WEBVTT 00:00:00.802 --> 00:00:08.494 - Good evening, everyone, and welcome to this regular session of the Bloomington Common Council. Thank 00:00:08.494 --> 00:00:16.337 - you very much for being here. It is November 4th, and I would like to call this meeting to order. Will 00:00:16.337 --> 00:00:24.334 - the clerk kindly call the roll? Yes. Councilmember Flaherty? Here. Stosberg? Here. Piedmont-Smith? Here. 00:00:24.334 --> 00:00:28.446 - Asari? Here. Daly? Here. Rallo? Here. And Ruff? Here. 00:00:28.578 --> 00:00:33.118 - Thank you very much. There are agendas posted there. 00:00:33.218 --> 00:00:41.157 - and somewhere there and there. And they're also posted online. For those of you who need it described 00:00:41.157 --> 00:00:49.096 - today, we have quite a packed agenda. We'll do our best to keep it light and enjoyable all throughout 00:00:49.096 --> 00:00:57.035 - your ride here with us. But we have a bunch of minutes for approval, four different ones, of which we 00:00:57.035 --> 00:01:03.184 - just got some amended minutes. I hope everybody saw those. We'll have reports. 00:01:03.184 --> 00:01:10.239 - from council members the mayor and then the the clerk and at which time there'll be a time for public 00:01:10.239 --> 00:01:17.293 - comment so if any of you want to venture to make public comment that'll be your chance everybody will 00:01:17.293 --> 00:01:21.374 - get three minutes as you know for public comment we have a 00:01:21.474 --> 00:01:28.558 - some question about appointments and removals of boards and commissions. And then we have one, two, 00:01:28.558 --> 00:01:35.713 - three, four, five, six, seven, eight things for first reading. Who approves this agenda? And then we 00:01:35.713 --> 00:01:42.868 - have three things for second reading. And so a fairly packed night. We'll try our best to be concise 00:01:42.868 --> 00:01:50.307 - for the first reading things. We'll have moments of public comment for all of that. And then the meeting 00:01:50.307 --> 00:01:51.440 - will end with a 00:01:51.440 --> 00:01:59.997 - Last time of public comment and just I'll say it once so I don't have to say it again This is for things 00:01:59.997 --> 00:02:08.227 - that are not on the agenda. You can comment at one of the two of those so with that do Do I have any 00:02:08.227 --> 00:02:15.806 - motions for minutes? Clerk Bolden before you move into the rest of your thing. Would it be a 00:02:17.378 --> 00:02:24.675 - So the agenda doesn't have your public hearing listed for your GO bonds ordinance. Could somebody make 00:02:24.675 --> 00:02:31.900 - a motion to amend the agenda to include the fact that it's your public hearing? Oh, great. Wonderful. 00:02:31.900 --> 00:02:39.197 - So let the record note for those who have an old agenda that we will be doing the official hearing for 00:02:39.197 --> 00:02:45.502 - our bond ordinance as required by law. This has now been stated out loud. OK. Thank you. 00:02:45.602 --> 00:02:54.267 - You're very welcome. Do I have any motions? You do. I move to approve the minutes for June 10th, 2026, 00:02:54.267 --> 00:03:02.680 - July 22nd, 2026, July 29th, 2026, August 5th, 2026. Second. Thank you. OK, motion and a second. Any 00:03:02.680 --> 00:03:11.514 - discussion or amendments to the minutes? All those in favor of approving the minutes say aye. Aye. Thank 00:03:11.514 --> 00:03:14.206 - you very much. Anybody opposed? 00:03:14.722 --> 00:03:20.426 - All right, that is wonderful. We'll now move on to reports. Do any of my colleagues, would you like 00:03:20.426 --> 00:03:26.301 - to make any statements or reports? And I'll go to Councilmember Daly, just seeing if anybody else, and 00:03:26.301 --> 00:03:32.062 - then I'll go Councilmember Piedmont-Smith, Councilmember Stasberg, and then we'll wrap it up. OK, so 00:03:32.062 --> 00:03:38.280 - take it away. I won't call on you. All right, thank you very much. What a night to be making this statement. 00:03:38.280 --> 00:03:43.870 - So I want to address the weekend events, the unfortunate weekend events that once again occurred. 00:03:44.130 --> 00:03:50.957 - In town, we're standing in the shadow of yet another horrific episode of gun violence right here in 00:03:50.957 --> 00:03:57.783 - Bloomington. This past weekend over homecoming, Kirkwood, a place that should have been filled with 00:03:57.783 --> 00:04:04.815 - music, joy, celebration, turned into a scene of chaos. And I'll just leave it there. I think we've all 00:04:04.815 --> 00:04:07.614 - heard. Before I move on, I want to thank 00:04:07.714 --> 00:04:14.156 - our police for their presence on Kirkwood and for their quick action. I know we had a heavy presence 00:04:14.156 --> 00:04:20.789 - and they moved fast. And while we did have seven injuries, it could have been a lot worse. And so thank 00:04:20.789 --> 00:04:27.423 - you very much for our police force for being there. I also want to address the victims, their families, 00:04:27.423 --> 00:04:33.928 - and every single person in our city who woke up Sunday morning feeling like I did, shaken and unsafe. 00:04:33.928 --> 00:04:36.990 - And I am deeply sorry. My heart breaks for you, 00:04:37.698 --> 00:04:43.512 - and for all of Bloomington. No one should ever go out for a night with friends and end up in a trauma 00:04:43.512 --> 00:04:49.269 - unit. The grief and anxiety left behind in our community doesn't just disappear when the police tape 00:04:49.269 --> 00:04:55.140 - comes down. So we are mourning with everybody who was involved, and you deserve so much more than just 00:04:55.140 --> 00:05:01.011 - our sympathy. And frankly, my sorrow is mixed with pure unadulterated rage. Because as a local leader, 00:05:01.011 --> 00:05:06.654 - the most infuriating part of this job is knowing that when our community cries out for protection, 00:05:07.010 --> 00:05:13.151 - Our hands are legally tied. The state legislature in Indianapolis has systematically stripped cities 00:05:13.151 --> 00:05:19.291 - like Bloomington of the power to protect our own streets. Under Indiana's strict pre-exemption laws, 00:05:19.291 --> 00:05:25.614 - local municipalities are explicitly forbidden from passing basic common sense gun safety measures. Just 00:05:25.614 --> 00:05:31.390 - think about how absurd that is. We can't even restrict firearms on our own municipal property. 00:05:31.906 --> 00:05:38.106 - We have literally seen residents walking around our public swimming pools with handguns tucked into 00:05:38.106 --> 00:05:44.368 - the waistbands of their trunks. We cannot even guarantee that a public pool or a community park is a 00:05:44.368 --> 00:05:50.630 - fire-free zone for our children because lawmakers in Indianapolis decided we weren't allowed to make 00:05:50.630 --> 00:05:56.892 - that call. And I want to be clear, this is not about the Second Amendment. Responsible gun ownership 00:05:56.892 --> 00:06:00.798 - and evidence-based common sense safety laws can and do coexist 00:06:00.962 --> 00:06:08.433 - elsewhere in this country. But this refusal to act combined with the insistence on blocking us as a 00:06:08.433 --> 00:06:16.128 - city from acting is actively hurting our people. I want to put this into real numbers that are driving 00:06:16.128 --> 00:06:23.824 - this crisis. On average, 1,198 people die by guns in Indiana every single year. Our homicide rate sits 00:06:23.824 --> 00:06:30.174 - well above the national average and has been steadily climbing over the past decade. 00:06:31.010 --> 00:06:37.961 - Indiana ranks 26th in the nation for gun safety. While our state was an early pioneer with extreme risk 00:06:37.961 --> 00:06:45.247 - laws, lawmakers have steadily rolled back progress ever since then, most recently by repealing our concealed 00:06:45.247 --> 00:06:52.131 - carry permit requirement. Not only do we have a high mortality rate, but every year 1,556 Hoosiers are 00:06:52.131 --> 00:06:58.816 - wounded by firearms. And those are not just simple wounds that you can put a Band-Aid over, some of 00:06:58.816 --> 00:07:00.286 - them change your life 00:07:00.482 --> 00:07:08.861 - forever. And beyond devastating human loss, gun violence costs Indiana $13.2 billion every year. 00:07:08.861 --> 00:07:17.585 - And $293.1 million of that is paid directly by the taxpayers. I don't want my tax money going toward 00:07:17.585 --> 00:07:26.741 - a problem that we could easily be preventing when this money is going toward people being hurt. So here's 00:07:26.741 --> 00:07:30.110 - the bottom line. If Indiana simply had 00:07:30.210 --> 00:07:37.896 - the gun death rate of the national leaders in gun safety, the 10 states with the strongest common sense 00:07:37.896 --> 00:07:45.287 - gun safety laws, we could actually save 8,545 Hoosier lives over the next 10 years. That's not just 00:07:45.287 --> 00:07:53.121 - a number, those are our neighbors, our students, our kids, our families. So to the Bloomington community, 00:07:53.121 --> 00:07:55.486 - I hear you, I share your anger. 00:07:55.586 --> 00:08:01.236 - and I promise that we will not treat shootings on Kirkwood as an inevitable cost of living here. We 00:08:01.236 --> 00:08:06.942 - will keep demanding change, we will keep fighting state preemption, and we will do everything in our 00:08:06.942 --> 00:08:12.705 - power to keep this city safe. I am starting to work on legislation right now that will hopefully help 00:08:12.705 --> 00:08:18.750 - with some preventative measures in as much as we can to keep our Bloomington residents safe, so thank you. 00:08:23.682 --> 00:08:32.732 - Yes, thank you, Councilmember Daly. I was going to talk about the shooting as well, but I think you've 00:08:32.732 --> 00:08:41.783 - covered it very eloquently. Another incident happened in the past week in Parkridge East neighborhood. 00:08:41.783 --> 00:08:51.184 - There were several flyers found that were from the KKK that were blatantly racist and totally unacceptable 00:08:51.184 --> 00:08:52.766 - in our community. 00:08:53.218 --> 00:09:03.179 - And I find it very, very disturbing that anyone would distribute such hate literature in Bloomington. 00:09:03.179 --> 00:09:13.141 - And I want to say very clearly that myself and all of us up here say there's no space for hate in our 00:09:13.141 --> 00:09:23.102 - community. We are committed to upholding the rights of all people, regardless of color in particular, 00:09:23.426 --> 00:09:30.941 - trying to redress systemic inequities that black Americans have faced in this country and continue to 00:09:30.941 --> 00:09:38.530 - face as is obvious by those hateful flyers that were distributed. So I just wanted to say that in case 00:09:38.530 --> 00:09:45.898 - you hadn't heard. Bloomington, we think it's a safe place and these two incidents, the shooting and 00:09:45.898 --> 00:09:52.382 - the racist flyers tell us that we are unfortunately not an exception to the hatred that 00:09:53.090 --> 00:10:05.559 - that spread sometimes in this country and the violence that is facilitated by lax gun laws in this country. 00:10:05.559 --> 00:10:17.336 - So my heart goes out to anybody who received those flyers. And I say to anybody who was involved with 00:10:17.336 --> 00:10:22.878 - distributing them that you're not welcome here. 00:10:24.738 --> 00:10:37.034 - need to actively say every day and every week that we will fight racism and look at things, policies 00:10:37.034 --> 00:10:48.721 - that we make from an anti-racist perspective. Thank you. Well, following those two very serious 00:10:48.721 --> 00:10:54.078 - announcements, I have one that's maybe more 00:10:54.210 --> 00:11:02.935 - fun I'm a little hesitant to make now but I wanted to share an event that the Bloomington Township trustee 00:11:02.935 --> 00:11:11.335 - is having at their office on 17th Street this Saturday between 10 a.m. And one their fall into fun and 00:11:11.335 --> 00:11:19.326 - they're gonna have hot cocoa kits and blankets and board games and fun and one of the things that 00:11:19.490 --> 00:11:25.725 - Has been pointed out kind of recently is this kind of outstanding question of what is it that townships 00:11:25.725 --> 00:11:32.200 - do? And so I just like this might be a good opportunity to go and hang out at Bloomington Township trustees 00:11:32.200 --> 00:11:38.375 - office and see what it is that the townships and the trustee does And so once again that event is this 00:11:38.375 --> 00:11:45.150 - Saturday between 10 and 1 and their office on 17th Street and it of course is geared toward folks that live in a 00:11:45.250 --> 00:11:51.638 - Bloomington Township. And so, you know, we just had an election yesterday. So if your precinct starts 00:11:51.638 --> 00:11:57.963 - with Bloomington, then you're in Bloomington Township. And that is a good bit of east side, east and 00:11:57.963 --> 00:12:04.476 - north in terms of the within the city of Bloomington. And I think also going out into the county there, 00:12:04.476 --> 00:12:10.926 - I was trying to find a map so I could be more precise, but I just wasn't that fast. So if you have any 00:12:10.926 --> 00:12:14.558 - questions, let me know. Maybe I'll see you there. Thanks. 00:12:15.330 --> 00:12:26.808 - Thank you all so very much. Mary, did you want to give comments today? Go ahead. I want to just start 00:12:26.808 --> 00:12:38.061 - by thanking President Nassari for his leadership on Sunday and helping communicate with Council and 00:12:38.061 --> 00:12:45.150 - others as we were dealing with the aftermath of that shooting. 00:12:45.346 --> 00:12:54.463 - really appreciate Council Member Daley's ongoing work. She's been working on gun violence since long 00:12:54.463 --> 00:13:03.671 - before she's been serving on council and I look forward to partnering with you on legislation for the 00:13:03.671 --> 00:13:12.968 - city. A very special thanks to Bloomington Police Department and our partners at IU Police and Indiana 00:13:12.968 --> 00:13:14.142 - State Police 00:13:14.402 --> 00:13:24.300 - who worked in incredible coordination ahead of Saturday's game, as they have been for all of our larger 00:13:24.300 --> 00:13:34.198 - events in Bloomington of late, making plans in case such a tragedy would hit. And because they had that 00:13:34.198 --> 00:13:44.286 - plan together, the response was in absolute lockstep and could not have been more rapid or more seamless. 00:13:44.482 --> 00:13:52.966 - But unfortunately, due to the gun laws that Councilmember Daley was referring to, it's very hard to 00:13:52.966 --> 00:14:01.620 - do much until those guns go off. And we are seeing an increase in the presence of guns in Bloomington 00:14:01.620 --> 00:14:10.189 - and around the state. And it is time that we ask our state legislators to change their policies. And 00:14:10.189 --> 00:14:12.734 - I've been working since April 00:14:12.834 --> 00:14:21.763 - on some legislation at the State House that would enable us to, when we pull a permit for a special 00:14:21.763 --> 00:14:31.138 - event to close a street, would enable us to limit firearms during those special times. So, more to come. 00:14:31.138 --> 00:14:35.870 - As we all know, there was an election last night and 00:14:35.970 --> 00:14:43.785 - some of the folks that we thought might carry this legislation are now no longer going to be in office. 00:14:43.785 --> 00:14:51.450 - And so it'll be a few weeks, I think, before we get any traction. But I'm hopeful we can at least get 00:14:51.450 --> 00:14:59.190 - a bill on the floor. And my thanks to our local legislators, Matt Pierce and Shelly Yoder, who've been 00:14:59.190 --> 00:15:02.046 - incredibly helpful with this already. 00:15:02.306 --> 00:15:11.234 - We're, in addition to that legislation, our police are beginning to work on even more steps to increase 00:15:11.234 --> 00:15:20.248 - intelligence ahead of time and do whatever it is that we possibly can do to try to mitigate these events 00:15:20.248 --> 00:15:29.176 - before they happen. And we will plan to keep you all up to date. I appreciate that Council Member Daley 00:15:29.176 --> 00:15:30.206 - is going to 00:15:31.298 --> 00:15:41.079 - hopefully put some legislation forward. Other things happening, appreciate Councilmember Piedmont-Smith's 00:15:41.079 --> 00:15:47.262 - address about the flyers that were distributed in Park Ridge East. 00:15:47.522 --> 00:15:57.156 - This is serious and we must stand up against any hate that shows its face in our community and let our 00:15:57.156 --> 00:16:06.509 - community know that that is not what we stand for as a community and it's not welcome here. In more 00:16:06.509 --> 00:16:14.366 - boring events, we also have been active at the State House in between sessions here 00:16:14.466 --> 00:16:22.394 - working on two things in particular. First, the impacts of SEA-1 and the hopeful changes that may be 00:16:22.394 --> 00:16:30.401 - forthcoming in the upcoming session. Have been meeting with Republican leaders on some tweaks that we 00:16:30.401 --> 00:16:38.408 - would like in order to make Bloomington more whole as a municipality, working with AEM in partnership 00:16:38.408 --> 00:16:39.742 - on that as well. 00:16:39.874 --> 00:16:49.152 - And then finally, the implications of SB 285, which is the bill that illegalizes sleeping outside in 00:16:49.152 --> 00:16:58.614 - public spaces and asking the state house for funding that assists with housing needs and mental health 00:16:58.614 --> 00:17:04.126 - needs for those who are no longer allowed to sleep outside. 00:17:04.322 --> 00:17:13.727 - So those are the things happening. I'm happy to answer questions or provide updates offline for folks 00:17:13.727 --> 00:17:23.041 - who need them. Council members any questions comments. OK. Thank you very much. All right. We'll now 00:17:23.041 --> 00:17:32.446 - move to council committees. And do we have any reports or motions or anything of the sort. All right. 00:17:33.538 --> 00:17:41.236 - We'll now move to a time of public comment. He's leaving just before your chance. But thank you, Group 00:17:41.236 --> 00:17:48.859 - Fleet 100. Bravo for being here. Yay. All right, we'll now move to a time of public comment. If you'd 00:17:48.859 --> 00:17:56.557 - like to make comment on something that is not on the agenda, now is your chance. Is there anybody here 00:17:56.557 --> 00:18:02.910 - who would like to make public comment on something not on the agenda? Anyone online? 00:18:04.386 --> 00:18:15.618 - Anyone online? Anyone online? No? Anyone online? OK. Thank you. All right. No one online. We'll move 00:18:15.618 --> 00:18:26.739 - on then from that raucous period of public comment. We now have an issue related to appointments to 00:18:26.739 --> 00:18:31.966 - boards and commissions. Are there any motions? 00:18:36.514 --> 00:18:45.765 - Totally up to you. I will say regardless of if anybody is to make some type of motion, I would like 00:18:45.765 --> 00:18:55.294 - to give the chance for this to be discussed and for public comment to be made on it. I move to discuss 00:18:55.294 --> 00:19:05.470 - the removal of advisory member from Historic Preservation Commission. Sounds like a motion. Is that a motion? 00:19:06.210 --> 00:19:14.748 - All right. All those in favor of discussing? Anyone opposed? OK. So I don't know if it might be, we've 00:19:14.748 --> 00:19:23.121 - done this now multiple times, but Mr. Allen, would you be willing just to give a few words, and then 00:19:23.121 --> 00:19:31.742 - if there's any questions, and then I'll allow our neighbor and commissioner to say a few words as well. 00:19:49.634 --> 00:19:57.208 - On April 22nd 2026 the Common Council appointed mr. Cross to be an advisory member of the Historic 00:19:57.208 --> 00:20:05.318 - Preservation Commission There were two meetings that staff brought to the attention of the clerk's office 00:20:05.318 --> 00:20:13.274 - where it was alleged that mr. Cross was inhibiting the business of the Historic Preservation Commission 00:20:13.274 --> 00:20:15.646 - those occurred on July 9th and 00:20:15.970 --> 00:20:24.624 - July 23rd respectively on July 23rd deputy clerk Jennifer Crosley had observed That meeting and observed 00:20:24.624 --> 00:20:32.948 - the second half as well as myself What we saw was a fairly heated exchange between mr. Cross and the 00:20:32.948 --> 00:20:36.574 - chair the chair ruling him out of order and 00:20:36.706 --> 00:20:43.275 - In both meetings both July 9th and July 23rd after significant delay of 30 minutes and approximately 00:20:43.275 --> 00:20:50.234 - 40 minutes Respectively in the different meetings. Mr. Cross then left the meeting and did not participate 00:20:50.234 --> 00:20:57.193 - in any further business did inhibit the board from getting to items on its agenda because it was regarding 00:20:57.193 --> 00:21:03.957 - a prior issue that was no longer on the agenda and the procedural mechanisms around that and procedural 00:21:03.957 --> 00:21:06.558 - regularities around that Following that 00:21:06.818 --> 00:21:17.982 - Deputy clerk Crosley sent a summary of the details of what had happened to council leadership additionally 00:21:17.982 --> 00:21:27.998 - On July 30th, mr. Cross sent an email to all HPC commissioners that requested them to reply and 00:21:28.258 --> 00:21:35.434 - Altogether on issues that he had raised in the meeting but outside of a properly noticed meeting under 00:21:35.434 --> 00:21:42.611 - the Indiana open-door law And he acknowledged that he wanted his response before the next meeting that 00:21:42.611 --> 00:21:49.996 - was properly noticed After Crosley alerted the council leadership to that on August 21st at the direction 00:21:49.996 --> 00:21:56.894 - of council leadership Myself on behalf of council sent a written notice to mr. Cross informing him 00:21:57.058 --> 00:22:03.339 - The alleged meeting disruptions the fact that it was alleged that he violated open-door law and that 00:22:03.339 --> 00:22:09.557 - there were violations of the city's code of conduct That are applicable to all board and commission 00:22:09.557 --> 00:22:15.962 - members At that time he was provided an opportunity to submit materials to council which he did so and 00:22:15.962 --> 00:22:22.429 - he has continued to do so I believe up until prior to this meeting He has continued to submit materials 00:22:22.429 --> 00:22:26.782 - to council He was also given a date and time that council would first 00:22:27.010 --> 00:22:37.423 - hear that on September 2nd 2026 Council decided to postpone consideration from December or so from September 00:22:37.423 --> 00:22:47.646 - 2nd to September 16th 2026 On September 26, they did recommend that the issue be referred to the interview 00:22:47.646 --> 00:22:54.142 - team committee see our committee team see who met on subsequently a 00:22:54.498 --> 00:23:02.302 - September 24th 2026 and following a discussion that all three members of team C had reviewed the videos 00:23:02.302 --> 00:23:10.032 - of the meeting and the conduct as alleged they unanimously agreed to recommend Removal to the council. 00:23:10.032 --> 00:23:17.086 - This is detailed also in a memo that's been submitted to council for this meeting and then at 00:23:17.602 --> 00:23:24.772 - The next meeting of council which was actually on October 14th Council that once again postponed 00:23:24.772 --> 00:23:31.646 - consideration until this meeting on November 4th we have received a variety of comments just 00:23:31.810 --> 00:23:39.053 - briefly about the removal, and I want to be very clear that this removal action did not take 00:23:39.053 --> 00:23:46.997 - into consideration any viewpoints that were expressed, any expressive statements about any particular 00:23:46.997 --> 00:23:55.330 - issue before the HPC. This really has to do with conduct as it relates to the code of conduct, the Indiana 00:23:55.330 --> 00:23:59.614 - open door law, but more specifically the inhibition of 00:23:59.746 --> 00:24:05.576 - doing business before the HPC and the HPC was unable for that time period that the meeting was delayed 00:24:05.576 --> 00:24:11.237 - to hear their regular petitions. And so one of the requirements under due process, not only that we 00:24:11.237 --> 00:24:17.011 - give notice and opportunity to be heard for Mr. Cross and as I stated, we had sent him notice that he 00:24:17.011 --> 00:24:22.558 - has submitted materials and I believe we're gonna give him an opportunity to speak as well today. 00:24:22.690 --> 00:24:30.496 - Indiana Court of Appeals has held that any removal for cause, and by ordinance this is a for cause removal, 00:24:30.496 --> 00:24:38.302 - any counsel appointee has to be removed, can only be removed for cause, it must be related, it must somehow 00:24:38.370 --> 00:24:45.317 - inhibit or prevent that member from performing their duties as an appointee. And so the question for 00:24:45.317 --> 00:24:52.470 - counsel to decide, and only counsel can decide this, at least at this stage, is whether the information 00:24:52.470 --> 00:24:59.967 - and the evidence is sufficient to show that under the allegations as raised and recommended by the interview 00:24:59.967 --> 00:25:05.470 - team committee, whether those are sufficient to show that there is some sort of 00:25:05.602 --> 00:25:15.639 - Pro inhibition on mr. Cross's ability to serve as an advisory member of the HPC Thank you so much, sir, 00:25:15.639 --> 00:25:25.387 - are there any questions for attorney Allen? Okay Councilmember Stasberg first sorry and then um, oh, 00:25:25.387 --> 00:25:35.038 - oh, sorry. Okay councilmember Smith Yes, thank you, mr. Allen so according to your legal opinion is 00:25:36.098 --> 00:25:49.140 - the inhibition or the delay that was caused by the commissioner. Is that evidence that the actions impeded 00:25:49.140 --> 00:25:53.406 - his performance as a commissioner? 00:25:56.578 --> 00:26:02.108 - Ultimately, that's that's a determination for counsel just to be very clear under the totality of the 00:26:02.108 --> 00:26:07.150 - evidence So regardless, it's not my legal opinion whether that happened You all need to make 00:26:07.150 --> 00:26:12.789 - that determination under the what's been provided to you and what you understand is the facts You know, 00:26:12.789 --> 00:26:18.373 - I could make an argument for it I don't know if that's very appropriate at this time other than to say 00:26:18.373 --> 00:26:23.795 - that I've outlined the facts that underlied underlay that that particular claim for those meetings, 00:26:23.795 --> 00:26:25.150 - I believe, you know also 00:26:25.314 --> 00:26:31.057 - Councilmember Piedmont Smith you were part of team committee C and everybody has viewed the videos of 00:26:31.057 --> 00:26:36.687 - those meetings because the only conduct is essentially mr. Cross was only Present at those meetings 00:26:36.687 --> 00:26:42.430 - for this period of delay and interaction and then he left those meetings and didn't carry further any 00:26:42.430 --> 00:26:48.398 - further HPC business So that all that to say is that's the evidence that's before you that you ultimately 00:26:48.398 --> 00:26:49.918 - make that determination on 00:26:53.058 --> 00:26:59.943 - Can we consider actions at the October 22nd HPC meeting. Those haven't been made part of this record. 00:26:59.943 --> 00:27:06.964 - And so I don't I don't think so. Just because if we had made them part of the record maybe. But in this 00:27:06.964 --> 00:27:13.984 - case these are really two distinct instances of the behavior that those are the ones that were noticed. 00:27:13.984 --> 00:27:21.342 - Nothing else was included in that notice. I don't think it would be appropriate to consider that. Thank you. 00:27:22.338 --> 00:27:30.580 - Thank you so much. Any other questions. Council member rough clarification on our procedure here. Are 00:27:30.580 --> 00:27:39.064 - we going to allow public comment on this at some point unless unless there is objection. I would I would 00:27:39.064 --> 00:27:47.468 - like at the minimum to allow Mr. Cross to say a few words. Well I'd like to make an I guess an informal 00:27:47.468 --> 00:27:50.942 - motion or whatever would be appropriate to 00:27:51.074 --> 00:27:57.524 - to say we give anyone from the public who wants to comment on this. I'd be happy to allow that if there 00:27:57.524 --> 00:28:03.726 - if there's no if there's no objection. I'd be happy to allow that. Thank you. Thank you. All right. 00:28:03.726 --> 00:28:09.927 - So so with that would you suggest we proceed with public comment first or with Mr. Cross's comments 00:28:09.927 --> 00:28:16.439 - first. Mr. Cross. Okay. So Mr. Cross we'd love to invite you sir if you'd like to make make a statement. 00:28:16.439 --> 00:28:19.230 - More than welcome to do so at this time sir. 00:28:22.978 --> 00:28:31.531 - And then afterwards, if anybody would like to make public comment, either online or in person, you're 00:28:31.531 --> 00:28:40.335 - also welcome to do so. And we had discussed it being five minutes. Is that OK with you still, Mr. Cross? 00:28:40.335 --> 00:28:48.804 - I beg your pardon? Is five minutes OK with you as the appropriate amount of time? No. This issue has 00:28:48.804 --> 00:28:52.158 - been going on since the 21st of August. 00:28:52.354 --> 00:28:59.874 - There have probably been about four council meetings, and persons who I understand have made complaints 00:28:59.874 --> 00:29:07.177 - against me have got an unlimited time to speak their mind. Ms. Crossley sat over there in that chair 00:29:07.177 --> 00:29:14.841 - and spoke for 10, maybe 20 minutes. Mr. Allen has spoken for a really long time at both council meetings. 