may go up modestly, but like it said in the introduction, we'd be targeting 100% average

00:54:38.125 --> 00:54:46.801
- with a ceiling of 140% AMI, which is typical for workforce housing. And then for our RADs, once they've

00:54:46.801 --> 00:54:55.227
- gone through a conversion, our RADs, the cap is 50% AMI, so we'll introduce those gradually as we're

00:54:55.227 --> 00:54:58.814
- successful with those applications and our

00:54:59.042 --> 00:55:06.231
- are ready to do those. So did that answer most of your questions? It did. Yeah. I do have one follow-up,

00:55:06.231 --> 00:55:13.078
- if that's OK. Sure. Yeah, absolutely. Go ahead. Thank you. Which is just, what do you think are the

00:55:13.078 --> 00:55:20.062
- most significant risks of this proposal? I mean, it's a pretty significant amount of debt. What could

00:55:20.062 --> 00:55:26.977
- go wrong? How are you anticipating that? What are the downside risks here? Absolutely. There is risk

00:55:26.977 --> 00:55:28.894
- here. To the BHA, these are

00:55:29.026 --> 00:55:37.697
- general revenue pledge bonds. What that means is anything that's already not tied up in a commitment.

00:55:37.697 --> 00:55:46.707
- So anything beyond what is owed to HUD or to our investors would be at risk here. We feel like developing

00:55:46.707 --> 00:55:55.038
- affordable housing, preserving affordable housing, addressing our housing shortage is a statutory

00:55:55.266 --> 00:56:03.789
- responsibility of the housing authority. So we see this risk as worthwhile. These types of deals have

00:56:03.789 --> 00:56:12.813
- been done before, mostly in larger places. So we're a little new in that we're a smaller housing authority,

00:56:12.813 --> 00:56:21.169
- smaller community attempting this, but there's no reason in my mind that we should not try this. So

00:56:21.169 --> 00:56:24.094
- I hope that answers your question.

00:56:26.210 --> 00:56:32.348
- Yeah, I think it does and it seems like like I suppose renting for more if you needed to or Selling

00:56:32.348 --> 00:56:38.670
- the properties would always be like there's back stops to the risk. It's not like the value of the you

00:56:38.670 --> 00:56:44.808
- know, the land Deteriorates entirely or something even if revenues don't match projections. Is that

00:56:44.808 --> 00:56:50.946
- part of your? Calculation I guess our analysis. Yeah I'll add just another piece that might help is

00:56:50.946 --> 00:56:55.550
- you know, another risk is that we can't fill these some of these have very

00:56:55.778 --> 00:57:03.230
- Vacancies, but we we believe the capex will do that We also do not have the capacity to asset manage

00:57:03.230 --> 00:57:10.978
- these or property manage these so we are going through an RFP process right now to address both of those

00:57:10.978 --> 00:57:18.430
- needs so we will be reliant on a larger property manager with More experience marketing this kind of

00:57:18.430 --> 00:57:21.086
- housing where whereas we're used to

00:57:21.410 --> 00:57:28.889
- working with a wait list and incredible demand for our units, that won't be the case here. So we're

00:57:28.889 --> 00:57:36.443
- bringing in some other experts to help us with that. Thank you so much. Yeah. Thank you. Any others?

00:57:36.443 --> 00:57:44.371
- Councilor Varela? Councilor Varela. I had a question related to, so logistically you're going to renovate

00:57:44.371 --> 00:57:51.102
- these properties and yet you're counting on rent. So you're going to be displacing people

00:57:51.746 --> 00:57:59.765
- or is there, could you describe a little bit about the process of how you're going to go about making

00:57:59.765 --> 00:58:08.177
- this capital investment while keeping people housed and the returns on rent that you'll require to service

00:58:08.177 --> 00:58:16.589
- the debt? So some of the renovations will not displace people. I'll give you one example. Woodland Springs

00:58:16.589 --> 00:58:19.262
- has staircases that are dangerous

00:58:19.650 --> 00:58:26.666
- That is not going to displace anyone. And many of the renovations are like that. So siding, air conditioning

00:58:26.666 --> 00:58:33.231
- units, where we can manage to keep people housed during those kind of renovations. I'll also add that

00:58:33.231 --> 00:58:39.860
- the vacancy rate on these is quite high. So being able to renovate some, we expect renovations to take

00:58:39.860 --> 00:58:46.489
- probably up to two years. So it's not going to be all at once. It's going to be doing pieces as we can

00:58:46.489 --> 00:58:47.326
- get to them.

00:58:47.746 --> 00:58:55.495
- This is something we do have experience with because we did it with our ads and we didn't displace anyone

00:58:55.495 --> 00:59:03.245
- so it's There's a clear path forward for us. I can certainly get more detail about that, but Sorry That's

00:59:03.245 --> 00:59:10.775
- adequate. I just wondered you know, you seem to have experience in this So I'm assured that you you've

00:59:10.775 --> 00:59:15.454
- been through it before so that's all I've got right now. Thanks

00:59:17.506 --> 00:59:28.722
- Okay, first of all, what is capex I'm sorry capital expenditures, so this would be renovation costs

00:59:28.722 --> 00:59:40.163
- Okay, thank you My question is about the actual language in the resolution Which is kind of legalese,

00:59:40.163 --> 00:59:47.454
- but it just doesn't make logical sense to me. It's um the second

00:59:48.194 --> 00:59:57.462
- paragraph after the whereas clauses where it says resolved further the series 2026 bonds shall be secured

00:59:57.462 --> 01:00:06.381
- by the general revenues of the authority and shall be payable from the proceeds of bonds to be issued

01:00:06.381 --> 01:00:13.726
- by the authority. So how can the bond funds be used to repay the bonds which. Yeah.

01:00:13.922 --> 01:00:21.488
- So not in their entirety. But there will likely be some bond proceeds used to fill up debt service reserve

01:00:21.488 --> 01:00:28.771
- funds or capitalize interest accounts. So like when they're going through the renovations to help have

01:00:28.771 --> 01:00:36.124
- a pool of money available to pay the bondholders during a certain kind of rehab or construction period.

01:00:36.124 --> 01:00:43.902
- And then depending on how pricing comes in and how the bonds are marketed, there'll be debt service reserves.

01:00:44.034 --> 01:00:52.036
- To fill up as well and some of that could be funded by bond proceeds Likely a lot of that will be funded

01:00:52.036 --> 01:00:59.123
- by project revenues as well. But again, it's kind of authorizing The the resolution is meant

01:00:59.123 --> 01:01:06.820
- to be authorizing the outside parameters to allow for maximum flexibility When the authority goes to

01:01:06.820 --> 01:01:13.374
- the market to market the bonds and the structure of the deal Well this sentence to me

01:01:15.458 --> 01:01:24.599
- The series 2026 bonds Shall be payable from the proceeds of the bonds Period. Yeah, so some bond proceeds

01:01:24.599 --> 01:01:33.826
- will be some stand in part but not not in total some bond proceeds will be used to to pay future interests

01:01:33.826 --> 01:01:42.623
- and and to fund debt service reserve funds that shouldn't be hit but for should there ever be project

01:01:42.623 --> 01:01:44.606
- revenue shortfalls, so

01:01:44.738 --> 01:01:53.906
- I understand that, but it says it shall be paid from the bond proceeds, period. Yeah. So that doesn't

01:01:53.906 --> 01:02:03.343
- make sense. Yeah. And in part, I think would have gone a long way there for us. So yeah, certainly happy

01:02:03.343 --> 01:02:12.511
- to make that revision on second reading. But hopefully, verbal explanation helped a little bit there.

01:02:12.511 --> 01:02:14.398
- But very good point.

01:02:15.394 --> 01:02:29.239
- Should have been in part. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you customer Rosenberger Hi, thank you couple questions

01:02:29.239 --> 01:02:44.606
- related first question is how are these properties selected? So we were approached by a developer broker who's

01:02:45.058 --> 01:02:52.004
- Applied to be our asset manager about this and they've been in touch with a number of property owners

01:02:52.004 --> 01:02:59.222
- in town This was the the deal that looked the most promising So it's hometown crew group had contemplated

01:02:59.222 --> 01:03:06.440
- selling these I think we're especially attractive to hometown group because there's not many other bodies

01:03:06.440 --> 01:03:13.182
- that could assume a Fannie Mae loan And do what we're doing to make this purchase happen So it was

01:03:13.570 --> 01:03:22.985
- purely through our brokers investigating what properties might be for sale, and all five of these are

01:03:22.985 --> 01:03:32.493
- owned by the same owner. Great, thanks. Follow-up to that is wild card a little bit, but can you speak

01:03:32.493 --> 01:03:42.462
- to why the Seminary Point properties most likely could not be considered or part of this purchase and bond?

01:03:43.746 --> 01:03:51.432
- I don't know if I can speak to that, but on a side note, we have been part of the conversation about

01:03:51.432 --> 01:03:59.042
- Seminary Point throughout, and that conversation is continuing. We have not contemplated attempting

01:03:59.042 --> 01:04:07.108
- to sell bonds to purchase any other properties beyond this deal, which this deal we've been contemplating

01:04:07.108 --> 01:04:08.478
- for about a year.

01:04:08.770 --> 01:04:15.823
- There have been a couple other potential deals that have come up, but those both sold quickly. And this

01:04:15.823 --> 01:04:23.012
- is the only one that's moving slowly enough that we could actually go through this process to potentially

01:04:23.012 --> 01:04:30.201
- use bonds to purchase it. I absolutely think we would consider selling bonds to purchase other properties

01:04:30.201 --> 01:04:37.118
- for the purpose of preserving or creating affordable housing. The timing of this is such that it just

01:04:37.474 --> 01:04:43.472
- this has been on our focus with the bond sale. So it's not something we wouldn't rule out. Awesome.

01:04:43.472 --> 01:04:49.591
- Thank you. And I totally understand that you got to move at the, you know, you got to find properties

01:04:49.591 --> 01:04:55.709
- that are moving at the snail pace of local government. So that makes sense. And very exciting to hear

01:04:55.709 --> 01:05:01.827
- that potentially seminary point properties could be in consideration for later. I love, I mean, a lot

01:05:01.827 --> 01:05:07.166
- of these properties, I think it's going to be great. It's adding a lot of housing units.

01:05:07.266 --> 01:05:15.303
- but the The seminary point is so wonderful because you don't need a car and like a lot of these properties

01:05:15.303 --> 01:05:22.890
- But thanks so much for answering. I think you're doing great Yeah, thank you others Councilman Rallo

01:05:22.890 --> 01:05:30.776
- Yeah, could you just state again? So a hometown is repairing and maintaining the properties but so could

01:05:30.776 --> 01:05:37.086
- you delve a little bit deeper into why BHA is planning to assume that liability and

01:05:37.218 --> 01:05:44.543
- Is it, I mean, what would happen if you did not do this? Is it just a matter of scale that it requires

01:05:44.543 --> 01:05:51.868
- this level, I suppose? Could you describe a little bit? I think the Fannie Mae is a pretty big factor.

01:05:51.868 --> 01:05:59.051
- That loan would not be assumable by just anyone. It may be the scale. I don't know what other offers

01:05:59.051 --> 01:06:06.590
- they've had, but they have been contemplating the sale for a year, so I'm guessing they haven't had many.

01:06:06.882 --> 01:06:15.620
- these If you're familiar with any of these properties, I would say two of them are in quite good shape

01:06:15.620 --> 01:06:24.274
- and Will not require a lot of work Three of them partly due to age and partly due to just neglect are

01:06:24.274 --> 01:06:33.182
- in very poor shape and it could be that the initial price tag that was contemplated or that they put out

01:06:33.506 --> 01:06:39.639
- Uh, for these apartment complexes was just too much for anybody to consider. Um, that has dropped by

01:06:39.639 --> 01:06:45.712
- about $10 million since we got involved and have kind of negotiated the sales price. So it could be

01:06:45.712 --> 01:06:51.906
- that if they went back to the public with a lower sales price, these would sell. But, um, like I said

01:06:51.906 --> 01:06:57.918
- before, I think at least two of these would quickly get demoed and redeveloped as student housing.

01:07:04.162 --> 01:07:10.780
- Thank you. I saw in that resolution that it's, and so this is kind of like a general BHA question.

01:07:10.780 --> 01:07:17.599
- It says, you know, it's in the first whereas clause, it specifically states these apartment complexes

01:07:17.599 --> 01:07:24.351
- and then says that they're within the incorporated area of Bloomington or within five miles thereof.

01:07:24.351 --> 01:07:31.304
- So I'm kind of assuming the BHA can like do stuff within five miles of Bloomington as part of like your

01:07:31.304 --> 01:07:32.574
- documentation and.

01:07:33.730 --> 01:07:40.543
- I don't know if you can speak to the statute some of our internal language some of our bylaws says strictly

01:07:40.543 --> 01:07:47.357
- Bloomington So but in terms of the state statute, yeah the state statute I think allows housing authorities

01:07:47.357 --> 01:07:53.665
- in certain situations to participate in projects within the five miles so to me that's a recitation

01:07:53.665 --> 01:08:00.100
- of statute and just saying we're checking the statutory box here with respect to an allowable project

01:08:00.100 --> 01:08:02.750
- for the Bloomington Housing Authority and

01:08:03.106 --> 01:08:09.425
- Okay, but in terms of the actual property is those are all within city limits because there's a couple

01:08:09.425 --> 01:08:15.684
- of them like where exactly is the border they are Woodland Springs part of Woodland Springs is in the

01:08:15.684 --> 01:08:22.003
- county. So it's split Yeah, and our intent would be to annex that into the into the city. Okay, great.

01:08:22.003 --> 01:08:23.230
- Great. Thank you. I

01:08:30.338 --> 01:08:39.202
- now to, oh, sorry, Casimir Pimo-Smith. I'm sorry, I'm still hung up on this language. So is there any

01:08:39.202 --> 01:08:47.979
- legal risk to leaving that one paragraph where it says the series 2026 bonds shall be secured by the

01:08:47.979 --> 01:08:57.103
- general revenues of the authority and shall be payable from the proceeds of bonds to be issued? Is that,

01:08:57.103 --> 01:08:59.102
- maybe I'm also asking,

01:08:59.234 --> 01:09:08.347
- Mr. Allen our counselor tree Is that okay to leave in there with the understanding that? Most of it

01:09:08.347 --> 01:09:17.460
- will be paid from revenues of the BHA and not from the bond itself I Think it's it's at the will of

01:09:17.460 --> 01:09:25.662
- the the body. I think it's okay. I also think it's okay to leave it out because Excuse me

01:09:28.258 --> 01:09:36.682
- What we're doing here is is fiscal body approval. So the the resolution to me isn't going to necessarily

01:09:36.682 --> 01:09:45.187
- Govern how the the the course of the project and how it's documented But it is going to check a diligence

01:09:45.187 --> 01:09:53.290
- box that we followed the Housing Authority statute and presented a resolution to the fiscal body for

01:09:53.290 --> 01:09:54.654
- its approval and

01:09:55.106 --> 01:10:03.236
- So I think it's okay to take it out if you're more comfortable we could also propose Some language for

01:10:03.236 --> 01:10:11.445
- your approval prior to to second reading. I'm assuming resolutions go for second reading, but it's also

01:10:11.445 --> 01:10:19.102
- okay, so Happy to to workshop some some language now with you then Mr. Allen, what do you think?