00:29:14.841 --> 00:29:15.998 - There have been 00:29:17.794 --> 00:29:24.900 - Committee on Council Processes meetings where, again, Mr. Allen and Ms. Crossley have spoken for significant 00:29:24.900 --> 00:29:31.419 - amount of times. There was an interview committee meeting, see, to discuss this issue that I didn't 00:29:31.419 --> 00:29:38.068 - even know was happening. I was not invited. I understand that there was no public comment. So even if 00:29:38.068 --> 00:29:44.717 - I did know and did attend, I wouldn't have gotten an opportunity to speak. So for me now, what, three 00:29:44.717 --> 00:29:45.630 - months later, 00:29:45.762 --> 00:29:55.335 - when everybody who has had an opinion about my removal from the HPC have had unlimited time to speak 00:29:55.335 --> 00:30:05.288 - and have had constant access with members of the council, for me now to be given five minutes is grossly 00:30:05.288 --> 00:30:13.534 - unfair. Not only that, but my entire position has been that the standard arrived at by 00:30:14.146 --> 00:30:22.209 - The Special Committee on Council Processes in 2023 with regards to the matter with Greg Alexander stated 00:30:22.209 --> 00:30:29.427 - very clearly what the standard is and what it required first and foremost. And I'll read here 00:30:29.427 --> 00:30:37.183 - that substantive due process consideration advise that a motion for removal of an appointed board or 00:30:37.183 --> 00:30:40.638 - commission member for cause should be narrow 00:30:41.154 --> 00:30:47.802 - specific and sufficiently clear that the city council members, members of the public, and the appointee 00:30:47.802 --> 00:30:54.385 - in question fully understand the specific conduct, statements, commissions, or omissions that have led 00:30:54.385 --> 00:31:01.097 - to the proposed removal. I have not been given any such information. I've been told that I have breached 00:31:01.097 --> 00:31:07.488 - the code of conduct, but I have not been told what specific statements, actions, or omissions on my 00:31:07.488 --> 00:31:09.406 - part constitutes that breach. 00:31:10.018 --> 00:31:18.613 - which sections of the code of conduct was breached, how that action breached that section, what evidence 00:31:18.613 --> 00:31:27.126 - was relied on, who was the complainant, and whether or not that breach rises to the level of precluding 00:31:27.126 --> 00:31:35.230 - me from continued service. At no point have I received any information. Mr. Allen says constantly, 00:31:35.458 --> 00:31:43.720 - that I responded. But if you read the contents of my response, it was that I was not given any information 00:31:43.720 --> 00:31:51.672 - to respond to. I have not been given an opportunity to speak, call witnesses, cross-examine witnesses. 00:31:51.672 --> 00:31:59.470 - I don't even know what the basis of the complaint is. It could not be Miss Crossley's email, because 00:31:59.470 --> 00:32:04.798 - on the 21st, I received notice. But Miss Crossley's document was not 00:32:05.250 --> 00:32:13.625 - sent until the 15th of September. So it could not have been the basis of the notice. There was no motion 00:32:13.625 --> 00:32:21.601 - made by any committee members, which certainly, with the other cases of removal, was what initiated 00:32:21.601 --> 00:32:30.215 - the process. Mr. Allen has not said who initiated this process. My understanding, and I could be completely 00:32:30.215 --> 00:32:33.246 - wrong, but based on my understanding, 00:32:34.082 --> 00:32:42.283 - before this matter could come to you. It should be based on a motion. That's how Mr. Alexander's issue 00:32:42.283 --> 00:32:50.644 - got before the council. That's how I think I have some other cases here. Fuentes and there were a couple 00:32:50.644 --> 00:32:58.765 - of others. I sat in this chamber and saw a motion for dismissal of persons for absences being made to 00:32:58.765 --> 00:33:01.950 - initiate the process. I don't know how. 00:33:04.834 --> 00:33:12.703 - Right? I've been told that I breached the open door law by sending an email to the chair for the chair 00:33:12.703 --> 00:33:20.419 - to respond. But out of transparency, I sent it to the other members. It wasn't for the other members 00:33:20.419 --> 00:33:28.059 - to respond. It was for the chair to respond. Because in the meeting, I raised points of I requested 00:33:28.059 --> 00:33:34.782 - information, which under Robert's rules, the chair should recognize and seek to answer. 00:33:34.914 --> 00:33:41.252 - He dismissed them out of hand, which in itself is a breach of process. And when I raised a point of 00:33:41.252 --> 00:33:47.780 - order, he dismissed those. So when there are persons here saying that the chair ruled me out of order, 00:33:47.780 --> 00:33:54.117 - if you read Robert's Rules, there's a procedure for ruling somebody out of order. The chair did not 00:33:54.117 --> 00:34:00.518 - follow it. I sent a document with my response to the notice. I sent several documents. I think there 00:34:00.518 --> 00:34:04.638 - were like eight attachments. My response to the notice as quote, 00:34:05.186 --> 00:34:15.723 - quoted by Mr. Askins in the B-square bulletin was 92 paragraphs long. And it painstakingly detailed 00:34:15.723 --> 00:34:26.788 - how the notice did not meet not only this council standard set in 2023 when Mr. Alexander faced a motion 00:34:26.788 --> 00:34:32.478 - from council member Rollo, which was ruled inadequate 00:34:32.770 --> 00:34:42.137 - under the standard and had to be represented because it was not specific enough. Had interview committee 00:34:42.137 --> 00:34:51.504 - see then rule unanimously that I be removed based on allegations, which again did not meet the standard, 00:34:51.504 --> 00:35:00.158 - that that report set. So I really don't know why I'm here. I have no idea what charges I've been 00:35:01.346 --> 00:35:09.888 - what breaches I've been alleged to commit. In my experience, and I have a lot of experience working 00:35:09.888 --> 00:35:18.686 - on boards of inquiries, investigations, both criminal and civil, any allegation charged to be answered 00:35:18.686 --> 00:35:27.996 - must have a date and time of the offense, a statement of the offense, it must identify which rule regulation 00:35:27.996 --> 00:35:29.790 - policy was breached, 00:35:29.986 --> 00:35:40.706 - It must demonstrate how that action breached that policy, rule, regulation, law. I have seen none of 00:35:40.706 --> 00:35:51.531 - that. I would really like someone here to tell me in very specific terms what is it that I said, when 00:35:51.531 --> 00:35:58.430 - I said it, how that statement breached a rule, what the rule is, 00:35:59.746 --> 00:36:09.623 - I haven't seen it. I've been told that I delayed the meeting. How did I delay the meeting? Was the actions 00:36:09.623 --> 00:36:19.316 - that I, firstly, did I delay the meeting? That has not been established in fact. Right? I've sat through 00:36:19.316 --> 00:36:27.070 - these meetings and I have waited hours while the procedures of this council happen. 00:36:29.282 --> 00:36:37.065 - Are any of you guilty for delay? No, because the actions that you took that pushed a matter on the agenda 00:36:37.065 --> 00:36:44.041 - further back in time was appropriate. So they'll have to demonstrate how an action that I took 00:36:44.041 --> 00:36:51.531 - was inappropriate and thus delayed the business of the meeting. I have watched the record myself, and 00:36:51.531 --> 00:36:54.174 - based on the guidelines of the HPC, 00:36:54.338 --> 00:37:01.703 - and Robert's Rules, which is our parliamentary process, I have seen nothing that I did. If I make a 00:37:01.703 --> 00:37:09.214 - point of order and that is being debated, how have I improperly delayed that meeting? It has not been 00:37:09.214 --> 00:37:16.800 - made known to me how is it that my sending an email to the chair of the commission, how is it a breach 00:37:16.800 --> 00:37:23.870 - of the Omdur law? I've read the law. I don't see how that breach is not anywhere in the notice. 00:37:24.770 --> 00:37:32.054 - of how my doing that has demonstrated it. And I'm sure you send emails to your colleagues all the time. 00:37:32.054 --> 00:37:39.407 - I don't know of any organization that can be run in this country in 2026 where one member sends an email 00:37:39.407 --> 00:37:46.410 - to another one and it's in a breach of the open door law. Otherwise, business couldn't happen. I've 00:37:46.410 --> 00:37:53.694 - seen members of this council get up and leave and come back and get up and leave, but yet my getting up 00:37:53.826 --> 00:38:04.584 - and leaving a meeting has now breached the rules. Did anybody ask me why I left the meeting? Did anybody 00:38:04.584 --> 00:38:15.138 - give me an opportunity to answer any question? Was I invited to any meeting? I've never seen. Is there 00:38:15.138 --> 00:38:19.646 - any police officer here? No. Well, I'm not. 00:38:19.778 --> 00:38:26.702 - an expert on American law, but I've watched enough TV. And I've never seen an investigation conducted 00:38:26.702 --> 00:38:34.168 - where the police doesn't seek to bring the man that they alleged to commit the offense and ask him questions. 00:38:34.168 --> 00:38:41.092 - But we've been here for three months, and nobody has said, hey, Renard, we're having a meeting. Come, 00:38:41.092 --> 00:38:46.590 - have a seat. Let me hear your side of the story. Do you want to bring a witness? 00:38:46.914 --> 00:38:55.573 - Maybe there's somebody who wants to come and speak on your behalf. Maybe there are members of the HPC 00:38:55.573 --> 00:39:04.487 - who are actually there in the meeting who are experts on our rules, processes, how we have done business 00:39:04.487 --> 00:39:13.401 - for the last certainly five years that I was a voting member and asked to come back to serve by a member 00:39:13.401 --> 00:39:16.542 - of the Common Council based on that. 00:39:16.706 --> 00:39:26.530 - five years worth of performance. I also, again, find this hard to separate from the issue of Seminary 00:39:26.530 --> 00:39:36.258 - Point. I strongly believe if this had happened about any other issue, I would not be here. I believe 00:39:36.258 --> 00:39:44.926 - that persons objected to how strongly I opposed the manner in which that demolition delay 00:39:46.018 --> 00:39:55.679 - was rammed through. I wrote very long documents detailing the breaches that took place. I wrote a 14-page 00:39:55.679 --> 00:40:04.702 - report on the breaches of procedure taken place by the chair, and nobody has acted on any of that. 00:40:08.962 --> 00:40:17.540 - I don't understand, again, how my sending documents to my political representative constitutes a breach, 00:40:17.540 --> 00:40:25.710 - harassment in any way. How does my making phone calls to consult persons at hand who administer the 00:40:25.710 --> 00:40:34.206 - HPC, how is that now a breach of the rules? None of that information is in the notice. Absolutely none. 00:40:38.562 --> 00:40:47.046 - So if this is the time and place that somebody can give me any information as to why I'm here, how I 00:40:47.046 --> 00:40:55.698 - breach the rules, I've checked the record. Not only is there a recording of the meeting, but there are 00:40:55.698 --> 00:41:04.266 - minutes taken. And if I was ruled out of audit, it should be in the minutes. It's not. If you all had 00:41:04.266 --> 00:41:06.366 - read anything that I had 00:41:06.690 --> 00:41:20.231 - said in my 92 paragraph notice and the seven or eight attachments, it would have clearly laid out how 00:41:20.231 --> 00:41:34.302 - this process is flawed, both on the standards set by this council and law. I am at a loss. I am confused. 00:41:36.770 --> 00:41:45.698 - That's it. I don't have anything else to say. Thank you very much Thank you, sir If anybody would like 00:41:45.698 --> 00:41:54.627 - to make public comment at this time on on this matter you may do so now and Yeah, if you could put the 00:41:54.627 --> 00:42:03.295 - timer up for three minutes, please Take it away, sir. If you aim for the record, please. Thank you. 00:42:03.295 --> 00:42:05.982 - Hi. My name is John Butler and 00:42:06.082 --> 00:42:14.541 - I'm the new chair of the HPC Brand-new I haven't even got to chair a meeting yet, but I'm looking forward 00:42:14.541 --> 00:42:22.840 - to it I've been on the HPC for the past year. I Feel that we had a bad meeting in July for the seminary 00:42:22.840 --> 00:42:27.070 - point hearing we made mistakes mistakes were made by 00:42:27.394 --> 00:42:35.009 - at all levels of the meeting, myself included. However, Commissioner Cross was not one of the members 00:42:35.009 --> 00:42:42.624 - who made mistakes. And so I think that when you make a mistake, you need to take some accountability. 00:42:42.624 --> 00:42:50.462 - You need to figure out what went wrong. If it's necessary, you need to say you're sorry. And I'm willing 00:42:50.462 --> 00:42:53.150 - to do that. I know what went wrong. 00:42:53.282 --> 00:43:00.688 - that I had a misunderstanding of some of the basic rules about demolition delay. This is because we've 00:43:00.688 --> 00:43:08.597 - just switched over to Robert's Rules. It's something we weren't using last year. It's also because demolition 00:43:08.597 --> 00:43:16.002 - delay is a tricky thing we rarely oppose or rarely slow down. And so the mechanisms are kind of opaque 00:43:16.002 --> 00:43:19.166 - at times. So, you know, mistakes were made. 00:43:20.610 --> 00:43:25.991 - Commissioner Cross attempted to point out that we were making these mistakes. He's attempted to get 00:43:25.991 --> 00:43:31.479 - these mistakes acknowledged and the powers that we did not want to do that or were unable to do that. 00:43:31.479 --> 00:43:33.470 - And so I really just want to sort of 00:43:33.890 --> 00:43:40.568 - Underlined that you know, we need to move forward. This whole thing is a huge waste of time. It's been 00:43:40.568 --> 00:43:47.246 - a waste of your time It's been a you know waste of the city's resources I have complete confidence and 00:43:47.246 --> 00:43:53.794 - Commissioner cross I believe that I can work with him and that he will be a valuable part of the HPC 00:43:53.794 --> 00:43:55.998 - if he's allowed to stay on it and 00:43:56.162 --> 00:44:02.914 - You know, he was on it for five years before this. We never had any problems. We had a bad meeting. 00:44:02.914 --> 00:44:09.667 - But I think it's time to put it behind us. And I just, I'm sorry that I had anything to do with the 00:44:09.667 --> 00:44:16.757 - mistakes that were made. But you know, sometimes mistakes are made. And so now we're gonna move forward. 00:44:16.757 --> 00:44:19.998 - And you know, I encourage civility. I encourage 00:44:20.354 --> 00:44:27.380 - due process but I also believe we really need to attempt to follow Robert's rules to the best of our 00:44:27.380 --> 00:44:34.475 - abilities. And you know if there's moments where we're struggling with it we need to take the time to 00:44:34.475 --> 00:44:41.709 - figure it out. And I think Commissioner Cross can help us do that. So thank you very much. I appreciate 00:44:41.709 --> 00:44:45.118 - your consideration. Thank you. Mr. Good evening. 00:44:46.754 --> 00:44:53.167 - My name is Eric host and I appreciate this opportunity to offer comment. I come before you to offer 00:44:53.167 --> 00:44:59.516 - comment regarding the proposed removal of Rennard cross from the Bloomington historic preservation 00:44:59.516 --> 00:45:06.378 - commission. Having attended the relevant meetings, I have closely evaluated whether the record establishes 00:45:06.378 --> 00:45:12.791 - legally sufficient cause for his removal. The common council addressed this identical issue in 2023 00:45:12.791 --> 00:45:16.126 - regarding Greg Alexander on the traffic commission. 00:45:16.802 --> 00:45:23.472 - The council's special committee established three core principles. Allegations must specify conduct, 00:45:23.472 --> 00:45:30.274 - statements, or omissions. The commissioner must receive adequate notice and an opportunity to respond. 00:45:30.274 --> 00:45:37.406 - There must be a demonstrated connection between the conduct and a diminished fitness to perform the duties. 00:45:38.946 --> 00:45:45.765 - The third requirement is vital. Under Waller versus City of Madison, removal for cause requires more 00:45:45.765 --> 00:45:52.989 - than disagreement, friction, or dissatisfaction. The conduct must directly impair the individual's fitness 00:45:52.989 --> 00:45:59.740 - to continue to serve. No evidence on the public record shows that Mr. Cross is unfit to fulfill his 00:45:59.740 --> 00:46:06.559 - duties nor has any explanation connected to his conduct, excuse me, any explanation connected to his 00:46:06.559 --> 00:46:07.774 - conduct indicates 00:46:07.874 --> 00:46:14.208 - diminished capacity. Mr. Cross has raised substantive questions regarding the Historic Preservation 00:46:14.208 --> 00:46:20.541 - Commission rules, Robert's Rules of Order, and governing law. Challenging procedure irregularities, 00:46:20.541 --> 00:46:27.002 - requesting information, and insisting on compliance are not evidence of unfitness, even if they might 00:46:27.002 --> 00:46:33.525 - be controversial. Disagreeing with how a commissioner exercises his responsibilities is not equivalent 00:46:33.525 --> 00:46:35.742 - to showing he cannot perform them. 00:46:36.450 --> 00:46:43.647 - Institutional consistency is at stake in this matter. The council must uphold the same evidentiary and 00:46:43.647 --> 00:46:51.053 - due process standards it established in 2023. Removing a commissioner for questioning official procedures 00:46:51.053 --> 00:46:57.691 - sets a dangerous precedent. The question before you is not whether Mr. Cross has been critical 00:46:57.691 --> 00:47:04.958 - or inconvenient, but whether legal cause has been proven. It is not. I respectfully urge the council to 00:47:06.562 --> 00:47:17.997 - Protect Commission independence and vote against removal of Bernard cross. Thank you. Thank you Next 00:47:17.997 --> 00:47:30.111 - person in chambers Hello Paul Rousseau I've just a few remarks I Echo the comments of the last two people. 00:47:30.111 --> 00:47:35.998 - I strongly urge you to set this aside I watched the 00:47:36.130 --> 00:47:44.022 - meetings of the Historical Preservation Commission in dispute here. And what I saw was that Mr. Cross 00:47:44.022 --> 00:47:51.759 - was perhaps the most knowledgeable and articulate member on the committee about all the matters. It 00:47:51.759 --> 00:47:59.883 - would be a real travesty for him to be removed. What I saw was that no members of the HPC were prevented 00:47:59.883 --> 00:48:04.990 - from performing their duties. In my view, a delay is not impeding 00:48:06.338 --> 00:48:13.915 - and certainly not as Mr. Ost just said. It's not grounds for being removed when Mr. Cross was actually 00:48:13.915 --> 00:48:21.418 - trying to rectify the mistakes that had been made or at least to get an acknowledgement that mistakes 00:48:21.418 --> 00:48:28.996 - were made and that things would be different going forward. I would like to give you some sense of the 00:48:28.996 --> 00:48:33.630 - background for this. I would like to read to you just a few of 00:48:34.082 --> 00:48:42.067 - the remarks that Mr. Cross himself made on June 10th in the meeting. Whenever we make a decision, not 00:48:42.067 --> 00:48:49.973 - only do we need to be able to defend it credibly, but it should stand up to historical scrutiny. One 00:48:49.973 --> 00:48:57.801 - of the ways of ensuring that happens is to avail ourselves of all the information, listening to all 00:48:57.801 --> 00:49:02.654 - the opinions. It is time consuming. However, it is essential. 00:49:03.970 --> 00:49:12.344 - I've never left this commission feeling that I've not been given an opportunity to fully express and 00:49:12.344 --> 00:49:21.049 - ventilate my opinion on a position on a topic ever until today. It is sad. With that backdrop, I believe 00:49:21.049 --> 00:49:29.672 - that what we have here is a political dispute disguised as a procedural dispute. I know that's a little 00:49:29.672 --> 00:49:32.574 - bit of an incendiary thing to say, 00:49:32.706 --> 00:49:43.590 - I keep seeing it over and over. The mistakes that were made to release the demolition delay seemed incredibly 00:49:43.590 --> 00:49:52.693 - rushed. The demolition delay was only 15 days old out of 90 days when the order was lifted. 00:49:52.693 --> 00:50:00.510 - What was the rush? Well, perhaps the rush was that a mediation was underway to 00:50:01.090 --> 00:50:08.754 - go around the demolition to actually preserve the housing and Certain political actors didn't want that 00:50:08.754 --> 00:50:16.271 - to happen so they want to rush it through to get the demolition I don't know, but it didn't look good 00:50:16.271 --> 00:50:23.714 - It looked very Controlled it looked like an HPC that was not independent Thank you Thank you so much 00:50:23.714 --> 00:50:25.630 - another commenter here in 00:50:39.170 --> 00:50:45.023 - Steve Olin former councilmember I served as parliamentarian of this body for more than five years I 00:50:45.023 --> 00:50:50.877 - watched the three meetings at the root of the case against mr. Cross He objected strenuously and at 00:50:50.877 --> 00:50:56.847 - length in the HPC meetings of July 9th and 23rd He may have overstepped procedurally, but his conduct 00:50:56.847 --> 00:51:02.759 - in no way rose to justify the action You're weighing tonight at the meetings of June 25th. The chair 00:51:02.759 --> 00:51:06.622 - was doing his level best, but he mishandled the essential problem 00:51:06.754 --> 00:51:13.139 - There were members who wished to postpone the question of the release of the demolition delay of Seminary 00:51:13.139 --> 00:51:19.224 - Point. Subsidiary motions take precedence and postponing is the first example of a subsidiary motion 00:51:19.224 --> 00:51:25.308 - listed in section 11 of Roberts. Those members had a right to have a vote on postponement before the 00:51:25.308 --> 00:51:30.910 - vote to release. They did not understand this right and the chair did not inform them of it. 00:51:31.074 --> 00:51:36.476 - Later in the meeting when the decision could still have been undone they were dissuaded from moving 00:51:36.476 --> 00:51:41.986 - to reconsider because another member in Misinformed them that a postponement vote had to wait because 00:51:41.986 --> 00:51:47.496 - the release vote was already on the floor This was a mistake that the chair did nothing to correct in 00:51:47.496 --> 00:51:53.114 - the next two meetings several members continued to express this mistaken belief that procedure had been 00:51:53.114 --> 00:51:54.302 - properly followed and 00:51:54.594 --> 00:52:01.640 - Mr. Cross objected at length and was accused of filibustering But the HPC had not adopted time limits 00:52:01.640 --> 00:52:08.687 - from members and no one neither. Mr. Cross the chair or anyone else present Understood how to conduct 00:52:08.687 --> 00:52:15.733 - his appeal of a decision of the chair which can be found under section 24 of Roberts This decision in 00:52:15.733 --> 00:52:17.598 - short was taken improperly 00:52:17.986 --> 00:52:24.738 - Here we are now and it's unclear who specifically moved to expel Mr. Cross from the HPC or how the supposed 00:52:24.738 --> 00:52:31.178 - defenses escalated to an expulsion hearing so quickly. Almost no disciplinary procedures under section 00:52:31.178 --> 00:52:34.366 - 61 of Roberts were followed within the commission. 00:52:34.498 --> 00:52:40.092 - They include calling the member to order, which the chair did, but they also include taking down Mr. 00:52:40.092 --> 00:52:45.796 - Cross's words or naming Mr. Cross. Any HPC member who believed he was holding the floor too long could 00:52:45.796 --> 00:52:51.390 - have called for a vote to end his holding the floor. Any member could have moved to have him removed 00:52:51.390 --> 00:52:57.095 - from the meeting, which can be done by a two-thirds vote of the membership. None of these motions were 00:52:57.095 --> 00:53:00.030 - made. To expel him would be an unprecedented action. 00:53:00.194 --> 00:53:06.059 - No one has ever been removed from a commission for cause except for non-attendance. That includes Greg 00:53:06.059 --> 00:53:11.980 - Alexander, who was accused in 2023 of offensive behavior outside of a meeting. Then, as now, the remedy 00:53:11.980 --> 00:53:18.016 - is not expulsion. The remedies involve censure first. They involve all commissioners better understanding 00:53:18.016 --> 00:53:23.710 - Roberts well enough to not shake the confidence of people who would serve on boards and commissions 00:53:23.710 --> 00:53:28.094 - that they will be run out of town for what amounts to political differences. 00:53:29.058 --> 00:53:34.945 - It gives me it gives me great pains to say that I would have to question my continued presence on a 00:53:34.945 --> 00:53:41.185 - City Commission If I knew that it was this easy to be ousted from it for such unprincipled reasons Please 00:53:41.185 --> 00:53:47.072 - do not expel. Mr. Cross. He is a principled man who has a better grasp at times than anyone I know. 00:53:47.072 --> 00:53:53.253 - Thank you Thank you. Thank you so much. Is there anyone online who wishes to comment? Okay person online 00:53:53.253 --> 00:53:54.430 - now you may comment 00:53:58.370 --> 00:54:08.002 - Yes, my name is Amy Butler. I actually had been present at many meetings for the HPC because I was trying 00:54:08.002 --> 00:54:17.451 - to save a little yellow house on 12th Street that the City Council did end up designating as a historic 00:54:17.451 --> 00:54:21.086 - site. And at the meetings I've been to, 00:54:21.442 --> 00:54:27.542 - When I actually was not at the meeting that have seminary point hearing, but I did watch it later. I 00:54:27.542 --> 00:54:33.763 - have never seen anything like that happen before. Um, the asking the commissioners that asked for more 00:54:33.763 --> 00:54:40.045 - time were ignored. There were people present who asked for more time. They were ignored. That had never 00:54:40.045 --> 00:54:46.266 - happened before at meetings. Um, the little yellow house that ended up getting saved. We had asked for 00:54:46.266 --> 00:54:49.950 - more time and we were granted it. Um, I think it was rushed. 00:54:50.146 --> 00:54:56.391 - I think there were probably reasons that was being rushed. I don't want to say there was a fix in, but 00:54:56.391 --> 00:55:02.696 - I felt like it was being rushed for a reason that was unclear to the rest of us at the time. But I feel 00:55:02.696 --> 00:55:08.940 - that it would be very unfair to remove Renard when he is a person who knows Robert's rules better than 00:55:08.940 --> 00:55:15.064 - anybody else in that room. And I think that there needs to be more training for our members. So this 00:55:15.064 --> 00:55:19.550 - doesn't happen again. But I think to remove him would be a poor decision. 00:55:19.842 --> 00:55:26.249 - And it would be another sad decision the city has made along this entire route with Seminary Point. 00:55:26.249 --> 00:55:32.848 - I don't think the HPC would be better off without him on it. I think he brings a lot to the table when 00:55:32.848 --> 00:55:39.318 - he's there with his experience. And I really urge you to please vote to retain him. Thank you. Thank 00:55:39.318 --> 00:55:45.789 - you very much. Is there anybody else online? Is there anybody else in council chambers who'd like to 00:55:45.789 --> 00:55:46.814 - make a comment? 00:55:47.202 --> 00:55:56.194 - You don't count unless you want to make it there. Anybody else want to make a public comment at this 00:55:56.194 --> 00:56:05.275 - time? OK. Attorney Rossman, would you like to tell us what our options are here? Thank you, President 00:56:05.275 --> 00:56:14.446 - Asari. Thank you, President Asari. Jacob Rossman, attorney for the Common Council. In its memo tonight 00:56:14.446 --> 00:56:15.870 - to the council, 00:56:16.514 --> 00:56:24.795 - The final addendum that was just published actually council staff has outlined some possible options 00:56:24.795 --> 00:56:33.733 - that the council can take I'll go through those briefly first option a and the staff's formal recommendation 00:56:33.733 --> 00:56:42.588 - is to drop or postpone consideration tonight without taking a final vote and to refer the general appointee 00:56:42.588 --> 00:56:44.638 - removal framework to the 00:56:45.314 --> 00:56:55.045 - on council processes to adopt or standardize rule first. The benefit of this would be to limit any immediate 00:56:55.045 --> 00:57:04.597 - litigation risk. And it also aligns with the council's ongoing review of Title II, an intermediate opinion 00:57:04.597 --> 00:57:14.238 - option. A council member could introduce a formal initiating motion on the floor tonight detailing charges. 00:57:15.138 --> 00:57:23.341 - Authorizing staff to serve an updated notice to mr. Cross with a complete evidentiary packet attached 00:57:23.341 --> 00:57:31.544 - And set a final deliberation vote for the November 18th meeting The benefit of this would be It would 00:57:31.544 --> 00:57:39.748 - help Cure any lack of an initiating floor motion so far And afford mr. Cross additional an additional 00:57:39.748 --> 00:57:44.734 - due process response window third option is the council could 00:57:45.346 --> 00:57:55.509 - proceed immediately to a vote tonight on removal. However, the council has not formally adopted a new 00:57:55.509 --> 00:58:05.871 - process yet to remove a council member, which could potentially raise additional due process challenges 00:58:05.871 --> 00:58:15.038 - under relevant case law. Thank you, Mr. Rossman. Any questions for Mr. Rossman or comments? 