01:10:19.202 --> 01:10:25.554
- I know that we had that conversation earlier I think the statement as a whole is meant to cover again

01:10:25.554 --> 01:10:32.030
- the maximum parameters of the possible bond. And understanding that even if if there was any situation.

01:10:32.162 --> 01:10:39.012
- where the underwriters were confused about how the bond proceeds were going to be used at all. To understand

01:10:39.012 --> 01:10:45.297
- that there might be a reserve fund that's used to finance by certain proceeds of the bond, but also

01:10:45.297 --> 01:10:52.147
- includes that revenue piece. I think those have to be read together and not disjunctively in that particular

01:10:52.147 --> 01:10:58.683
- whereas clause. So read together conjunctively, I think it's fine to leave it. I am not concerned about

01:10:58.683 --> 01:11:02.014
- it at all. Also, I think to Chris's point as well is

01:11:02.946 --> 01:11:08.783
- The full parameters of the issuance are covered not only in the initiating resolution of the BHA, but

01:11:08.783 --> 01:11:14.677
- also the confirmatory resolution of the BHA, which is far more specific about the bond parameters. And

01:11:14.677 --> 01:11:20.400
- as we've just seen, because this is potentially going to be a placement, those parameters are going

01:11:20.400 --> 01:11:26.351
- to get further narrowed down as we go. We're just doing the broad overarching approval with the maximum

01:11:26.351 --> 01:11:28.926
- possible parameter. So from that standpoint,

01:11:29.250 --> 01:11:38.744
- My opinion would be to try to give as much flexibility as we can at this stage if you're all comfortable

01:11:38.744 --> 01:11:47.967
- with the project and the issuance and allow that process to work itself out Okay, well I won't try to

01:11:47.967 --> 01:11:57.100
- do an amendment on the fly then if If the legal advice is that this is sound the way it is Thank you

01:11:57.100 --> 01:11:58.366
- Thanks, sorry

01:11:58.562 --> 01:12:05.439
- It says here, so in the staff memo that was issued to us, it indicates that on May 19th, the BHA presented

01:12:05.439 --> 01:12:11.995
- to the Economic Development Commission, which indicated general support for the project and bonds. So

01:12:11.995 --> 01:12:18.423
- that wording general support leads me to think that maybe they had some concerns or reservations or

01:12:18.423 --> 01:12:24.914
- just deeper questions. Can you speak to anything that might have been other than like, yes? I didn't

01:12:24.914 --> 01:12:27.678
- hear that. I think general might have just

01:12:27.842 --> 01:12:35.792
- been too vague a word. If anything, I heard those members say, I heard expressed excitement, and this

01:12:35.792 --> 01:12:43.898
- is a bold direction, I think were some of the words I heard. So if anybody else wants to speak to that,

01:12:43.898 --> 01:12:51.614
- but I'm happy to just echo that. That's what happened. Awesome. Thank you. Just wanted to clarify.

01:12:51.778 --> 01:12:57.119
- If I wrote the language so I could tell you why I use the word generally, if you'd like. The reason

01:12:57.119 --> 01:13:02.459
- why I use generally is just because the EDC didn't formally vote on it. Since this isn't the normal

01:13:02.459 --> 01:13:08.013
- kind of rat process where they have a role to play, this is more of an advisory. It's just to say there

01:13:08.013 --> 01:13:13.621
- was no formal vote taken, but the room was very supportive of this. I'm sorry, I was in art form. Great,

01:13:13.621 --> 01:13:18.855
- I just wanted to hear what other bodies had in their opinions. So that's very helpful, thank you.

01:13:18.855 --> 01:13:20.350
- Thank you, just super fast.

01:13:21.250 --> 01:13:28.756
- When do you expect these purchases to happen? You said repairs would take up to two years, but when

01:13:28.756 --> 01:13:36.487
- are we actually going to take control of the properties? So the purchase agreement has to be executed,

01:13:36.487 --> 01:13:44.218
- I believe, by November. And there is still a lot of due diligence on these properties to be done. This

01:13:44.218 --> 01:13:49.022
- has been a very slow, tedious process. So I would expect those.

01:13:49.410 --> 01:13:57.466
- Renovations to begin immediately by the end of the year. So we're hopeful that the sale will take place

01:13:57.466 --> 01:14:05.599
- take place by November Okay, great. Thank you If I can add something to that just if this purchase falls

01:14:05.599 --> 01:14:13.654
- through We still have the ability potentially to utilize bonds to use this on other properties. So it's

01:14:13.654 --> 01:14:16.830
- it's a tool that with your approval will

01:14:16.962 --> 01:14:24.574
- will take forward. And if we're successful on this first purchase, it's certainly one we plan to use

01:14:24.574 --> 01:14:32.186
- again. Any other questions? All right. Seeing none, we're going to move to a time of public comment.

01:14:32.186 --> 01:14:39.723
- Same rules as the first time, if you'd like to comment. And if you're online, there is a raise hand

01:14:39.723 --> 01:14:44.094
- function that would be very helpful if you'd let us know.

01:14:45.218 --> 01:14:51.764
- Hello council members I'm Mary Morgan I'm executive director of heading home of South Central Indiana

01:14:51.764 --> 01:14:58.245
- and I am a board member of the Bloomington Housing Authority. I just wanted to let you know that the

01:14:58.245 --> 01:15:04.727
- board gave its full threaded support for this project. You know it's a gutsy move. It's an area that

01:15:04.727 --> 01:15:07.422
- we have not explored before. It's a need.

01:15:07.842 --> 01:15:14.810
- And even though initially these will be workforce housing units, that's going to benefit our entire

01:15:14.810 --> 01:15:22.127
- community. I look forward to the longer term plan to turn these through RAD process into more affordable

01:15:22.127 --> 01:15:29.374
- units, but I think nonetheless it's needed. It's keeping these properties locally owned, which is huge.

01:15:29.538 --> 01:15:36.646
- And I think we're just grateful that we have someone with Nate's experience leading this effort. I feel

01:15:36.646 --> 01:15:43.686
- like it's a great opportunity for our community. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else in council chambers

01:15:43.686 --> 01:15:46.078
- would like to make a comment here?

01:15:55.810 --> 01:16:02.272
- Good evening council Randy Cassidy. I'm speaking tonight as a citizen, but Understand the aspect of

01:16:02.272 --> 01:16:09.057
- the work for housing and the fact of what BHA is done with the rad and the thing It's an admirable thing

01:16:09.057 --> 01:16:15.777
- to do the one only question I have on this particular thing because it is a pass-through situation that

01:16:15.777 --> 01:16:22.304
- BHA would be responsible is is this going to end up being a tax? exempt properties when this is done

01:16:22.304 --> 01:16:25.470
- because my quick calculation and while trying to

01:16:25.666 --> 01:16:32.061
- Workforce housing, tax revenues and such, those five properties at the present moment are churning out

01:16:32.061 --> 01:16:38.332
- about $830,943 a year in property taxes. So that's the only question that I would have in regards to

01:16:38.332 --> 01:16:44.727
- it is how the replacement of that income might impact overall for the next few years in regards to it.

01:16:44.727 --> 01:16:50.936
- The workforce housing is extremely needed. BHA is extremely good at managing accordingly. And under

01:16:50.936 --> 01:16:53.854
- Nathan's leadership, they've done a great job.

01:16:54.626 --> 01:17:03.079
- the revenue replacement is my only question. Thank you. Thank you so much. Any others in council chambers?

01:17:03.079 --> 01:17:11.217
- All right, we'll move on. As the third is getting ready, anybody online? All right, we'll go to online

01:17:11.217 --> 01:17:19.038
- then for the moment. They should unmute you and we're welcoming your comments. Yeah, Kevin Keough.

01:17:19.170 --> 01:17:25.026
- Tonight's discussion I think highlights just how complex the $100 million proposal is, but complexity

01:17:25.026 --> 01:17:30.824
- shouldn't replace standard. I don't know how much financial due diligence has been done, but I agree

01:17:30.824 --> 01:17:36.622
- preserving 924 affordable housing units is a crucial goal. However, the council seems to be asked to

01:17:36.622 --> 01:17:42.421
- authorize up to $100 million in bond while effectively flying blind on three, I think three standard

01:17:42.421 --> 01:17:45.406
- items. The first is evaluation. I don't think I had

01:17:45.634 --> 01:17:53.740
- heard any discussion tonight about have these units been valued? I think I would be part of having an

01:17:53.740 --> 01:18:02.244
- independent appraiser or valuation study. I haven't heard that tonight. Second, the operating performance,

01:18:02.244 --> 01:18:10.668
- I'm just fabulous that there hasn't been, as part of the documentation, the performance. As an accountant

01:18:10.668 --> 01:18:12.734
- and a CPA and an auditor,

01:18:12.994 --> 01:18:18.549
- I would think that would be something we would want to look at and see and just really understand the

01:18:18.549 --> 01:18:24.049
- math. How is it working? Because I think there's been some questions tonight and some confusion. The

01:18:24.049 --> 01:18:29.604
- third is I think you really need an independent risk assessment. I know the team presenting the deal,

01:18:29.604 --> 01:18:35.541
- they're part of the transaction and are heavily invested in that. But I think the council needs an objective

01:18:35.541 --> 01:18:41.150
- third party financial advisor to make a really good risk assessment. I need the approval without these

01:18:41.410 --> 01:18:49.084
- I believe three basic disclosures. It is an oversight. It's not really oversight. It's a leap of faith.

01:18:49.084 --> 01:18:56.462
- It seems like you're being asked to take a leap of faith and then to basically fly blind. So again,

01:18:56.462 --> 01:19:03.915
- I think it should be part of this process. You actually know what the appraisal of these assets are.

01:19:03.915 --> 01:19:07.678
- I think you need multi-year operating performance.

01:19:07.810 --> 01:19:14.399
- Hopefully you go out at least 10 years, and I really think you need a really good independent

01:19:14.399 --> 01:19:21.549
- risk assessment. Good intentions do not pay off bonds. Sound math does. So I think you really need to

01:19:21.549 --> 01:19:28.699
- look at the numbers. So thank you. Thank you so much. Is there anybody else online? Were you going to

01:19:28.699 --> 01:19:35.358
- comment, Mr. M.G.? Or was he just standing up earlier? Okay. Anybody else in council chambers?

01:19:37.794 --> 01:19:47.400
- All right going once okay, we'll come back to council members any comments or further questions Piedmont

01:19:47.400 --> 01:19:56.640
- Smith Yeah, I'd like to follow up and ask the question about the tax exempt status of the properties

01:19:56.640 --> 01:20:06.064
- once the sale goes through Any specific details I'll rely on Chris, but yes, these would be tax exempt

01:20:06.064 --> 01:20:07.070
- properties

01:20:07.714 --> 01:20:18.071
- That is part of what makes this a workable deal. Do you have a more specific? Any other questions? This

01:20:18.071 --> 01:20:29.026
- kind of follows up a little bit on some of what Mr. Keough was talking about with that kind of due diligence.

01:20:29.026 --> 01:20:36.894
- And it's probably most for the attorneys in the room in terms of this, because

01:20:37.282 --> 01:20:44.267
- these bonds aren't really being issued by the city of Bloomington, and it's not going against our bond

01:20:44.267 --> 01:20:51.116
- limits or anything like that. It's entirely the responsibility of the BHA. Why do we have to approve

01:20:51.116 --> 01:20:55.998
- them doing this? Because I'm kind of working on the assumption that the

01:20:56.290 --> 01:21:02.924
- BHA has done that due diligence, and that when this was presented to them with the full resolution that

01:21:02.924 --> 01:21:09.303
- has all of those details in it that is in our packet and that was referred to earlier, that initial

01:21:09.303 --> 01:21:15.681
- presentation was part of this. And that's the assumption that I've been working off of here. And so

01:21:15.681 --> 01:21:22.124
- it's kind of this weird question, like, why is council involved at all? And that goes, I'm assuming,

01:21:22.124 --> 01:21:26.206
- to state law. But does anybody know why that decision was made?

01:21:27.010 --> 01:21:33.615
- Your assumption is correct. It's statutory requirement, check, and balance. But just to reiterate, the

01:21:33.615 --> 01:21:39.836
- housing authorities hired CFX, which is a nationally renowned housing financial advisor who has,

01:21:39.836 --> 01:21:46.313
- you know, legally a fiduciary duty to the authority. And I know that the team is dug in quite deeply

01:21:46.313 --> 01:21:52.982
- on diligence, and it's still an ongoing process, like with any other real estate transaction. You know,

01:21:52.982 --> 01:21:56.894
- they're digging in deep on their diligence, that's for sure.

01:21:57.026 --> 01:22:05.816
- But yes, they have a financial advisor but the reason that we're bringing it to your attention other

01:22:05.816 --> 01:22:14.519
- than Good brother sister governance is is because of the statutory requirement that the fiscal body

01:22:14.519 --> 01:22:23.309
- of the unit approve such projects Mr. Allen, do you know like why this is part of that state statute

01:22:23.309 --> 01:22:24.702
- in terms of the

01:22:25.410 --> 01:22:31.422
- Overall, because we also don't approve like BHA budgets or anything like that during budget time, right?

01:22:31.422 --> 01:22:35.774
- That's right. Yeah, you do. You do hear the BHA. I think it's part of that.

01:22:35.842 --> 01:22:41.173
- kind of quasi relationship that the city of Bloomington has. I can't tell you why the general assembly

01:22:41.173 --> 01:22:46.452
- in their infinite wisdom included this particular oversight because it kind of, it does mirror though

01:22:46.452 --> 01:22:51.627
- other bonding authority. So there are independent entities obviously that have bonding authority in

01:22:51.627 --> 01:22:56.958
- which the city council provides some oversight. So I guess it's more of a mirror of that to make sure,

01:22:56.958 --> 01:23:02.496
- just like there's a requirement in the statute that a public hearing was held. So the notice, they already

01:23:02.496 --> 01:23:05.808
- published the notice in the paper and as part of the BHA board,

01:23:05.808 --> 01:23:11.454
- had to hold a public hearing. It's more just to make sure this is given wide public attention, that

01:23:11.454 --> 01:23:17.100
- the public has a chance to speak out about it, to learn about it and learn about the parameters and

01:23:17.100 --> 01:23:23.198
- give maximum opportunity to feel like there is actual representation before it's approved. Okay, thank you.

01:23:26.050 --> 01:23:33.678
- I have a quick follow-up question to a handful of both the comments and some things that other councilmembers

01:23:33.678 --> 01:23:40.821
- said, and I think I asked a similar question when we heard at the EDC, but just sort of wrapping maybe

01:23:40.821 --> 01:23:48.034
- some of this together. In terms of the risk, and Councilmember Flaherty aptly spoke about the backstops

01:23:48.034 --> 01:23:54.622
- that are available, I mean, one being selling of the properties, but because we're putting BHA

01:23:54.690 --> 01:24:01.648
- funds as the assurance for the bond are, in the worst case scenario, can there be downstream effects

01:24:01.648 --> 01:24:08.536
- on other BHA operating procedures? And then the question that Mr. Keough brought up, I mean, are we

01:24:08.536 --> 01:24:15.770
- fairly certain of the, if our main backstop is the ability to sell the property, do we have any concerns

01:24:15.770 --> 01:24:23.140
- about the liquidity of that property or our ability to sell it quickly? I should rather say that buildings

01:24:23.140 --> 01:24:24.656
- aren't liquid, right?