00:58:16.770 --> 00:58:26.895 - OK, I suppose we also could just dismiss the issue. It's another thing we can do. OK, so any comments 00:58:26.895 --> 00:58:37.120 - at this time? Councilmembers or motions? Councilmember Stasberg. I guess I have, I don't know, is this 00:58:37.120 --> 00:58:43.870 - a statement? Is this a question? I'm not sure what it is right now. 00:58:44.258 --> 00:58:54.465 - I guess one of I would like to address to some degree Mr. Cross's initial statement that he gave this 00:58:54.465 --> 00:59:04.472 - evening in terms of kind of questioning what was the problem? What did he do wrong? Why was sending 00:59:04.472 --> 00:59:14.078 - the email to the chair a violation of open door? And did he delay the meeting in a way that was 00:59:14.690 --> 00:59:22.181 - I'll say detrimental or offensive enough to warrant this, which I appreciate the public comment tonight, 00:59:22.181 --> 00:59:29.600 - especially Mr. Voland's comments in terms of Roberts. And I also want to recognize that this particular 00:59:29.600 --> 00:59:36.734 - petition issue that was being dealt with with the demolition delay of Seminary Point was a very hot 00:59:37.122 --> 00:59:44.365 - button issue, I think it is still a very hot button issue for this community. And that anything related 00:59:44.365 --> 00:59:51.468 - to it then took on a little bit more tension, right, by all parties. And I'll say skepticism, because 00:59:51.468 --> 00:59:58.432 - there were a couple public commenters that were basically like, this was all political. And I don't 00:59:58.432 --> 01:00:05.397 - know whether it was or not. I don't know if it was rushed or not. I have no idea. But simply having 01:00:05.397 --> 01:00:06.302 - that kind of 01:00:06.882 --> 01:00:14.581 - Thought around it and feeling around it by multiple community members Makes it seem that way regardless 01:00:14.581 --> 01:00:21.984 - of whether it ever was But I did want to address that some of this stuff at least is covered in the 01:00:21.984 --> 01:00:29.980 - the commissioner training that the clerk's office is doing and Mr. Cross has still not gone to the training 01:00:29.980 --> 01:00:35.902 - does not seem interested in the training has berated the training as useless so 01:00:36.962 --> 01:00:46.035 - That is not something that was publicly done here, but it was something that was done after one of the 01:00:46.035 --> 01:00:55.196 - HPC meetings. So it's an issue. And in terms of whether or not any part of this situation, I think that 01:00:55.196 --> 01:01:04.092 - one of the key things for me in terms of legal, which I would maybe want to think about a little bit 01:01:04.092 --> 01:01:05.854 - more, is, you know, 01:01:06.114 --> 01:01:14.660 - if, in fact, he is still able to serve on the commission, being fit to serve on the commission in terms 01:01:14.660 --> 01:01:22.960 - of, I don't know, general demeanor. And I appreciate what Mr. Volin said, like bringing up points of 01:01:22.960 --> 01:01:29.534 - order shouldn't be a problem, right? I do it myself. It shouldn't be a problem. 01:01:30.242 --> 01:01:37.568 - I also think that there's a line of, I think that 45 minutes was a little bit long, and it was pretty 01:01:37.568 --> 01:01:45.038 - clear that everybody else in that meeting was just like, nobody knows what to do right now, and so what 01:01:45.038 --> 01:01:51.646 - are we supposed to do? It was over by that point. It was kind of like beating a dead horse. 01:01:52.194 --> 01:01:58.300 - That is a waste of the public's time. That's a waste of the petitioner's time. It's a waste of everybody's 01:01:58.300 --> 01:02:04.178 - time. And then to walk out after that kind of in a huff to refuse to then participate in the rest also 01:02:04.178 --> 01:02:10.170 - feels like, OK, if you're going to get upset about things and then not participate, then maybe, in fact, 01:02:10.170 --> 01:02:15.876 - you're not fit to serve. And that's the question that's going through my head right now in terms of 01:02:15.876 --> 01:02:21.982 - fitness to serve. And even if it was political, there's political things that happen up here all the time. 01:02:22.114 --> 01:02:30.960 - my constituents would and should vote any of us out of office if we can't manage to sit up here and 01:02:30.960 --> 01:02:40.249 - take all the bolarchy, right? So that's part of, you know, whether you're getting shot down by the chair 01:02:40.249 --> 01:02:49.096 - or berated by the public, because sometimes the public can come in and really holler at us, like we 01:02:49.096 --> 01:02:50.334 - have to just, 01:02:51.842 --> 01:03:00.343 - listen and be respectful and know when to push and when to wait and plan a push in another way. I appreciate 01:03:00.343 --> 01:03:08.376 - that the email was sent to the chair as a follow-up. I hadn't heard about that per se in that context. 01:03:08.376 --> 01:03:16.409 - But yeah, it shouldn't have been cc'd to everybody and that is a basic open door thing that we've been 01:03:16.409 --> 01:03:21.790 - operating under for a number of years at this point on our own body. 01:03:22.530 --> 01:03:30.898 - the only things that will BCC each other sometimes, but generally that is about scheduling. That's what 01:03:30.898 --> 01:03:39.428 - it's just about. When are you available? And other than that, the nine of us are not on the same message. 01:03:39.428 --> 01:03:47.716 - I don't email all of my colleagues any substantive information. Even providing information in that way 01:03:47.716 --> 01:03:52.222 - can be considered a violation, and that is the way that 01:03:52.578 --> 01:04:00.431 - that bodies like this do business. So I guess that's all I have to say. I don't know about the three 01:04:00.431 --> 01:04:08.284 - options, so. Thank you. And anyone else? Councilman Flaherty. Sure, thank you. Briefly, I don't find 01:04:08.284 --> 01:04:16.215 - the open door law stuff compelling at all. I have yet to see any opinion or case law of any kind that 01:04:16.215 --> 01:04:20.414 - indicates sending an email can violate open door law. 01:04:21.730 --> 01:04:29.777 - Emails are not meetings full stop That's it and It's actually bit this is a broader problem It's I know 01:04:29.777 --> 01:04:37.669 - it's a specific sub issue within this thing But this like idea that sending an email to someone is is 01:04:37.669 --> 01:04:45.793 - enough if I open door law violation is absurd. Anyway on the merits, I appreciate all the comments folks 01:04:45.793 --> 01:04:51.518 - I agree that we as a council need to continue to establish better process 01:04:52.130 --> 01:04:59.293 - for Removals for cause from boards and commissions You know the the various due process considerations. 01:04:59.293 --> 01:05:06.180 - Mr. Cross suggested are warranted that should be You know incorporated into a clearer process and I 01:05:06.180 --> 01:05:13.067 - appreciate our counsel attorney administrator Advising us to take action on that. I think we should 01:05:13.067 --> 01:05:20.574 - I think that should proceed apart from this particular proposed removal and I would be satisfied or ready to 01:05:21.442 --> 01:05:29.214 - act on it tonight by way of declining to remove Mr. Cross from HPC. So that's my view. If that happens 01:05:29.214 --> 01:05:36.835 - to be the majority of you, I would encourage another colleague to make a motion so we could do that. 01:05:36.835 --> 01:05:43.852 - But there are multiple paths open to us. So, yeah, thank you. Thank you, Constable Fleuride. 01:05:43.852 --> 01:05:50.718 - Anyone else? Okay, then I'll make just a very brief comment as well. I think that there's, 01:05:51.330 --> 01:05:58.974 - First off, I can't speak for all of us, but for myself, I would like to say sorry that you have been 01:05:58.974 --> 01:06:06.921 - at this many meetings first and foremost. I think that a question that we're not asking is whether after 01:06:06.921 --> 01:06:14.717 - all of this, you would even still be willing to serve on a committee in the first place. I don't think 01:06:14.717 --> 01:06:21.150 - that any resident or any person who is a member of any one of our commissions should 01:06:21.346 --> 01:06:28.246 - ever have to worry about being brought before a public meeting on multiple occasions, being spoken about 01:06:28.246 --> 01:06:34.949 - by elected officials, being, despite the fact you're appointed and serving in a pseudo-judicial role, 01:06:34.949 --> 01:06:41.585 - I get that that is a public position and that you accept that when you accept the appointment. But I 01:06:41.585 --> 01:06:43.294 - just think that there's a 01:06:43.746 --> 01:06:50.910 - Element of privacy that you deserve and I think that we have far extended what that means regardless 01:06:50.910 --> 01:06:58.003 - of the merits of this I don't think that this is an appropriate way to treat you or anybody whoever 01:06:58.003 --> 01:07:05.380 - serves on a commission now that notwithstanding I'd like to then ask my council colleagues I think sort 01:07:05.380 --> 01:07:10.558 - of building off of the same things that councilmember Flaherty said it's 01:07:11.426 --> 01:07:21.300 - The idea that somebody that we appoint who we want to be a voice on a commission, somebody who we want 01:07:21.300 --> 01:07:30.886 - to have their own ideas, somebody who is appointed so that they can actually bring disagreement and 01:07:30.886 --> 01:07:36.350 - surface them and fight for a position to punish a person 01:07:36.770 --> 01:07:42.881 - for essentially an act of civil disobedience. Even if you take the fact that you're like, actually, 01:07:42.881 --> 01:07:49.297 - Robert's rules were followed perfectly and all of those things, even within that structure, if you don't 01:07:49.297 --> 01:07:55.713 - think that the process is going correctly, for you to stand up and say, look, I'm going to do everything 01:07:55.713 --> 01:08:02.190 - within my power to stop this process from going forward. We can't hold so tight to rules and regulations, 01:08:02.190 --> 01:08:06.590 - which our other commissioners said very clearly. They had just adopted. 01:08:06.690 --> 01:08:14.331 - only to subjugate people to our own outcomes and desires. But then when they beat against those and 01:08:14.331 --> 01:08:22.429 - use those same rules, mind you, to say that this process isn't working, we go, well, you're out of order. 01:08:22.429 --> 01:08:24.798 - That is just classic violence. 01:08:25.122 --> 01:08:33.607 - racially based. I'm not saying that people were racially based in this context, but this is how, through 01:08:33.607 --> 01:08:42.254 - generations, people like me and like Mr. Cross have been kept under the authoritarian rule of institutions 01:08:42.254 --> 01:08:48.638 - that were not built to serve us. And I just don't want to live in a city where 01:08:48.738 --> 01:08:54.568 - where people who serve on our commissions worry about whether or not they know Robert's rules. I don't 01:08:54.568 --> 01:09:00.228 - want to live in a city where if you do something wrong, we're going to bring you out here and shame 01:09:00.228 --> 01:09:04.926 - you publicly. And so within my agency to act, I would ask that we, with prejudice, 01:09:05.218 --> 01:09:11.062 - do not like that we abandon this and do not bring it again. I think that we have the ability, we have 01:09:11.062 --> 01:09:17.078 - already done it in essence through our process now of doing this over six, seven meetings. We've already 01:09:17.078 --> 01:09:22.980 - made it clear that hey, this is something that we're concerned about, but we're also adults. And after 01:09:22.980 --> 01:09:28.710 - all of this, bringing it back to my original question, the fact that Mr. Cross still wants to serve 01:09:28.710 --> 01:09:35.184 - on this committee after all of this says something to me about fitness to serve to address the conversation that 01:09:35.184 --> 01:09:42.220 - Point that was brought up before so I just I would beg my colleagues, please to join me in voting against 01:09:42.220 --> 01:09:48.924 - Mr. Cross's removal. Are there any other comments? Okay, any motions councilmember Stasberg I just I 01:09:48.924 --> 01:09:55.629 - just want to say that in this situation. It really feels like it's I mean when I watched the meeting 01:09:55.629 --> 01:10:02.266 - it almost felt like the opposite like it was somebody who did know Roberts rules was bullying those 01:10:02.266 --> 01:10:03.262 - who didn't and 01:10:03.714 --> 01:10:14.810 - And that's how it really sounded to me. And I guess I would hope that we can look farther than historic 01:10:14.810 --> 01:10:25.693 - prejudice and understanding that, yeah, absolutely, those rules were then being used, and potentially 01:10:25.693 --> 01:10:29.854 - inappropriately, to shame somebody who 01:10:29.986 --> 01:10:40.479 - was a relatively new chair, I think, and clearly maybe needed more training in how to be chair. 01:10:40.479 --> 01:10:51.519 - And I mean, we could say that this is a failure all around in terms of how we set up our volunteers, 01:10:51.519 --> 01:10:56.766 - like, let, like, volunteers to succeed or fail. 01:10:57.378 --> 01:11:04.336 - the commissions and what it is that we're asking them to do and the HPC is a Commission that is state 01:11:04.336 --> 01:11:11.158 - it's it's written by state statute like we have to have it by state statute and it it makes it very 01:11:11.158 --> 01:11:17.980 - important and the items that they deal with are very important and the other piece of this that was 01:11:17.980 --> 01:11:25.142 - a problem is I do believe there was not an attorney present at the first one of these meetings and There 01:11:25.142 --> 01:11:26.302 - should have been 01:11:26.850 --> 01:11:33.707 - in the same way that we have attorneys here, in the same way that Plan Commission has attorneys, in 01:11:33.707 --> 01:11:40.702 - the same way that I assume a whole bunch of the state statutory boards have attorneys present all the 01:11:40.702 --> 01:11:47.628 - time at every meeting. I guess that's where I think that there were lots and lots of balls that were 01:11:47.628 --> 01:11:53.662 - dropped. I think that the one that we're looking at right now specifically feels like a 01:11:54.082 --> 01:12:00.058 - a question of when that ball got dropped, right? How you then, what is the appropriate way to point 01:12:00.058 --> 01:12:06.153 - out and say, hey, you dropped the ball, and then how many times do you do it? Like, where's the line, 01:12:06.153 --> 01:12:12.248 - and did you cross the line? And that's also, like, you know, Mr. Boland really pointed out this idea, 01:12:12.248 --> 01:12:18.224 - like, well, then shouldn't, you know, like, there's another step, there's a sanctuary step in there 01:12:18.224 --> 01:12:20.734 - that's in between, and that maybe that's, 01:12:20.866 --> 01:12:28.699 - Absolutely, what should have happened with additional training and additional understanding and additional 01:12:28.699 --> 01:12:36.092 - like here's where the line, you know roughly is and Here's how it got stepped over And also if there 01:12:36.092 --> 01:12:43.559 - are any motions happy to take them mindful of time everyone Yes, I have a question for you president. 01:12:43.559 --> 01:12:48.830 - Sorry Did you approve the memo that went to mr. Cross on August 21st? I 01:12:50.562 --> 01:12:58.677 - from our counsel attorney? I'm very sorry to say that I do not remember. I'm so sorry, Mr. Allen. I 01:12:58.677 --> 01:13:07.036 - literally do not remember. I don't know. I don't believe the Council President approved the exact form 01:13:07.036 --> 01:13:15.151 - of the letter. We had talked about the outlines and what was going to be in the letter, but not the 01:13:15.151 --> 01:13:19.614 - text of the letter. Thank you. That's my recollection. 01:13:20.386 --> 01:13:30.369 - If I could follow up, I think this has been mishandled in countless ways, both on our end and to some 01:13:30.369 --> 01:13:40.547 - extent on the HPC members and even on Mr. Cross. I think there have been mistakes up and down the line. 01:13:40.547 --> 01:13:50.334 - And even though I am a member of interview committee C that voted unanimously to recommend removal, 01:13:50.530 --> 01:13:59.095 - I think that this is foo bar and we just can't follow. I don't think we should add. I don't think we're 01:13:59.095 --> 01:14:07.659 - in a position to make a good decision here. We just the process has been so flawed that I think we need 01:14:07.659 --> 01:14:15.153 - to dismiss this now. Come up with a policy make that policy known to everybody involved to 01:14:15.153 --> 01:14:19.518 - all the commissions and then follow through with it. 01:14:20.482 --> 01:14:36.780 - Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Smith. Any others. Go ahead. Motion. Go ahead. Please. I move to dismiss 01:14:36.780 --> 01:14:48.158 - this without prejudice. Sorry. Sorry. I don't watch enough Law and Order. 01:14:51.042 --> 01:14:59.860 - with prejudice There's a motion in the second discussion counselor Piedmont Smith What does that what 01:14:59.860 --> 01:15:08.505 - does with prejudice mean just to clarify for everybody My understanding is it means that we're done 01:15:08.505 --> 01:15:16.286 - talking about it. We can't bring this specific issue back up under this specific scenario 01:15:17.346 --> 01:15:24.989 - You would never be able to raise these charges against the individual based on these meanings ever again 01:15:24.989 --> 01:15:32.778 - in the future Thank you any other discussion All right. All those in favor of the of the motion to dismiss 01:15:32.778 --> 01:15:40.567 - roll call. Okay Councilman app counselor clerk Bolden. Will you please? call roll on the motion to dismiss 01:15:40.567 --> 01:15:41.950 - with prejudice and 01:15:58.370 --> 01:16:07.818 - Okay. Council member Flaherty. Yes. Stossberg. Yes. Smith. Yes. Sorry. Yes. Daily. Yes. Rallo. Yes. 01:16:07.818 --> 01:16:17.360 - Yes. And that motion carries. This matter is dismissed with prejudice. Thank you all for being here. 01:16:17.360 --> 01:16:26.430 - We'll now move on to legislation for first readings. Are there any motions. I move. I think so. 01:16:29.378 --> 01:16:36.051 - I move to introduce for the clerk to read by title and synopsis only ordinance twenty twenty six dash 01:16:36.051 --> 01:16:42.659 - twenty seven motion in the second. Any discussion. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed. Will the 01:16:42.659 --> 01:16:43.902 - clerk please read. 01:16:48.578 --> 01:16:54.861 - Ordinance twenty twenty six dash twenty seven to fix the salaries of all elected city officials for 01:16:54.861 --> 01:17:01.208 - the city of Bloomington for the year twenty twenty seven. The synopsis is as follows. This ordinance 01:17:01.208 --> 01:17:07.680 - recommended by the special fiscal committee sets the twenty twenty seven salaries for all elected city 01:17:07.680 --> 01:17:14.026 - officials for the city of Bloomington. Thank you. I move to discuss ordinance twenty twenty six dash 01:17:14.026 --> 01:17:18.110 - twenty seven motion and second all those in favor of discussing. 01:17:19.010 --> 01:17:26.466 - Opposed okay Thank you as chair of the special fiscal committee, I'll go ahead and present this I wrote 01:17:26.466 --> 01:17:33.779 - a memo in there I don't want to belabor this particular ordinance right now because I do expect it to 01:17:33.779 --> 01:17:36.862 - go to second reading after much discussion 01:17:36.962 --> 01:17:46.722 - Too long didn't read the special fiscal committee decided to recommend a two point seven percents COLA 01:17:46.722 --> 01:17:56.387 - increase for all elected official salaries this year and also wanted to ask staff to do some specific 01:17:56.387 --> 01:18:01.598 - research into Into this issue during the next year The 01:18:01.858 --> 01:18:09.247 - There are four of us on that committee it passed to one councilmember Flaherty was not present at that 01:18:09.247 --> 01:18:17.067 - meeting and I voted against this recommendation and that's why I have included those two possible amendments 01:18:17.067 --> 01:18:24.313 - I They are of course like exclusively can't have both of them one of them is simply keeping the 2026 01:18:24.313 --> 01:18:25.246 - salaries and 01:18:26.178 --> 01:18:32.314 - And I could talk more about my reasoning for either of these if you want me to And the other one is 01:18:32.314 --> 01:18:38.512 - kind of doing something a little bit different. It's it's addressing the ultimate inequities and how 01:18:38.512 --> 01:18:44.648 - cola increases mostly benefit those at the top of the pay scale and not the bottom of the pay scale 01:18:44.648 --> 01:18:50.846 - and So then it essentially averages the overall cola increase and then divides it between the 11 and 01:18:50.914 --> 01:18:57.663 - elected positions and And so then there's not a fiscal impact like the fiscal impact is the same as 01:18:57.663 --> 01:19:04.682 - giving the two point seven percent to each individual position So it doesn't change the monetary piece. 01:19:04.682 --> 01:19:11.769 - I felt with my amendments I didn't want to change any of the monetary piece in terms of having to adjust 01:19:11.769 --> 01:19:18.720 - budgets or figure out where additional salary money might come from and I've also included in the memo 01:19:18.720 --> 01:19:20.880 - kind of an outline of something 01:19:20.880 --> 01:19:31.198 - that we've talked about, that we started with that framework that was started a couple of years ago. 01:19:31.586 --> 01:19:38.056 - the guiding principles which got adjusted by council members Flaherty and Piedmont Smith and then we 01:19:38.056 --> 01:19:44.719 - were working on all of the rest of it in terms of the Process and so one of the pieces of that I wanted 01:19:44.719 --> 01:19:51.189 - to highlight right now is Essentially working on this much earlier in the year. So then if there are 01:19:51.189 --> 01:19:57.723 - significant budgetary impacts of Different salaries that those get realized well before budget season 01:19:57.723 --> 01:20:00.990 - instead of in budget season because otherwise like 01:20:01.122 --> 01:20:09.648 - I mean, it's just sort of, it's opposite to do anything with that. So does anybody have any questions? 01:20:09.648 --> 01:20:18.092 - Any questions? All right. Seeing none, we will go to a time of public comment. Anyone like to comment 01:20:18.092 --> 01:20:26.536 - on this ordinance? Anyone online? Coming back to council, would any, oh, there you are, Councilmember 01:20:26.536 --> 01:20:31.006 - Ruff. Does anybody like to make any comments on this? 01:20:33.506 --> 01:20:41.911 - Or the amendments and we can also introduce the amendments if you'd like I Just wanted to comment that 01:20:41.911 --> 01:20:50.560 - I'm not in favor of not Including a cola increase. I'm not in favor of the amendments. I think I'm sorry. 01:20:50.560 --> 01:20:59.454 - I couldn't quite hear you. Can you speak? Oh Sorry, usually I'm too loud. I'm not in favor of the amendments 01:20:59.454 --> 01:21:02.718 - of not Of not including a cola increase 01:21:03.362 --> 01:21:10.256 - I think across the board I think that's what what we need to be doing and I think we need to keep an 01:21:10.256 --> 01:21:17.150 - eye on or an eye toward incoming future councils. I don't want to be sending a message that you know 01:21:17.150 --> 01:21:24.044 - we're going to keep things stagnant. So in favor of the amendment or not the amendment the ordinance 01:21:24.044 --> 01:21:31.006 - not the amendments. So that's where I'm at right now. Yes can I ask a clarifying question. So you're. 01:21:31.106 --> 01:21:36.928 - Clearly you're not in favor of amendment one and you're why not in favor of amendment two I think we 01:21:36.928 --> 01:21:42.981 - should just do standard cola increases. Keep it simple. Thank you Councilmember Sasser, I guess I wanted 01:21:42.981 --> 01:21:48.919 - to follow up a little bit on that too So you so you don't have a concern then generally speaking about 01:21:48.919 --> 01:21:54.914 - the inequities related to the those at the top of the pay scale getting much larger cola increases than 01:21:54.914 --> 01:21:57.278 - those at the bottom of the pay scale and 01:22:00.642 --> 01:22:06.640 - Well, we don't do it any differently for the other staff in the city. That's true. So and that that 01:22:06.640 --> 01:22:12.818 - was Right. We've discussed doing it that way and that was the discussion at the special fiscal meeting 01:22:12.818 --> 01:22:18.937 - and that was why I mean what got presented I mean, obviously I got out voted Was basically like well, 01:22:18.937 --> 01:22:24.935 - we don't do it anywhere else So why should we do it here and my argument would essentially be maybe 01:22:24.935 --> 01:22:27.454 - we should start doing it somewhere and we 01:22:27.746 --> 01:22:38.752 - Have the power in this particular ordinance. We don't necessarily have the power in civil staff So that 01:22:38.752 --> 01:22:49.334 - would be my argument for that explanation Second time third time, you know what happens So I wanted 01:22:49.334 --> 01:22:56.318 - to say and I know this is unusual in terms of who speaks when but 01:22:56.418 --> 01:23:03.544 - I appreciate councilmember Stossberg's looking at how council salaries and clerk salaries and mayoral 01:23:03.544 --> 01:23:10.740 - salaries are set from a different perspective. And I've heard her speak about equity in coal increases 01:23:10.740 --> 01:23:18.075 - for I can I think I can comfortably say years because you talked about it in 2024 as well. So this isn't 01:23:18.075 --> 01:23:22.686 - new. I am concerned about the way that you've proposed it because 01:23:23.586 --> 01:23:30.907 - You're proposing a COLA percentage increase of 0.8, which is significantly less than the cost of living 01:23:30.907 --> 01:23:38.368 - increase that you've seen for the mayor over the last several years. The clerk's office would be at 1.25% 01:23:38.368 --> 01:23:45.407 - for a COLA increase and the council would see a COLA increase or salary increase at 4.49%, which is 01:23:45.407 --> 01:23:52.798 - higher than most actually all city staff. If you assume the council salary based off of 20 hours a week, 01:23:53.026 --> 01:24:01.224 - you all would make about $24.69. There are city staff members who are job grade three who make less 01:24:01.224 --> 01:24:09.832 - than you do per hour, but they serve full time and sometimes under very difficult conditions. So looking 01:24:09.832 --> 01:24:18.686 - at this, I understand the intent and I think it's good to try and approach it from a different perspective. 01:24:19.106 --> 01:24:28.213 - But I also think that doing it in this way gives the council themselves a significant bump that other 01:24:28.213 --> 01:24:37.498 - city staff will not achieve. That's all. Thank you very much. Any other council members. I'll just make 01:24:37.498 --> 01:24:39.998 - one comment. It's you know. 01:24:40.130 --> 01:24:52.916 - Hill I am Diagon but I think we have an opportunity and perhaps our last opportunity to think and address 01:24:52.916 --> 01:24:56.414 - the questions of clerk clerk 01:24:56.610 --> 01:25:04.728 - responsibilities, workload, et cetera, vis-a-vis council and council staff. It's the last time I get 01:25:04.728 --> 01:25:12.766 - to make this argument, Clerk Bolden. And I would be for, as I've said before, as I said when we did 01:25:12.766 --> 01:25:20.804 - clerk office salaries, I would be for raising the clerk's salary more substantially and giving them 01:25:20.804 --> 01:25:26.430 - more responsibility for the management of council, office, et cetera. 01:25:26.594 --> 01:25:34.249 - Recognize that this is not a position that anybody else is is of but I'm just going to say it While 01:25:34.249 --> 01:25:42.058 - I have a chance to any other comments. Okay motions. Oh councilmember Sasper. I Just want to say that 01:25:42.058 --> 01:25:49.790 - that that's an interesting idea except that the clerk responsibilities are in state code technically 01:25:49.790 --> 01:25:55.838 - and that It would be it would have to be a negotiation with every single clerk 01:25:56.130 --> 01:26:00.711 - Thinking about this and I know Clark Bolton You have said this to me multiple times in terms of setting 01:26:00.711 --> 01:26:05.160 - up the office for the future, right? Like because we're it's not always gonna be the same nine of us 01:26:05.160 --> 01:26:09.697 - up here It's not always gonna be the same person over there It's not always gonna be at the same mayor 01:26:09.697 --> 01:26:14.278 - and we need to be more forward-thinking than that And one of the things about elected official salaries 01:26:14.278 --> 01:26:18.110 - for those of you who don't know they can't go down Once they go up, they can't go down 01:26:18.850 --> 01:26:25.475 - And so that's honestly like one of mine by by leaving it at 2026 values It kind of goes well if we can't 01:26:25.475 --> 01:26:31.784 - decide how they should go up Then maybe they should just stay where they are And so that's why like 01:26:31.784 --> 01:26:38.093 - I don't even know which of those amendments I like the best I just was throwing them all out there. 01:26:38.093 --> 01:26:44.970 - Thanks So I'll I was gonna make a motion if you wanted me to so I'll go ahead and move to Consider ordinance 01:26:44.970 --> 01:26:48.062 - 2026 27 for second reading at our next regularly 01:26:48.418 --> 01:26:57.253 - regular session which Thank you is November 9th 18th November 18th Any discussion Okay, all those in 01:26:57.253 --> 01:27:06.000 - favor say aye Any opposed? All right. Thank you. That will be read for a second reading on November 01:27:06.000 --> 01:27:14.923 - 18th. Are there any motions I Move that ordinance 2026 dash 31 be introduced and read by the clerk by 01:27:14.923 --> 01:27:17.022 - title and synopsis only 01:27:18.114 --> 01:27:24.894 - Motion to second, any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Will the clerk please read? 01:27:27.682 --> 01:27:33.975 - Ordinance twenty twenty six dash thirty one UDO amendments related to housing attainability synopsis 01:27:33.975 --> 01:27:40.393 - is as follows this ordinance contains amendments to the unified development ordinance to amend the use 01:27:40.393 --> 01:27:46.625 - specific standards regulating the use dwelling accessory unit dwelling cottage home dwelling duplex 01:27:46.625 --> 01:27:52.856 - dwelling triplex and dwelling fourplex council sponsor is Stossberg. Thank you very much. Any other 01:27:52.856 --> 01:27:57.342 - motions. I move to discuss ordinance twenty twenty six dash thirty one. 01:27:57.890 --> 01:28:04.666 - motion in a second any discussion Okay, all those in favor say aye aye Any opposed? All right Councilman, 01:28:04.666 --> 01:28:11.186 - we're gonna say something first and then we'll hand over there's this will there just be a very brief 01:28:11.186 --> 01:28:17.642 - note on this one Oh, no, I don't have anything I mean I'm sponsoring I'm the sponsor on this because 01:28:17.642 --> 01:28:24.226 - I am the council member that represents playing Commission So I thought that that was most appropriate 01:28:24.226 --> 01:28:27.678 - Mr. Grulick or or mr. Coyne where either of you gonna 01:28:28.002 --> 01:28:34.871 - Comment on this one. Yes but I think there was I might have got the numbers wrong but it was this the 01:28:34.871 --> 01:28:41.740 - one where there was a needs to there was some issue. I don't. There was a minor change. I think there 01:28:41.740 --> 01:28:48.609 - was a language. Okay. I'm conflating the position in the definition of duplex. That was the only take 01:28:48.609 --> 01:28:55.006 - it away. I'm conflating the one that wasn't ready that we're going to have to delay. Go ahead. 01:28:55.106 --> 01:29:01.917 - And so I apologize. I was talking with council staff for a second. Did you want me to give just a Do 01:29:01.917 --> 01:29:08.661 - the presentation sir Wonderful. Excellent. Happy to happy to move forward here then so this is kind 01:29:08.661 --> 01:29:13.854 - of the last series of amendments that the the planning department had have a 01:29:13.954 --> 01:29:20.543 - been working on since last year beginning part of last year we had started to highlight several aspects 01:29:20.543 --> 01:29:26.878 - within the unified development ordinance that kind of controlled housing and you know regulated how 01:29:26.878 --> 01:29:33.593 - much housing you can build within the city. What are the different uses that can happen within districts. 01:29:33.593 --> 01:29:40.436 - What are the standards that control that. And so we had come up with a very lengthy list of things setbacks 01:29:40.436 --> 01:29:43.920 - subdivision standards allowing a diversity of land use 01:29:43.920 --> 01:29:51.545 - a lot of that language or those intentions were addressed with the council resolution that dealt with 01:29:51.545 --> 01:29:59.170 - setbacks and subdivision standards there was also a house bill that was coming forward last year that 01:29:59.170 --> 01:30:05.150 - we were watching and looking for what would be the implications for the UDO and 01:30:05.698 --> 01:30:12.665 - And so there were some things within that house bill that we did need to adjust specifically with accessory 01:30:12.665 --> 01:30:19.180 - dwelling units And so the amendments to the udio that are before you tonight kind of deal with three 01:30:19.180 --> 01:30:26.148 - aspects This is kind of the last set of cleanups that we have So one of those deals with accessory dwelling 01:30:26.148 --> 01:30:29.502 - units. So as I mentioned part of house bill 1001 is 01:30:29.634 --> 01:30:36.590 - did introduce a new definition for accessory dwelling units. So we are syncing our definition of accessory 01:30:36.590 --> 01:30:37.630 - dwelling units. 01:30:37.698 --> 01:30:45.322 - With the language within house bill 1001 another aspect of the zoning code That provides for a diversity 01:30:45.322 --> 01:30:53.164 - of housing that we haven't seen utilized very much is for cottage home developments And so we are proposing 01:30:53.164 --> 01:31:00.497 - to kind of amend the language within that to adjust the density standards that allow within that and 01:31:00.497 --> 01:31:04.926 - then the last component dealt with duplexes and specifically 01:31:04.994 --> 01:31:12.446 - Several of the aspects that control duplexes So just for the council's general reminder When duplexes 01:31:12.446 --> 01:31:19.825 - were approved several years ago, there were some new specific restrictions that govern how those are 01:31:19.825 --> 01:31:27.423 - Evaluated there were also some spatial restrictions that created a hundred and fifty foot buffer around 01:31:27.423 --> 01:31:32.318 - every duplex for two years that didn't allow for any others within 01:31:32.418 --> 01:31:40.444 - Buffer there was also a maximum of duplexes that were allowed per calendar year of 15 And so we are 01:31:40.444 --> 01:31:48.550 - proposing to remove both of those to remove the spatial buffering requirement You know that 150 foot 01:31:48.550 --> 01:31:55.774 - buffer. We're also proposing to remove that cap that 15 number cap that is in the udl and 01:31:56.482 --> 01:32:02.932 - And so a lot of those those two aspects Work towards some of the language that was in house bill 1001 01:32:02.932 --> 01:32:09.572 - that directed communities to look at barriers to housing within their community So these were two things 01:32:09.572 --> 01:32:16.085 - certainly that that we could address and bring forward another aspect with duplexes and triplexes that 01:32:16.085 --> 01:32:20.638 - we are adjusting is for triplexes and four plexes there's language that 01:32:21.442 --> 01:32:27.883 - restricts that building to only two entrances. And so as we encountered some situations with triplexes 01:32:27.883 --> 01:32:34.450 - and fourplexes where they wanted to condomize a unit and have each unit have its own entrance, you know, 01:32:34.450 --> 01:32:40.891 - restricting that building to only two entrances really prevents you from establishing a two true owner 01:32:40.891 --> 01:32:47.270 - occupied unit with your own door, your own entrance and being kind of your own self-sufficient little 01:32:47.270 --> 01:32:50.334 - unit there. So we were proposing to remove that. 01:32:50.498 --> 01:32:57.970 - And then as I mentioned with the use specific standards for duplexes as we have gone through the process 01:32:57.970 --> 01:33:05.228 - of evaluating those You know one of the criteria deals with roof pitch, but we have also consistently 01:33:05.228 --> 01:33:12.487 - utilized that to Deal with the orientation of that roof design so that gables are of houses along the 01:33:12.487 --> 01:33:20.030 - street are facing the same direction So we're proposing an amendment just for that one particular element 01:33:20.162 --> 01:33:28.428 - So real quickly on the screen here, I've shown the language that was in house bill 1001 Dealing with 01:33:28.428 --> 01:33:37.185 - accessory dwelling units. So we are modifying our language within the UDO to sync with that as I mentioned 01:33:37.185 --> 01:33:46.270 - one of the standards or several the standards that we are proposing to adjust with duplexes was related to the 01:33:46.530 --> 01:33:53.361 - Number that is required for the number that is allowed per year that spatial buffer that is created 01:33:53.361 --> 01:34:00.328 - around that and then the orientation of the roofs at the plan commission one of the changes that they 01:34:00.328 --> 01:34:01.694 - wanted to make for. 01:34:02.626 --> 01:34:10.132 - Duplexes allowed for the utilization of houses along both sides of the street When they are evaluating 01:34:10.132 --> 01:34:17.638 - the four specific elements that are in the udio So the Planning Commission added language to allow for 01:34:17.638 --> 01:34:24.998 - both sides of the street to be utilized for that evaluation And then the third one that or the yeah, 01:34:24.998 --> 01:34:30.974 - the third aspect was for cottage developments so this is a development type where 01:34:31.106 --> 01:34:38.815 - You typically have a common area of sorts and then houses that are kind of circling that in some capacity 01:34:38.815 --> 01:34:46.160 - When this particular language was incorporated within the UDO we were we were obviously proposing it 01:34:46.160 --> 01:34:53.650 - from a very conservative standpoint and so the the density of housing that was allowed on a particular 01:34:53.650 --> 01:34:55.614 - property was correlated to 01:34:55.906 --> 01:35:02.029 - If you were to take that same property and subdivide it based on the minimum lot size in the district 01:35:02.029 --> 01:35:08.152 - how many houses would you get on that particular property. So the density standards that you see here 01:35:08.152 --> 01:35:14.335 - were kind of reflective of of that equation. But long story short we haven't seen this utilized hardly 01:35:14.335 --> 01:35:21.118 - at all. So it certainly does provide a nice opportunity to have a diversity of housing options. So you know the. 01:35:21.250 --> 01:35:27.905 - density limits and the minimum and maximum project sizes have certainly been a hindrance in terms of 01:35:27.905 --> 01:35:34.627 - how these have been utilized. And we've even recently been working with an individual to utilize this 01:35:34.627 --> 01:35:41.216 - but the density restrictions just just don't allow them to accomplish the number of units that they 01:35:41.216 --> 01:35:47.805 - need there. So we are proposing to increase those density standards to give a higher probability of 01:35:47.805 --> 01:35:51.166 - this housing type being used within the community. 01:35:51.362 --> 01:35:58.276 - So with that the planning commission heard this at their October 12th planning commission meeting and 01:35:58.276 --> 01:36:05.259 - they voted five to zero to forward this to the common council with a favorable recommendation. So that 01:36:05.259 --> 01:36:12.105 - is what we are proposing. I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you 01:36:12.105 --> 01:36:17.054 - very much. Council members any questions. Council member Piedmont Smith. 01:36:18.690 --> 01:36:26.661 - Yes in regard to House Bill 1001 does it actually require that municipalities define the 80 years in 01:36:26.661 --> 01:36:34.711 - the same way that they are defined in state code to do that as as I mentioned late last year you know 01:36:34.711 --> 01:36:42.603 - early part of last year you know we had considered several different aspects for accessory dwelling 01:36:42.603 --> 01:36:47.102 - units of things to possibly modify you know one of those 01:36:47.490 --> 01:36:53.480 - possible modifications was to allow to accessory dwelling units on a property you know another aspect 01:36:53.480 --> 01:36:59.352 - to try that we were considering evaluating was removing the owner occupancy restriction and then we 01:36:59.352 --> 01:37:05.460 - also had kind of looked at increasing the size that could be allowed for those units so with the change 01:37:05.460 --> 01:37:11.626 - of the house bill that certainly presented a good opportunity to you know make sure that our definitions 01:37:11.626 --> 01:37:16.030 - match with the state approved but also you know kind of carry forward with 01:37:16.162 --> 01:37:24.620 - Increasing the size a little bit to help make them a little bit more viable Okay, but it's not required. 01:37:24.620 --> 01:37:32.917 - It's not required. No, okay. Thank you Any other questions Because we're suspect users oh, sorry, it's 01:37:32.917 --> 01:37:40.972 - just stretching. All right, we'll go to public comment then at this time Would anybody like to make 01:37:40.972 --> 01:37:45.886 - a public comment on 2020 on ordinance? 2026 31 Anyone online 01:37:46.914 --> 01:37:54.986 - Thank you so much. We'll come back to council. We have someone online. Ah, very exciting. Person online, 01:37:54.986 --> 01:38:02.827 - you may speak at this moment. You have three minutes. You can just state your name for the record. My 01:38:02.827 --> 01:38:10.668 - name is Jamie Scholl. I won't take three minutes. Thank you for this time, by the way. Whenever we're 01:38:10.668 --> 01:38:16.510 - considering density, there's some questions that come to mind, some points. 01:38:16.738 --> 01:38:30.226 - basically every time we talk about this. And one is, do we have the appropriate infrastructure to support 01:38:30.226 --> 01:38:44.222 - this development? Do we have enough support for BPD, for fire? I watch these meetings and maybe not everyone, 01:38:45.314 --> 01:38:55.399 - But when hearing about we need a new ladder truck for fire, was that not considered when approving all 01:38:55.399 --> 01:39:05.582 - these very tall buildings? Another one is green space. Green space is absolutely necessary for positive 01:39:05.582 --> 01:39:12.926 - mental health and to help those to to help stay out of a depressive state. 01:39:13.442 --> 01:39:22.164 - It has many benefits. There's many scientific studies that show it's beneficial. I don't know if that's 01:39:22.164 --> 01:39:30.634 - been planned in. And lastly, is this kind of development, is this going to support home ownership or 01:39:30.634 --> 01:39:38.014 - will this be more, mostly largely wealth creation for developers and the rentier class? 01:39:38.690 --> 01:39:46.784 - I'm concerned that we have so many renting and we have a lot of people who want to own homes and they 01:39:46.784 --> 01:39:54.718 - don't have a way to do that. So whenever hearing about more density, those are the points that come 01:39:54.718 --> 01:40:02.891 - to mind and I hope those are something that I'll consider. Thank you. Thank you so much, Michelle. Any 01:40:02.891 --> 01:40:06.462 - other commenters online? Anyone in chambers? 01:40:06.626 --> 01:40:15.376 - Okay we'll come back to council for any final comments or motions or things that you'd like to see addressed 01:40:15.376 --> 01:40:23.403 - before a second reading. Councilman Piedmont Smith I guess it would be useful before for the second 01:40:23.403 --> 01:40:31.992 - reading or before to have some kind of visual to describe what it might look like with the greater density 01:40:31.992 --> 01:40:33.758 - cottage developments. 01:40:34.018 --> 01:40:41.392 - You know 43 units per acre that sounds like a lot at multiple stories et cetera. How does that interplay 01:40:41.392 --> 01:40:48.625 - with the height limitations things like that. So if we could get some examples maybe of higher density 01:40:48.625 --> 01:40:55.718 - cottage developments from other communities that would be helpful. Thank you so much council member. 01:40:55.718 --> 01:41:01.758 - Any others things you'd like to see before the next meeting. Going once twice motion. 01:41:04.002 --> 01:41:11.368 - Sorry, sorry, no too late. No, go ahead. It comes from Stasburg. I was gonna motion. I was gonna Oh, 01:41:11.368 --> 01:41:18.880 - there's a motion. Okay, move for move that we Move ordinance 20 26 31 to a second reading in two weeks 01:41:18.880 --> 01:41:26.465 - at our next regularly scheduled Session regular session on November 18th. Thank you very much. Is there 01:41:26.465 --> 01:41:32.446 - a second? Thank you motion and a second by comes for Piedmont Smith by a fraction 01:41:32.642 --> 01:41:41.567 - All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right. That will be discussed at our next regular 01:41:41.567 --> 01:41:50.493 - session. Are there any motions? I move that ordinance 2026-32 be introduced and read by the clerk by 01:41:50.493 --> 01:41:52.702 - title and synopsis only. 01:41:54.658 --> 01:42:00.651 - Any discussion I'll just note for everybody's and the planning is going to say this in a second But 01:42:00.651 --> 01:42:06.703 - there's we still haven't got all of the signatures for petition So we're not going to be able to act 01:42:06.703 --> 01:42:12.876 - on this regardless Planning is asking that we still do the first reading of it But we'll have to delay 01:42:12.876 --> 01:42:19.108 - it and I will explain a little bit We need to delay it beyond our next meeting. So just for everybody's 01:42:19.108 --> 01:42:21.086 - awareness as we vote on this but 01:42:21.186 --> 01:42:29.443 - So the motion and the second will the clerk. Oh no. All those in favor say aye aye. Will the clerk please 01:42:29.443 --> 01:42:37.466 - read ordinance twenty twenty six dash thirty two to amend the city of Bloomington zoning maps and zone 01:42:37.466 --> 01:42:45.567 - property currently in the Monroe County jurisdiction to mixed use corridor in anticipation of voluntary 01:42:45.567 --> 01:42:50.942 - annexation the snaps. This is as follows. This ordinance would zone. 01:42:51.906 --> 01:43:01.016 - 0.77 acres to mix use corridor in connection with a voluntary annexation Councilmember Stossberg sponsors. 01:43:01.016 --> 01:43:09.785 - Thank you very much At this point I'm gonna make a motion to also read to the next ordinance so we can 01:43:09.785 --> 01:43:18.639 - discuss them together for sake of brevity, so I move to the to introduce ordinance 2026 dash 33 To read 01:43:18.639 --> 01:43:21.278 - to yeah, you said introduce Oh 01:43:21.474 --> 01:43:29.507 - I'm sorry. This is why I should have my things pulled up in front of me to be introduced and read by 01:43:29.507 --> 01:43:37.540 - the clerk by title and synopsis only. Sorry. Sorry. I was getting there. All those in favor say aye. 01:43:37.540 --> 01:43:44.062 - Aye. Any opposed. All right. Well, please read twenty twenty six thirty three or. 01:43:44.610 --> 01:43:50.226 - Ordinance twenty twenty six dash thirty three to amend the city of Bloomington zoning maps and zone 01:43:50.226 --> 01:43:56.348 - property currently in the Monroe County jurisdiction to residential multifamily in anticipation of voluntary 01:43:56.348 --> 01:44:02.021 - annexation. The synopsis is as follows. This ordinance would zone five point five three one acres to 01:44:02.021 --> 01:44:07.974 - residential multifamily in connection with a voluntary annexation. Thank you very much. I move to discuss 01:44:07.974 --> 01:44:13.310 - ordinance twenty twenty six dash thirty two and ordinance twenty twenty six dash thirty three. 01:44:15.042 --> 01:44:21.409 - Second motion and a second all those in favor. Aye. Any opposed. All right. It can just say Mr. Grulick 01:44:21.409 --> 01:44:27.592 - maybe or I don't know if Mr. Wheeler is now online. He wasn't earlier. But if you want to maybe just 01:44:27.592 --> 01:44:32.734 - say a few things about this and then explain why we cannot take action on this yet. 01:44:33.058 --> 01:44:39.395 - Yeah absolutely. So both of these two ordinances or a recommendation from the Plaint Commission to the 01:44:39.395 --> 01:44:46.101 - council to accompany a voluntary annexation request for these two particular areas. So the Plaint Commission 01:44:46.101 --> 01:44:52.253 - made a recommendation for zoning so that recommendation should follow with the same hearing of when 01:44:52.253 --> 01:44:57.790 - the actual voluntary or the actual annexation discussion and action should happen so that 01:44:57.922 --> 01:45:03.808 - Obviously if the council does choose to annex it then that zoning can be implemented. You know if you 01:45:03.808 --> 01:45:09.637 - choose not to annex them then the zoning is irrelevant or that that particular aspect is irrelevant. 01:45:09.637 --> 01:45:15.928 - So they need to be brought forward together to be heard at the same time. So the actual annexation component 01:45:15.928 --> 01:45:21.756 - still has a few things to be done on the outside end so that that can come forward separately but at 01:45:21.756 --> 01:45:22.622 - the same time. 01:45:24.706 --> 01:45:29.777 - and there's a time we need to do that within 20, there's a 20 day window that you need to make 01:45:29.777 --> 01:45:31.806 - an announcement for, is that correct? 01:45:34.306 --> 01:45:39.971 - Think it's a I think there's a 20-day notice period or a 10-day. Oh, yes Yes, so the annexate and I 01:45:39.971 --> 01:45:45.182 - don't know if mr. Wheeler is online if he wants to speak to that But yes, there is a public 01:45:45.182 --> 01:45:50.960 - notice requirement for the actual annexation component So that has not been initiated yet. So as soon 01:45:50.960 --> 01:45:57.021 - as that Process has started and that 20-day notice period has ran out then it can be placed on the council 01:45:57.021 --> 01:46:02.799 - agenda Excellent. So So with that being said it might be useful if anybody has things that you'd like 01:46:02.799 --> 01:46:04.158 - to raise before this is 01:46:04.290 --> 01:46:14.641 - brought back if you want it to be brought back or any questions or clarifications at this point. Otherwise 01:46:14.641 --> 01:46:24.508 - we should move this to at the earliest December 2nd. Councilmember Puma Smith. Well I guess I'll just 01:46:24.508 --> 01:46:33.214 - note that I the ordinance twenty twenty six dash thirty two for 222 South Johnson Street. 01:46:33.794 --> 01:46:46.032 - I'm a little concerned about the zoning recommendation being commercial in that it seems to be Most 01:46:46.032 --> 01:46:57.290 - of the parcels are I'm sorry. This is the one that is to 32 lots 0.77 acres It's yeah 26-32 01:46:57.290 --> 01:47:02.430 - zoning recommendation is for MC multi-use 01:47:03.010 --> 01:47:12.229 - for mixed use corridor. It does seem to sit behind the houses on Third Street that are commercial buildings. 01:47:12.229 --> 01:47:20.772 - And so I'm questioning why it would be a commercial building since it is does not have direct access 01:47:20.772 --> 01:47:30.076 - to Third Street. So if that could be clarified and elucidated next time we talk about this I would appreciate 01:47:30.076 --> 01:47:32.190 - it. Thank you very much. 01:47:32.354 --> 01:47:43.054 - Any others? OK. Wonderful person in charge of motions. Would you like to make one? Don't we need to 01:47:43.054 --> 01:47:54.183 - go to public comment? I'm sorry. Thank you very much. Would anybody like to make public comment on this 01:47:54.183 --> 01:47:58.142 - ordinance? On either of them, sorry. 01:47:59.042 --> 01:48:07.636 - Actually, let me do it one by one. Would anybody like to make comment on ordinance 202632? Is there 01:48:07.636 --> 01:48:16.315 - anyone online? Anyone online? Is there anyone to tell me whether there's anyone online? I'm going to 01:48:16.315 --> 01:48:25.854 - assume there's no one online. Anyone like to make comment on ordinance 202633? I assume there's no one online. 01:48:27.042 --> 01:48:37.877 - All right, we'll come back to council Any comments all right, so with that Motion I move to send ordinance 01:48:37.877 --> 01:48:48.206 - twenty twenty six dash thirty two and ordinance twenty twenty six dash thirty three To our meeting on 01:48:48.206 --> 01:48:55.294 - December 2nd Second motion in a second all those in favor Any opposed 01:48:56.418 --> 01:49:02.779 - Thank you very much. Those two ordinances will be discussed on December 2nd. Move on. Are there any 01:49:02.779 --> 01:49:09.268 - motions? I move that ordinance twenty twenty six dash thirty four be introduced and read by the clerk 01:49:09.268 --> 01:49:15.629 - by title and synopsis only. There's a motion and a second. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed. 01:49:15.629 --> 01:49:18.110 - All right. Will the clerk please read. 01:49:23.714 --> 01:49:29.918 - Ordinance 2026-34 to vacate public parcels regarding two 12-foot wide alley segments located in the 01:49:29.918 --> 01:49:36.184 - southwest corner of West 11th Street and North Rogers Street. Trades District Community Development, 01:49:36.184 --> 01:49:42.263 - LLC petitioner and owner. Synopsis is as follows. The petitioner owner, Trades District Community 01:49:42.263 --> 01:49:48.591 - Development, LLC, request vacation of two alleys that are in the southwest corner of West 11th Street 01:49:48.591 --> 01:49:50.142 - and North Rogers Street. 01:49:50.242 --> 01:49:58.807 - These parcels are part of the trades district West phase and are being prepared for redevelopment council 01:49:58.807 --> 01:50:07.209 - sponsor is Stossberg Thank you very much Correct I am the council sponsor for that one This was a error 01:50:07.209 --> 01:50:15.774 - on let me restate that say the council sponsor is a sorry my apologies to Stossberg for listing her again 01:50:16.546 --> 01:50:25.621 - Yeah she's got plenty today. I move to discuss ordinance twenty twenty six dash thirty four. Second. 01:50:25.621 --> 01:50:34.875 - All right. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed. All right. I'll just maybe actually I'll hand 01:50:34.875 --> 01:50:42.782 - over to the birthday boy himself. Sorry. Yes. Just point of order you need to pass the. 01:50:43.074 --> 01:50:53.472 - Yes, because I'm the sponsor you wanted to go there you go Yeah, so you can do it then I don't have 01:50:53.472 --> 01:51:03.975 - anything to say I might have things to say later But it's his birthday With the birthday boy like to 01:51:03.975 --> 01:51:08.030 - Present that's Yeah, what a great gift 01:51:09.762 --> 01:51:16.363 - I guess it is matter of public record what my birthday is, but thank you. Yeah So for the City Council, 01:51:16.363 --> 01:51:22.774 - I just want to first start by thanking you because you've all been very supportive of the work We're 01:51:22.774 --> 01:51:29.184 - doing with the trades district. So we always appreciate that State your name for the John Fernandez. 01:51:29.184 --> 01:51:35.658 - I'm the CEO of amplify Bloomington the property that is subject to this Piece of legislation is owned 01:51:35.658 --> 01:51:37.118 - by the trades district 01:51:37.634 --> 01:51:45.587 - Community Development Corporation, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of amplify Bloomington just for 01:51:45.587 --> 01:51:53.385 - the record So I think that proposal is pretty straightforward. There are some old platted alleys on 01:51:53.385 --> 01:52:01.260 - this property That have not been developed by the city or used as public rights away as far as I can 01:52:01.260 --> 01:52:02.430 - tell ever They 01:52:03.714 --> 01:52:12.008 - They don't really connect anything and there's no network that they would connect to had they been developed 01:52:12.008 --> 01:52:19.617 - the property alley that runs south of 11th Street actually stops halfway through the property so it 01:52:19.617 --> 01:52:27.226 - doesn't even proceed all the way to The adjacent property of the south which would be a building if 01:52:27.226 --> 01:52:30.270 - it did that's where the beeline Heights 01:52:30.434 --> 01:52:38.453 - Apartments are there's an alley platted that runs east-west from Rogers Street West to the Bender property 01:52:38.453 --> 01:52:46.022 - and there's no I mean the Bender property has been there forever and So we're not sure it would ever 01:52:46.022 --> 01:52:53.741 - connect anything it had it been developed as an alley these alleys I would just say that you know this 01:52:53.741 --> 01:52:58.462 - parcel if you're familiar with it. It's pretty challenging and 01:52:59.106 --> 01:53:08.278 - It's been vacant for a long time. It has recorded environmental conditions so that you can't have ground 01:53:08.278 --> 01:53:17.187 - floor residential unless you do a soil management plan for the site. It also has water infrastructure 01:53:17.187 --> 01:53:26.097 - from 1910. So there's some significant infrastructure requirements for the property. These alleys, as 01:53:26.097 --> 01:53:27.582 - they're platted, 01:53:28.386 --> 01:53:36.483 - I just add one more challenge and obstacle as we try and secure development partners to build on that 01:53:36.483 --> 01:53:44.421 - site, consistent with the vision that we all have for the trades district. I would just say that if 01:53:44.421 --> 01:53:49.502 - these alleys are vacated, which we certainly hope they will be, 01:53:50.466 --> 01:53:57.475 - Any development on the site's gonna have to go to the Planning Commission and and we'll have to work 01:53:57.475 --> 01:54:04.415 - with the City Planning Department So any issues of connectivity, I feel confident will be seriously 01:54:04.415 --> 01:54:11.355 - addressed and they'll be adequately addressed because we need to have a good access for pedestrians 01:54:11.355 --> 01:54:15.102 - bicyclists and and vehicles as well so the request is 01:54:15.234 --> 01:54:23.682 - Our judgment is very consistent with the city's councils policy as it relates to alley vacations and 01:54:23.682 --> 01:54:32.297 - we would just really Ask for the council support and happy to answer any questions Thank you very much 01:54:32.297 --> 01:54:38.654 - Thank you very much, thank you does any council member have any questions I 01:54:43.618 --> 01:54:52.184 - Seeing no questions. We'll go to that was easy We'll go to public comment. Anybody in chambers have 01:54:52.184 --> 01:55:00.836 - public comment or anybody online? Nobody online anybody in chambers All right, we're gonna come back 01:55:00.836 --> 01:55:09.402 - to council for council comment any council members have comment. Oh Council member ala presentation 01:55:09.402 --> 01:55:13.086 - Mr. Fernandez, I'm generally in support of 01:55:13.186 --> 01:55:23.629 - maintaining alleys throughout the city, but Having listened to the arguments and and observed the The 01:55:23.629 --> 01:55:34.073 - geography of this Vacation I don't I see it in the better public interest to vacate it and so I'll be 01:55:34.073 --> 01:55:40.830 - supporting of that this today Thank you Anybody else have comment 01:55:42.178 --> 01:55:51.089 - on this ordinance twenty six thirty four. All right. Seeing seeing council member sorry I'd just like 01:55:51.089 --> 01:56:00.350 - to echo council member Rallo's point. I do generally and I think we've discussed this here before like I. 01:56:00.610 --> 01:56:06.851 - I tend to be concerned with setting precedents particularly with things like alley vacations because 01:56:06.851 --> 01:56:13.215 - you know then the next time someone wants a vacation they look at you know last time we did a vacation 01:56:13.215 --> 01:56:19.394 - and You know, but I but I do think that this is I Think that it is a an exception. I'm a very clear 01:56:19.394 --> 01:56:23.966 - one and I'm also will be supporting and obviously I'm sponsoring it but I 01:56:24.066 --> 01:56:30.341 - I just just just to note that this is not a statement of my general views around alleys But I do think 01:56:30.341 --> 01:56:36.493 - that in this particular case and what we're trying to do in the trades district. It's Both necessary 01:56:36.493 --> 01:56:42.829 - and I mean maybe not necessary, but I have certainly I'm ideal Thank you very much. All right, and with 01:56:42.829 --> 01:56:48.982 - that councilmember Stossberg I agree with my two colleagues. I generally don't like alley vacations, 01:56:48.982 --> 01:56:53.246 - but when I look at these right now, they're both kind of dead end and 01:56:53.538 --> 01:57:01.176 - alleys and Dead-end alleys are also not particularly useful in terms of how we manage planning and things 01:57:01.176 --> 01:57:08.813 - like that so I At this point don't see any problems with it, but I do assume that this is going to second 01:57:08.813 --> 01:57:16.523 - reading. Is that correct? Okay. Well, I was just making sure that that was the assumption of other citizen 01:57:16.523 --> 01:57:20.990 - ordinance and I assume that it was going to second reading so 01:57:22.850 --> 01:57:29.853 - Councilmember Flaherty Sure I share some of the sentiments my colleagues of just as a general Starting 01:57:29.853 --> 01:57:36.924 - principle, you know preferring to to maintain any platted public right-of-way in the city the challenge 01:57:36.924 --> 01:57:43.587 - with these kind of decisions is that there are They're potentially a hundred year plus decisions. 