01:24:24.656 --> 01:24:32.211
- our ability to sell it quickly should things go south, given the sort of market that those properties

01:24:32.211 --> 01:24:39.766
- are already showing right now. And last question is, are we able to segregate the loan in a way where

01:24:39.766 --> 01:24:47.247
- you could sell off one property, or do they have to operate as a unit? I'll speak to the first part,

01:24:47.247 --> 01:24:52.062
- and then I'll ask Chris to speak to the loan. So that was a lot.

01:24:52.322 --> 01:25:00.427
- Back up and make sure I've got all that. So yes, general revenues are pledged as part of the assurance

01:25:00.427 --> 01:25:08.532
- of these bonds. I mentioned this before, but we have multiple entities that own the RADs, that own our

01:25:08.532 --> 01:25:16.715
- future light tech project, that own various projects. And in those investor partially owned properties,

01:25:16.715 --> 01:25:22.302
- there's a waterfall. So only the portion that reaches us is available.

01:25:22.466 --> 01:25:31.137
- as a pledge. So that means we have to meet the DCR that's required by the project before we even get

01:25:31.137 --> 01:25:39.894
- to the funds that might be pledged for this purpose. Obviously there are other funds that we have, so

01:25:39.894 --> 01:25:48.480
- Summit Hill and some funds that HUD has no jurisdiction over that would be pledged. Things that HUD

01:25:48.480 --> 01:25:51.742
- has responsibility for we also cannot

01:25:52.066 --> 01:26:01.125
- Pledge in this deal. So in terms of the greater risk I Part of our due diligence will be appraising

01:26:01.125 --> 01:26:10.183
- these properties So I think we'll get a better sense as we dive in how sellable these are if we had

01:26:10.183 --> 01:26:19.332
- to sell one quickly To to save ourselves in a bad situation but Can't speak to that quite yet. So in

01:26:19.332 --> 01:26:20.510
- terms of the

01:26:20.738 --> 01:26:26.418
- the loan and whether that's can be divided. Yeah, particularly the fan the Fannie Mae loan because the

01:26:26.418 --> 01:26:32.319
- way the way we were talking about it is that one of the reasons people didn't want to assume this property

01:26:32.319 --> 01:26:37.889
- we were thinking is because of the existence of that of that fairly large loan. Yeah, and I'll check

01:26:37.889 --> 01:26:43.570
- with Colliers and the diligence team on that specific question of because I don't want to misstate the

01:26:43.570 --> 01:26:45.886
- answer to that question of whether it's a

01:26:46.338 --> 01:26:53.792
- a mortgage loan secured by all properties or whether the properties could be separated out. But it is

01:26:53.792 --> 01:27:01.392
- an existing Fannie mortgage-backed security mortgage loan securing all of them. But I'll have to follow

01:27:01.392 --> 01:27:09.211
- up to determine whether the properties could be broken apart and how easily that could be done. Excellent.

01:27:09.211 --> 01:27:15.934
- Thank you. I forgot I was chairing. Any other questions? Councilmember Flaherty, thank you.

01:27:16.994 --> 01:27:25.852
- Thank you. Yeah, just a few more follow-ups. So assuming this is authorized, the Bloomington Housing

01:27:25.852 --> 01:27:34.710
- Authority Board would still have to make additional approvals subsequent to this, right? Correct, we

01:27:34.710 --> 01:27:44.094
- have our final resolution going to next Tuesday's BHA board meeting at 8.30. Got it, so you just mentioned

01:27:45.762 --> 01:27:53.456
- of the properties that it sounded like those have not been done, but you would do them. Is that correct?

01:27:53.456 --> 01:28:01.296
- And so is that, would that not proceed the forward's decision then? We are, so what the board is approving

01:28:01.296 --> 01:28:08.624
- is the limit of bonds that we could potentially sell. My understanding is these bonds still have to

01:28:08.624 --> 01:28:11.262
- be sold to somebody. So we have to,

01:28:11.394 --> 01:28:17.905
- there will be a process of convincing them that BHA is a good bet and that these properties are a good

01:28:17.905 --> 01:28:24.353
- purchase. So that's a long process. What you all are approving and what BHA is approving is what that

01:28:24.353 --> 01:28:30.674
- max limit of bonds might be. So. That's helpful. I guess to further clarify, before purchase of the

01:28:30.674 --> 01:28:37.185
- properties themselves, would those be approved by the board later down the line as a separate decision

01:28:37.185 --> 01:28:40.030
- then? Like this is about bond authorization.

01:28:40.162 --> 01:28:47.866
- purchase of the properties themselves would come later. Is that a safe assumption? Yes, a purchase of

01:28:47.866 --> 01:28:55.570
- this magnitude would require resolution of the board. Correct. Okay. Got it. Yeah. Okay. That answers

01:28:55.570 --> 01:29:01.310
- my questions. Thank you. There was one other part. So we are relying on our

01:29:03.074 --> 01:29:13.285
- broker, developer, and that partnership to do much of the due diligence. Once we have a property manager

01:29:13.285 --> 01:29:22.718
- on board, they will also participate in some of that. Thank you. And one final question from me.

01:29:22.818 --> 01:29:29.656
- because we're sort of setting the upward bounds of this, do you have an internal thought on particular

01:29:29.656 --> 01:29:36.428
- things that may make this not work? Do you guys already know? I mean, we say like 9%, for example, as

01:29:36.428 --> 01:29:43.199
- an interest rate, but do you already internally say, look, we can't go beyond eight? Is there certain

01:29:43.199 --> 01:29:46.718
- economics that don't make this work? In other words,

01:29:47.042 --> 01:29:52.081
- What I'm implying by the question is us passing this today, approving this today, we're not setting

01:29:52.081 --> 01:29:57.221
- you on a necessary path of going and purchasing this. We're just saying, generally speaking, here are

01:29:57.221 --> 01:30:02.411
- some things that we were concerned about. We want you to keep in mind while you go about this process.

01:30:02.411 --> 01:30:07.602
- So just talk us through a little bit about the continued thought process, the continued due diligence,

01:30:07.602 --> 01:30:11.230
- and the continued decision-making processes that will happen hereafter.

01:30:11.362 --> 01:30:17.636
- I mean, just like any property purchase, there's a long list of due diligence. So I don't know if I

01:30:17.636 --> 01:30:24.162
- can speak to specifics about a certain interest rate making a deal not work. But when we get to a final

01:30:24.162 --> 01:30:30.436
- pro forma, if it doesn't cash flow, obviously, there's no path forward. And if we're not generating

01:30:30.436 --> 01:30:36.711
- the kind of revenue that we expected, there's no path forward. I mean, that's one of the conditions

01:30:36.711 --> 01:30:40.350
- for this. So happy to share that as those come available.

01:30:40.578 --> 01:30:48.899
- Don't have specifics on that at the moment. So, yeah. Council members, any final comments or motions

01:30:48.899 --> 01:30:57.219
- for that matter? Council member Stasberg, then Piedmont Smith, then Rallo. I have a final comment. I

01:30:57.219 --> 01:31:04.963
- suppose we can call it. As was said, this is kind of a big move, kind of bold, kind of gutsy.

01:31:04.963 --> 01:31:08.670
- The word gutsy, I think, was used out there.

01:31:09.058 --> 01:31:16.528
- I think it's also kind of exciting to be going forth in this manner. And I guess I specifically want

01:31:16.528 --> 01:31:22.814
- to call out Kingston Manor because that is over in District 3, which is my district.

01:31:22.882 --> 01:31:30.356
- I live less than a mile, actually, from that complex. I knocked doors in that complex. I've been in

01:31:30.356 --> 01:31:38.354
- the common spaces. A couple people let me into their units, and it definitely needs a lot of improvements.

01:31:38.354 --> 01:31:45.828
- But the rents over there are very affordable, and that's something that has kept people there. It's

01:31:45.828 --> 01:31:50.462
- also an amazing location. You know, speaking to this idea of,

01:31:50.626 --> 01:32:02.110
- the return on investment of selling, tearing it down, and rebuilding some much more luxurious, expensive

01:32:02.110 --> 01:32:03.422
- apartments.

01:32:03.490 --> 01:32:11.642
- on a bus line, it's adjacent to the college mall area, which has a lot of shopping. It has a lot of

01:32:11.642 --> 01:32:20.038
- grocery and food options. It really is nicely placed. It's in a great school district. There are a lot

01:32:20.038 --> 01:32:29.086
- of families that live in that complex, and I'm really pleased that it's on this list, and I'm hoping that this

01:32:29.186 --> 01:32:37.162
- all will go through in terms of all those numbers working out so that the folks who live there can continue

01:32:37.162 --> 01:32:44.694
- to live in a place where they can afford their rent, but their hallways won't be musty and they won't

01:32:44.694 --> 01:32:52.301
- have some of those health and safety concerns that currently exist in that complex. So I'm really glad

01:32:52.301 --> 01:32:58.430
- that you guys are moving forth boldly in this manner and I hope that it works out.

01:32:58.530 --> 01:33:08.489
- in really positive ways for Bloomington. Thanks. Yes, I agree with my colleague. I think this is a bold

01:33:08.489 --> 01:33:18.065
- move and a positive direction for BHA. I understand these are not at the affordability level of the

01:33:18.065 --> 01:33:25.726
- current BHA properties, but they are an essential part of our housing ecosystem

01:33:25.890 --> 01:33:34.417
- and they are at levels that are much lower than the new student housing complexes that we see popping

01:33:34.417 --> 01:33:42.776
- up. So I think it is very important to preserve these and to improve the management of them through

01:33:42.776 --> 01:33:51.135
- this rehabilitation that you're planning to invest in. I was focusing on Basswood because that's in

01:33:51.135 --> 01:33:52.222
- my district.

01:33:52.354 --> 01:34:00.433
- And when I was campaigning, people would be like, oh, you're not going to Basswood, are you? You're

01:34:00.433 --> 01:34:08.997
- not going there alone, are you? I felt perfectly safe there. But it is run down. It does need investment.

01:34:08.997 --> 01:34:17.480
- And it does provide very, very badly needed housing for people who don't have a lot of money. So I think

01:34:17.480 --> 01:34:19.742
- Mr. Cassidy had a question.

01:34:19.874 --> 01:34:28.507
- Important point about the eight hundred thirty one thousand estimated property tax revenues from these

01:34:28.507 --> 01:34:37.140
- properties that Government would be losing But I think you know our portion of that the city's portion

01:34:37.140 --> 01:34:45.522
- of that I would consider a good investment in keeping this housing. So, thank you I Think it's been

01:34:45.522 --> 01:34:47.198
- covered pretty well

01:34:49.250 --> 01:34:56.061
- I have nothing more to add, thank you. Thank you. Council Member Ruff, anything? I'll just add that

01:34:56.061 --> 01:35:02.940
- I think, oh, sorry, I'm sorry, Council Member, the whole room got excited that you raised your hand,

01:35:02.940 --> 01:35:09.751
- so Council Member Flaherty. Any order is fine with me. Yeah, I just wanted to briefly follow up. A,

01:35:09.751 --> 01:35:16.767
- I support this and appreciate the creative thinking and the efforts to do something different. I think

01:35:16.767 --> 01:35:18.878
- there's some advantages to it.

01:35:19.426 --> 01:35:25.890
- I think it is a little strange our approval. We're not really the primary fiscal oversight body for

01:35:25.890 --> 01:35:32.354
- BHA. I see our role here essentially as approving at a relatively high level conceptually, which is

01:35:32.354 --> 01:35:39.141
- I think what we're hopefully doing here today. And it was good to confirm and clarify the multiple steps

01:35:39.141 --> 01:35:44.958
- to follow from the board, which does have a more direct fiscal oversight role of the BHA.

01:35:45.090 --> 01:35:50.808
- First, in just authorizing the bonds for this purpose. And then second in approving large scale purchases

01:35:50.808 --> 01:35:56.472
- to follow, which is probably the stage at which we would have some of the additional due diligence steps

01:35:56.472 --> 01:36:01.921
- for their review that Mr. Kia was asking about. So I appreciated those questions. I also appreciated

01:36:01.921 --> 01:36:04.510
- the discussion and afforded afterwards. Thanks.

01:36:05.794 --> 01:36:12.162
- Thank you so much. Just echoing the comments, I love the fact that this is bold. My assessment of why

01:36:12.162 --> 01:36:18.718
- it's bold though is maybe different. I think that this is bold simply because we haven't done it before.

01:36:19.042 --> 01:36:25.998
- hope that as a city, generally, we can start adopting more of like, let's do stuff that we haven't done

01:36:25.998 --> 01:36:32.955
- before. But I think just pragmatically, it's shrewd, there's an opportunity to invest and provide value

01:36:32.955 --> 01:36:39.711
- to the people who live here. And I think that it's the type of philosophy that we should be adopting

01:36:39.711 --> 01:36:46.533
- for all of the type of goals that we're trying to achieve here. And so I just, I really applaud, yes,

01:36:46.533 --> 01:36:49.008
- the willingness to do something new,

01:36:49.008 --> 01:37:00.064
- And I'm excited for for what that can deliver. So needless to say I'm very supportive of this. So with

01:37:00.064 --> 01:37:10.798
- that being said If there's no other comments Will the clerk kindly read the roll now call the roll?

01:37:10.798 --> 01:37:18.526
- Sorry Yes Rosenberger yes clarity Yeah Stasberg yes Piedmont Smith. Yes

01:37:19.810 --> 01:37:31.075
- Sorry? Yes. Daily? Yes. Rallo? Yes. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much. I move that ordinance

01:37:31.075 --> 01:37:42.229
- 2026-12 be read by title and synopsis only. Second. Motion and a second. Any discussion? All right.

01:37:42.229 --> 01:37:47.806
- Will the clerk please call the roll? Rosenberger?

01:37:49.410 --> 01:38:07.142
- Yes. Clarity. Yes. Stasberg. Yes. Piedmont Smith. Yes. Asari. Yes. Daly. Yes. Rallo. Yes. Ruff. Yes.

01:38:07.142 --> 01:38:16.798
- Thank you. Will the clerk please read. Ordinance 2026.

01:38:17.602 --> 01:38:23.495
- dash 12 to amend title 15 of the Bloomington municipal code entitled vehicles and traffic to seasonally

01:38:23.495 --> 01:38:29.615
- provide a carless Kirkwood council sponsors daily and Rosenberger the synopsis is as follows this ordinance

01:38:29.615 --> 01:38:35.282
- seeks to codify streets and alleys in Bloomington that disallow vehicular traffic Specifically this

01:38:35.282 --> 01:38:40.382
- ordinance codifies the seasonal carless schedule of specific blocks of Kirkwood Avenue. I

01:38:40.866 --> 01:38:47.149
- With this ordinance, businesses and residents can expect a permanent seasonal carless Kirkwood, allowing

01:38:47.149 --> 01:38:53.252
- businesses the predictability to invest in outdoor infrastructure for guests. The city administration

01:38:53.252 --> 01:38:59.774
- has provided valuable operational feedback in its 2026 memorandum identifying important challenges regarding

01:38:59.774 --> 01:39:05.937
- infrastructure, sanitation, public safety and accessibility that naturally arise as temporary programs

01:39:05.937 --> 01:39:08.510
- transition toward permanent city fixtures.