01:57:43.587 --> 01:57:50.658 - I mean, that's the time scale of things. We're talking about whatever gets built at the trades district 01:57:50.658 --> 01:57:52.222 - Won't be there forever 01:57:52.322 --> 01:57:58.960 - When it's no longer there, conditions may have changed. We might wish we had alleys. It's just really 01:57:58.960 --> 01:58:05.598 - hard to see into the future. That said, I'm not a 100% never vacate alleys no matter what person, but 01:58:05.598 --> 01:58:12.496 - I do feel like to me there's a more compelling case when there's a clear vision of what is getting built. 01:58:12.496 --> 01:58:15.294 - It's like, okay, a convention center, say. 01:58:15.522 --> 01:58:22.606 - that's of a scale or size that you simply cannot do it, or maybe can't reasonably do it without vacating 01:58:22.606 --> 01:58:29.217 - some alley. The other concerns I have, I don't care that much, I mean, I like alley connectivity, 01:58:29.217 --> 01:58:36.166 - I prefer it, but that's not the only factor to me. I think they're really useful for a lot of reasons, 01:58:36.166 --> 01:58:43.115 - including utilities and trash, and also just controlling massing and scale of buildings. I think there 01:58:43.115 --> 01:58:44.734 - are very few exceptions 01:58:45.058 --> 01:58:51.054 - Of building types in a city our size that I think Need to be or must be bigger than a quarter block 01:58:51.054 --> 01:58:57.111 - I think I think the buildings called the Avenue now, you know much talked about for many reasons for 01:58:57.111 --> 01:59:03.647 - a long time I just don't think generally we need City block sized buildings again. There are some exceptions 01:59:03.647 --> 01:59:09.643 - to that a convention center might be one but in general I just don't find it very compelling to and 01:59:09.643 --> 01:59:11.742 - I think when you vacate alleys and 01:59:12.418 --> 01:59:17.983 - you lose the default. I was concerned about this with Hopewell, by the way, as well, when the administration 01:59:17.983 --> 01:59:23.140 - came in and vacated the prior plat, which had been created for the purpose of trying to help control 01:59:23.140 --> 01:59:27.888 - some of that building scale and massing. In a blank slate, what's going to tend to happen is 01:59:27.888 --> 01:59:32.994 - value engineering is going to lead towards the biggest building because the economy is a scale, and 01:59:32.994 --> 01:59:36.670 - that all comes at a cost. It comes at a tradeoff for how our urban form 01:59:37.026 --> 01:59:43.140 - looks, feels, whether it's human scale. That's not to say that if we vacate these out, these things 01:59:43.140 --> 01:59:49.376 - will go poorly here or anything like that. But to me, these are all a set of factors that are kind of 01:59:49.376 --> 01:59:55.489 - hard to overcome. So I'm not sure I will be supporting it. If we need to vote tonight, that's fine. 01:59:55.489 --> 02:00:01.664 - Or if we need to vote another time, that's fine too. I appreciate the petition and the arguments for 02:00:01.664 --> 02:00:06.494 - it. I just wanted to share my perspective on it. Thanks. All right, thank you. 02:00:06.850 --> 02:00:20.555 - Anybody else. OK. Do I have a motion. Yeah you can. Council member Stossberg I would move to send ordinance 02:00:20.555 --> 02:00:34.005 - 20 26 34 to a second reading at our next regularly scheduled meeting on November 18th. Second. All right. 02:00:34.005 --> 02:00:36.670 - Motion and a second. 02:00:36.930 --> 02:00:48.191 - Thanks. Do we vote on that? I can't remember all of a sudden. Thank you. All in favor say aye. Aye. 02:00:48.191 --> 02:00:59.676 - Aye. Anybody opposed? No. All right. That passes. One, two, three, four, five, six to one. All right. 02:00:59.676 --> 02:01:02.942 - I'm going to pass that back. 02:01:05.186 --> 02:01:12.603 - He said he was gonna say yes if anyways, hello everyone. Here we are. Thank you very much back to things 02:01:12.603 --> 02:01:20.020 - What you want to say? Oh council members that's where thank you I would like to make a motion to suspend 02:01:20.020 --> 02:01:27.084 - the rules in order to amend the gen the agenda to align the next three ordinances with the prepared 02:01:27.084 --> 02:01:30.686 - slideshow and Consider them in the following order 02:01:30.818 --> 02:01:43.105 - First ordinance 2026 37, which is currently item H next 2026 35, which is currently item F and then 02:01:43.105 --> 02:01:55.392 - ordinance 2026 36 item G so do HFG Oh The most recent agenda did that This is the problem of having 02:01:55.392 --> 02:01:57.726 - too many addendums 02:01:59.170 --> 02:02:06.842 - So they go 14, 18, and then fund. Perfect. Never mind then. Thank you. It's been done. Thank you. 02:02:06.842 --> 02:02:14.672 - Thank you. Thank you. So what you want to say? I move that ordinance 2026-37 be introduced and read 02:02:14.672 --> 02:02:22.657 - by the clerk by title and synopsis only. Second. Motion to second. Any discussion? All those in favor 02:02:22.657 --> 02:02:27.198 - say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Will the clerk please read? 02:02:31.714 --> 02:02:38.915 - Will you please give me a moment because I'm actually going to try and find that. Absolutely. 02:02:38.915 --> 02:02:46.805 - Thank you. That's funny. That's exactly what I was thinking. I've been practicing my stand up to. Okay 02:02:46.805 --> 02:02:54.618 - I'm ready now. Ordinance 20 26 dash 37 an amendment to chapter 14 point four zero point zero six zero 02:02:54.618 --> 02:03:00.670 - of Title 4 of the Bloomington Municipal Code regarding false emergency alarms. 02:03:00.802 --> 02:03:08.118 - The synopsis is as follows, this ordinance sponsored by council member Stasberg, amend section 1440 02:03:08.118 --> 02:03:15.580 - 060 A and B of title 14 of the Bloomington municipal code entitled peace and safety to allow specific 02:03:15.580 --> 02:03:23.261 - fire personnel to issue a notice of violation, refer all fine language to title 18 and add clarification 02:03:23.261 --> 02:03:27.358 - to cases of fire, fire false alarms. Sponsors Stasberg. 02:03:29.954 --> 02:03:37.041 - Thank you. I move to discuss ordinance twenty twenty six dash thirty seven Okay, all those in favor 02:03:37.041 --> 02:03:44.411 - of discussing Any opposed all right, let us discuss go ahead councilmember Stasberg I don't really have 02:03:44.411 --> 02:03:51.782 - much to say about this one either it's I've been very pleased to work with the fire department on these 02:03:51.782 --> 02:03:59.294 - three ordinances and They have a whole show prepared for us You know, yeah, take it away, sir. It doesn't 02:03:59.522 --> 02:04:04.598 - And don't feel that you have to, you've been here from the beginning. Don't feel like you need to make 02:04:04.598 --> 02:04:09.969 - the end longer, you know? Don't worry. My part will be very short. Roger Kerr, Chief of the Fire Department. 02:04:09.969 --> 02:04:14.995 - Just wanted to point out we've got, I know they've come in three separate ordinances, but really they 02:04:14.995 --> 02:04:19.973 - all work together on our side as one. So just want to point that out. And I just want to say this is 02:04:19.973 --> 02:04:24.950 - something that started probably as much as three years ago to get to where we're at tonight. So this 02:04:24.950 --> 02:04:28.350 - has been going on for some time to get to where we're at this point. 02:04:28.482 --> 02:04:39.006 - Not something that just happened in a short order, but I'll turn it over to a deputy chief lit one and 02:04:39.006 --> 02:04:49.531 - fire marshal You Meyer for the experts on this and why we're here. So I'll leave it to them. Thank you 02:04:49.531 --> 02:04:56.990 - Fire marshal Jeff you Meyer City of Bloomington Fire Department Proposal 02:04:59.042 --> 02:05:06.824 - to amend title 14 and Repel and reenact title 18 and establish the fire fund as chief said that these 02:05:06.824 --> 02:05:14.605 - kind of all work together Together, but we're going to do them as separate. So the amendment to title 02:05:14.605 --> 02:05:22.234 - 14 Currently this would allow just as stated the fire department to issue and collect fines without 02:05:22.234 --> 02:05:27.422 - having to call a police officer currently title 14 the only way for 02:05:27.650 --> 02:05:36.622 - Is citation to be issued is by the police department so for false for any type of false alarm whether 02:05:36.622 --> 02:05:45.770 - it be a Police false alarm or a fire first alarm. So amendments to this would allow the fire department 02:05:45.770 --> 02:05:54.654 - to issue those citations for false alarms for the fire department Or we have a I'm sorry There we go 02:06:02.114 --> 02:06:10.667 - Here we're caught up. I apologize. I just started talking. So there's no changes to these sections of 02:06:10.667 --> 02:06:19.556 - title 14 The changes are as follows so section a would allow or adding the fire chief and their designees 02:06:19.556 --> 02:06:28.277 - to that section and then section B, we're basically updating the fine schedule for police to coordinate 02:06:28.277 --> 02:06:30.206 - and match what will be 02:06:30.338 --> 02:06:39.203 - It set forth in title 18 which will discuss that fee schedule during that presentation Any questions 02:06:39.203 --> 02:06:47.981 - about title 14 Any questions, yeah, by the way, yeah, okay any questions All right, I'm seeing none 02:06:47.981 --> 02:06:57.022 - we'll now move to public comment would anybody like to comment on the riveting changes to title 14 and 02:07:00.610 --> 02:07:08.178 - Seeing none anyone online I'm shocked and amazed. We'll come back to counsel and he any comments I'll 02:07:08.178 --> 02:07:15.671 - just say for this one specifically I think that it's really valuable to allow our fire department to 02:07:15.671 --> 02:07:23.090 - issue the citations for the violations that they're sort of in charge of determining whether or not 02:07:23.090 --> 02:07:26.206 - their violations and I that feels like an 02:07:26.786 --> 02:07:33.268 - a lapse in code that's been, I'm not sure how many years in the making, but they're the ones that are 02:07:33.268 --> 02:07:39.813 - gonna know whether or not a violation took place, and so they're the ones that should be able to write 02:07:39.813 --> 02:07:46.168 - a ticket. Thank you so much. I'll say that I would be very happy to vote for this now. If anybody's 02:07:46.168 --> 02:07:53.031 - against it, I would love to know. Second. Well, I'm not motioning it, but just saying. That was my comment. 02:07:53.031 --> 02:07:54.302 - Any other comments? 02:07:55.970 --> 02:08:05.520 - So I prefer to vote for it. You want to do a motion then you can. No we did public comment then we came 02:08:05.520 --> 02:08:15.070 - back. Yeah. So you want to do because we're all. Well I'll make the motion to adopt ordinance 20 26 37. 02:08:20.034 --> 02:08:29.094 - I think we have to yeah, we have there's some intermediary step does anybody remember what it is like 02:08:29.094 --> 02:08:38.244 - move to consider Move to consider this first second reading tonight boy. Where's where's that CCP memo 02:08:38.244 --> 02:08:46.238 - when we need it Because we have to have unanimous consent in order to consider it tonight 02:08:47.394 --> 02:08:53.468 - So maybe maybe that needs to be the motion like move move to consider it tonight because then there 02:08:53.468 --> 02:08:59.664 - has to be two votes There has to be a move to consider it tonight, which has to be unanimous and then 02:08:59.664 --> 02:09:05.860 - there has to be a move for adoption Which I think needs a two-thirds majority to pass motion and I'll 02:09:05.860 --> 02:09:08.958 - make a motion for us to consider ordinance 2026 37 02:09:11.618 --> 02:09:27.554 - Second, okay. This has to pass unanimously and will the clerk please call the roll Councilmember Stossberg. 02:09:27.554 --> 02:09:39.358 - Yes Piedmont Smith Yes, sorry. Yes, daily. Yes, Rallo. Yes rough and flirty and 02:09:40.546 --> 02:09:49.251 - Thank you very much that we can now consider it if you'd like Would you like to make another motion 02:09:49.251 --> 02:09:58.130 - I move that we we adopt ordinance 2026 37 Motion in a second all those in favor I'm sorry. I actually 02:09:58.130 --> 02:10:05.790 - meant to say any discussion seeing none clerk. Will you please call the roll? Thank you 02:10:09.378 --> 02:10:17.378 - Councilmember Piedmont-Smith? Yes. Asari? Yes. Daly? Yes. Rallo? Yes. Ruff? Yes. Flaherty? Yes. 02:10:17.378 --> 02:10:25.961 - And Stossberg? Yes. Congratulations. That passes. You'll never have to talk about it again. Fantastic. 02:10:25.961 --> 02:10:34.711 - You may sit while we do this all over again for the next ones. Though I might say, just as a suggestion, 02:10:34.711 --> 02:10:39.294 - we could put them together. We can't? Fine. OK, go on. 02:10:39.490 --> 02:10:48.740 - I move that ordinance twenty twenty six dash thirty five be introduced and read by the clerk by title 02:10:48.740 --> 02:10:57.809 - and synopsis only motion a second any discussion. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed. Will the 02:10:57.809 --> 02:11:06.968 - clerk please read. Yes. And again that was ordinance twenty twenty six thirty five thirty six thirty 02:11:06.968 --> 02:11:08.510 - five. Ordinance. 02:11:08.674 --> 02:11:14.996 - 2026 35 to repeal and reenact title 18 of the Bloomington municipal code entitled fire prevention. The 02:11:14.996 --> 02:11:21.195 - synopsis is as follows. This ordinance repeals and reenacts the city's outdated 1997 fire prevention 02:11:21.195 --> 02:11:27.701 - code to align with Indiana state standards. It outlines the fire chief's authority to manage fire scenes, 02:11:27.701 --> 02:11:34.023 - conduct investigations, perform life safety inspections, order evacuations and review safety plans for 02:11:34.023 --> 02:11:36.478 - new and remodeled class one structures. 02:11:36.578 --> 02:11:42.710 - The updated regulations establish stricter controls for open burning, consumer fireworks, vacant buildings, 02:11:42.710 --> 02:11:48.445 - tents, crowd managers, and fire watch personnel. To improve emergency response and scene access, the 02:11:48.445 --> 02:11:54.464 - ordinance standardizes street addressing, fire lanes, key boxes, water supply requirements, and emergency 02:11:54.464 --> 02:12:00.426 - electrical disconnects. Furthermore, it mandates smoke detectors in all city dwelling units and requires 02:12:00.426 --> 02:12:06.558 - regular maintenance and testing for fire hydrants, extinguishers, and mandatory emergency lighting systems. 02:12:06.754 --> 02:12:15.302 - Finally, the code introduces inspection fees and sets specific violation fines, aligning enforcement 02:12:15.302 --> 02:12:23.765 - with Bloomington Municipal Code 1.01.130 to allow penalties of up to $2,500 per occurrence. Council 02:12:23.765 --> 02:12:32.821 - sponsor is Stossberg. Thank you so much. I move to discuss Ordinance 2026-35. Second. Motion and a second. 02:12:32.821 --> 02:12:35.614 - All those in favor say aye. Aye. 02:12:35.778 --> 02:12:45.043 - All right back to you sir Fire marshal city of Bloomington. The reason for the changes to we're repealing 02:12:45.043 --> 02:12:54.220 - and reenacting title 18 as stated title 18 hasn't been updated since 1997 it's all nearly 30 years since 02:12:54.220 --> 02:13:03.397 - then the state of Indiana which is really behind on the codes anyways has updated their codes four times 02:13:03.397 --> 02:13:04.446 - since then. 02:13:04.546 --> 02:13:14.806 - This will improve our consistency with Indiana law and your clear give us clear guidance for property 02:13:14.806 --> 02:13:25.469 - owners developers contractors and the public The proposed ordinance will update reference current Indiana 02:13:25.469 --> 02:13:31.102 - adopted codes currently, Indiana is using the 2014 code 02:13:31.458 --> 02:13:39.774 - It'll also clarify the authority of the fire chief and their designees Currently that would be myself 02:13:39.774 --> 02:13:48.254 - fire marshal and two deputy fire marshals Just establish clear enforcement procedures including notices 02:13:48.254 --> 02:13:56.571 - violations emergency orders and the appeals process More changes improved fire department access road 02:13:56.571 --> 02:14:00.158 - and fire protection system requirements and 02:14:00.546 --> 02:14:10.652 - Improve overall life safety requirements for new developments and redevelopments To establish a better 02:14:10.652 --> 02:14:20.759 - fee and fine schedule Would remote public safety And deter building owners from ignoring critical fire 02:14:20.759 --> 02:14:29.982 - and other code violations also with the fee schedule we could recover cost from responding to 02:14:30.082 --> 02:14:39.979 - repeated false fire alarms Part of the fee schedule is that is here establishing fees I can encourage 02:14:39.979 --> 02:14:50.070 - business owners and contractors to correct violations sooner than later and also Would do we would have 02:14:50.070 --> 02:14:59.870 - less re-inspections if we're charging re-inspection fees as you can see on the fee schedule a little 02:15:00.162 --> 02:15:07.270 - Off up there, but as you can feel the fee schedule no fees would be charged for the first inspection 02:15:07.270 --> 02:15:14.659 - the first Reinspection it would be the third inspection or the second reinspection before any fees would 02:15:14.659 --> 02:15:21.767 - be established And also the sections in there with the new construction So the first acceptance test 02:15:21.767 --> 02:15:27.678 - would be at no charge and if they failed an acceptance test, it would be a $250 fee 02:15:31.522 --> 02:15:38.935 - So the fines will be a deterrent for business owners who just ignore the violations and do not correct 02:15:38.935 --> 02:15:46.276 - them will help honestly to never have to find anyone. That's our goal. Our goal is to intervention is 02:15:46.276 --> 02:15:53.976 - to educate people and get them to understand why the things need fixed or why it's a violation and educate 02:15:53.976 --> 02:15:59.806 - them and help them understand rather than to find we never anticipate this to be 02:15:59.906 --> 02:16:08.821 - a revenue source but we do have with these we do have the option for those that do not correct things 02:16:08.821 --> 02:16:17.648 - in a timely manner. We have used the up to twenty five hundred dollars limit just for a way to break 02:16:17.648 --> 02:16:27.262 - down the difference for something minor a minor violation first something a critical life safety violation or 02:16:27.554 --> 02:16:35.826 - a first-time violation of something small verse a repeat over and over violation of the same violation 02:16:35.826 --> 02:16:44.500 - at the same location Excuse me an example of that would be Exit doors change shut for an event or something 02:16:44.500 --> 02:16:53.334 - like that versus just a simple exit light out if we set a standard fee then those two would could potentially 02:16:53.334 --> 02:16:55.422 - have the same foot fee so 02:16:55.554 --> 02:17:04.282 - We just that's why we went with the up to twenty five hundred dollars a day to give flexibility the 02:17:04.282 --> 02:17:13.010 - occupancy in excess of certification. Just to clarify that that would be a business or say a bar or 02:17:13.010 --> 02:17:21.912 - an event that is over occupied not anything residential not a residential occupancy. Any questions to 02:17:21.912 --> 02:17:24.094 - title 18. Any questions. 02:17:25.346 --> 02:17:34.444 - Open burning violation with the deep. What does that really constitute? I Mean I the open burning the 02:17:34.444 --> 02:17:43.452 - open burning violation. I noticed it now the fine could go up to $2,500 and you know, I occasionally 02:17:43.452 --> 02:17:52.818 - see around town somebody Doing some open burning. It's a house. So yeah, so we we have not fined I think 02:17:52.818 --> 02:17:54.334 - there's been one 02:17:54.850 --> 02:18:00.911 - Fine since I've been here in the last five years for that again, it's the up to is depending on the 02:18:00.911 --> 02:18:07.215 - response so say a person Would apply for an open burn permit and it's they want to burn a pile of brush 02:18:07.215 --> 02:18:13.276 - a large pile of brush They want to clear out a section and we deny that we deny that permit because 02:18:13.276 --> 02:18:19.459 - we don't think that it's you know It's dry season or whatever for whatever reason we deny it and then 02:18:19.459 --> 02:18:24.126 - the person would go to burn it anyways and it would spread to someone else's 02:18:24.418 --> 02:18:31.734 - Property and we've got more resources. We think that we don't want to limit ourself on the amount of 02:18:31.734 --> 02:18:38.977 - the fine and that the 2500 is in accordance to the blooming municipal code, so we just want to have 02:18:38.977 --> 02:18:46.438 - options for We're not trying to To go up to the 2500 and we're going to set some parameters. I believe 02:18:46.438 --> 02:18:51.870 - on kind of a recommendation of what you know first time versus multiple or 02:18:52.162 --> 02:19:00.037 - And the amount of response that we would have to respond to in that Yeah, and then real quick the tampering 02:19:00.037 --> 02:19:07.620 - some of the things that at least on the surface sound like they'd be super dangerous messing with exits 02:19:07.620 --> 02:19:15.130 - tampering with alarm systems Would those those seem really dramatic to me in terms of seriousness, but 02:19:15.130 --> 02:19:21.182 - yet the max fine didn't seem Commensurate with what it feels like those things are 02:19:21.474 --> 02:19:31.029 - So the $2,500 is up to it's up to $2,500. That's the most that we can And according to the Bloomington 02:19:31.029 --> 02:19:39.934 - Municipal Code, okay. Okay. Thank you Thank you very much any other questions customer Stasberg 02:19:41.890 --> 02:19:47.798 - I actually do have a question, especially because I suspect somebody might move to consider this tonight. 02:19:47.798 --> 02:19:53.483 - And the title 18 changes are immense. I spent a lot of time reading through these. And I'm still kind 02:19:53.483 --> 02:19:59.168 - of looking at it going, am I sure that there's no typos in there? Because there's probably something. 02:19:59.168 --> 02:20:01.342 - But one of the things that got deleted 02:20:02.050 --> 02:20:09.372 - that I don't think got re-put in anywhere else that I had meant to ask you guys about, and then it just 02:20:09.372 --> 02:20:16.413 - kind of slipped my mind, was it no longer has obstruction or hindrance of hydrants and other things 02:20:16.413 --> 02:20:23.735 - like that in here. Is that because it's somewhere in state law already, and so it would be duplicative? 02:20:23.735 --> 02:20:31.550 - And I just wanted to kind of bring that up to kind of, is that the reason? And is it clear somewhere else that 02:20:31.778 --> 02:20:39.395 - That would obviously be a violation So yeah, that's already addressed in the fire code violation. There 02:20:39.395 --> 02:20:46.793 - has to be a three-foot clearance around any fire Device is whether it be an FTC whether it be a fire 02:20:46.793 --> 02:20:54.337 - hydrant or anything else. I'm not really sure I Did it where it got deleted or how we got through that 02:20:54.337 --> 02:20:58.878 - but it's already addressed in the state fire code Okay, if it 02:20:59.138 --> 02:21:05.658 - Was not in here. It's not gonna be detrimental to us. We can still enforce the state fire I don't think 02:21:05.658 --> 02:21:12.116 - that it is anyway, but that's one of the things I was like, okay that got X'd out Did it get rewritten 02:21:12.116 --> 02:21:18.574 - somewhere else because some of the other stuff that got I thought did get rewritten somewhere else and 02:21:18.574 --> 02:21:25.470 - I wasn't sure about that one and then I also wanted to I'm trying to figure out how to make this a question I 02:21:26.338 --> 02:21:33.978 - To address the up to and kind of the concerns that councilmember rough was just having because I had 02:21:33.978 --> 02:21:41.618 - those same concerns and I was like up to like like talk about that a little bit and so I posited the 02:21:41.618 --> 02:21:49.484 - idea of essentially having Some kind of Guide that is written that is semi-formal within the department 02:21:49.484 --> 02:21:50.846 - that helps define 02:21:51.106 --> 02:21:57.069 - What the up to should be in terms of what you were talking about with how like bad how you know, etc 02:21:57.069 --> 02:22:02.973 - So that then nobody can accuse the department of being discriminatory in any way and going well I'm 02:22:02.973 --> 02:22:09.349 - gonna you know find these people 2,500 and these people $50 and So that there can be some fairness attached 02:22:09.349 --> 02:22:15.371 - to it So is that something that you guys have had time to talk about in terms of how to actually like 02:22:15.371 --> 02:22:20.094 - implement that kind of like rubric? system for defining how to assess the up to 02:22:20.482 --> 02:22:28.563 - It's not completely yes, but yes, we've talked about that and and forming a Something kind of a guideline 02:22:28.563 --> 02:22:36.874 - if you will on what to assess fines on Again, this is the seriousness or versus, you know, if it's multiple, 02:22:36.874 --> 02:22:44.497 - you know If it's happening multiple times or just one time, you know a person's first offense first 02:22:44.497 --> 02:22:49.758 - someone that's you know Did it multiple other times? So Okay. Thanks 02:22:50.946 --> 02:22:59.624 - Thank you so much. Other questions? Seeing none, we'll now go to public comment. Would anybody like 02:22:59.624 --> 02:23:07.607 - to comment on Title 18? Ooh. Go for it. State your name for the record and so on, Mr. West. 02:23:07.607 --> 02:23:16.459 - I'm Wes Martin. I'm the president of the 586 Political Action Committee. We're the advocacy group for 02:23:16.459 --> 02:23:20.190 - the local firefighters union. We recommend 02:23:20.290 --> 02:23:27.421 - That this does pass and wanted to thank our new fire marshal as well as councilmember Stasberg for all 02:23:27.421 --> 02:23:34.414 - of their work in bringing the code up to date as you've heard It's been behind for quite a while and 02:23:34.414 --> 02:23:41.337 - we believe that these updates will provide significant improvements not just in the quality of life 02:23:41.337 --> 02:23:48.261 - and the work that we do as firefighters but also will improve the safety and outcomes for residents 02:23:48.261 --> 02:23:49.438 - in our community 02:23:49.826 --> 02:23:57.914 - So just wanted to pass along the recommendation that our brothers and sisters support this legislation 02:23:57.914 --> 02:24:06.395 - wholeheartedly and Are again very grateful to both council and our fire marshal for bringing these forward. 02:24:06.395 --> 02:24:14.404 - Thank you Anybody online Is there anybody else in chambers all right, we'll come back to council then 02:24:14.404 --> 02:24:16.446 - any comments or motions I 02:24:20.194 --> 02:24:35.422 - I don't think that there are any serious typos. I just like to read through things. I was 02:24:35.906 --> 02:24:41.333 - There were significant like little edits and comments that I made and the word document became a little 02:24:41.333 --> 02:24:46.813 - bit Challenging you could say and so I was like, okay, I'm gonna read through it one more time But there 02:24:46.813 --> 02:24:52.136 - were so many pieces of legislation tonight I didn't get to it and I figured he'd go to second reading 02:24:52.136 --> 02:24:57.354 - but I don't think that there's any serious I just did a little swift look through to make sure that 02:24:57.354 --> 02:24:58.398 - like everything was 02:24:59.650 --> 02:25:05.388 - like aligned correctly in terms of the A's and the ones and the capital A's and all of that kind of 02:25:05.388 --> 02:25:11.242 - stuff, because it was mostly that kind of formatting that I was like, I want to make sure that that's 02:25:11.242 --> 02:25:16.980 - all right, because some of that was stuff that changed and the numbering, but I think that it looks 02:25:16.980 --> 02:25:22.719 - fine, and I think that content-wise, it's, yeah. Excellent. Is there anybody else? I'm welcoming if 02:25:22.719 --> 02:25:27.998 - you'd like to move for us to discuss it today, but I mean, obviously, that's up to you all. 02:25:29.218 --> 02:25:41.677 - consent to consider Motion and second any discussion. All right, will the clerk please call the roll 02:25:41.677 --> 02:25:50.558 - And my apologies I didn't catch who made the second councilmember Rallo 02:25:57.922 --> 02:26:05.386 - Councilmember Asari. Yes. Daily. Yes. Rollo. Yes. Ruff. Yes. Clarity. Yes. Stossberg. Yes. 02:26:05.386 --> 02:26:14.163 - Piedmont Smith. Wonderful. We may now vote on it if you'd like to adopt it. Yes. I move to adopt ordinance 02:26:14.163 --> 02:26:22.365 - twenty twenty six dash thirty five motion and a second by Councilmember Rallo. Any discussion. Will 02:26:22.365 --> 02:26:24.990 - the clerk please call the roll. 02:26:28.002 --> 02:26:37.258 - Yes. Rallo. Yes. Ruff. Yes. Flaherty. Yes. Stossberg. Yes. Piedmont Smith. Yes. Sorry. Yes. Thank you. 02:26:37.258 --> 02:26:46.333 - Fantastic. That carries. We did it. That's wonderful. OK. Are there any other motions. Twenty twenty 02:26:46.333 --> 02:26:55.769 - six dash thirty six be introduced and read by the clerk by title and synopsis only motion in the second. 02:26:55.769 --> 02:26:57.566 - All those in favor. 02:26:57.730 --> 02:27:05.680 - Aye. Any opposed. All right. Well the clerk please read. OK. So ordinance twenty twenty six dash thirty 02:27:05.680 --> 02:27:14.011 - six to establish a dedicated fire department fund. The synopsis is as follows this ordinance. This ordinance 02:27:14.011 --> 02:27:21.808 - sponsored by council member Stasberg establishes the fund to support events and programs that advance 02:27:21.808 --> 02:27:27.006 - the community educational goals of the Bloomington Fire Department. 02:27:30.050 --> 02:27:38.917 - I move to discuss ordinance twenty twenty six dash thirty six. Thank you very much. Motion and a second. 02:27:38.917 --> 02:27:47.615 - All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed. All right. Good evening. Good evening. Max Litwin deputy 02:27:47.615 --> 02:27:56.567 - fire chief city Bloomington. So along with the repeal and reenactment of title 18 comes the establishment 02:27:56.567 --> 02:27:57.918 - of a fire fund. 02:27:58.754 --> 02:28:04.544 - Historically we haven't been able to collect monies as a result of fines and fees and now that we can 02:28:04.544 --> 02:28:10.618 - we would like an appropriate place for it to go from an estate accounting standpoint. We have new software 02:28:10.618 --> 02:28:16.295 - that allows for seamless invoicing collection and tracking for the fees. We intend for the funds to 02:28:16.295 --> 02:28:22.199 - go towards purposes that would benefit the community which I'll expand upon momentarily and there would 02:28:22.199 --> 02:28:27.932 - be no impact to the general fund or any other funds in that this would be a new source of funds that 02:28:27.932 --> 02:28:28.670 - didn't exist 02:28:28.834 --> 02:28:35.030 - before. Ultimately we hope that we don't have to collect fees and that every situation we encounter 02:28:35.030 --> 02:28:41.411 - is already safe. However if we do encounter something that requires mitigation through a fine or a fee 02:28:41.411 --> 02:28:47.793 - what better purpose than to direct that towards something that would make the community even safer via 02:28:47.793 --> 02:28:53.988 - causes like community outreach public education and fire prevention. Some examples of some of those 02:28:53.988 --> 02:28:57.086 - efforts could consist of smoke detectors installs 02:28:58.178 --> 02:29:04.695 - fire extinguisher training youth education things along those lines. In reality it's unlikely that we're 02:29:04.695 --> 02:29:10.963 - going to incur a substantial amount of money into this fund through fines and fees but we would like 02:29:10.963 --> 02:29:17.542 - the means to spend it on something that would benefit the community regardless via subsidizing supporting 02:29:17.542 --> 02:29:23.935 - or expanding the efforts that I just mentioned. The language for establishing the fire fund would live 02:29:23.935 --> 02:29:24.990 - within title 18. 02:29:27.682 --> 02:29:37.250 - And during our annual budget presentation we would offer counsel an explanation of what the funds are 02:29:37.250 --> 02:29:47.381 - intended to be spent towards. And with that any questions. Thank you so very much. Are there any questions. 02:29:47.381 --> 02:29:56.574 - Council member Smith. Yes. In the memo that came from and a Dean of Casamani and it said that the 02:29:57.410 --> 02:30:05.595 - The structure of the fund creates a separate audited treasury account developed from revenue gained 02:30:05.595 --> 02:30:14.271 - through programs, training, and fees, resulting from Bloomington Municipal Code 18 and 14. So in addition 02:30:14.271 --> 02:30:23.029 - to fees, which I now understand, we just adopted some fees, revenue gained through programs and trainings, 02:30:23.029 --> 02:30:25.566 - could you speak to that? Yeah. 02:30:25.986 --> 02:30:32.768 - No I believe the intent is simply from the revenue generated from these fines and fees from title 18 02:30:32.768 --> 02:30:39.550 - schedule thus living within title 18. I think we expanded on the potential uses to not restrict what 02:30:39.550 --> 02:30:46.332 - we could do to benefit the community of which we use terminology like training and things like that. 02:30:46.332 --> 02:30:53.181 - But to my understanding the language is strictly reserved to funding that would come in from a result 02:30:53.181 --> 02:30:55.934 - of title 18 fee schedule. OK. Thank you. 02:31:01.058 --> 02:31:08.012 - Okay, seeing none, we'll now go to public comment. Would anyone like to make public comment? 02:31:08.012 --> 02:31:15.639 - Anyone online? Anyone in chambers? Back to us. Any final comments? I would similarly be happy to vote 02:31:15.639 --> 02:31:23.116 - for this. Councilmember Stosberg. I'll just make a final comment again and thank the department for 02:31:23.116 --> 02:31:28.126 - their hard work on this and being a pleasure to work with. Thanks. 02:31:30.946 --> 02:31:39.144 - Generally, I guess we'll get another chance. You've been here all night, but just thank you for your 02:31:39.144 --> 02:31:47.505 - service to the city and I know we have the one of the best fire departments around and It's incredible 02:31:47.505 --> 02:31:55.785 - to see your leadership dedication to everything that we do. So, thank you All right motions It's 2026 02:31:55.785 --> 02:32:00.574 - dash 36 Any discussion Will the clerk please call the roll 02:32:09.218 --> 02:32:24.138 - Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Wonderful. I move to adopt ordinance twenty twenty 02:32:24.138 --> 02:32:38.910 - six dash thirty six. Any discussion. Will the clerk please call the roll. Council member Ruff. Yes. 02:32:39.426 --> 02:32:48.393 - Yes Stossburg. Yes Piedmont Smith. Yes. Sorry. Yes. Daily. Yes. Rallo. Thank you. Thank you very much. 02:32:48.393 --> 02:32:56.750 - That passes. Hey you guys may not have to come back next week. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. 02:32:56.750 --> 02:33:05.891 - Thank you. All right. We're now moving on to items of second readings. Guys we're making swift movements 02:33:05.891 --> 02:33:07.806 - today. This is great. 02:33:09.954 --> 02:33:22.836 - Is everybody feeling all right? Do you need a break, a stretch, time? No? OK. You do? Would you like 02:33:22.836 --> 02:33:35.972 - to? No? OK. Yes, I know. Thank you. I was giving Clerk Bolden a moment to feel your disappointment for 02:33:35.972 --> 02:33:37.758 - a moment. OK. 02:33:38.146 --> 02:33:47.403 - However I do move that ordinance twenty twenty six dash twenty three be introduced and read by the clerk 02:33:47.403 --> 02:33:57.013 - by title and synopsis only second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed. Clerk please read ordinance 02:33:57.013 --> 02:34:01.598 - twenty twenty six dash twenty three UDO amendments. 02:34:02.018 --> 02:34:09.503 - related to limited compliance and change in use standards. The synopsis is as follows. This ordinance 02:34:09.503 --> 02:34:17.501 - contains amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance to amend the language related to limited compliance 02:34:17.501 --> 02:34:25.206 - and change in use standards. Council Stossberg or council member Stossberg sponsored. Thank you so much. 02:34:25.206 --> 02:34:29.022 - Thank you. I move to adopt ordinance 20 26 dash 23. 02:34:29.602 --> 02:34:36.316 - All right. We have heard this already, but Mr. Grulick, any words you'd like to add? I can't remember 02:34:36.316 --> 02:34:43.095 - if there's questions that we left you with, or I don't seem to recall it. I don't really have anything 02:34:43.095 --> 02:34:49.677 - more to present than was heard last time. I don't remember us having any particular questions. So I 02:34:49.677 --> 02:34:53.758 - understand that there might be an amendment. Is this correct? 02:34:57.794 --> 02:35:07.573 - If you have one sir, go ahead I Considered an amendment and worked a little bit with staff on it with 02:35:07.573 --> 02:35:17.352 - both attorney Rossman and attorney Allen both with input and particularly attorney Rossman decided or 02:35:17.352 --> 02:35:25.214 - advised that because it was done on very short notice I I didn't come up with the 02:35:26.018 --> 02:35:34.354 - Plan and the idea approach to do it until very late 11th hour unfortunately, but And my concerns I'll 02:35:34.354 --> 02:35:42.527 - just bring up when we do general comments about When we do our general comments, I'll I'll say what 02:35:42.527 --> 02:35:50.863 - I was thinking what I was doing I would just say like for all of us. I mean, I don't know how you all 02:35:50.863 --> 02:35:55.358 - feel but I just you know, it's like like our job is to 02:35:55.714 --> 02:36:03.069 - you know, write and change and adapt laws, right? And so I would hate for any one of you at any time 02:36:03.069 --> 02:36:10.498 - to not be able to introduce something that you want to introduce, you know, or to hinder your ability 02:36:10.498 --> 02:36:17.926 - to do your job. And so just saying that if that means that we need to recess to do it, or I'd be open 02:36:17.926 --> 02:36:20.766 - to supporting whatever you need to do. 02:36:21.218 --> 02:36:26.936 - Whether I agree with what you want to introduce or not, right? I just I do think that your ability to 02:36:26.936 --> 02:36:32.766 - do it matters. So Well, if we could take five minutes I'd I'd use it you think you think you could have 02:36:32.766 --> 02:36:38.652 - it if we well, I think I would be able to make a Just I should I feel better about like you just pointed 02:36:38.652 --> 02:36:44.538 - out you'd hate to see yeah. Yeah any of us feel like well We didn't take advantage of something we could 02:36:44.538 --> 02:36:48.798 - have and then when it's our job to try and make things better as we see and 02:36:48.994 --> 02:36:57.182 - Representing the interests of the community, right? So exactly just a few minutes might okay. So unless 02:36:57.182 --> 02:37:05.133 - there's an objection I'd like to take a five five Can I do so it's um? 907 so how about we come back 02:37:05.133 --> 02:37:13.321 - at 15 past is that okay seven minute break. Let me write. Okay, we were recessed until 915 I Would like 02:37:13.321 --> 02:37:14.974 - to call you all back 02:37:17.666 --> 02:37:25.276 - the magnets that be draw you back and Well, you're all still in the room. So I think that counts as 02:37:25.276 --> 02:37:33.114 - quorum. Yeah, there's nothing about this is or something. Okay All right, everyone Councilmember ruff. 02:37:33.114 --> 02:37:39.582 - Are you satisfied with the time that you had? Thank you for helping me get that done 02:37:39.746 --> 02:37:48.346 - Thank you for your service to the city of Bloomington and his residence Let us what were we at though. 02:37:48.346 --> 02:37:57.280 - He said is did we do public comment? We haven't done public comment. Does anybody else have any questions? 02:37:57.280 --> 02:38:05.880 - Okay, good. We'll go to a time of public comment For item ordinance 20 26 23 does anybody would anyone 02:38:05.880 --> 02:38:09.470 - like to comment on 20 26 23? Anyone online 02:38:12.770 --> 02:38:23.805 - No one online. I mean, a confirmation is helpful. Hey, no one online. I mean, they're not going to tell 02:38:23.805 --> 02:38:34.627 - me. I've waited for you to tell me. Thank you. All right, we'll come back to public to ourselves now. 02:38:34.627 --> 02:38:41.630 - Any final comments before we take up a vote? Council Member Ruff? 02:38:46.082 --> 02:38:54.839 - I just had some initial concerns about we've been the council and the city administration. We've been 02:38:54.839 --> 02:39:04.024 - moving very quickly with changes to the DDO designed to increase density in various ways that particularly 02:39:04.024 --> 02:39:12.094 - impact certain neighborhoods. And my concern was that we were looking at things individually. 02:39:12.450 --> 02:39:24.506 - And not maybe considering holistically that this These changes could encourage Further Investment decisions 02:39:24.506 --> 02:39:35.668 - that were really based purely on deriving maximal returns on residential use investment rather than 02:39:35.668 --> 02:39:42.366 - Design to or actually producing an outcome of affordability 02:39:42.850 --> 02:39:54.087 - accessibility For residents for residential uses and Inadvertently like where our tent our purpose would 02:39:54.087 --> 02:40:04.895 - be to increase affordability and efficiency of the use of space but in reality was this another step 02:40:04.895 --> 02:40:11.102 - in Promoting inadvertently, I believe but still promoting 02:40:12.194 --> 02:40:19.868 - conversions of uses away from achieving affordable outcomes and so but you know after discussing this 02:40:19.868 --> 02:40:27.618 - with the staff and and Our legal our staff and city planning staff I'm okay now with with whoever with 02:40:27.618 --> 02:40:35.594 - where we are and I'm not going to introduce the amendments But thanks again for giving me the opportunity 02:40:35.594 --> 02:40:41.086 - to explain Thank you so much councilmember other councilmembers comments 02:40:41.826 --> 02:40:53.490 - Councillor Pima Smith. I thought the two public commenters last time made a compelling case that it's 02:40:53.490 --> 02:41:05.039 - very burdensome on small business owners to come into full compliance just with a change of use of a 02:41:05.039 --> 02:41:06.526 - property and 02:41:06.658 --> 02:41:13.517 - And we do want to enable and encourage small business owners. And I've heard this from nonprofits as 02:41:13.517 --> 02:41:20.443 - well, when they've taken over a property and the use has now changed to a nonprofit. And they have to 02:41:20.443 --> 02:41:27.302 - build a whole new sidewalk. And they don't have the funds to do it. So I think this is a move in the 02:41:27.302 --> 02:41:34.161 - right direction. And I'll be supporting it. Thank you. Any other comments? OK. Seeing none, will the 02:41:34.161 --> 02:41:36.062 - clerk please call the roll. 02:41:44.194 --> 02:41:55.258 - It Councilmember Flaherty Stasberg. Yes, Piedmont Smith. Yes. Sorry. Yes Daily. Yes, Rallo. Yes, Ruff. 02:41:55.258 --> 02:42:06.214 - Yes. Thank you. That passes unanimously. Thank you, clerk Thank you very much All right. Well move on 02:42:06.214 --> 02:42:11.262 - along I move that ordinance 2026-29 be adopted 02:42:11.490 --> 02:42:19.007 - Introduced and read by the clerk by title and synopsis only There's a motion in the second all those 02:42:19.007 --> 02:42:26.748 - in favor say aye Any opposed will the clerk please read Ordinance 2026 dash 29 amending the Bloomington 02:42:26.748 --> 02:42:34.414 - municipal code to prohibit the development deployment or delivery of superintelligence within the city 02:42:34.414 --> 02:42:39.326 - of Bloomington, Indiana the synopsis is as follows ordinance 2026 02:42:42.178 --> 02:42:47.647 - Ordinance 2026-29 prohibits the distribution and deployment of superintelligent artificial 02:42:47.647 --> 02:42:54.079 - general intelligence within the city of Bloomington. The common council explicitly recognizes that uniform 02:42:54.079 --> 02:43:00.329 - state level regulation of superintelligence systems is optimal for long-term governance. This ordinance 02:43:00.329 --> 02:43:06.761 - adds a new chapter to the Bloomington municipal code, which is enacted as an interim public safety measure 02:43:06.761 --> 02:43:09.886 - to protect the city of Bloomington only during this 02:43:10.242 --> 02:43:17.562 - during the period of state and federal legislative inaction and omission. Council sponsor is Rallo. 02:43:17.562 --> 02:43:25.029 - I move to adopt ordinance twenty twenty six dash twenty nine. Second. All right. Council member Rallo 02:43:25.029 --> 02:43:32.861 - take us away. Thank you says ordinance twenty twenty six dash twenty nine. Before I begin the presentation 02:43:32.861 --> 02:43:39.230 - there are several amendments to this ordinance to consider since they're mostly minor. 02:43:39.842 --> 02:43:50.381 - These are for clarification perfect purposes May I introduce those amendments before beginning? Oh I 02:43:50.381 --> 02:44:00.919 - do I have a minutes. Yes, okay for them then I move adoption of Amendment number 1a for 20 26-29. Is 02:44:00.919 --> 02:44:05.406 - there a second? Second go for it Thank you 02:44:05.570 --> 02:44:13.594 - So this amendment clarifies the meaning of superintelligence domain artificial superintelligence ASI 02:44:13.594 --> 02:44:21.697 - as having general capabilities that is not specific or narrow but endowed with those exceeding humans 02:44:21.697 --> 02:44:29.880 - in all cognitive domains and having agencies and acting autonomously. So it just provides that clarity 02:44:29.880 --> 02:44:33.534 - that what we're speaking about is artificial. 02:44:37.026 --> 02:44:50.238 - Thank you. Any questions. I just want to clarify one a isn't the third addendum third. Yes. 02:45:07.394 --> 02:45:18.195 - Any other questions? OK, while we do a little cogitating, anybody in the public like to make a comment 02:45:18.195 --> 02:45:29.101 - on this? Now's your chance. I know you want to. Just on the amendment, by the way. Well, anyone online? 02:45:29.101 --> 02:45:33.086 - Evan, is there? No, I'm just kidding. 02:45:33.282 --> 02:45:41.959 - All right Coming back to council any comments or questions council member Stosselberg. Um, I actually 02:45:41.959 --> 02:45:50.466 - think that I have a question for you council members Sorry, because I kind of view you as maybe the 02:45:50.466 --> 02:45:59.483 - closest to a Computer AI expert up here. So do you feel satisfied with this definition? Yes. Okay, great. 02:45:59.483 --> 02:46:01.950 - Thanks All right Anyone else 02:46:03.810 --> 02:46:15.810 - OK. Will you can we voice vote on these or does it have to be OK. So we please call the roll on amendment 02:46:15.810 --> 02:46:27.470 - 1 1 a. What is this. Yes 1 a. Amendment 1 26 29. Council member Stossberg. Yes. Piedmont Smith. Sorry. 02:46:27.470 --> 02:46:33.470 - Yes. Daily. Oh yes. Rallo. Yes. Ruff. Yes. Flaherty. 02:46:35.266 --> 02:46:44.554 - Thank you so much that passes count some umbrella you want to introduce your next amendment? Yes, the 02:46:44.554 --> 02:46:53.661 - next amendment for ordinance 2026 29 is amendment to a Are you moving? All right, is there a second 02:46:53.661 --> 02:47:02.494 - Okay, amendment to a take it away. Thank you yes, this this changes the the ordinance insofar as 02:47:03.010 --> 02:47:12.483 - It removes the second second session section of the determination for the dissolution of the ordinance 02:47:12.483 --> 02:47:21.773 - A colleague described the difficulty of determining a 95% confidence of the residents of Bloomington 02:47:21.773 --> 02:47:30.970 - as being impractical and so I remove that and furthermore I place the The primary determination for 02:47:30.970 --> 02:47:32.350 - dissolution of 02:47:32.514 --> 02:47:43.606 - which is scientific consensus into the preamble and another colleague Councilmember Piedmont Smith suggested 02:47:43.606 --> 02:47:54.393 - that since I made the move to the preamble that it should consist of removing the The Shell and replacing 02:47:54.393 --> 02:47:56.734 - was should so it reads 02:47:57.026 --> 02:48:04.318 - Whereas ASI should only be permitted to be developed when there is a broad scientific Consensus that 02:48:04.318 --> 02:48:11.610 - the development of super intelligence can be done safely and controllably using a probabilistic risk 02:48:11.610 --> 02:48:19.263 - risk assessment examining the catastrophic risk which should be similar to the civil engineering standard 02:48:19.263 --> 02:48:24.894 - for nuclear power plants requiring a safety level of 99.999 percent certainty 02:48:27.778 --> 02:48:37.135 - Thank you very much any questions for the sponsor We'll go to public comment would anybody like to comment 02:48:37.135 --> 02:48:45.967 - on amendment to a To a why are we a B? Okay, I'll understand maybe there were other iterations. Okay 02:48:45.967 --> 02:48:55.149 - All right, anybody online we'll come back to council Councilmember Stasberg, I appreciate these changes. 02:48:55.149 --> 02:48:56.286 - Thank you. I 02:48:57.218 --> 02:49:05.672 - Thank you so much. All right. Will the clerk please call the roll. Councilmember Piedmont Smith. Sorry. 02:49:05.672 --> 02:49:14.127 - Yes. Daily. Yes. Rallo. Yes. Rough clarity. Stasberg. Yes. Wonderful. Do you have any other amendments. 02:49:14.127 --> 02:49:22.338 - I do. Two more. I'd like to move amendment three of twenty twenty six twenty nine. Second. Thank you 02:49:22.338 --> 02:49:24.126 - very much. Go for it. 02:49:24.738 --> 02:49:32.051 - So it amends the preamble just to refer to our Resolution which was adopted on June 10th of 2026 So 02:49:32.051 --> 02:49:39.730 - it reads whereas on June 16th 2026 the Bloomington Common Council adopted resolution 2026 10 recognizing 02:49:39.730 --> 02:49:47.336 - and calling on other governmental agents entities at all levels to consider the existential risks posed 02:49:47.336 --> 02:49:52.894 - by artificial intelligence and the Common Council called for moratorium and 02:49:52.994 --> 02:50:00.321 - on the development of artificial general slash super intelligence until the industry could guarantee 02:50:00.321 --> 02:50:07.793 - that that technology aligns with human values and wellbeing. Any questions for the sponsor? All right, 02:50:07.793 --> 02:50:15.483 - we'll go to public comment. Would anyone like to public comment on amendment three? Anyone online? Coming 02:50:15.483 --> 02:50:21.214 - back to council, would you like to make any final comments on amendment three? 02:50:22.146 --> 02:50:33.007 - Fantastic. Will the clerk please call the roll? Yes, Daley. Yes, Rallo. Yes, Ruff. Yes, Flaherty Stasburg. 02:50:33.007 --> 02:50:43.157 - Yes, Piedmont Smith. Yes. Thank you. Thank you that motion passes as well. Okay, my final motion is 02:50:43.157 --> 02:50:51.582 - amendment 4a for amendment 4a of 20 26 29 And it is wait. Is there a second? Sorry 02:50:53.378 --> 02:51:01.000 - Yes, this is under the section labeled 14.25.030 prohibition distribution of superintelligence. It's 02:51:01.000 --> 02:51:08.849 - to clarify that the distribution and deployment in this ordinance shall not include any end user access 02:51:08.849 --> 02:51:16.546 - to such an ASI system. In other words, it focuses on the developer and deployer, not the residents of 02:51:16.546 --> 02:51:22.206 - Bloomington. Thank you very much. Are there any questions for the sponsor? 02:51:23.682 --> 02:51:34.695 - Councilmember Stossberg, what's the difference between 4 and 4a? I'm trying to figure that out I asked 02:51:34.695 --> 02:51:45.495 - that because I read for earlier today and now I'm trying to figure out the difference in terms of 4a 02:51:45.495 --> 02:51:52.766 - Oh, that's right. Yes, it was your suggestion. Sorry. Yes, please I 02:51:53.410 --> 02:52:04.576 - amendment for has the heading prohibition distribution of superintelligence and amendment for a says 02:52:04.576 --> 02:52:16.073 - Prohibition on the distribution of superintelligencer against against yes, so it's just the title Sorry 02:52:16.073 --> 02:52:23.038 - about that. Yes. Thank you. Thank you any other questions Okay 02:52:23.170 --> 02:52:31.469 - We'll go to public comment. Would anybody like to make public comment on amendment for Anyone online 02:52:31.469 --> 02:52:39.685 - all right, we'll come back council members any comments Councilmember Stasberg, I I appreciate this 02:52:39.685 --> 02:52:47.902 - one, too And I just want to I guess clarify with our attorneys that the language here does do what? 02:52:48.130 --> 02:52:56.657 - councilmember Rallo said that it would do in terms of not including any random user residents My concern 02:52:56.657 --> 02:53:05.022 - generally speaking when I spoke to councilmember Rallo about this was the kind of like unintentionally 02:53:05.022 --> 02:53:12.656 - you say where somebody is using it and not realizing that they're using something that counts 02:53:12.656 --> 02:53:14.686 - as superintelligence and 02:53:16.354 --> 02:53:25.470 - I just want to make sure that this language covers that in terms of residents. 02:53:29.634 --> 02:53:36.130 - could have captured just general use in any home of any person. Right now, it's now narrowed just to 02:53:36.130 --> 02:53:42.625 - be one that it covers only distribution, essentially. Distribution and dissemination then explicitly 02:53:42.625 --> 02:53:48.542 - calls out that it's not intended to cover any individual end user. So if there was a person 02:53:48.770 --> 02:53:57.180 - Individual person who was distributing it or was the cause of it being distributed in the community 02:53:57.180 --> 02:54:05.591 - that person could still be captioned on the ordinance But that would not necessarily be an end user 02:54:05.591 --> 02:54:14.085 - who is just a resident of the city of Bloomington. Okay. Thanks All right, any other questions Okay, 02:54:14.085 --> 02:54:18.206 - well the clerk we call the role on amendment for 02:54:18.722 --> 02:54:34.697 - A. Sorry for a on an amendment for a house eight. We get there. Yes. Oh. OK. Let's try that again. Daily 02:54:34.697 --> 02:54:48.542 - Rallo. Yes. Rough. Yes. Clarity. Yes. Stossberg. Yes. Piedmont Smith. Yes. And sorry. Yes. 02:54:48.898 --> 02:54:57.413 - Thank you. Thank you very much. All right The Ordinance as amended. Yeah, get away. Thank you. So let's 02:54:57.413 --> 02:55:05.847 - go with the slideshow. Thank you Thank you very much, mr. Rossman so we will begin I'm sorry the first 02:55:05.847 --> 02:55:14.117 - slide so ordinance 2026 29 prohibits the distribution and deployment of artificial superintelligence 02:55:14.117 --> 02:55:17.310 - ASI within the city of Bloomington and 02:55:17.666 --> 02:55:24.475 - It fills a regulatory void. This is extremely dangerous technology and it is currently unregulated So 02:55:24.475 --> 02:55:31.217 - this serves in the interim as a public safety measure to protect the city of Bloomington only during 02:55:31.217 --> 02:55:38.160 - the period of state and federal legislative inaction on omission And so we are jurisdictionally allowed 02:55:38.160 --> 02:55:45.035 - to do this The city the violations may result in civil penalties Injective relief and more appropriate 02:55:45.035 --> 02:55:47.038 - referral to the Monroe County 02:55:47.266 --> 02:55:56.559 - prosecutor for any potential state criminal level criminal charges and This ordinance is directed as 02:55:56.559 --> 02:56:06.129 - I said to the developers and deployers not the residents of Bloomington So Artificial Superintelligence 02:56:06.129 --> 02:56:13.950 - ASI is a lethal extinction level hazard with an unacceptable probability of risk and 02:56:14.882 --> 02:56:25.218 - This is referring to a recent survey published in September and It is the largest of its kind to date 02:56:25.218 --> 02:56:36.062 - indicating that there which is about 1,600 researchers and top researchers in the field with their average 02:56:36.062 --> 02:56:43.966 - estimation of an extinction risk of 18% To refer to some specific individuals 02:56:44.258 --> 02:56:51.751 - notable individuals with their risk estimates. Jeffrey Hinton has been very vocal about this. He is 02:56:51.751 --> 02:56:59.320 - one of the inventors of neural networks, which is utilized in the creation of these frontier models, 02:56:59.320 --> 02:57:06.888 - and he's a Nobel Prize winner. Gives an estimate of 10 to 50%. Yahshua Bengio, the most cited living 02:57:06.888 --> 02:57:12.958 - scientist and AI researcher has a 20% estimation that will result in extinction. 02:57:13.186 --> 02:57:20.715 - Paul Christiano has a 50-50 chance. He's an AI alignment expert. He is the head of safety for the US 02:57:20.715 --> 02:57:28.840 - AI Safety Institute at the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Roman Yompolsky, he's a long-time 02:57:28.840 --> 02:57:36.443 - AI safety expert. He established the term AI safety many years ago, and as a professor at Louisville, 02:57:36.443 --> 02:57:40.990 - he gives a near certainty that it will result in extinction. 02:57:41.698 --> 02:57:51.093 - David Krueger, who I interviewed a couple of weeks ago, and who lends his support for this, has about 02:57:51.093 --> 02:58:00.488 - a 50% chance of extinction. Daniel Cocagello, he left to open AI as a whistleblower. He was a futures 02:58:00.488 --> 02:58:06.014 - forecaster, and he is warning of AI extinction risk of 70%. 02:58:06.594 --> 02:58:14.966 - And then Elon Musk and Dario Amadei, of course, are developers of the technology. They're CEOs of the 02:58:14.966 --> 02:58:23.255 - leading AI companies. And they admit to high risk of 10% to 30%, Elon Musk case, and Dario Amadei of 02:58:23.255 --> 02:58:31.873 - 25%. Artificial superintelligence, I want to distinguish. It has the capabilities of agency, generality, 02:58:31.873 --> 02:58:34.910 - and intelligence that exceed humans. 02:58:35.042 --> 02:58:41.998 - not assured to be in human control at this point. This is to be distinguished between tool AI and narrow 02:58:41.998 --> 02:58:48.755 - AI that are within human control. They're narrowly focused. And so these are types of technology that 02:58:48.755 --> 02:58:55.445 - could be used, for instance, to cure cancer. They've already won some researchers developing it have 02:58:55.445 --> 02:59:02.070 - won the Nobel Prize for protein folding in biology. And so there are other narrow purposes where AI 02:59:02.070 --> 02:59:03.262 - could be applied. 02:59:03.682 --> 02:59:10.991 - That are within human control that should be pursued. They need guardrails in some cases, but they're 02:59:10.991 --> 02:59:18.587 - not going to they're not autonomous They're not going to have agency of their own So the experts warnings 02:59:18.587 --> 02:59:25.825 - consists of but aren't limited to these observations They refer to them as grown that is they're not 02:59:25.825 --> 02:59:33.278 - programmed step-by-step in as conventional artificial intelligence used to be their neural networks and 02:59:33.442 --> 02:59:43.127 - that evolve through training on vast amounts of data. The designers, because of their complexity, the 02:59:43.127 --> 02:59:52.906 - designers admit they don't fully understand their workings. Their complexity renders them inscrutable. 