01:39:08.898 --> 01:39:16.846
- With that this ordinance aims to provide the necessary legal and budgetary certainty for the city to

01:39:16.846 --> 01:39:25.030
- move beyond Incomplete solutions and invest in more permanent infrastructure such as more ADA compliant

01:39:25.030 --> 01:39:33.135
- features and high quality seating recommended by staff I Move that ordinance 2026-12 be adopted second

01:39:33.135 --> 01:39:38.014
- Will the clerk please call the roll? Oh, sorry All right. Yay

01:39:38.594 --> 01:39:47.612
- Would somebody like to say something? Council member Rosa Parker. I'll start. Thank you. Okay, so I

01:39:47.612 --> 01:39:57.081
- do want to start by saying council member Daley and I are aware that this ordinance does not have enough

01:39:57.081 --> 01:40:06.910
- votes to override the mayor's veto. I find that pretty unfortunate for the city of Bloomington residents and

01:40:07.202 --> 01:40:16.026
- visitors. While we still have an ordinance in our books and our code that Kirkwood will be open to people

01:40:16.026 --> 01:40:24.350
- and closed to cars, April 2027 this ordinance sought to make that a more predictable occurrence and

01:40:24.350 --> 01:40:32.758
- we still have a lot on the book so it'll be interesting what we hear then. I'll talk more about that

01:40:32.758 --> 01:40:35.422
- later. What I do want to say is

01:40:35.746 --> 01:40:42.594
- this ordinance that tweaked really the original ordinance was really awesome to work on. Uh, I spent

01:40:42.594 --> 01:40:49.442
- a really long time, I think since, at least since I on city council have done something where people

01:40:49.442 --> 01:40:56.425
- have been so excited and come to help with so many ideas and so many stories either about what they've

01:40:56.425 --> 01:41:03.205
- experienced other places or what they've experienced on Kirkwood. And it just really was an awesome

01:41:03.205 --> 01:41:04.222
- experience to,

01:41:04.450 --> 01:41:12.754
- see Bloomington residents so enthused and so excited about something as neat as closing five blocks

01:41:12.754 --> 01:41:21.141
- in our city to cars. I made some bullet points that go a little deeper in that. You know, we've had,

01:41:21.141 --> 01:41:26.206
- I would say, a lot of public input. This today is our one to

01:41:27.490 --> 01:41:35.226
- three, four, fifth meeting this year on the topic. And we have been meeting on this topic for five years.

01:41:35.226 --> 01:41:42.669
- And those meetings have been fairly predictable because we have always had to pass the outdoor dining

01:41:42.669 --> 01:41:49.310
- program ordinance starting in COVID. So some fun people we heard from, parents with an odd

01:41:49.410 --> 01:41:55.986
- With a child with autism, he only spends time on Kirkwood when there aren't cars. People who bike to

01:41:55.986 --> 01:42:02.561
- work to IU who choose Kirkwood instead of the seven line when it doesn't have cars on it. People who

01:42:02.561 --> 01:42:09.332
- use mobility devices who feel safer and take more time shopping on streets without cars. We just simply

01:42:09.332 --> 01:42:16.103
- and in general heard from so many people who either experience Kirkwood car free as families or friends

01:42:16.103 --> 01:42:17.470
- or experience elder.

01:42:18.370 --> 01:42:25.052
- streets internationally car free and just like absolutely up their quality of time spent there. We also

01:42:25.052 --> 01:42:31.734
- heard from a church worried about parking, which is something we can solve. And we heard from advocates

01:42:31.734 --> 01:42:38.352
- of people with disabilities worried about people's access. I say advocates there because we also heard

01:42:38.352 --> 01:42:41.886
- from many people with disabilities who prefer a street

01:42:42.338 --> 01:42:49.637
- without cars. From the outdoor dining ordinance and this one, we worked with the Council for Community

01:42:49.637 --> 01:42:56.936
- Accessibility and we would and will continue to do so. Car Free Kirkwood, this ordinance specifically,

01:42:56.936 --> 01:43:04.519
- was unanimously recommended by the Bloomington Commission on Sustainability and Resilience and unanimously

01:43:04.519 --> 01:43:09.054
- positively recommended by the Transportation Commission. It was

01:43:09.186 --> 01:43:17.435
- a 5-4 vote here, and of course, the 2025 ordinance was a 9-0 vote. I think most council members at least

01:43:17.435 --> 01:43:25.684
- have talked about their vote changes, and I do want to acknowledge, of course, opinions change and years

01:43:25.684 --> 01:43:33.618
- change, so maybe to the best of our ability, we don't really go through that again. Public input, so

01:43:33.618 --> 01:43:34.718
- I came across

01:43:35.202 --> 01:43:41.498
- a chart from safety week that I did send to all of council members. This was something that really had,

01:43:41.498 --> 01:43:47.854
- well, it had never been shared with city council. And so during safety week, planning and transportation

01:43:47.854 --> 01:43:54.150
- staff tabled on Kirkwood for four days. This was in August during welcome week for IU. So students were

01:43:54.150 --> 01:44:00.265
- back or were coming back, parents and visitors were here, more families were here because the school

01:44:00.265 --> 01:44:04.926
- system was back in session and people were back at the grind after vacation.

01:44:05.026 --> 01:44:12.639
- I would say, you know, we have a lot of data on this. We've had a lot of meetings. The mayor had a listening

01:44:12.639 --> 01:44:19.833
- session. And to me, this is the very best data that we have because this is people, a random selection

01:44:19.833 --> 01:44:27.097
- of people experiencing a space and commenting on that space. I don't know why you guys are nodding down

01:44:27.097 --> 01:44:32.126
- there. I can't hear you. If we want to put this up, that would be good.

01:44:32.738 --> 01:44:40.387
- While that's happening, I will just say the fun fact of this is it was collected in August 2025 and

01:44:40.387 --> 01:44:48.266
- it was available and not used when ESD made the decision in 2026 to keep Kirkwood open to cars. That's

01:44:48.266 --> 01:44:56.145
- its own problem and can be talked about later. So in this survey or in this tabling of 271 people, 90%

01:44:56.145 --> 01:44:59.358
- of those of those who participated either

01:44:59.522 --> 01:45:07.822
- They got two little puff balls to put into jars any way they chose and so 90% of those puff balls went

01:45:07.822 --> 01:45:16.283
- into jars that either wanted Kirkwood permanently closed to cars and open to people or seasonally closed

01:45:16.283 --> 01:45:25.470
- to cars and open to people. 3% I guess didn't say anything which then I guess they just filled out their name and

01:45:26.050 --> 01:45:35.206
- then the other 10% weren't in favor of a closure. You know, I'm just kind of like taking the liberty

01:45:35.206 --> 01:45:44.362
- because I'm here to talk about other cool stuff. So I was looking up and speaking with the person in

01:45:44.362 --> 01:45:51.614
- Indiana who runs a creating places program because we hear a lot about how this

01:45:51.778 --> 01:45:57.984
- oh, this is done in other cities and other states, but it can't be done here. We've got state code.

01:45:57.984 --> 01:46:04.437
- We've got state legislation that's shrinking our budgets and everything like that. And I think in part,

01:46:04.437 --> 01:46:11.015
- that's why this Indiana program is so successful. It's crowdfunding. It doesn't have to use any municipal

01:46:11.015 --> 01:46:17.780
- dollars. It's $100,000. And cities across Indiana, some with Republican mayors and Republican city councils,

01:46:17.780 --> 01:46:20.510
- are doing awesome things to activate spaces

01:46:20.706 --> 01:46:28.440
- for people. So I looked up great things like Spark in Indianapolis now closes Monument Circle seasonally.

01:46:28.440 --> 01:46:35.955
- It has this past year, 61,000 people who went there. And of course, if you know Indianapolis, Monument

01:46:35.955 --> 01:46:43.179
- Circle is a big space where cars really come from all different directions. So it's a pretty high,

01:46:43.179 --> 01:46:46.462
- high task, I think, to get that coordinated.

01:46:47.522 --> 01:46:55.874
- Terre Haute revitalized streets with bike racks, seating, gateway signage. This took place under a Republican

01:46:55.874 --> 01:47:03.999
- mayor. Hey, do we say Monticello or Monticello here? I forget Monticello, I think. I don't know. Connected

01:47:03.999 --> 01:47:11.667
- its river to the downtown similar to Kirkwood. They were crowdfunding $50,000 and the public donated

01:47:11.667 --> 01:47:17.438
- $101,000, which is amazing. And I think it's just pointing to the fact that

01:47:17.922 --> 01:47:26.319
- people will show up and people want this and people will spend their own money on it. We have had some

01:47:26.319 --> 01:47:34.634
- projects here in Bloomington. Captain Janeway on the B line was the first project. The Southeast, the

01:47:34.634 --> 01:47:42.787
- Southeast YMCA also did a playground, a new playground with a creating places grant. Most recently,

01:47:42.787 --> 01:47:44.254
- Cicada Cinema did

01:47:44.386 --> 01:47:52.459
- this exact creating places grant. They were looking to raise $50,000. They raised $62,000 and then got

01:47:52.459 --> 01:48:00.454
- a matching grant of $50,000 from the state of Indiana. I point to that because that grant closed July

01:48:00.454 --> 01:48:08.606
- 15th and so it really, it really I think hits home that people want places to gather and there is again

01:48:08.706 --> 01:48:15.342
- money in this community to help create those places. I speak to these projects and this grant because

01:48:15.342 --> 01:48:21.913
- one, many council members are worried about a budget and too many council members say it takes a lot

01:48:21.913 --> 01:48:28.485
- of money to pull this off. And these are all projects that are most of them are well under $100,000.

01:48:28.485 --> 01:48:31.998
- Most of them are on the 20 to $30,000 range. And then

01:48:32.738 --> 01:48:39.268
- The staff for this program did also price out the five blocks of Kirkwood as being a 30 to $40,000 project

01:48:39.268 --> 01:48:45.493
- to activate it. So I think it's important to, you know, not necessarily make believe things, but like

01:48:45.493 --> 01:48:51.840
- give experts a call and figure it out. That's all I want to say right now about it. Again, I understand

01:48:51.840 --> 01:48:56.478
- we don't have the votes. I do want to speak maybe potentially have a longer

01:48:56.610 --> 01:49:04.874
- final comment if we're not timing those. So I would like to ask for that and use my time from 78 other

01:49:04.874 --> 01:49:13.058
- meetings tonight. Thank you. Thank you so much, Council Member Rosenberger. Other comments? If any or

01:49:13.058 --> 01:49:21.562
- questions or anything else you'd like to do at this moment, I also would take any motions. Council Member

01:49:21.562 --> 01:49:22.846
- Piedmont-Smith.

01:49:24.514 --> 01:49:34.277
- So that was a lot from Councilmember Rosenberger. Thank you. A lot to process. I'm interested in these

01:49:34.277 --> 01:49:43.850
- crowdfunding. I couldn't really follow. So there's crowdfunding that has been used in Indiana cities

01:49:43.850 --> 01:49:49.726
- that the state matches for activation of public space is that

01:49:50.178 --> 01:49:57.632
- what you were talking about. Yes, so IHCDA, the Indiana Housing and Community Development Authority,

01:49:57.632 --> 01:50:05.086
- has up to $100,000, well, up to $50,000 matching grant for nonprofits or municipalities in the state

01:50:05.086 --> 01:50:12.835
- of Indiana to activate spaces. It's been used for everything, right? Murals, public bathrooms, restoring

01:50:12.835 --> 01:50:16.894
- a train car on the South Moe Non-Freedom Trail, buying

01:50:17.890 --> 01:50:25.825
- flower pots to go on street lamps and watering them. Yeah. A removable screen for a street that gets

01:50:25.825 --> 01:50:33.681
- used for showing movies in a summer. It's the website is patronicity.com slash creating places. And

01:50:33.681 --> 01:50:42.558
- it's really awesome today. I scrolled through every single project and got really excited and obviously jealous.

01:50:45.986 --> 01:50:52.583
- Oh, so it's $50,000 match, right? So the municipality or the nonprofit raises that money. You cannot

01:50:52.583 --> 01:50:59.442
- donate to your own cause. So if the city were to apply for this, also it's very low barrier application.

01:50:59.442 --> 01:51:06.105
- It's just like a Kickstarter page that you fill out. The city could not fund it, but for example, the

01:51:06.105 --> 01:51:12.702
- chamber could or like DBI could be the sponsor and the city then, if it wanted, could put in $10,000

01:51:12.702 --> 01:51:14.270
- or something like that.

01:51:19.778 --> 01:51:29.254
- Anything else? Okay, I'll go to public comment if if anyone would like to comment on a reconsideration

01:51:29.254 --> 01:51:38.454
- of ordinance 2026 12 Take it away Or so just the heck what the heck I'm here I'm really appreciated

01:51:38.454 --> 01:51:47.838
- the comments by councilmember Rosenberger, and this is not the end well this issue will come back and

01:51:48.322 --> 01:51:55.558
- And this is just the beginning. We might not have the money to do it the way we want to do it, which

01:51:55.558 --> 01:52:03.367
- I think is the reason for some people reconsidering. But there will be another day. And I really appreciated

01:52:03.367 --> 01:52:10.604
- the conversations that the mayor initiated. That was a very good meeting, an hour and a half meeting

01:52:10.604 --> 01:52:14.974
- a few days before her veto. A lot of good input from people.

01:52:16.450 --> 01:52:26.783
- We need more of that. And I think she's on board with getting more input about that. So thanks, everybody

01:52:26.783 --> 01:52:36.434
- involved. Any other people would like to make public comment at this time? Is there anyone online?

01:52:36.434 --> 01:52:45.598
- All right. To the folks online, you should be able to unmute at this point. Are they unmuted?

01:52:59.266 --> 01:53:08.570
- Hello, go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the Council, Steve Volin. I just wanted to speak briefly

01:53:08.570 --> 01:53:17.265
- as a member of the Transportation Commission. I hate to correct Council member Rosenberger, but the

01:53:17.265 --> 01:53:25.961
- vote was not unanimous. It was five to one in favor. So I just wanted to mention that correction. I

01:53:25.961 --> 01:53:28.830
- also wanted to call attention to

01:53:29.410 --> 01:53:38.608
- the resolution that I brought in 2023 on a downtown circulator, the idea of a permanently running bus

01:53:38.608 --> 01:53:48.438
- that's circulating around downtown. I mentioned it now because I did the math on it. And if we had corrected

01:53:48.438 --> 01:53:58.718
- parking meter rates the way they should be corrected, at least a million dollars a year would have been generated

01:53:59.202 --> 01:54:07.843
- for the purpose of that circulator. The recent study from Walker parking, which we presented to you

01:54:07.843 --> 01:54:16.656
- in a couple of weeks, but it's still going through transportation commission does call for adjustment

01:54:16.656 --> 01:54:24.606
- of rates both up and down, but any change in rates is going to generate significant revenue

01:54:25.154 --> 01:54:33.405
- far more than would be needed to do any kind of activation on Kirkwood. If the council is concerned

01:54:33.405 --> 01:54:41.822
- about raising money, the money basically has always been there in the form of street meters. And that

01:54:41.822 --> 01:54:50.238
- money should always be devoted to either transportation related issues, preferably public transit, or

01:54:50.238 --> 01:54:53.374
- to fixing or improving transportation

01:54:53.826 --> 01:55:01.388
- infrastructure within the district where the money is generated. At least that's the philosophy of this

01:55:01.388 --> 01:55:09.168
- transportation commission member. So if money is an object, I would urge council to rethink their concern.