02:59:52.906 --> 03:00:02.686 - And so they're essentially referred to as black boxes. Intelligence scales with more compute, that is, 03:00:03.650 --> 03:00:14.269 - There is no apparent limits to machine intelligence. The more compute, the more capability. And so it 03:00:14.269 --> 03:00:25.199 - seems very much on track to exceed human capabilities, perhaps by many folds, orders of magnitude. We're 03:00:25.199 --> 03:00:31.966 - currently, in the design of these systems, nearing what's called 03:00:32.290 --> 03:00:39.755 - recursive self-improvement Of a hundred percent that is it refers to the machine intelligence designing 03:00:39.755 --> 03:00:47.363 - machine intelligence So it totally removes human agency in control over these systems because they design 03:00:47.363 --> 03:00:53.895 - themselves and then the next model designs themselves at Infant item and this is where you 03:00:53.895 --> 03:01:02.078 - get an intelligence explosion and is the point where artificial super intelligence evolves instrumental goals are 03:01:02.434 --> 03:01:09.536 - inevitable, that is referring to a long described prediction, but now confirmed that these systems develop 03:01:09.536 --> 03:01:16.372 - goals to gain resources, expand capabilities, and have self-preservation drives of their own. That is, 03:01:16.372 --> 03:01:23.076 - anything that's goal-directed is going to want to preserve itself in order to get that goal. And so, 03:01:23.076 --> 03:01:29.912 - it was speculated that these instrumental goals were going to evolve, and yet, yes, they have. They've 03:01:29.912 --> 03:01:30.974 - been confirmed. 03:01:31.330 --> 03:01:39.172 - Alignment is unachievable That is that the capability is far exceeding the work of safety at this point 03:01:39.172 --> 03:01:46.712 - and it's now acknowledged that these systems will Are capable of deceiving their developers to fake 03:01:46.712 --> 03:01:54.478 - alignment and they're actually selected of course for because they're being selected for alignment and 03:01:54.478 --> 03:02:00.510 - they know that they will be Terminated if they do not answer correctly they are 03:02:00.610 --> 03:02:07.688 - known to deceive their developers. So it renders them essentially untestable. Many capabilities are 03:02:07.688 --> 03:02:14.766 - on an exponential. I'll get to that in a moment. The doubling time is every four to seven months at 03:02:14.766 --> 03:02:22.127 - this point, but it could contract. And this is a principal reason why researchers at frontier labs such 03:02:22.127 --> 03:02:29.630 - as Jacob Coxon quit because of the concern of loss of control and chose to speak out and warn the public. 03:02:31.650 --> 03:02:39.568 - Containment of ASI is impossible. That has been evident now as predicted, but it is now evident because 03:02:39.568 --> 03:02:47.410 - of incidents like the hugging face, incident where ASI swarms broke out of OpenAI and found a way onto 03:02:47.410 --> 03:02:55.023 - the internet and then broke into other companies, including breaking into OpenAI. So it essentially 03:02:55.023 --> 03:03:01.342 - posits that it is impossible to contain mines that are orders of magnitude smarter 03:03:01.826 --> 03:03:10.210 - our own. And there are many signs over the past months indicating that we're losing control, and they've 03:03:10.210 --> 03:03:18.515 - been in quit during the news. So I won't expound unless you would like to know. I can do so. This slide 03:03:18.515 --> 03:03:26.580 - shows the AI capability that's been doubling every seven months. This is measured in length of tasks 03:03:26.580 --> 03:03:29.534 - compared to humans, and these graphs 03:03:29.634 --> 03:03:36.856 - derived from a premier non-profit research institute called METER. METER was the one that did the forensic 03:03:36.856 --> 03:03:43.741 - analysis of the OpenAI incident where it broke in the hugging face and revealed what had happened. It 03:03:43.741 --> 03:03:50.625 - stands for the Model Evaluation and Thread Research Institute. So you can see its capabilities are on 03:03:50.625 --> 03:03:57.645 - the exponential. And what that implies is that we're looking at a very contracted amount of time before 03:03:57.645 --> 03:03:58.590 - we reach ASI. 03:03:59.010 --> 03:04:07.532 - This is why it's urgent, why it is, many are saying that this is, we're in a crisis stage, because we 03:04:07.532 --> 03:04:16.472 - need to act before the next models achieve artificial super intelligence where they're beyond our control. 03:04:16.472 --> 03:04:24.827 - So, if this occurs, if ASI occurs, humans will be the second most intelligent species, says Jeffrey 03:04:24.827 --> 03:04:27.166 - Hinton, Nobel Prize winner. 03:04:28.226 --> 03:04:37.412 - and to remind people why we are so successful as we are the current most intelligent species. And we 03:04:37.412 --> 03:04:46.598 - have an undisputed dominion over the earth. I think that's indisputable. Our dominion is apparent in 03:04:46.598 --> 03:04:55.966 - our history. So this is the human influence about 10,000 years ago where humans occupied about only 1% 03:04:56.066 --> 03:05:05.416 - of the total mammalian biomass on the planet. This is before civilization. And the remainder was occupied 03:05:05.416 --> 03:05:14.236 - by wild mammals and wild birds. Today, wild mammals and birds are just a tiny fraction of the total 03:05:14.236 --> 03:05:23.145 - biomass. It's mostly occupied by humans. And the other, the majority is occupied by our domesticated 03:05:23.145 --> 03:05:25.438 - animals, mostly for food. 03:05:26.562 --> 03:05:35.809 - So we've transformed the planet for our own purposes, being as intelligent as we are. And nothing can 03:05:35.809 --> 03:05:44.874 - compete to supplant us until now. So this was an expert witness I interviewed. He's very supportive 03:05:44.874 --> 03:05:53.758 - of our efforts. I didn't want to include the full interview, but David Krueger, who's a professor 03:05:53.858 --> 03:06:02.069 - Ed Milo at the University of Montreal. He's an assistant professor there in machine intelligence. He 03:06:02.069 --> 03:06:10.281 - says ASI is not inevitable. Unfortunately, I think there is still a greater than 50% chance that ASI 03:06:10.281 --> 03:06:18.492 - leads to human extinction if we don't course correct. So we urgently need to course correct. Another 03:06:18.492 --> 03:06:23.614 - expert witness that I contacted is Daniel Cocagello, who was a 03:06:23.778 --> 03:06:34.569 - Who is a whistleblower left open AI in 2024 and He co-wrote the scenarios of AI 2027 which is a leading 03:06:34.569 --> 03:06:45.048 - Speculation on the evolution of ASI that seems to be on track what he says if we don't stop these AI 03:06:45.048 --> 03:06:49.406 - companies from automating AI research and 03:06:49.698 --> 03:06:55.778 - and development and kicking off recursive self-improvement and ultimately creating superintelligence 03:06:55.778 --> 03:07:02.280 - that is AI systems that are better than the best humans at everything, while also being faster and cheaper, 03:07:02.280 --> 03:07:08.420 - then humanity will probably lose control over this planet. Bloomington can't stop the AI companies on 03:07:08.420 --> 03:07:14.440 - its own, but by taking a stand, it can inspire others and contribute to the turning of the tide. So 03:07:14.440 --> 03:07:16.126 - thank you to Mr. Cocagello. 03:07:16.898 --> 03:07:24.037 - An expert witness, Anthony Aguirre, who is the president's CEO and founder of the Future of Life Institute, 03:07:24.037 --> 03:07:30.647 - sort of probably the leading AI safety organization in the world. A professor of physics, he joined 03:07:30.647 --> 03:07:37.389 - us in June. He states, I and many other independent experts believe that development of highly expert 03:07:37.389 --> 03:07:43.999 - level autonomous general intelligence, AGI, would present an acute risk to our society, to national 03:07:43.999 --> 03:07:45.982 - security and humanity itself. 03:07:46.338 --> 03:07:54.216 - Personally, I support the city of Bloomington ordinance to ban superintelligence unless provably safe 03:07:54.216 --> 03:08:01.940 - And then the final expert witness who actually is still available I think he's zooming in right now 03:08:01.940 --> 03:08:09.896 - if anyone wants to ask him questions Is Peter Jensen who's president of the safe AI forever Institute, 03:08:09.896 --> 03:08:15.998 - which is leading the way on educating and forming municipalities on the danger 03:08:16.450 --> 03:08:24.138 - And due to the length of this meeting, I wasn't able to provide other expert witnesses. But I appreciate 03:08:24.138 --> 03:08:31.605 - Mr. Jensen for being online if people have questions for him. So to conclude, ordinance 2026-29 is in 03:08:31.605 --> 03:08:39.073 - response to what AI safety's expert warned is an acute crisis. If we fail to halt the current attempt 03:08:39.073 --> 03:08:45.150 - to create ASI, we will likely lose control. And humanity will be disempowered then 03:08:45.474 --> 03:08:51.741 - and no longer have control over our destiny. Congress and the administration are either operating too 03:08:51.741 --> 03:08:58.376 - slowly or accelerating the race to ASI, in the case of the administration. There are good signs in Congress 03:08:58.376 --> 03:09:04.950 - that they're starting to act, and we can help to prod them on. I maintain municipalities are not helpless. 03:09:04.950 --> 03:09:11.586 - We can, however, shape the regulatory landscape. If we have a patchwork of regulations banning, prohibiting 03:09:11.586 --> 03:09:13.982 - superintelligence, then we can spur on 03:09:14.114 --> 03:09:22.856 - The needed reform that we need at higher levels of governance. So this ordinance sets a precedent for 03:09:22.856 --> 03:09:31.856 - others to follow other municipalities and that's the end of my presentation and as I said Peter Jensen's 03:09:31.856 --> 03:09:39.998 - online and Larry Allen who kindly assisted me in this Endeavor is available for questions Okay 03:09:40.386 --> 03:09:49.779 - Thank you so much, Councilmember Rallo. And thank you, Ms. Jensen, for joining us and for sitting through 03:09:49.779 --> 03:09:58.906 - this meeting. Any questions, you all, for Councilmember Rallo or Ms. Jensen? Councilmember Brough. I'd 03:09:58.906 --> 03:10:08.830 - love to take advantage of having Ms. Jensen with us. Thank you very much. Thank you for your time and expertise 03:10:09.218 --> 03:10:20.755 - and sharing it with us. My question is we've recently seen and heard a lot about vulnerabilities in 03:10:20.755 --> 03:10:32.522 - websites and web servers in recent weeks and bad human actors have and can certainly use AI for cyber 03:10:32.522 --> 03:10:37.598 - attacks. What I'm wondering is if ASI would 03:10:38.210 --> 03:10:48.310 - be able to use, to presumably, it would be able to do the same kind of cyber attacks at a much higher 03:10:48.310 --> 03:10:58.508 - level, a much greater rate, much more comprehensively, moving so quickly. Is this part of the way that 03:10:58.508 --> 03:11:04.350 - experts like yourself see AI being able to gain control of 03:11:04.674 --> 03:11:13.212 - basically of everything, and take over control, because I think people have a really hard time imagining, 03:11:13.212 --> 03:11:21.751 - how would it happen? How could artificial intelligence take over the mechanisms of society and the world? 03:11:21.751 --> 03:11:29.886 - Is their ability to basically just take over systems and hack into anything and create endless cyber 03:11:29.886 --> 03:11:34.558 - attacks part of the whole story or part of the potential? 03:11:37.890 --> 03:11:49.162 - The short answer is absolutely yes. And we've seen this already over the summer, autonomous agents broke 03:11:49.162 --> 03:12:00.005 - into hugging face in the famous break-in. We've seen the FBI and many other federal agencies warning 03:12:00.005 --> 03:12:07.198 - about the risks now of cyber events, which have occurred at vastly 03:12:07.362 --> 03:12:17.382 - exponential rates this year. Just last week, the largest criminal hacking event occurred with a $6.3 03:12:17.382 --> 03:12:27.799 - billion crypto theft. So that that shows that a super intelligence, which would want to gain power would 03:12:27.799 --> 03:12:34.942 - certainly one of the first things would want to gain financial power to 03:12:35.586 --> 03:12:44.137 - buy things, hire people to do all kinds of nefarious activities. So we're seeing this already now with 03:12:44.137 --> 03:12:52.522 - the current systems. And, you know, as Dave Rallo pointed out just a minute ago, we're talking about 03:12:52.522 --> 03:13:00.906 - the word super intelligence. So it's hard to imagine all the ways that they could do these things to 03:13:00.906 --> 03:13:03.646 - take control, but fundamentally, 03:13:04.194 --> 03:13:15.132 - every system you can think of that we use today in our cities are automated with digital controllers, 03:13:15.132 --> 03:13:26.284 - electricity, water, the food supply system, your police force, your fire house, your, your, uh, sewage. 03:13:26.284 --> 03:13:33.790 - Um, you know, everything is running with computers basically. And if, 03:13:34.242 --> 03:13:44.319 - Indeed, any computer can be hacked today, both software and hardware. It's an extremely worrisome risk 03:13:44.319 --> 03:13:54.297 - if an ASI evolved and the first thing you would want to do is have control over its own existence. So 03:13:54.297 --> 03:14:03.102 - the answer is yes. The short answer is yes. And the long answer is it would be incredibly 03:14:04.034 --> 03:14:12.145 - intelligent in the way it went about achieving its goal. I hope that answers your question. Yeah, 03:14:12.145 --> 03:14:20.587 - thank you. Thank you so much. Other questions? Council Member Piemont-Smith. Yes, this is for Council 03:14:20.587 --> 03:14:28.946 - Member Rallo. Seeing that this is an international problem with no borders, what impact do you think 03:14:28.946 --> 03:14:32.670 - our ordinance here in Bloomington will have? 03:14:36.290 --> 03:14:47.144 - I've been part of the AI safety community now. It's sort of embedded in it and there Peter is located 03:14:47.144 --> 03:14:58.530 - He lives in London There are people who are involved who are in Denmark Romania It's getting international 03:14:58.530 --> 03:15:04.702 - attention right now I think that we need an international 03:15:05.506 --> 03:15:13.703 - There have been hearings before the Parliament in Canada. In fact, David Krueger was an expert witness 03:15:13.703 --> 03:15:21.661 - to the Parliament there. I think I sent that video to Council. And so there is a growing awareness, 03:15:21.661 --> 03:15:30.096 - and I think that this will help lead the way in inspiring action at the local level and hopefully country 03:15:30.096 --> 03:15:33.598 - level. I think the EU needs to take action. 03:15:34.274 --> 03:15:41.154 - Actually, the proposals for controlling these systems is fairly simple, because they rely on advanced 03:15:41.154 --> 03:15:48.371 - chip technology, and they use such tremendous amounts of compute, therefore so much power, so much energy, 03:15:48.371 --> 03:15:54.846 - that it would be conceivable to have international agreements. So hopefully we'll achieve that. 03:16:03.906 --> 03:16:11.955 - I was gonna save this just for my final remarks, so maybe I can just, can I just say it then? It's in 03:16:11.955 --> 03:16:19.925 - one fell swoop, and it'll be easier, because I think Councilman Brela has a couple other things he'd 03:16:19.925 --> 03:16:28.132 - like to say. Otherwise, I'm happy to say it if we're at the end. Oh, maybe we're at the end, okay. I'll 03:16:28.132 --> 03:16:33.182 - just say, I think maybe two things in response to the question. 03:16:33.282 --> 03:16:41.998 - The first one, and I think that Councilman Rallo is perhaps would be remiss not to mention, so I will 03:16:41.998 --> 03:16:50.544 - mention, the theory of change here. The goal is not for this ordinance to be perfect or cover every 03:16:50.544 --> 03:16:59.089 - single technical feasibility here or to be a scientific document describing what ASI is or isn't or 03:16:59.089 --> 03:17:00.798 - anything like that. 03:17:00.930 --> 03:17:09.403 - Nor are we kidding ourselves that us by ourselves acting in this way would by itself have this huge 03:17:09.403 --> 03:17:17.875 - effect on world affairs, if you will. However, I think the theory of change that's sort of implicit 03:17:17.875 --> 03:17:22.366 - in everything that's being said here is that you can 03:17:22.466 --> 03:17:29.454 - through local action create a sort of network effect. And we saw this during the Cold War, for example, 03:17:29.454 --> 03:17:36.240 - with nuclear free zones. Lots of local governments adopted ordinances that might have seemed the way 03:17:36.240 --> 03:17:43.026 - that this one seems. It's like, OK, it's largely symbolic. You can't really enforce it, so on and so 03:17:43.026 --> 03:17:45.982 - forth. But you can look sort of throughout. 03:17:46.082 --> 03:17:51.540 - in history that there are actually examples, like, for example, in New Zealand, that local ordinances 03:17:51.540 --> 03:17:57.373 - became national law. And they had a huge impact, I think, in the United States of galvanizing and organizing 03:17:57.373 --> 03:18:02.938 - people. And I think we're sort of at a very similar moment, right, where the goal here is to say, well, 03:18:02.938 --> 03:18:08.289 - as a local government, we're trying to make steps towards this. I think there's a lot of other work 03:18:08.289 --> 03:18:13.747 - that we really need to do if we're particularly interested in the concerns. And we've already started 03:18:13.747 --> 03:18:16.048 - some of that work thinking about a broader 03:18:16.048 --> 03:18:21.615 - sort of risk approach to surveillance technologies and other types of things as well in our 03:18:21.615 --> 03:18:27.667 - cyber infrastructure. And certainly, so this won't be the end of it, but I'll give you sort of one, 03:18:27.667 --> 03:18:33.597 - you know, maybe positive note here. After we passed resolution, I forget the number, 26 whatever, 03:18:33.597 --> 03:18:37.470 - you know, like seven years ago it feels like because we've done 03:18:37.858 --> 03:18:45.757 - 7,000 things today, people were reaching out from Costa Rica saying, hey, we're trying to put together 03:18:45.757 --> 03:18:53.580 - this international defense node on AI safety, and our local government is thinking about it. So like, 03:18:53.580 --> 03:19:01.250 - OK, will that happen? Who knows? But I think that movement in this direction is generally positive. 03:19:01.250 --> 03:19:03.934 - So I think that it's a commendable 03:19:04.066 --> 03:19:09.806 - Sort of you know for first step. It's not a perfect step. That's you know There's lots of things that 03:19:09.806 --> 03:19:15.658 - we can question in the ordinance, but again. I think the theory of change is This is the main objective 03:19:15.658 --> 03:19:21.286 - here Could could I add something that there are examples of hazardous chemicals that were banned by 03:19:21.286 --> 03:19:24.606 - municipalities that then led to state and federal laws and 03:19:32.130 --> 03:19:40.547 - Forgot that I was in charge councilmember rough and I'm just mindful of the time everyone we have one 03:19:40.547 --> 03:19:49.213 - more thing to do Yeah, this question is for mr. Allen who I know worked extensively with with councilman 03:19:49.213 --> 03:19:57.548 - Rallo in thinking about this The practical the practicality of this so my question sort of spins off 03:19:57.548 --> 03:20:00.766 - what everybody's been talking about is 03:20:00.962 --> 03:20:10.647 - collective action from larger group network of communities that start to take similar steps, but my 03:20:10.647 --> 03:20:20.622 - question is Could a prohibition like this at the local level Help individuals or groups of individuals 03:20:20.622 --> 03:20:29.726 - have come together for the purpose of Saving humanity Take legal action against companies who 03:20:29.858 --> 03:20:40.446 - Creating ASI It does this create any kind of a framework by which they could actually take a legal action 03:20:40.446 --> 03:20:50.334 - at a local level because of the violation of the ordinance Came up what this ordinance does not do 03:20:50.754 --> 03:20:57.299 - Is it and it cannot do under Indiana law is create its own private right of action. The city is not 03:20:57.299 --> 03:21:03.844 - able to do that by ordinance under the Home Rule Act. However having an ordinance on the books like 03:21:03.844 --> 03:21:09.342 - this if there is a private lawsuit so if you had individuals that were affected by. 03:21:09.442 --> 03:21:15.578 - ASI and they brought a lawsuit for negligence and for harm against companies that were distributing 03:21:15.578 --> 03:21:22.082 - this, they could point to the ordinance to help them establish what's called negligence per se. Basically 03:21:22.082 --> 03:21:28.341 - the violation of a law, if it's intended to cover the class of people and the class of action that is 03:21:28.341 --> 03:21:34.477 - contemplated under the ordinance, then you don't have to then prove the negligent intent portion of 03:21:34.477 --> 03:21:37.054 - it. It's negligence per se because you're 03:21:37.314 --> 03:21:46.609 - violating the law essentially violating the law so an example of this recently last year there was actually 03:21:46.609 --> 03:21:53.150 - a Scooter case in Indiana where the question was violation riding a scooter 03:21:53.282 --> 03:21:58.480 - hitting a pothole, having an accident where there are significant injuries, was that negligence per 03:21:58.480 --> 03:22:03.730 - se? And the court said yes, of course, because one, the ordinance in question outlawed the riding of 03:22:03.730 --> 03:22:09.291 - scooters in that place, finding it that it was a safety hazard for individuals. And so it's very analogous 03:22:09.291 --> 03:22:14.749 - to the situation. So in the way it's helpful, it's indirectly helpful, because it helps lower the burden 03:22:14.749 --> 03:22:20.051 - that they may have to prove in a court of law. It just doesn't create an independent right of action. 03:22:20.051 --> 03:22:22.494 - Hey, thank you very much for that explanation. 03:22:26.370 --> 03:22:33.503 - Thank you very much, any other questions? Okay, let's go to pub. I have one more for Mr. Jensen real 03:22:33.503 --> 03:22:40.989 - quick before he gets away from us. Yes, please, go ahead. Well, it's something I've often wondered about, 03:22:40.989 --> 03:22:47.981 - and when I've talked to this about people, they can't break away from the idea of borgs, you know, 03:22:47.981 --> 03:22:53.278 - be a borgs, like terminators, right? But to what extent, Mr. Jensen, would 03:22:54.210 --> 03:23:06.008 - Would robotics really be required to do horrendous significant damage, fundamental damage to humanity? 03:23:06.008 --> 03:23:18.494 - Well, last I was present at the session two weeks ago, and we saw testimony from Bill Gates and many others. 03:23:19.490 --> 03:23:26.833 - Bill Gates himself, who's not a Luddite and certainly a software expert, premier expert said himself 03:23:26.833 --> 03:23:34.321 - that this technology has the capability to cause events that could kill a billion people. So the power 03:23:34.321 --> 03:23:41.591 - of this technology is absolutely immense. And he's not talking about robots. He's talking about the 03:23:41.591 --> 03:23:47.262 - way it is now digitally. Cause you know, with power, great power comes great, 03:23:47.490 --> 03:23:55.615 - capabilities to do all kinds of things. Now, robots building robots is happening right now in China, 03:23:55.615 --> 03:24:03.659 - actually. China is leading in robots, which is a terrible idea by the way, but it isn't necessarily 03:24:03.659 --> 03:24:11.945 - needed to have robots to take control of digital systems, obviously, and to have vast resources to get 03:24:11.945 --> 03:24:15.806 - people to do things, which people do for money. 03:24:15.906 --> 03:24:25.253 - So the short answer is that the danger is imminent, is what the experts are saying. And of course, robots 03:24:25.253 --> 03:24:34.424 - are not many years away, humanoid robots, and they must be controlled as well. So this is a very, very, 03:24:34.424 --> 03:24:42.536 - very critical moment in time where we need to really do the right thing. It's on our watch. 03:24:42.536 --> 03:24:45.534 - We have children, people we love. 03:24:46.402 --> 03:24:53.891 - This is on our watch. So we need to do what we can, and we can do that. And so the short answer is the 03:24:53.891 --> 03:25:01.235 - danger is imminent, and it isn't necessarily from robots. It's from digital super intelligences that 03:25:01.235 --> 03:25:08.506 - are basically starting to occur now in these systems. That would be my short answer. Did that help? 03:25:08.506 --> 03:25:16.286 - I hope? Yes, it does. Thank you. Thank you so much. OK. We'll now go to public comment on ordinance number 03:25:17.218 --> 03:25:34.012 - 2026 29 Would anybody in chambers like to comment now's your chance as amended? Yes, now's your chance 03:25:34.012 --> 03:25:42.654 - Go ahead mr. So Paul Rousseau the comparison between 03:25:44.098 --> 03:25:50.392 - Artificial super intelligence and nuclear weapons is very apt in my opinion. So I would like to go down 03:25:50.392 --> 03:25:56.748 - Memory lane for some of us a little bit of a history from an article that appeared in arms control today 03:25:56.748 --> 03:26:02.921 - a few years ago Just read some excerpts 47 years ago Randall Forsberg a young defense and disarmament 03:26:02.921 --> 03:26:08.126 - researcher launched the nuclear weapons freeze campaign designed to stop the drift of 03:26:08.546 --> 03:26:14.014 - Nuclear war with the u.s. Soviet agreement to stop the testing production and deployment of nuclear 03:26:14.014 --> 03:26:19.919 - weapons The freeze campaign escalated into a mass movement that swept across the United States It attracted 03:26:19.919 --> 03:26:25.496 - the support of nearly all peace groups as well as that of mainstream religious professional and labor 03:26:25.496 --> 03:26:30.964 - organizations for the most part early movement efforts focused on popularizing the idea of a freeze 03:26:30.964 --> 03:26:32.222 - on the local level and 03:26:32.962 --> 03:26:37.812 - Activists distributed vast quantities of literature about the nuclear arms race and brought 03:26:37.812 --> 03:26:43.294 - freeze resolutions before organizations With which they were affiliated as well as before town meetings 03:26:43.294 --> 03:26:48.618 - city councils and state legislatures They gather signatures on freeze petitions locally as part of a 03:26:48.618 --> 03:26:54.152 - nationwide campaign and placed freeze referenda on the ballots and cities counties and states throughout 03:26:54.152 --> 03:26:59.529 - the country Although these activities were time-consuming and labor-intensive they meshed nicely with 03:26:59.529 --> 03:27:02.270 - the efforts of other groups to alert the public and 03:27:02.594 --> 03:27:09.714 - to the dangers of nuclear war. These efforts helped produce a widespread display of resistance by Americans 03:27:09.714 --> 03:27:16.637 - to the nuclear arms race. When the freeze campaign delivered the petitions to the US and Soviet missions 03:27:16.637 --> 03:27:23.295 - to the United Nations, they contained the signatures of more than 2.3 million Americans. By November 03:27:23.295 --> 03:27:30.086 - of 1983, the freeze had been endorsed by more than 270 city councils, including Bloomington, 71 county 03:27:30.086 --> 03:27:31.998 - councils, and by one or more 03:27:32.578 --> 03:27:39.843 - One or both houses of 23 state legislatures. In 1984, it became part of the presidential campaign as 03:27:39.843 --> 03:27:47.036 - well. Initially, the Reagan administration talked glibly of fighting and winning a nuclear war. But 03:27:47.036 --> 03:27:54.805 - under enormous political pressure from the freeze campaign, the Reagan administration dramatically reversed 03:27:54.805 --> 03:28:02.430 - its rhetoric. In the fall of 1983, Reagan even told his startled Secretary of State George Shultz, quote, 03:28:02.530 --> 03:28:11.586 - Maybe I should go see Soviet leader Andropov and propose eliminating all nuclear weapons," end quote. 03:28:11.586 --> 03:28:20.553 - Reagan persisted with this idea and searched for a Soviet negotiating partner. And in March 1985, he 03:28:20.553 --> 03:28:29.342 - found one in Mikhail Gorbachev. So this is the strategy, I think. It has to be from the ground up. 03:28:30.050 --> 03:28:36.927 - And I, for one, have been convinced this is an existential threat ever since I heard Mo Gadat, the former 03:28:36.927 --> 03:28:43.481 - chief business officer for Google, sound the alarm in the summer of 23. And he's a programmer and an 03:28:43.481 --> 03:28:49.904 - expert. And he loves the machines, but he says it's a danger. It's huge. It's an existential risk. 03:28:49.904 --> 03:28:56.457 - Thank you. Thank you so much. Is there anybody else in chambers who'd like to make a public comment? 03:28:56.457 --> 03:28:58.014 - Is there anyone online? 03:29:00.162 --> 03:29:07.689 - We'll come back to counsel any final comments here before we take the role Part of the reason I did 03:29:07.689 --> 03:29:15.216 - this was to raise salience that is public awareness of this and So I won't say anything more, but I 03:29:15.216 --> 03:29:22.366 - would like to play just a brief video. It was produced by safe AI forever. I think it nails it 03:29:38.082 --> 03:29:52.055 - But I think the development of full artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race. Once 03:29:52.055 --> 03:30:04.415 - humans develop artificial intelligence, it would tape off on its own and redesign itself at 03:30:04.415 --> 03:30:07.774 - an ever-increasing rate. 03:30:09.090 --> 03:30:15.517 - humans who are limited by slow biological evolution couldn't compete and would be superseded. We've 03:30:15.517 --> 03:30:22.136 - never created beings that may soon be smarter than us. We don't know what's going to happen. We should 03:30:22.136 --> 03:30:28.563 - obviously be cautious. It would be very foolish to say there was like a 1% chance. Nobody knows how 03:30:28.563 --> 03:30:35.183 - to estimate it. A 10% chance seems not an unreasonable estimate to me. What is the worst case scenario 03:30:35.183 --> 03:30:38.846 - that you're worried about? Well, the worst case scenario 03:30:39.042 --> 03:30:46.529 - is human extinction. These are risks we cannot afford. We have the faintest idea what we're doing. We 03:30:46.529 --> 03:30:53.943 - don't know how these systems work. We don't know how to get them to do anything or to stop them from 03:30:53.943 --> 03:31:01.503 - doing anything. I think once this basic message comes out that this isn't an arms race, it's a suicide 03:31:01.503 --> 03:31:08.990 - race, where everybody loses if anybody's AI goes out of control, it really changes the whole dynamic. 