01:55:09.168 --> 01:55:16.730
- You're gonna be getting a package of parking meter rate reform in the next few months if there's almost

01:55:16.730 --> 01:55:23.710
- no question about it. It's just a matter of when and what the structure of that reform will be.

01:55:23.938 --> 01:55:38.094
- I wouldn't use that as a reason to begin planning for a more car-free Kirkwood. Thank you for your time,

01:55:38.094 --> 01:55:49.150
- and I appreciate it. Thank you so much. Next person online. Are they still there?

01:55:54.146 --> 01:56:06.868
- Do you have a moniker or something I can? It's the person with the screen name Buff Brown. Oh.

01:56:06.868 --> 01:56:20.796
- Buff Mr. Brown, Mr. Lawrence Brown, are you there? Hello, can you hear me? Yes, we can. Yay. All right,

01:56:20.796 --> 01:56:23.742
- that took me a while.

01:56:24.866 --> 01:56:32.119
- All right, my name is Buff Brown. I have been a long-time advocate for bike, pet, and transit options

01:56:32.119 --> 01:56:39.372
- for decades in Bloomington, founder of a former group called BTOP, Bloomington Transportation Options

01:56:39.372 --> 01:56:46.768
- for People, that operated for 10 years with relatively good success from 2004 to 2014. I have also been

01:56:46.768 --> 01:56:51.390
- a professional transportation planner for 25 years, now retired.

01:56:51.746 --> 01:56:59.622
- I now live in Portland, Oregon for family reasons. I have now lived and advocated in five cities and

01:56:59.622 --> 01:57:07.499
- know how councils and mayor relationships work and how they fail as well. I have been following this

01:57:07.499 --> 01:57:15.531
- issue for years and have enjoyed the seasonal closure of Kirkwood and many visits back to Bloomington.

01:57:15.531 --> 01:57:20.990
- I have a few points to make. Number one, this will work in the early,

01:57:21.186 --> 01:57:29.995
- Earlier you start, the better. So vote yes. Use the 2027 planning process that you have planned to plan

01:57:29.995 --> 01:57:38.720
- for its growth, not its rebirth. For a council to make this happen, this is exactly how to do it. This

01:57:38.720 --> 01:57:47.445
- is the horse and not the cart. All data shows that this is what your community wanted. A public survey

01:57:47.445 --> 01:57:49.054
- at the safety week

01:57:49.218 --> 01:57:56.925
- Last year, a stakeholder business survey shows the majority of respondents want it as well. The 11-0

01:57:56.925 --> 01:58:04.784
- vote of the sustainability commission, the 5-1 vote by the transportation commission, and most of all,

01:58:04.784 --> 01:58:12.719
- a 5-4 vote by the council. Everything shows the community wants this, just not the mayor and some vocal

01:58:12.719 --> 01:58:16.382
- stakeholders. I worry about the following. One.

01:58:16.898 --> 01:58:24.619
- The vote is significantly about the power and authority of the legislative branch and the executive

01:58:24.619 --> 01:58:32.417
- branch. And I think voting no abrogates power from the council. Two, I hope that the council members

01:58:32.417 --> 01:58:40.369
- who I have worked with for years, whom I call the old guard, Ruff Rallo and Piedmont Smith, I feel are

01:58:40.369 --> 01:58:45.310
- becoming the establishment Democrats, those who tend to hold up

01:58:45.602 --> 01:58:55.017
- the status quo rather than take risks. So my conclusion, I'm asking you all to believe that your younger

01:58:55.017 --> 01:59:04.612
- council people are here to make a difference, to create new things and make them work at a risk admittedly

01:59:04.612 --> 01:59:13.758
- for their lives and their children's better lives. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anybody else? Okay.

01:59:14.146 --> 01:59:26.102
- other person who is online. We welcome your comments. You should be able to speak now. Hello? Hello,

01:59:26.102 --> 01:59:38.412
- we can hear you. Okay, we can hear you. Well, one second. We could hear you, and now it sounds a little

01:59:38.412 --> 01:59:44.094
- bit muffled. We'll give you back your time, but

01:59:44.866 --> 01:59:58.398
- Are you able to adjust your microphone by chance? It's a little better, but you sound a little bit distant.

02:00:22.914 --> 02:00:31.010
- Thank you, and if it's possible to write out what you said, that would also help, because we

02:00:31.010 --> 02:00:39.715
- saw a transcription, couldn't exactly hear it, but it would be helpful just for confirmation if you

02:00:39.715 --> 02:00:48.159
- could type that in into the chat, if that's possible, and we'll very happily read that out loud.

02:00:48.159 --> 02:00:51.902
- Thank you. Okay, anybody else in chambers?

02:00:58.690 --> 02:01:06.009
- pending the last comment here, then we'll come back to council comment. Have they written it? They haven't?

02:01:06.009 --> 02:01:13.056
- Okay. Well, if they do, we'll stop and we'll read it. Okay. Fantastic. Back to council members. Council

02:01:13.056 --> 02:01:20.036
- Member Daley. Thank you very much. Yep. As co-sponsor of this ordinance, I just wanted to quickly jump

02:01:20.036 --> 02:01:21.662
- in and make my comment.

02:01:22.242 --> 02:01:29.868
- It has been a wild process working on this with councilmember Rosenberger, you know after the vote six

02:01:29.868 --> 02:01:37.716
- weeks ago You know, she and I have had multiple conversations and and some really great meetings Deciding

02:01:37.716 --> 02:01:44.158
- how we were going to move forward, especially once the mayor did veto it and we we did

02:01:44.386 --> 02:01:50.546
- come to an agreement early on that we were not going to work to overturn the veto. We were going to

02:01:50.546 --> 02:01:56.952
- press pause and we were going to continue working on it throughout the fall and the winter and get that

02:01:56.952 --> 02:02:03.111
- greater input and have more conversations and continue to keep developing it. And so we had decided

02:02:03.111 --> 02:02:09.271
- that was going to be the plan. But then over the past six weeks, we have had a lot of outreach from

02:02:09.271 --> 02:02:11.550
- a lot of invested community members.

02:02:11.714 --> 02:02:20.070
- business owners, we've had just so much positive reinforcement from members of the community who wanted

02:02:20.070 --> 02:02:28.345
- us to continue moving with this. So it is on the agenda for tonight. This is just part of our standard

02:02:28.345 --> 02:02:36.861
- procedural. I didn't realize that it was actually coming up on the agenda for tonight, so I was surprised

02:02:36.861 --> 02:02:40.798
- when I saw it. But all that being said, one more

02:02:40.962 --> 02:02:48.536
- we did talk about the budgeting and the money. There was money in, I don't think Council Member Rosenberger

02:02:48.536 --> 02:02:55.760
- said this, is that there was money in the budget for this year to put toward Kirkwood. And so we still

02:02:55.760 --> 02:03:03.194
- have that money budgeted. So there is still money set aside that we can be putting toward the adjustments

02:03:03.194 --> 02:03:10.558
- and the changes that we want to see to help make this more of how we envision a pedestrianized Kirkwood.

02:03:10.978 --> 02:03:17.527
- So we do have some of that money now that we can be thinking about. So I just wanted to put that out

02:03:17.527 --> 02:03:24.010
- there as well. But I don't expect that this is necessarily going to go anywhere tonight, but we are

02:03:24.010 --> 02:03:30.948
- going to continue to keep working on this. And because it, of course, is an ordinance that I co-sponsored,

02:03:30.948 --> 02:03:37.496
- I will be voting in favor of this tonight because I worked hard on this. And I think a lot of people

02:03:37.496 --> 02:03:40.414
- really do want to see this come forward too.

02:03:40.610 --> 02:03:46.301
- So thank you. Thank you, Council Member Flaherty. Thank you. I appreciate the arrival of the conversation

02:03:46.301 --> 02:03:51.777
- and that we're taking a vote on the veto. I know that the sponsors have suggested that based on their

02:03:51.777 --> 02:03:57.307
- conversation with council members, they don't expect the veto to be overridden tonight. I think that's

02:03:57.307 --> 02:04:02.676
- a disappointing outcome, in my opinion, if that's the case, but Council Member Rosemarie also noted

02:04:02.676 --> 02:04:08.367
- that we've had council members change their minds about this. Perhaps they will change their minds again.

02:04:08.367 --> 02:04:08.958
- Who knows?

02:04:09.058 --> 02:04:15.229
- I do want to cover some things. First, just as I'll always keep saying with this about messaging, this

02:04:15.229 --> 02:04:21.220
- is not a street closure. It is a street conversion. It is a temporary closure to motor vehicles and

02:04:21.220 --> 02:04:27.571
- a corresponding opening to pedestrians, bicyclists, wheelchair users, pets, scooter users, skateboarders,

02:04:27.571 --> 02:04:33.742
- shoppers, diners, sporting events, celebrators, et cetera. It is a public space conversion in probably

02:04:33.742 --> 02:04:36.318
- the ideal place in Bloomington to do that.

02:04:36.546 --> 02:04:42.808
- It's just, it makes so much sense. I think that's why there's such broad public buy-in for it. We're

02:04:42.808 --> 02:04:49.257
- blessed with such a unique connector from the downtown and the courthouse square to Kirkwood. It's like

02:04:49.257 --> 02:04:55.891
- the perfect context for this. We could have done it probably a half a century ago. And no mayor or council

02:04:55.891 --> 02:05:02.154
- since has been able to figure this out. I'm sure plenty of people have thought about it. Maybe it'll

02:05:02.154 --> 02:05:05.502
- be ours. Maybe it'll be 20 years from now, who knows?

02:05:05.922 --> 02:05:11.652
- I do think, and hold out hope, that it will happen eventually when we have people with the right political

02:05:11.652 --> 02:05:17.329
- will and vision for this, even if that's not right now. I think it's been noted this has had broad policy

02:05:17.329 --> 02:05:22.792
- support from some of the bodies that we ask for their input on their area of expertise, in particular

02:05:22.792 --> 02:05:28.683
- here, sustainability and transportation. It's been noted that the Commission on Sustainability and Resilience

02:05:28.683 --> 02:05:33.342
- unanimously supported this with the resolution, and that the Transportation Commission

02:05:33.538 --> 02:05:40.300
- Well, had some questions and some healthy discussion, did ultimately support the proposal with a vote

02:05:40.300 --> 02:05:47.062
- of five to one. It was Bloomington Transit Director Connell, who was the no vote. And yeah, you know,

02:05:47.062 --> 02:05:53.956
- I think there was a recognition that the proposed staff findings that this didn't align with city goals

02:05:53.956 --> 02:06:00.254
- were incorrect in the commission's opinions. There was, you know, we were all aligned on that.

02:06:00.514 --> 02:06:06.293
- Also just noting the climate action plan says that we are supposed to determine appropriate locations

02:06:06.293 --> 02:06:12.072
- for car-free pedestrian zones in high density areas. This is the appropriate location. We're supposed

02:06:12.072 --> 02:06:17.737
- to establish an implementation based on the Kirkwood pilot project observations. And again, I think

02:06:17.737 --> 02:06:23.516
- that's what this sets the policy direction to do. Yes, there's work that would come yet or would come

02:06:23.516 --> 02:06:29.918
- following this, but it takes the commitment for us to then do that because otherwise every conversation about it

02:06:30.146 --> 02:06:35.875
- is plagued by uncertainty. Will we? Won't we? Is it going to happen next year, et cetera? Without policy

02:06:35.875 --> 02:06:41.823
- certainty, we can't take the next steps around budgeting, around design, around making sure it is accessible

02:06:41.823 --> 02:06:47.825
- and safe and equitable. And even the little kind of single issues that are unique to individual stakeholders,

02:06:47.825 --> 02:06:53.446
- like First Christian Church that emailed us earlier this week concerned most significantly about their

02:06:53.446 --> 02:06:58.302
- six angled parking spaces in the alley between Washington and Lincoln north of Kirkwood.

02:06:58.562 --> 02:07:04.220
- That's a valid concern. They have limited parking. I get it. I've walked that space. It seems to me

02:07:04.220 --> 02:07:09.878
- like 90 degree pull-in parking would be possible in that alley, even if tight. I asked them if they

02:07:09.878 --> 02:07:15.535
- have talked to planning and transportation staff or explored that possibility. I haven't heard back

02:07:15.535 --> 02:07:21.420
- yet. But the point more broadly is that these problems are solvable. Are there accessibility challenges

02:07:21.420 --> 02:07:27.134
- potentially? Yes. Can we solve them? Also, yes. Are there accessibility challenges with car history?

02:07:27.682 --> 02:07:34.779
- and safety challenges, yes. And those are hard to solve. I am concerned more broadly about some comments

02:07:34.779 --> 02:07:41.539
- I've heard, relatively limited, but over time, about that essentially conflate direct motor vehicle

02:07:41.539 --> 02:07:48.569
- access with accessibility for people with disabilities. Those are not the same thing. And to the extent

02:07:48.569 --> 02:07:51.678
- that we're working against pedestrian safety,

02:07:51.874 --> 02:07:58.195
- in the name of accessibility, but really you're just talking about car access. I think we're really

02:07:58.195 --> 02:08:04.768
- missing the picture. I think this does happen. But more broadly, people with disabilities actually have

02:08:04.768 --> 02:08:11.088
- the most to gain in a situation like this. About a third of people don't drive. That's about 10% of

02:08:11.088 --> 02:08:17.851
- adults who don't drive. But among the disability community, that is dramatically higher. I've seen numbers

02:08:17.851 --> 02:08:20.190
- cited around 60% of that population.

02:08:20.706 --> 02:08:26.495
- And car-heavy cities and places are more dangerous to disabled people. They are based on extensive research

02:08:26.495 --> 02:08:31.962
- and also expertise from accessibility advocates. So there's been studies that show vehicle pedestrian

02:08:31.962 --> 02:08:37.483
- deaths among wheelchair users is 36% higher than the overall population. Our own data show in our Safe

02:08:37.483 --> 02:08:43.379
- Streets for All action plan that Kirkwood Avenue from Walnut Street to India Avenue is part of the high-entry

02:08:43.379 --> 02:08:47.614
- network for vulnerable road users. It is a dangerous place to be a pedestrian.

02:08:47.778 --> 02:08:53.975
- or a wheelchair user or a bicyclist. That's the data. Those are the facts. The National League of Cities

02:08:53.975 --> 02:08:59.878
- also notes that pedestrian zones in cities result in a more accessible, efficient, and cleaner city

02:08:59.878 --> 02:09:05.957
- for all residents. That's their view. Also, there's a fair amount for disability advocates about this.

02:09:05.957 --> 02:09:11.859
- Anna Zeverts is a disability advocate and author of the book, When Driving is Not an Option. She is

02:09:11.859 --> 02:09:16.286
- a low vision person and a non-driver and also a leader in mobility equity.

02:09:16.418 --> 02:09:22.375
- She's worked with the National Safety Council's Mobility Safety Advisory Group and has lamented that

02:09:22.375 --> 02:09:27.743
- accessibility sometimes becomes a political football in the discussion of pedestrian zones

02:09:27.743 --> 02:09:33.877
- and how unfortunate that is. But the car-free zones, when designed properly with accessibility in mind,

02:09:33.877 --> 02:09:40.542
- provide far greater autonomy for disabled non-drivers than traditional vehicle-only spaces do. So again, I think

02:09:40.930 --> 02:09:47.617
- If we really prioritize accessibility and collaboration here, we can get that right. I have high confidence

02:09:47.617 --> 02:09:53.994
- in that. I think former council member Volin, transportation commissioner, commission chair Volin made

02:09:53.994 --> 02:10:00.372
- some great points about parking meter revenues in addition to, you know, budgeted funding that we have

02:10:00.372 --> 02:10:06.563
- for this that council member Daly noted. The last point I did want to reiterate is the broad public

02:10:06.563 --> 02:10:07.678
- support for this.

02:10:07.938 --> 02:10:12.626
- I think there's also some like sample bias selection, but you know, kind of like self selection bias

02:10:12.626 --> 02:10:17.314
- pieces. I would imagine that the folks, the mayor hears from our people who are opposed because they

02:10:17.314 --> 02:10:22.095
- know that she is supposed so they know that she is the receptive audience for their opposition. That's

02:10:22.095 --> 02:10:26.922
- probably I wasn't able to attend the listening session. I was out of town. But my guess is that it was,

02:10:26.922 --> 02:10:31.657
- you know, mostly that kind of kind of perspective there. She had already made the decision earlier in

02:10:31.657 --> 02:10:33.374
- the year. If you had a ladder early,

02:10:33.666 --> 02:10:39.218
- not to go through with the conversion this year, even though it was passed by ordinance last year by

02:10:39.218 --> 02:10:44.771
- this council. So she'd already made the decision. In my mind, the veto was a given, but I appreciate

02:10:44.771 --> 02:10:50.268
- that she did have a listening session prior to doing it. But again, she'd already made the decision

02:10:50.268 --> 02:10:55.986
- earlier in the year. The best data we have is what, well, the best data we now have, the best data that

02:10:55.986 --> 02:11:01.758
- the Mayor's administration had, but didn't share with us previously, was from pop-up events on Kirkwood.

02:11:01.954 --> 02:11:07.503
- asking people how they interact. This is, by the way, a good analog was Cascades, which we never did

02:11:07.503 --> 02:11:12.996
- convert to a non-car park space. But similarly, we asked people when they interacted with it, asked

02:11:12.996 --> 02:11:18.600
- hundreds of people during that trial what they preferred. And actually, the strong majority wasn't in

02:11:18.600 --> 02:11:24.313
- favor of converting that space. Obviously, we never did it. Similarly here, we asked people interacting

02:11:24.313 --> 02:11:29.916
- with Kirkwood, not to show up to a meeting like this, but we're just, what do you think? And that 90%

02:11:29.916 --> 02:11:31.070
- of the people wanted

02:11:31.426 --> 02:11:37.300
- some type of conversion of Kirkwood to a non car space in favor of being a public space for people.

02:11:37.300 --> 02:11:43.292
- That's pretty, pretty wild. Those are, those are very impressive numbers. And, and, you know, only 7%

02:11:43.292 --> 02:11:49.343
- favored no closure to cars at all. So that's quite striking. Again, I think it's the best data we have

02:11:49.343 --> 02:11:55.218
- on this. Also among council members, probably 90% of the emails we've received have been in support

02:11:55.218 --> 02:11:56.510
- and in favor of this.

02:11:56.802 --> 02:12:02.776
- It's hard to get perfect data. But if we really wanted to, we probably could through hiring a survey

02:12:02.776 --> 02:12:09.106
- firm or something. Lastly, I know there's been some discussion about, oh, we can continue the conversation

02:12:09.106 --> 02:12:15.021
- from here. Sure. We've kind of been down this path. Previously, I brought a UDO resolution a couple

02:12:15.021 --> 02:12:21.114
- of years ago. The mayor made some calls, got folks to vote no on introduction. That was disappointing.

02:12:21.114 --> 02:12:26.142
- Notionally, we were supposed to have a lot of collaboration that followed from that.

02:12:26.626 --> 02:12:31.818
- planning and transportation staff did conduct some sessions. We had a, you know, a deliberation session

02:12:31.818 --> 02:12:37.061
- with the council. It actually wasn't all that collaborative. Ultimately, there wasn't really any action.

02:12:37.061 --> 02:12:42.053
- So I brought back that resolution, the same resolution, and we passed it. So the track record there

02:12:42.053 --> 02:12:47.046
- isn't very good. Again, I think the mayor's made very clear that she is opposed to this. So I'm not

02:12:47.046 --> 02:12:52.089
- putting a lot of faith in, you know, collaboration to follow. I think it's up to the city council to

02:12:52.089 --> 02:12:52.638
- lead here.

02:12:52.962 --> 02:12:58.494
- The one other recent experience there was with the snow removal on sidewalks, which by the way is a

02:12:58.494 --> 02:13:04.082
- significant accessibility issue and a pedestrian safety issue. I led a deliberation session on that,

02:13:04.082 --> 02:13:09.891
- invited all of the relevant department heads from city staff and the mayor told them not to come because

02:13:09.891 --> 02:13:15.645
- they had been spending too much time on the Hopewell PUD process. So Tim Street showed up anyway, bless

02:13:15.645 --> 02:13:20.126
- him and thank you, but the others did not because that was the order from above.

02:13:20.354 --> 02:13:28.051
- Again, not a great track record on collaboration on things related to pedestrian safety, accessibility,

02:13:28.051 --> 02:13:35.673
- transportation sustainability. So it's up to us to lead. I hope we do. If we don't, hopefully the next

02:13:35.673 --> 02:13:43.148
- term, the council will or a mayor will. Thank you. Thank you so much. Any others? Well, I'll make my

02:13:43.148 --> 02:13:49.438
- quick plea for those of you still considering in hopes that two people will join us.

02:13:49.570 --> 02:13:58.093
- Just a handful of things. First, I'd like to add to the list that Councilmember Rosenberger started

02:13:58.093 --> 02:14:06.786
- off with in terms of the people that we've heard from. And one additional stakeholder that I think is

02:14:06.786 --> 02:14:15.990
- relevant to add here are those who spoke against closing Kirkwood, but for this reason. They made arguments

02:14:15.990 --> 02:14:18.462
- like, it would be awesome if

02:14:19.138 --> 02:14:26.684
- But...you all won't, right? Wouldn't it be cool if we had that? We would love to live in a city that,

02:14:26.684 --> 02:14:34.157
- but we're not that city. And I think that it's important for us to realize that that in itself is an

02:14:34.157 --> 02:14:41.999
- analysis of what people are thinking of their local government. That they don't think that we can deliver

02:14:41.999 --> 02:14:46.142
- or follow through with our own vision and our own plan.

02:14:46.242 --> 02:14:53.512
- And I'd like to echo what councilmember Flaherty has been saying throughout this process and so many

02:14:53.512 --> 02:15:00.999
- others This is a thing that's written fairly clearly in a bunch of city plans and again that that we've

02:15:00.999 --> 02:15:04.670
- got a lot of momentum around and every single time

02:15:04.802 --> 02:15:11.193
- We stopped short of doing something along these lines, and that does not breed confidence. It doesn't

02:15:11.193 --> 02:15:17.459
- breed confidence in those who would think to move here, doesn't breed confidence in those who would

02:15:17.459 --> 02:15:23.787
- invest, doesn't breed confidence in the local business community, and that has downstream effects on

02:15:23.787 --> 02:15:30.429
- other things that we do. The second thing that I'd like to note is we should remember why this was before

02:15:30.429 --> 02:15:31.870
- us in the first place.

02:15:32.162 --> 02:15:39.631
- In collaboration, we brought forth a piece of legislation that, again, within the whereas clauses and

02:15:39.631 --> 02:15:47.466
- within our debate and within the request that we received from significant stakeholders, our constituents,

02:15:47.466 --> 02:15:55.007
- was that we wanted to give some certainty, at least for a period of time, to downtown business. That's

02:15:55.007 --> 02:16:02.110
- what was requested. And then going into season two of what was supposed to be the full-throated,

02:16:02.274 --> 02:16:09.598
- properly backed version of this where people supposedly had already invested two days before we were

02:16:09.598 --> 02:16:16.994
- to continue with that. We're told that actually we're not going to do it this year. This echoes a lot

02:16:16.994 --> 02:16:22.142
- of other things where I think it's important for us to assert the fact

02:16:22.242 --> 02:16:31.349
- that we too are elected officials who represent the city of Bloomington. We too receive feedback. We

02:16:31.349 --> 02:16:40.366
- too have a responsibility to those who, to our constituents. And I think that it's not fair that we

02:16:40.366 --> 02:16:50.104
- would pass an ordinance that could immediately be just turned in another direction and not with appropriate

02:16:50.104 --> 02:16:51.998
- data points as well.

02:16:52.962 --> 02:17:00.309
- I think that we also need to note that there's this ongoing theme where we're talking about things like

02:17:00.309 --> 02:17:07.515
- economic development. And one of the areas that is throughout most arguments for economic development

02:17:07.515 --> 02:17:15.075
- in the city is that we must attract a different demographic or at least cultivate a particular demographic

02:17:15.075 --> 02:17:22.846
- to be in our city. And that includes making sure that we have more workforce, that we have more young people.

02:17:23.202 --> 02:17:29.623
- Realistically, I have advocated for this. I'm not saying that this is not a zero sum question. You don't

02:17:29.623 --> 02:17:36.289
- do that at the expense of people who are retirees. I think that we have to make the city great for everybody

02:17:36.289 --> 02:17:42.772
- who lives here. But the point here is that I do think, as it relates to economic development, that people

02:17:42.772 --> 02:17:49.315
- within that target demographic are remarkably excited about what a city looks like with a closed Kirkwood.

02:17:49.315 --> 02:17:53.168
- Students are excited about that. Alums are excited about that.

02:17:53.168 --> 02:18:00.958
- And so that does tie to a lot of other things that we're trying to do. Finally, I'll say that a lot

02:18:00.958 --> 02:18:09.138
- of problems were brought up, and I think that we have a, I don't know, a culture here of if we can state

02:18:09.138 --> 02:18:15.838
- a problem, and I guess I just throw a problem out there, and so because I've said it,

02:18:16.034 --> 02:18:21.412
- There it is. It's a problem. But all problems are opportunities for innovation. Every single thing that

02:18:21.412 --> 02:18:26.893
- was brought up, whether it's, well, what are we going to do about, that's the conversation that we should

02:18:26.893 --> 02:18:31.857
- be having. And we don't have that conversation until somebody brings forth some type of a piece

02:18:31.857 --> 02:18:37.235
- of legislation. We also brought up, and I think this is a really valid argument, which it's like, look,

02:18:37.235 --> 02:18:41.630
- at the end of the day, why are we investing in Kirkwood instead of, I think that's a

02:18:41.698 --> 02:18:48.602
- very strong argument. It's one that resonates a lot with me. But the reality is that we're now no closer

02:18:48.602 --> 02:18:55.572
- to doing that investment either. And so I'm concerned with the fact that we're just going to cycle around

02:18:55.572 --> 02:19:02.278
- having deliberation about what we might do. We're paying some consultants to come and tell us what we

02:19:02.278 --> 02:19:08.919
- already know about the street. And that path dependency matters an awful lot. And so to me, what was

02:19:08.919 --> 02:19:10.366
- really exciting about

02:19:10.434 --> 02:19:16.077
- putting forth this resolution, this ordinance, is that it addresses those issues of council's place

02:19:16.077 --> 02:19:21.777
- in governance, yes, but it also gives a clear mark. Now, we can amend. We can go back to it and say,

02:19:21.777 --> 02:19:27.590
- look, actually, as we started to do this design, we realized some things that we hadn't thought about.

02:19:27.590 --> 02:19:33.233
- But it gives us a direction to go towards, instead of just going around and around the mountain and

02:19:33.233 --> 02:19:39.046
- not coming to any type of real solution. So that's why I would urge you, I beg you, colleagues, please

02:19:39.046 --> 02:19:40.400
- join us, because again,

02:19:40.400 --> 02:19:47.581
- If this isn't working, we have a year, we have a whole year to design this right, to fund this right,

02:19:47.581 --> 02:19:54.692
- to put all of the efforts into making this work. And if not, then we can take it back. But not doing

02:19:54.692 --> 02:20:02.084
- anything, I don't think gets us any closer to the Bloomington that we're trying to become. So with that,

02:20:02.084 --> 02:20:06.590
- I'll pass to anybody else. Council Member Stossberg. Thank you.

02:20:07.810 --> 02:20:14.934
- I want to start by saying I appreciate the research country member Rosenberger dead on the grants and

02:20:14.934 --> 02:20:21.919
- and those options and the input from mr. Bowlin regarding using parking meter fees as a way to fund

02:20:21.919 --> 02:20:29.044
- this and I just appreciate that those thoughts and while the ultimate cost of activation and redesign

02:20:29.044 --> 02:20:32.606
- as a piece of my initial vote at this point I have

02:20:32.674 --> 02:20:39.089
- kind of a slightly different primary motivation driving it. I agree with nearly everything that Councilmember

02:20:39.089 --> 02:20:45.213
- Flaherty and Asari just said about the challenges with the mayor and the general importance of the power

02:20:45.213 --> 02:20:51.045
- of the legislative body. And that's like the most that's that's the thing that tempts me most right

02:20:51.045 --> 02:20:56.935
- now to change my vote. Honestly, is it's not about the issue. It's about saying like the majority of

02:20:56.935 --> 02:21:00.318
- us like thought this thing like figure it out. Right. But

02:21:01.378 --> 02:21:08.193
- What is still gonna end up being a no vote for me this evening is really feeling like the success of

02:21:08.193 --> 02:21:15.210
- this closure depends on this collaboration between council and the administration and city departments.

02:21:15.210 --> 02:21:22.160
- And without that buy-in from the administration and city departments, it won't be successful. And it's

02:21:22.160 --> 02:21:28.907
- really clear that we don't have that buy-in right now. And I appreciate that sentiment that we have

02:21:28.907 --> 02:21:31.134
- to force that to make it happen.

02:21:31.874 --> 02:21:38.798
- I'm not sure that that's the approach that, I'm just not on board with that approach at this point.

02:21:38.798 --> 02:21:46.067
- And maybe it's because I'm still relatively new here and I'm still, you know, I'm gonna give this chance

02:21:46.067 --> 02:21:53.268
- or maybe it's because I have just a more like ingrained sense of I would rather have this collaborative

02:21:53.268 --> 02:21:57.630
- consensus sort of thing as opposed to this adversarial debate.

02:21:57.954 --> 02:22:05.979
- Because despite how it might look sometimes, I would much rather have a nice collaborative conversation

02:22:05.979 --> 02:22:13.850
- that results in consensus than have to debate somebody in my soul. But I think that we can still give

02:22:13.850 --> 02:22:21.644
- it time. I don't think that this is an issue that is going to die. I said to somebody who emailed me

02:22:21.644 --> 02:22:24.190
- over the last couple of days, if

02:22:24.258 --> 02:22:30.560
- this ordinance looks slightly different than maybe I would support it if it wasn't five blocks, if it

02:22:30.560 --> 02:22:36.862
- was only one block, if we start with a smaller bite of the apple to figure out how to make this truly

02:22:36.862 --> 02:22:43.103
- successful in one block and then move it on to more block. And those, I think, are maybe some of the

02:22:43.103 --> 02:22:49.405
- conversations that Council Member Asari was just referring to in this idea. And I do think that those

02:22:49.405 --> 02:22:54.224
- can still happen, that those still need to happen even without this ordinance

02:22:54.224 --> 02:23:02.980
- forcing that 2027 hand, because ultimately, we do still have what otherwise was on the books last year

02:23:02.980 --> 02:23:11.736
- in terms of saying, hey, barring some real, you know, whatever thing, these should be closed. And that

02:23:11.736 --> 02:23:18.622
- is something to bring up again. So I am gonna continue the same vote that I did.

02:23:18.722 --> 02:23:25.522
- Last time, and if anybody is interested, I spoke extensively in the June meeting about that. And I also

02:23:25.522 --> 02:23:32.061
- have some of those same concerns still moving forward in terms of what it would mean to make this a

02:23:32.061 --> 02:23:38.600
- vibrant, successful pedestrian space and the real redesign and activation kind of potential. And if

02:23:38.600 --> 02:23:45.270
- anybody is interested in hearing those, I wrote out those comments. And I would be happy to send them

02:23:45.270 --> 02:23:47.166
- to you and just let me know.

02:23:47.650 --> 02:23:55.993
- I do want to thank everybody who's emailed and had conversations with me about this over the last several

02:23:55.993 --> 02:24:04.100
- weeks. I read them all, I swear, and I consider them. I did go to that meeting that the mayor had, and

02:24:04.100 --> 02:24:12.286
- there was a diverse set of folks there advocating for different things. The vision is really beautiful.

02:24:12.418 --> 02:24:21.415
- The vision is really really beautiful and creating that vision on Kirkwood or somewhere would be really

02:24:21.415 --> 02:24:30.326
- beneficial to Bloomington and hopefully we can make that happen. Thanks Yeah, I very good comments and

02:24:30.326 --> 02:24:39.236
- I want to say that I really appreciate the sponsors for bringing the ordinance forward Because we need

02:24:39.236 --> 02:24:41.918
- to have this discussion debate

02:24:42.370 --> 02:24:51.123
- So it's been very helpful. And I supported it last time because I wanted this to be taken seriously.

02:24:51.123 --> 02:24:59.962
- It has merit. I am aware of many streets that have been closed that have failed. Some have succeeded.

02:24:59.962 --> 02:25:08.974
- But I don't see it succeeding, especially in such an iconic, important public space as Kirkwood without

02:25:08.974 --> 02:25:12.094
- community buy-in. Gotta have people

02:25:12.834 --> 02:25:22.699
- All sorts of people come and have their say and envision what could be. Was it optimal last summer when

02:25:22.699 --> 02:25:32.279
- it was closed? I don't think so. I visited it several times. I found it rather trashed. It wasn't an

02:25:32.279 --> 02:25:42.334
- optimal place to be. We can close the street, sure, but we can't administrate the operation of the space.

02:25:43.010 --> 02:25:52.428
- So we need a collaborative approach, as Councilmember Stasberg says. So I would like to, and to tag

02:25:52.428 --> 02:26:02.128
- as a corollary, I think that that requires collaboration. I don't see an adversarial act of overriding

02:26:02.128 --> 02:26:11.358
- a veto as helpful in moving this forward. I didn't like the adversarial relationship in Hopewell,

02:26:12.098 --> 02:26:20.797
- We finally hammered out up. I think a better product in the end So it takes two obviously I do recognize

02:26:20.797 --> 02:26:29.496
- that the mayor issued a letter stating that She wanted the council administration to engage in a process

02:26:29.496 --> 02:26:37.781
- she said to envision what would be the best outcome for Kirkwood with community input I take her at

02:26:37.781 --> 02:26:41.758
- her word that that's what she intends to do and

02:26:42.178 --> 02:26:50.181
- We have the means to do it in deliberation sessions here, and we can have multiple deliberation sessions

02:26:50.181 --> 02:26:58.184
- to that end. I would say, I've detected we have divided opinions in the community. I don't think anybody

02:26:58.184 --> 02:27:05.805
- can say, yes, this is a no-brainer, the majority support this. I don't see it. In fact, I see a lot

02:27:05.805 --> 02:27:10.302
- of merchants very nervous about what the outcome might be,

02:27:10.626 --> 02:27:18.797
- And Mias may be being conservative, small c conservative, and just wanting to maintain what they can

02:27:18.797 --> 02:27:27.211
- predict. And I don't presume to know how to run those businesses, so I take it very seriously. So since

02:27:27.211 --> 02:27:35.382
- we have divided opinions, I think it's incumbent on us to have those deliberation sessions, bring in

02:27:35.382 --> 02:27:38.942
- all sorts of different considerations about

02:27:39.042 --> 02:27:46.042
- the businesses, the churches, the library, accessibility concerns, public safety, cleanliness, the design

02:27:46.042 --> 02:27:52.382
- of the street, how we can optimize it, and of course there's gonna be trade-offs, there's gonna

02:27:52.382 --> 02:27:58.986
- be opportunity costs and trade-offs to consider, and the expense involved, which is part of it too.

02:27:58.986 --> 02:28:05.855
- Regarding the poll, yes, I think that there is, as I said, this really deserves merit. I mean, it could

02:28:05.855 --> 02:28:07.902
- be an amazing space closed off

02:28:08.322 --> 02:28:16.197
- and it deserves to be done appropriately and right. And I don't want to just barrel through and say,

02:28:16.197 --> 02:28:23.371
- we're gonna close it, and you figure it out, I think we need to meet. I think that we, with

02:28:23.371 --> 02:28:31.480
- the administration, you know, during safety week, 271 respondents, yes, they responded at pop-up events

02:28:31.480 --> 02:28:37.406
- during welcome week. So that's probably a pretty selective and biased poll.

02:28:37.730 --> 02:28:44.846
- Yeah, I take it as information, but I can't say that's the community opinion. So we really need to drill

02:28:44.846 --> 02:28:51.827
- down on that. So I'm not going to attempt to overwrite the vote. I'm going to actually reverse my vote

02:28:51.827 --> 02:28:58.740
- this evening, but I'm going to go into this process expecting that we're gonna have a better Kirkwood

02:28:58.740 --> 02:29:05.517
- than we have now going forward, and I'm open to all sorts of different input on how we can maximize

02:29:05.517 --> 02:29:07.550
- pedestrian use of that space.

02:29:11.554 --> 02:29:22.210
- Yeah, speaking as one of the old fart farts no old guard Along along with Councilmember Pimo Smith's

02:29:22.210 --> 02:29:32.971
- who probably also rode her bike down here today and one of the old old guard who for the however many

02:29:32.971 --> 02:29:39.934
- thousandths of times I I rode my bike down to City Hall again and

02:29:40.290 --> 02:29:49.745
- Tonight and I'll write home again tonight Maybe on Kirkwood You know, I I feel like I Agree with a lot

02:29:49.745 --> 02:29:59.659
- of what I've agreed with some of what almost everyone said tonight on both sides of this But I particularly

02:29:59.659 --> 02:30:09.022
- agree with a lot of what Councilman Rallo said We don't know where the community is out on this and I

02:30:09.154 --> 02:30:17.542
- in the enthusiasm of a lot of supporters with this vision for this, I just feel like in that zeal and

02:30:17.542 --> 02:30:26.095
- enthusiasm, which I appreciate and I understand if this is something you really aspire and really think

02:30:26.095 --> 02:30:34.812
- is going to be such a game-changing quality of life amenity in Bloomington, I understand that excitement,

02:30:34.812 --> 02:30:38.430
- but I just feel a lot of it is exaggerated.

02:30:40.706 --> 02:30:48.615
- Like when we first all voted about for the season closure before like last year when we first did It

02:30:48.615 --> 02:30:56.680
- was a 90 voter or whoever was unanimous who all was here It's partly in part because since then I have

02:30:56.680 --> 02:31:04.667
- heard from a lot of businesses and residents in opposition They caused me to step back and reevaluate

02:31:04.667 --> 02:31:10.462
- I Sort of assumed there was just large wide-scale enthusiasm for the idea

02:31:11.106 --> 02:31:20.685
- Initially and I found that that's in my experience over the past several months. That's That's not the

02:31:20.685 --> 02:31:30.172
- case. You can't say that clearly I can't say there's dominant opposition either right But I think the

02:31:30.172 --> 02:31:34.078
- burden is on demonstration that it's very

02:31:34.306 --> 02:31:42.674
- Favored to make a change like this to brush forward of overturn To go against and not be collaborative

02:31:42.674 --> 02:31:50.879
- with the administration to take the step to do that and and We're not I'm not there You know and The

02:31:50.879 --> 02:31:59.409
- arguments have been made. I just want to make a few anecdotal points, you know again, I have been riding

02:31:59.409 --> 02:32:03.390
- my bike downtown in Bloomington for 55 years and

02:32:03.586 --> 02:32:10.029
- Literally used to ride in McCullough school as an elementary school kid I raised my two kids here riding

02:32:10.029 --> 02:32:16.656
- up and down Kirkwood coming to the farmers mark on a Saturday mornings zoom as young kids I have experience

02:32:16.656 --> 02:32:22.793
- here one of the notes we got tonight from one the supporters literally says I Love having a beeline

02:32:22.793 --> 02:32:29.113
- which means I can walk from my apartment to food truck Fridays at switchyard park Well, yeah, it makes

02:32:29.113 --> 02:32:33.470
- it a nice one, but you could walk there without the beeline. It's it's

02:32:34.146 --> 02:32:43.870
- It's this, again, it's an exaggerated enthusiasm that leads to statements that I don't think are helping

02:32:43.870 --> 02:32:53.594
- the careful consideration and weighing in all the costs. The sustainability argument. I've been thinking

02:32:53.594 --> 02:32:59.614
- long and hard about this and trying to research it a little bit.

02:33:00.834 --> 02:33:09.643
- I'm not sure I get or understand how this proposal automatically reduces a carbon footprint of Bloomington

02:33:09.643 --> 02:33:17.959
- and creates and is more sustainable. I mean, if people are riding their bikes or walking to Kirkwood

02:33:17.959 --> 02:33:26.356
- because it's safe, well, they're walking from all where they live and they're going where there's not

02:33:26.356 --> 02:33:27.262
- pedestrian

02:33:27.970 --> 02:33:35.951
- closed roads or roads that are closed to cars Traffic's moving over to set 4th Street where the restaurants

02:33:35.951 --> 02:33:43.563
- are people are walking all over 4th Street You're gonna have more traffic on a closed Kirkwood They're

02:33:43.563 --> 02:33:51.100
- gonna go to 7th Street 6th Street You know the assumption I'm trying to think about what is that that

02:33:51.100 --> 02:33:57.086
- automatically makes this a big sustainability Game-changer and I'm just not sure

02:33:57.826 --> 02:34:04.711
- I'm just not sure I get it. When I drive, I said I was gonna give some anecdotes. You know, when I ride

02:34:04.711 --> 02:34:11.530
- my bike down Crookwood on the closed, during closed periods, I actually feel it's not, it's less safe.

02:34:11.530 --> 02:34:18.349
- I'm dodging people that are unpredictably moving all over the street if I'm riding my bike down there.

02:34:18.349 --> 02:34:24.969
- Scooters, skateboarders, people walking, cars are much more predictable. When I ride down Crookwood

02:34:24.969 --> 02:34:26.558
- with their cars, I feel

02:34:27.010 --> 02:34:35.873
- Less safe and more likely that I'm gonna hurt somebody else When it is closed so there's just all these

02:34:35.873 --> 02:34:44.396
- assumptions that I'm not I'm skeptical of in a lot of ways and one of my one of my most honored new

02:34:44.396 --> 02:34:53.089
- urbanist planners and thinkers that I personally have known Was not in favor of this and said told me

02:34:53.089 --> 02:34:55.390
- that he watched Louisville

02:34:56.674 --> 02:35:06.212
- in their closed area, be hurt. The downtown businesses and the liveliness of the area be hurt by this,

02:35:06.212 --> 02:35:16.212
- by similar type of projects. So I'm more than willing to look at this and work at it. And seasonal closure,

02:35:16.212 --> 02:35:26.398
- or certainly event closures for big major events. And I'm totally open to that. And maybe it is a good thing.

02:35:27.106 --> 02:35:35.478
- The way to do it is take our time, be collaborative with the administration, because as has been pointed

02:35:35.478 --> 02:35:43.611
- out, they control the mechanisms, the machinery of implementing this and making it work and making it

02:35:43.611 --> 02:35:51.823
- good. So we've got to play ball together on this. And so I'm completely open to it, visiting the idea.

02:35:51.823 --> 02:35:56.926
- And I don't mean to be poo-pooing it, but I did want to counter

02:35:57.634 --> 02:36:06.960
- with some of my own personal experience. Some of the assumptions and enthusiasm that this is

02:36:06.960 --> 02:36:17.289
- just automatically just a fantastic thing that's just gonna rain down mainly primarily benefits to the

02:36:17.289 --> 02:36:26.014
- community. So thanks for indulging me for a few minutes. Appreciate it. Well, a lot of

02:36:26.274 --> 02:36:35.145
- Good points have been brought up by members of the public and by my colleagues. I spent the last three

02:36:35.145 --> 02:36:44.447
- weeks in Germany, where my parents are from, and where I spent a lot of time as a child. And the pedestrian

02:36:44.447 --> 02:36:53.404
- zones there are fabulous. Unless you try to bike through them, then really you have to dismount because

02:36:53.404 --> 02:36:55.902
- they are filled with people.

02:36:56.226 --> 02:37:04.448
- It's a little different in the United States, where cities were built for cars, including our city,

02:37:04.448 --> 02:37:12.835
- largely. Kirkwood is one of the widest streets we have. It's much wider than it needs to be for cars.

02:37:12.835 --> 02:37:21.468
- Anyway, so I can appreciate the vibrancy of a pedestrian zone, and I would love to see that on Kirkwood.

02:37:21.468 --> 02:37:25.086
- I think that most people can agree on that.

02:37:26.114 --> 02:37:37.849
- I appreciated what councilmember Volin said, councilmember, it's old habits, parking commissioner Volin

02:37:37.849 --> 02:37:49.470
- about using increased parking meter fees to implement the activation of a pedestrian zone on Kirkwood.

02:37:49.470 --> 02:37:55.902
- That is one of the several reasons why I think we should

02:37:56.418 --> 02:38:06.581
- take our time with this. If we can put through parking meter rate increases and tie the increased revenues

02:38:06.581 --> 02:38:16.649
- to Kirkwood activation, I think that would be a great way to move forward on this. I'm sorry, my thoughts

02:38:16.649 --> 02:38:23.582
- are a little jumbled because there's so many things to think about here.

02:38:25.186 --> 02:38:35.304
- We are facing reduced revenues as are all local governments in the state of Indiana thanks to the actions

02:38:35.304 --> 02:38:45.231
- of the Indiana General Assembly, the increased property tax deductions, and the mess of what has become

02:38:45.231 --> 02:38:48.286
- our local income tax structure.

02:38:49.442 --> 02:38:57.635
- We're going to have to cut something. We have grandiose visions. We want to do this and that and revitalize

02:38:57.635 --> 02:39:05.220
- South Wall. That is what I said a month ago. There are a lot of good ways to spend limited taxpayer

02:39:05.220 --> 02:39:12.958
- dollars. Something's got to give. We can't keep adding more programs. We're going to struggle to keep

02:39:12.958 --> 02:39:19.102
- up with funding the programs and projects we already have. So this is a reality.

02:39:20.226 --> 02:39:30.243
- I try to be bold. I praised BHA, we did tonight, for being bold and heading in a new direction. But

02:39:30.243 --> 02:39:40.461
- I also need to be a steward of taxpayer dollars and recognize our limits in that respect. And that is

02:39:40.461 --> 02:39:50.078
- a reason why I voted no on this and why I will not be changing my vote. I think that, you know,

02:39:51.234 --> 02:40:00.389
- the Suggestions from councilmember Rosenberger. Those are all great things that we can pursue. I mean

02:40:00.389 --> 02:40:09.365
- if there is a crowdfunding mechanism But this is going to take ongoing financial commitment ongoing

02:40:09.365 --> 02:40:17.982
- staffing storage of the the shade structures It's not of course one the first time we invest in

02:40:18.722 --> 02:40:26.682
- Permanent structures that that'll be the biggest investment, but there will be ongoing costs So even

02:40:26.682 --> 02:40:34.800
- a crowdfunding thing is not going to really carry us forward As far as what the public wants I I agree

02:40:34.800 --> 02:40:42.838
- with councilmember rough and councilmember Rallo's we don't really know I mean we got probably biased

02:40:42.838 --> 02:40:47.646
- input at the listening session that the mayor held because I

02:40:48.290 --> 02:40:59.524
- It was 48-hour advance notice on a Tuesday evening in the summer. And I think a lot of her friends were

02:40:59.524 --> 02:41:09.246
- there. But I also think we got the input on the planning and transportation safety survey

02:41:09.730 --> 02:41:16.268
- That's biased, too, because you're asking people who are enjoying a car-free Kirkwood whether they would

02:41:16.268 --> 02:41:22.868
- like a car-free Kirkwood. Well, they're going to say yes. They're out there enjoying it right now. You're

02:41:22.868 --> 02:41:29.219
- not asking the people who maybe didn't come because they couldn't drive or whatever other reasons. So

02:41:29.219 --> 02:41:31.710
- I'm sorry I'm a little disjointed here.

02:41:31.842 --> 02:41:39.699
- The last thing I want to say is that I agree that a collaborative approach with the administration and

02:41:39.699 --> 02:41:47.327
- with the community with Council on Community Accessibility with perhaps a consultant who has worked

02:41:47.327 --> 02:41:54.954
- with other cities that have thriving pedestrian zones. I think that's the way to go. And I do share

02:41:54.954 --> 02:42:01.438
- the hesitation that some in the community and maybe also on this body have as far as

02:42:02.210 --> 02:42:10.068
- Collaboration with this mayoral administration because that administration has fallen short on Collaborating

02:42:10.068 --> 02:42:17.421
- on other things. I mean they asked us to approve Hopewell, you know with a rubber stamp Which was not

02:42:17.421 --> 02:42:24.774
- particularly collaborative But I still I still think and I talked with the mayor briefly yesterday on

02:42:24.774 --> 02:42:31.550
- the phone. I think that collaboration is possible and should be the route that we pursue so I

02:42:33.026 --> 02:42:40.368
- That's it for me. Thank you. All right. Councilmember is embargo. You're going to redeem your time.

02:42:40.368 --> 02:42:47.783
- Go everybody grab a glass of wine or tea and settle in. Okay. It was a little long and then you know

02:42:47.783 --> 02:42:55.198
- you get all those comments to comments. All right. So councilmember is sorry and clarity went first.

02:42:55.198 --> 02:42:58.942
- And wow my comments were incredible. I want to say

02:42:59.234 --> 02:43:06.658
- Thank you, Council Members Asari and Flaherty. I want to live in a city where you two lead because I

02:43:06.658 --> 02:43:14.009
- teared up. I got excited. It made sense. You say, let's do it. Let's try it. You know, let's do our

02:43:14.009 --> 02:43:21.654
- goals. Let's do our plans. Like seriously, I just appreciate your comments so much. And I think so many

02:43:21.654 --> 02:43:23.198
- made sense that, um,

02:43:24.418 --> 02:43:32.393
- A lot of council members talked about this as some kind of potentially like dead end or a rushed start

02:43:32.393 --> 02:43:40.678
- when we have talked about this a lot as being the start that have a lot of notes about the mayor's failure

02:43:40.678 --> 02:43:48.421
- to collaborate with us. And I will bring those up in a minute, but like it is true that we have not

02:43:48.421 --> 02:43:51.518
- seen this mayor collaborate with us and

02:43:51.810 --> 02:43:58.629
- This was brought because the 2025 ordinance was unilaterally decided by the mayor to not open Kirkwood,

02:43:58.629 --> 02:44:05.644
- right? That was a little messed up the way I said it. The point of this was just to encourage and pressure

02:44:05.644 --> 02:44:12.200
- the mayor to work with this city council. I have a lot of confidence in my colleagues that the nine

02:44:12.200 --> 02:44:18.494
- of us can and do work really well together. And I think in a way, some of us had a rough start,

02:44:19.522 --> 02:44:25.942
- I truly value all of you and your opinions and your perspective and your experiences and your skills

02:44:25.942 --> 02:44:32.490
- and your talents and I would love to also say that about a mayor who works with their city council but

02:44:32.490 --> 02:44:38.910
- like so far this term two and a half years in like I can't say that and it does make me sad it's not

02:44:38.910 --> 02:44:43.678
- really a professional feeling but it does make me sad because hearing from

02:44:44.994 --> 02:44:51.741
- council members Asari and Flaherty, I really was, you know, again, excited that, heck yeah, we can do

02:44:51.741 --> 02:44:58.488
- this. Like it's true. And I think one council member mentioned, we put the start date as April, 2027,

02:44:58.488 --> 02:45:05.169
- and that maybe if things were a little different, they would vote for it. We can amend this forever.

02:45:05.169 --> 02:45:12.115
- It's our code to amend. We can shorten the months. We can shorten the streets. We can decide it actually

02:45:12.115 --> 02:45:14.430
- needs to wait until 2028 to start.

02:45:14.690 --> 02:45:23.889
- We can do that. Without this ordinance, we cannot do that. I think it's true that the momentum is now,

02:45:23.889 --> 02:45:32.820
- and I want to believe that we can keep the momentum. But a lot of times when we alienate the public

02:45:32.820 --> 02:45:37.822
- or, you know, like, don't listen, they stop showing up.

02:45:38.594 --> 02:45:44.859
- I used to speak, right, as a public commenter. And after a while, I felt insane. Like, how many times

02:45:44.859 --> 02:45:51.001
- can I come and talk about the 4th Street parking garage, right? Like, that was nuts. That was nuts.

02:45:51.001 --> 02:45:57.204
- I think there were three main fears about this. There was money. And I think we showed that this can

02:45:57.204 --> 02:46:03.408
- be funded for free. It can actually be activated space for free in Bloomington. And maybe that looks

02:46:03.408 --> 02:46:07.646
- like something a council member said. Maybe it's not all the blocks.

02:46:08.418 --> 02:46:15.814
- Accessibility can also be tackled. That was a fear. We've got awesome folks in our community to talk

02:46:15.814 --> 02:46:23.209
- to. We've got websites that are useful, as Councilmember Flaherty said. And the fear that I think is

02:46:23.209 --> 02:46:30.532
- the toughest to get by is the fear that the mayor won't play along. And some people call it buy-in,

02:46:30.532 --> 02:46:37.854
- I think, which is potentially nicer, or collaboration. But it's really hard that we have one person

02:46:38.114 --> 02:46:45.136
- who is in charge who you know well is an equal body of government that does not want this. If this wasn't

02:46:45.136 --> 02:46:52.092
- detailed we would be doing it so if we had a six vote we would be doing this and we've done it for years

02:46:52.092 --> 02:46:59.048
- already and you know some council members talked about last year not being successful. People down there

02:46:59.048 --> 02:47:04.414
- apparently thought it was. People down there said they would like to see this so

02:47:04.514 --> 02:47:11.442
- If there is trash, that's also an easy problem. We have public works. There was a project, a Creating

02:47:11.442 --> 02:47:18.098
- Places project that just bought extra trash cans. Again, I looked at all of them. So I really do,

02:47:18.098 --> 02:47:24.890
- you know, I think most of you are pretty set, but with the first two final comments, I just want to

02:47:24.890 --> 02:47:32.158
- say I really was like, can we just do this? And can we trust each other that we will amend this ordinance?

02:47:33.122 --> 02:47:40.085
- if and because we need to. And that we've had and we've asked the mayor to collaborate with us on multiple

02:47:40.085 --> 02:47:46.592
- occasions. Council member Flaherty talked about snow removal where she disallowed staff from coming

02:47:46.592 --> 02:47:53.100
- to that deliberation session. This ordinance was inspired by a lack of collaboration. Other council

02:47:53.100 --> 02:47:59.607
- members mentioned that. I have a list, but I don't want to go through all of them. I think the main

02:47:59.607 --> 02:48:01.950
- one is that the mayor brought a PUD

02:48:02.050 --> 02:48:08.224
- And we weren't first we weren't engaged with that from the start, which is like okay like you can do

02:48:08.224 --> 02:48:14.826
- that. But the mayor and her staff threatened to sue us for two weeks because we wanted to impose reasonable

02:48:14.826 --> 02:48:19.838
- conditions on the PD. That isn't even a lack of collaboration that is obstructing

02:48:20.738 --> 02:48:27.816
- City Council from doing its job. So I guess kudos to those who are still hoping that the mayor will

02:48:27.816 --> 02:48:35.106
- collaborate. I think that we can still follow the same timeline. Council Member Aralo, I think, talked

02:48:35.106 --> 02:48:42.255
- about deliberation sessions this year. Let's do it, right? Like, if you all don't want to pass this,

02:48:42.255 --> 02:48:47.422
- we don't have to. There is the ordinance that is in existence that says,

02:48:48.162 --> 02:48:54.858
- April 2027, of course, like we won't be a part of that decision, right? And okay, another council member

02:48:54.858 --> 02:49:01.299
- talked about the Kirkwood puffballs, okay. Also, everybody got two puffballs. So if they really used

02:49:01.299 --> 02:49:07.932
- to, it was 130 whatever people, okay. So I wanna correct that as well as the Transportation Commission.

02:49:07.932 --> 02:49:14.564
- We have no scientific data on this. We have no scientific data for anything in the city of Bloomington.

02:49:14.564 --> 02:49:16.286
- I worked at an evaluation.

02:49:17.090 --> 02:49:23.397
- social enterprise and it costs a lot of money to hire that and it takes a lot of time to do that. Here's

02:49:23.397 --> 02:49:29.523
- a little bit about what the internet says about how often and how long we study things. Studies stall

02:49:29.523 --> 02:49:35.770
- controversial decisions, they pacify those opposed, they defer accountability, they maintain the status

02:49:35.770 --> 02:49:39.614
- quo and they add costs to make projects financially unfeasible.

02:49:39.906 --> 02:49:46.142
- I am understanding this is a council that also wants to study things. And if one here would like to

02:49:46.142 --> 02:49:52.815
- stop studying things and start doing, I would like to partner with you and collaborate on some ordinances.

02:49:52.815 --> 02:49:59.426
- Someone mentioned 4th Street in Louisville. I am, you know, I was born in Southern Belle. I'm from there.

02:49:59.426 --> 02:50:06.286
- I've been there many times. The longest time I spent on 4th Street was a Congress for New Urbanism conference

02:50:06.286 --> 02:50:09.342
- because they booked up the hotels on 4th Street.

02:50:09.570 --> 02:50:19.054
- as an example of something cool cities do. And I think many council members are new urbanists, especially

02:50:19.054 --> 02:50:28.091
- the old guard. Someone talked about this being very adversarial. It doesn't have to be, and it's not

02:50:28.091 --> 02:50:34.622
- us making it. It's the mayor. We're not up here saying anything crazy or

02:50:35.810 --> 02:50:43.512
- Harsh, right? We're up here being like, let's go. I guess it takes two to tango, but I think we could

02:50:43.512 --> 02:50:51.214
- also just be talked to like regular people sometimes. Someone else used the word exaggerated. Someone

02:50:51.214 --> 02:50:58.765
- talked about, I don't want to bike there. This really isn't for biking. We do have streets and bike

02:50:58.765 --> 02:51:04.126
- lanes for that. This is social interaction, and most likely this would

02:51:04.386 --> 02:51:12.043
- be a dismount zone like the sidewalks of Kirkwood and the square. Kirkwood was platted literally 100

02:51:12.043 --> 02:51:20.080
- years ago before the automobile. So the width of it took pedestrians, it was about pedestrians and horses

02:51:20.080 --> 02:51:27.813
- and stuff. So it wasn't planned for cars. I think a council member talked about it being really wide.

02:51:27.813 --> 02:51:32.286
- Businesses being opposed, the ESD packet from 2026 had 20,

02:51:32.386 --> 02:51:40.127
- 54 businesses surveyed, 26 strongly supported or supported, 20 opposed or strongly opposed, eight were

02:51:40.127 --> 02:51:47.793
- neutral, which means like they could be on either side, right? I mean, you can add it to either side,

02:51:47.793 --> 02:51:55.458
- but that means 32 are like, yay, okay. I think that's about it. I think it is a bummer. I think that,

02:51:55.458 --> 02:51:59.742
- I think I mostly hope this council, yes votes, no votes,

02:52:00.866 --> 02:52:07.283
- Really mean what you say they, you know, you're really interested in this and you want to do more work

02:52:07.283 --> 02:52:13.638
- on it. This has happened before. Last time, you know, we tried to make it legal to sleep in parks and

02:52:13.638 --> 02:52:19.931
- council members opposed said they were going to do something and You can see what's been done there.

02:52:19.931 --> 02:52:26.223
- I guess that's it. You know, thanks for entertaining me and letting me Yeah, do this. Nothing. Maybe

02:52:26.223 --> 02:52:28.030
- you really had a choice, but

02:52:28.514 --> 02:52:37.031
- I am disappointed, I would say, in my colleagues. And I would love to think more about a council that

02:52:37.031 --> 02:52:45.464
- leaves and has a vision than what we are now. Thanks. Thank you so much. Now, if there's no opposed,

02:52:45.464 --> 02:52:53.897
- I'd like to ask the clerk to call the roll, please. All right. Clerk, will you please call the roll?

02:52:53.897 --> 02:52:56.318
- Councilmember Flaherty? Yes.

02:52:58.178 --> 02:53:13.443
- Sasberg no Piedmont Smith. No, sorry. Yes daily. Yes Rallo no Rough no Rosenberger. Yes Thank you very

02:53:13.443 --> 02:53:18.334
- much. That motion does not carry

02:53:18.434 --> 02:53:26.989
- All right, we are now at the final period of additional public comment. If you did not comment at the

02:53:26.989 --> 02:53:35.377
- first one and would like to make a comment on something that is not on the agenda, now is your time

02:53:35.377 --> 02:53:43.681
- to do that. Is there anybody in chambers? Who would you like to make a comment on? Anybody online?

02:53:43.681 --> 02:53:48.126
- All right, move on to questions of council schedule.

02:53:48.258 --> 02:53:55.597
- Important. Yes, please I'll just say that we have a fiscal committee meeting on Friday at 830 in the

02:53:55.597 --> 02:54:03.226
- morning and as a reminder usually those are an hour this one's gonna be an hour and a half because Reedy

02:54:03.226 --> 02:54:10.710
- is coming to Talk about financial planning stuff. So thank you The committee on council processes will

02:54:10.710 --> 02:54:17.758
- meet tomorrow at 4 o'clock till 530 in the Allison conference room Thank you All right with that

02:54:18.306 --> 02:54:19.486
- We are adjourned. Thank you.