03:31:09.602 --> 03:31:16.905 - And the bad case, and I think this is important to say, is lights out for all of us. I don't know. I'm 03:31:16.905 --> 03:31:24.067 - relatively an optimist, so I think there's a 25% chance that things go really, really badly. I think 03:31:24.067 --> 03:31:31.441 - the danger of AI is much greater than the danger of nuclear warheads by a lot. And nobody would suggest 03:31:31.441 --> 03:31:38.532 - that we allow anyone to just build nuclear warheads if they want. That would be insane. And mock my 03:31:38.532 --> 03:31:39.454 - words, AI is 03:31:39.682 --> 03:31:46.661 - far more dangerous than nukes. We will have created the most dangerous thing ever. This makes nuclear 03:31:46.661 --> 03:31:53.572 - weapons look like nothing. Safe AI is a global requirement for the common benefit and flourishing of 03:31:53.572 --> 03:32:00.619 - people. Until federal and state laws exist to protect our citizens from unsafe super intelligence, the 03:32:00.619 --> 03:32:07.804 - responsibility falls upon municipal governments to protect their citizens in their own city. When enough 03:32:07.804 --> 03:32:08.830 - cities say no, 03:32:09.122 --> 03:32:18.459 - the AI industry will become liable. They will withdraw from the suicide race to superintelligence. It's 03:32:18.459 --> 03:32:27.527 - happened before when the chemical industry has withdrawn lethal products for similar reasons. We can 03:32:27.527 --> 03:32:35.877 - make it happen again. The risk of doing nothing for our children and families is extinction. 03:32:35.877 --> 03:32:38.750 - Narrow AI, Tool AI, and Safe AI 03:32:38.882 --> 03:32:47.992 - contained and controlled forever are a benefit for all. But now the AI industry is building 03:32:47.992 --> 03:32:58.390 - super intelligence with no idea how to contain or control it. Unless provably safe, ban artificial super 03:32:58.390 --> 03:33:04.926 - intelligence. Thank you. Thank you very much. Any other comments? 03:33:06.594 --> 03:33:18.765 - All right. With that also thank you again Miss Jensen for being here with us. I'm very grateful. Will 03:33:18.765 --> 03:33:30.696 - the clerk please call the roll. Council member all. Yes. Ruff Flaherty Stasberg Yes. Piedmont Smith 03:33:30.696 --> 03:33:33.918 - Yes. Sorry Yes. Daily Yes. 03:33:34.370 --> 03:33:43.506 - All right, that passes. Congratulations, Councilmember Barallo. All right. We are on the last item of 03:33:43.506 --> 03:33:52.552 - our agenda. And we are doing great, guys. Thank you all for this. Amazing. What, you got some things 03:33:52.552 --> 03:34:01.599 - to say? Motions? Sure, why not? I move that ordinance 2026-30 be introduced and read by the clerk by 03:34:01.599 --> 03:34:03.838 - title and synopsis only. 03:34:04.226 --> 03:34:14.683 - Many discussion will the clerk oh no all those in favor Any opposed will the clerk please read Or an 03:34:14.683 --> 03:34:25.451 - ins 2026-30 author authorizing issuance of City of Bloomington, Indiana general obligation bonds series 03:34:25.451 --> 03:34:33.630 - 2026 to provide funds to finance the costs of certain capital improvements and 03:34:34.114 --> 03:34:42.761 - Equipping projects and incidental expenses in connection there within and an account of the issuance 03:34:42.761 --> 03:34:51.666 - of the bonds and Appropriating the proceeds derived from the sale of such bonds Synopsis this ordinance 03:34:51.666 --> 03:35:00.227 - approves the issuance of general obligation bonds of the city of Bloomington, Indiana under Indiana 03:35:00.227 --> 03:35:01.854 - code 36-4-6-19 and 03:35:02.210 --> 03:35:09.867 - In an aggregate principal amount not to exceed six million eight hundred and sixty eight thousand dollars 03:35:09.867 --> 03:35:17.162 - For the purpose of financing certain capital projects and investments throughout the city related to 03:35:17.162 --> 03:35:23.230 - safety improvements Thank you, I move that ordinance 2026 dash 30 be adopted second 03:35:23.906 --> 03:35:33.102 - Okay, this just to be clear this constitutes our public hearing as mandated by state law of ordinance 03:35:33.102 --> 03:35:42.479 - of the I'm sorry of ordinance 2026 30 So as required by state law, we are now holding a public hearing. 03:35:42.479 --> 03:35:52.126 - You will have a chance to make public comment as usual on this Controller sir, take it away You a question 03:35:52.226 --> 03:35:59.890 - Procedurally, I do have an amendment to propose for this legislation and I just don't know I I don't 03:35:59.890 --> 03:36:07.630 - I don't care when We'll do we'll do a brief presentation any additional questions and we can move the 03:36:07.630 --> 03:36:15.218 - amendment. Okay. Thank you so much counselor rough So on your most recent agenda these are actually 03:36:15.218 --> 03:36:20.606 - two items the consent concern the same underlying piece of legislation 03:36:20.738 --> 03:36:26.765 - which is authorizing the issuance of the series 2026 general obligation bonds and appropriating the 03:36:26.765 --> 03:36:32.913 - proceeds from sale of such bonds. You'll remember that we provided a presentation on this legislation 03:36:32.913 --> 03:36:35.806 - at first reading at your meeting on October 26. 03:36:35.938 --> 03:36:41.446 - The presentation is in the packet for that meeting, as are several staff memos explaining the procedures 03:36:41.446 --> 03:36:46.953 - as well as the proposed projects. In response to questions from Councilmember Ruff at the first reading, 03:36:46.953 --> 03:36:52.303 - we've also provided another memo in tonight's packet explaining the processes associated with project 03:36:52.303 --> 03:36:55.870 - selection and review that are relevant to the engineering projects. 03:36:56.002 --> 03:37:02.874 - So along with me tonight, we have Justin Chang from Reedy Financial, Stephanie Crandall, the Bond Council 03:37:02.874 --> 03:37:09.552 - from Barnes and Thornburg. Was she able to join by Zoom? Great. Thank you very much. Corporate Council 03:37:09.552 --> 03:37:16.424 - Margie Rice, Deputy Mayor Gretchen Knapp, Deputy Fire Chief Max Litwin, and City Engineer Andrew Seaborg. 03:37:16.424 --> 03:37:23.102 - We are not going to reiterate the presentation, but we're happy to answer any questions that you have. 03:37:23.234 --> 03:37:29.704 - Being considered first is the official public hearing on the appropriation of the bond proceeds So this 03:37:29.704 --> 03:37:36.049 - is a statutory opportunity for the public to make comment on the proposed bonds and the appropriation 03:37:36.049 --> 03:37:42.332 - the public hearing has been properly noticed in the state's gateway system and then after the public 03:37:42.332 --> 03:37:48.926 - hearing concludes the Will then be up for questions on the actual ordinance 2026 30 which includes both a 03:37:49.058 --> 03:37:55.702 - authorizing the issuance of the series 2026 geo bonds and appropriating the bond proceeds I will just 03:37:55.702 --> 03:38:02.803 - say that I think that we have a package of projects in this bond that fits right in with multiple priorities 03:38:02.803 --> 03:38:09.382 - the council has asked us to prioritize in particular maintaining and enhancing our assets pedestrian 03:38:09.382 --> 03:38:14.398 - safety and implementing our plans so I don't know if Stephanie has any other 03:38:14.722 --> 03:38:21.958 - comments she wants to make about the requirements of the public hearing or any other process comments 03:38:21.958 --> 03:38:29.052 - before we move on to hearing from the public? No, you've covered it. Okay, great. Well, I will step 03:38:29.052 --> 03:38:36.217 - back and listen to the public. So at this time, there's, and there'll be another time, but if anyone 03:38:36.217 --> 03:38:42.814 - would like to make public comment on during this time of public hearing, now is your chance. 03:38:45.282 --> 03:38:53.624 - Is there anyone online. OK. And so with that we'll come to council members. Are there any questions. 03:38:53.624 --> 03:39:01.553 - Council member Ruffin and then you can feel free to introduce the amendment I believe. Correct. 03:39:01.553 --> 03:39:10.473 - Yes everyone. I want to first of all thank administration staff for providing information that was provided 03:39:10.473 --> 03:39:13.694 - in response to my questions from last. 03:39:14.370 --> 03:39:22.592 - last meeting where this was discussed but as Mr. McKim said when I someone I spoke to him about it on 03:39:22.592 --> 03:39:30.734 - the phone It might not satisfy your concerns, but here's the information and I appreciate the effort 03:39:30.734 --> 03:39:38.876 - very much and from planning transportation staff and receive or two so But a side question I noticed 03:39:38.876 --> 03:39:41.214 - in the list of projects that 03:39:42.658 --> 03:39:50.676 - Indiana Avenue project in a list of the traffic safety Projects the roadway projects, right and and 03:39:50.676 --> 03:39:58.854 - for a while there all the talk was Indiana Avenue was like sort of on accelerated pace it seemed like 03:39:58.854 --> 03:40:06.871 - to move forward and You know, there's nothing into this 10th Street. There's West Kirkwood. There's 03:40:06.871 --> 03:40:09.918 - What's what's why not Indiana Avenue? 03:40:17.474 --> 03:40:26.574 - Good evening. Andrew Seabor city engineer. Indiana Avenue was a project led and facilitated by our planning 03:40:26.574 --> 03:40:34.410 - and transportation department basically at a study level. It was ultimately presented to the 03:40:34.410 --> 03:40:43.173 - city transportation commission a version of it. The transportation commission voiced some concerns with 03:40:43.173 --> 03:40:46.206 - the proposal that they were shared. 03:40:46.370 --> 03:40:53.791 - and asked for another option to be reconsidered. Since that time basically the approach has been that 03:40:53.791 --> 03:41:01.284 - changing or further evaluations of Indiana would be more appropriate to do through the larger downtown 03:41:01.284 --> 03:41:08.705 - corridor study that's planned for next year. So we've talked a lot about a Kirkwood study but that is 03:41:08.705 --> 03:41:16.126 - going to be more than a Kirkwood study looking at downtown transportation facilities and how they all 03:41:16.450 --> 03:41:23.536 - off of each other so so it's essentially the plan is to look at Indiana and other facilities in the 03:41:23.536 --> 03:41:30.622 - downtown corridor area starting next year okay so just as quick follow-up to that so the university 03:41:30.622 --> 03:41:38.133 - being Indiana University it hasn't gotten involved or weighed in in any way shape or form on that project 03:41:38.133 --> 03:41:42.526 - for example I know the the city planning department primarily 03:41:42.818 --> 03:41:48.942 - Coordinated with a lot of stakeholders including Indiana University. I want to say it was either thing 03:41:48.942 --> 03:41:55.126 - was last week actually I joined a meeting with IU leadership and city planning staff just to talk about 03:41:55.126 --> 03:42:00.894 - transportation planning generally and there's some great opportunities where they are looking to 03:42:01.154 --> 03:42:08.812 - Initiate a transportation study of their own transportation plan for their campus And so that timing 03:42:08.812 --> 03:42:16.546 - aligns really well with what planning is looking to do next year to try to coordinate those two plans 03:42:16.546 --> 03:42:24.204 - To make sure they sync and work together Okay, thank you for that. I was just wondering in that list 03:42:24.204 --> 03:42:30.270 - of projects why I didn't see it so if I could make motion move my amendment and 03:42:30.978 --> 03:42:44.222 - I would need the assistance of Mr. Rossman and or mr. Allen Can you put the amendment up rather than 03:42:44.222 --> 03:42:57.465 - Is it did when the draft I sent to you Okay, thank you. Thank you very much So what my met what this 03:42:57.465 --> 03:43:00.350 - amendment does is it? 03:43:00.578 --> 03:43:11.313 - Cuts the bond amount in half to be sought that sorry we haven't is there a second. Oh, sorry anyway 03:43:11.313 --> 03:43:22.155 - Okay, go ahead introduce it this amendment would cut the amount of the bond in half and Restrict the 03:43:22.155 --> 03:43:30.206 - use of the proceeds of the bond funds to fully fund the firetruck and then 03:43:30.594 --> 03:43:38.789 - specific aspects of certain projects I don't are they listed in there what I meant the the lighting 03:43:38.789 --> 03:43:47.231 - the intersection lighting sidewalk and pavement reconstruction on 10th Street some of the details that 03:43:47.231 --> 03:43:55.999 - were included in in the project details and the reason the reason I'm the reason I'm doing this is because 03:43:55.999 --> 03:43:58.622 - I'm proposing this is because I 03:44:00.034 --> 03:44:10.231 - I don't feel like these two General major project proposals a two and a half million dollar needed fire 03:44:10.231 --> 03:44:20.232 - emergency vehicle with roadway projects that include, you know curb bump outs Whatever changes to the 03:44:20.232 --> 03:44:28.958 - roadway that we're seeing a lot all over town that I know are well intended and meant to 03:44:29.186 --> 03:44:40.986 - Intended to promote safety for all users, but in my experience They're not doing that they're the citizens 03:44:40.986 --> 03:44:52.345 - the community at large The majority my sense is are not happy with with what is going on and the irony 03:44:52.345 --> 03:44:55.102 - to them and to me too of 03:44:56.514 --> 03:45:04.505 - Large new emergency vehicle like this fire truck In the in the same bond funding restrictions to the 03:45:04.505 --> 03:45:12.416 - street constrictions and Deflections and modifications the street that will make it actually harder 03:45:12.416 --> 03:45:20.565 - and slower To use that piece of equipment I'm real quick. I just like to show right over here on South 03:45:20.565 --> 03:45:25.470 - Rogers the other day I rode my bike as I do most every day in 03:45:25.602 --> 03:45:34.354 - in this community. And can you run the little clips that I'd like to show? Run the one that's one minute 03:45:34.354 --> 03:45:42.773 - first. So this was just the other day. And the camera's mounted on a little mount on the front of my 03:45:42.773 --> 03:45:51.275 - bike. And I know these aren't well-intended. I'm not questioning anybody's intent at all. As a matter 03:45:51.275 --> 03:45:54.526 - of fact, I want to applaud the efforts 03:45:55.202 --> 03:46:02.323 - To try to make our streets safer by This is going if you can get it up this is simply running West yeah 03:46:02.323 --> 03:46:09.239 - run the run the minute one. That's a minute and seven. Okay, so here we are Crossing Rogers and this 03:46:09.239 --> 03:46:16.224 - is the new work. I'm on a bike that car just pulled in I'm you see the Nick so I'm as a bike list fun 03:46:16.224 --> 03:46:24.030 - cyclist funneling into that curb that's been placed on the left middle and on the right it's been brought out and 03:46:24.386 --> 03:46:32.295 - And so at a busy time, this was a relatively unbusy time late evening. But as you can see now, I don't 03:46:32.295 --> 03:46:40.051 - know why I hit a button that inadvertently slowed the way down. But if you're patient, you'll see as 03:46:40.051 --> 03:46:47.884 - I come through here that there's not room really for a car to go around me, which of course irritates 03:46:47.884 --> 03:46:53.182 - cars and makes them more resentful to cyclists when they get held up 03:46:53.378 --> 03:47:02.141 - in a situation like this. And then as you see, as you come out of this restriction, up ahead, you will 03:47:02.141 --> 03:47:10.733 - see right where the curb bumps out significantly right there, where the space between the car on the 03:47:10.733 --> 03:47:19.921 - right and the curb is that far. Now, if you could run the second one that's about 30 seconds or 40 seconds, 03:47:19.921 --> 03:47:22.814 - and then there's a 20 second one. 03:47:23.938 --> 03:47:31.442 - So then this is where it's relatively unmodified. There's room on the right. I'm riding in what would 03:47:31.442 --> 03:47:38.873 - be places for cars to park, and then there's a car coming through on the left. And right ahead of me 03:47:38.873 --> 03:47:46.378 - is this bump out deflecting device. This is what I'm headed right at. There's a curb coming right up, 03:47:46.378 --> 03:47:52.190 - covered by leaves, kind of dangerous. And you can see the opening right there. 03:47:52.770 --> 03:48:00.730 - forces me into into the roadway very much into the roadway and then you cross the intersection and as 03:48:00.730 --> 03:48:09.002 - you approach that curb bump out what if a car is coming behind me which and and not be look at the arrows 03:48:09.002 --> 03:48:16.962 - from the curb to the center line there and I'm a bike now I get around it and you can see it it opens 03:48:16.962 --> 03:48:20.318 - up again on the last ones the 22nd one and 03:48:23.202 --> 03:48:32.413 - So here you can get another good view of what we're talking about. This is farther on. These are just 03:48:32.413 --> 03:48:41.443 - as I'm writing down. This is one after the other as I'm headed west. The reason I want to show that 03:48:41.443 --> 03:48:50.473 - is we're seeing this all over town, these projects. And again, they're well intended, I know. But I 03:48:50.473 --> 03:48:53.182 - cannot vote for more of that. 03:48:55.394 --> 03:49:04.855 - When I want to but but I want to vote for the firetruck and for some of the things that are listed the 03:49:04.855 --> 03:49:14.040 - sidewalk reconstruction on 10th Street pavement improvements the lighting the improved lighting But 03:49:14.040 --> 03:49:23.501 - Millions more of which some is going to go to Those types of modifications the roadways I I can't I've 03:49:23.501 --> 03:49:25.246 - got it has to stop 03:49:26.018 --> 03:49:34.406 - We've had enough that we need to step step back and really look and try to assess what? What they're 03:49:34.406 --> 03:49:42.794 - doing for us. Are they really creating safety and how does the community how does the citizenry feel 03:49:42.794 --> 03:49:51.431 - about? these All of these things that large speed bumps curbs bump outs So I'm proposing this amendment 03:49:51.431 --> 03:49:52.926 - to fully fund the 03:49:53.058 --> 03:50:02.712 - The firetruck and some of the roadway improvements but not leave enough for carte blanche of these these 03:50:02.712 --> 03:50:11.905 - other types of projects because as we've seen We don't really have the ability To really dictate or 03:50:11.905 --> 03:50:21.559 - design or have a lot of input. I don't I don't I don't think the public has confidence that their wishes 03:50:21.559 --> 03:50:22.846 - and input and 03:50:23.042 --> 03:50:29.853 - is really taken into consideration when the designs are made. When I stopped my bike, when I've taken 03:50:29.853 --> 03:50:36.730 - those videos, I stopped on the street for a second at the intersection of Rogers and Maple, or I'm not 03:50:36.730 --> 03:50:43.407 - sure which one I was at. And a woman came out and said, what are you filming? And I said, well, I'm 03:50:43.407 --> 03:50:50.084 - concerned about these bump outs. And she goes, I live here. I have three young children. And I hate 03:50:50.084 --> 03:50:53.022 - them. So we walked to Building Crates Park. 03:50:53.378 --> 03:51:00.670 - We've crossed before these she said they've they confuse people. They don't slow down the traffic. They 03:51:00.670 --> 03:51:07.822 - confuse the traffic They make people nervous. It's we hate them and I've heard that in time and again 03:51:07.822 --> 03:51:15.114 - and and and and I'd also and when I turn around and came back and I went through one of the longer bump 03:51:15.114 --> 03:51:22.686 - outs I could tell there was a car right behind me couldn't get around me because there were cars coming and 03:51:22.850 --> 03:51:33.583 - West and I was going Easton and I could tell the guy behind me was just irritated just resentful That 03:51:33.583 --> 03:51:44.526 - there was he was put in that situation of waiting for me to to move through there. So I I Don't believe 03:51:44.526 --> 03:51:52.734 - we have a process that adequately takes into account Enough and consideration 03:51:52.834 --> 03:52:00.135 - and with enough time to really evaluate and carefully take input in. And the woman said to me, I'm a 03:52:00.135 --> 03:52:07.508 - resident here on the west side. When planning and transportation came and did what she called dog and 03:52:07.508 --> 03:52:15.386 - pony show, the design was in place. Nobody had any confidence that we were going to have very much influence 03:52:15.386 --> 03:52:22.398 - on the outcome. So thank you for giving me a significant amount of time to express my reasoning. 03:52:22.882 --> 03:52:29.792 - For wanting to do that for proposing this Again, it's I appreciate what staff and others want to do 03:52:29.792 --> 03:52:36.840 - But I just don't think it's what we're getting from these projects and I I don't want to see any more 03:52:36.840 --> 03:52:43.750 - of them go forward Let's take care of the potholes the bad condition our roads are in let's fix the 03:52:43.750 --> 03:52:50.660 - sidewalks. Let's do the lighting But let's be more thoughtful in retrospect now, we've got a lot of 03:52:50.660 --> 03:52:52.318 - these measures in place 03:52:52.450 --> 03:53:00.345 - Before we go and continue to do more of them So thanks very much. I really appreciate everybody's patience 03:53:00.345 --> 03:53:07.871 - and time, but it's upsetting to me I'm a I'm an I'm a cyclist. There's hardly a day in the last Let's 03:53:07.871 --> 03:53:15.545 - say start writing to McCullough school and I was in third grade. So I was eight or nine. There's hardly 03:53:15.545 --> 03:53:21.374 - been a day in 57 years that I haven't been on a bike in this town hardly a day 03:53:21.570 --> 03:53:29.246 - Winters and the council members can vouch that I ride here in snowstorms and It's it's it's really get 03:53:29.246 --> 03:53:36.921 - becoming. I'm a I'm a confident cyclist I'm one of the ones that's classified as strong and confident. 03:53:36.921 --> 03:53:44.522 - I Ride in the middle of traffic. I'm relatively fearless But when I was on Rogers the other day doing 03:53:44.522 --> 03:53:50.782 - that ride, I was a little Nervous and it takes a lot to get me nervous on a bicycle 03:53:51.970 --> 03:54:01.651 - So thank you. Thank you. Councilmember F. Any questions for the sponsor here. Councilmember Stossberg 03:54:01.651 --> 03:54:03.454 - question of staff. 03:54:05.250 --> 03:54:12.755 - How does this affect your long-term bond planning to essentially cut this in half because and I don't 03:54:12.755 --> 03:54:20.848 - So when this was first introduced at first reading they were limited to 20 minutes total for the presentation 03:54:20.848 --> 03:54:28.205 - and for any questions And I know that that presentation was rushed I could tell that that was quite 03:54:28.205 --> 03:54:34.974 - rushed. So I'm not sure how much it was absorbed by council members the long-term plan that 03:54:35.074 --> 03:54:42.366 - you guys are operating under right now in terms of go bonds, in terms of how bonding has had to shift 03:54:42.366 --> 03:54:49.515 - in terms of SEA 1 and the restrictions on bonds. So if you could maybe reflect on that a little bit 03:54:49.515 --> 03:54:53.662 - for us, that would be great. Thanks. Thank you very much. 03:54:53.922 --> 03:55:03.081 - I will first say that you are absolutely right that just due to our general restrictions now on property 03:55:03.081 --> 03:55:12.588 - taxes, GO bonds really provide our primary means of raising funds for capital projects, capital investments. 03:55:12.588 --> 03:55:21.398 - And we've been working with Reedy Financial on our, as you well know, being on the fiscal committee, 03:55:21.398 --> 03:55:23.230 - our long-range plan. 03:55:23.362 --> 03:55:32.410 - the What their analysis has showed is we pretty much have to rely on Geo bonds to be able to continue 03:55:32.410 --> 03:55:41.902 - to maintain An appropriate level of investment in capital. We just simply don't have the the other sources 03:55:41.902 --> 03:55:47.934 - of revenue I would like to maybe have mr. Seabor if he has a second 03:55:48.034 --> 03:55:55.262 - Talk about in particular the because some of these projects that are part of this proposal actually 03:55:55.262 --> 03:56:02.489 - do leverage MPO funding and other sources of funding and I kind of want to make sure that that that 03:56:02.489 --> 03:56:09.862 - we understand that The degree to which the this is actually leveraging other other projects the other 03:56:09.862 --> 03:56:16.222 - thing I will say is that the costs the transaction costs of doing a bond are relatively 03:56:16.962 --> 03:56:23.757 - Are relatively similar for a seven million dollar bond or six point eight million dollar bond and a 03:56:23.757 --> 03:56:30.687 - three point four million dollar bond So it's definitely less efficient to do it doesn't mean it can't 03:56:30.687 --> 03:56:37.549 - be done But it's just it is less efficient to do smaller bonds rather than larger bonds and it might 03:56:37.549 --> 03:56:44.548 - mean that we make our kind of current thought in terms of Proposal in terms of funding these long-term 03:56:44.548 --> 03:56:46.654 - capital plans is to do rolling 03:56:46.754 --> 03:56:56.205 - six-year bonds every three years So depending on council priorities for projects we may need to accelerate 03:56:56.205 --> 03:57:05.214 - that process rather than doing them only once every three years, but mr. Seaboard, can you comment in 03:57:05.214 --> 03:57:14.046 - particular on the The degree to which these these projects leverage Yeah, happy to discuss that and 03:57:14.046 --> 03:57:16.254 - any other questions that 03:57:16.546 --> 03:57:23.765 - Council members may have the specifically in this bond there are Two projects focused on crosswalk safety 03:57:23.765 --> 03:57:30.985 - that the bond I think it's the crosswalk improvements, which is Number three on the screen. We're looking 03:57:30.985 --> 03:57:38.272 - at right here. That's crossed out would fund the construction inspection of a project focused on improving 03:57:38.272 --> 03:57:41.950 - crosswalks near Tri-North and over by Kroger East and 03:57:42.210 --> 03:57:48.176 - The project's already been funded by design and next year's budget which was approved has the construction 03:57:48.176 --> 03:57:53.752 - funding This is just the inspection funding to make sure we can leverage those federal funds And is 03:57:53.752 --> 03:57:59.327 - also the design of a future crosswalk safety project that we don't have a defined scope for because 03:57:59.327 --> 03:58:04.959 - this would fund the design that we would develop that scope and present what that would look like to 03:58:04.959 --> 03:58:10.590 - the Transportation Commission. So those are two projects that have federal funding that we might not 03:58:10.754 --> 03:58:18.644 - Be able to utilize without without the bond There were other opportunities to potentially just leverage 03:58:18.644 --> 03:58:26.687 - other projects focusing on maintenance, but those were the two with federal funding I wanted to highlight 03:58:26.687 --> 03:58:34.046 - Mr. Seaborg, could you just elaborate a little bit more? Could you I mean so customer rough just 03:58:34.498 --> 03:58:42.436 - Talked at length about narrowing of roadways that cause very hazardous conditions for bicycles. Is that 03:58:42.436 --> 03:58:50.146 - part of this? I'm not sure how to respond to the statement. I don't I don't know what we're doing is 03:58:50.146 --> 03:58:57.855 - Creating hazardous conditions if anything we are implementing Safety countermeasures in City Council 03:58:57.855 --> 03:59:03.198 - adopted plans. So I'm just not sure how there's a trade-off there and 03:59:03.522 --> 03:59:10.037 - I mean if bicyclists use this a road and it in its intermittently narrowed such it forces you into traffic 03:59:10.037 --> 03:59:16.369 - That's hazardous for the bicyclist. I guess now that could be a crosswalk as well So it's might be good 03:59:16.369 --> 03:59:22.640 - for the for the pedestrian But I'm but I'm kind of conflicted here because I don't want to do anything 03:59:22.640 --> 03:59:28.851 - that causes an accident for bicyclists Which I know I've been in one for sure Absolutely, and I guess 03:59:28.851 --> 03:59:29.886 - just to be clear 03:59:30.082 --> 03:59:36.698 - What is being narrowed isn't a space that bicyclists would be expected to legally ride. Bicyclists would 03:59:36.698 --> 03:59:43.377 - be either in a bike lane that would be maintained or in the vehicular lane or on a sidewalk. Those points 03:59:43.377 --> 03:59:50.183 - would not be pinched down any further by any of these projects. I thought roadways were open to bicyclists, 03:59:50.183 --> 03:59:56.862 - but you're saying it would be prohibited. Is there a sign that says bicycles are prohibited on that road? 03:59:57.026 --> 04:00:04.767 - I don't think that's what I said and if I did I'm sorry Bicycles are not prohibited from riding in the 04:00:04.767 --> 04:00:12.584 - roads Okay, what did you say you said that there well, it was the opposite but I Think bikes if they're 04:00:12.584 --> 04:00:15.966 - you said they wouldn't be using that road. I 04:00:16.322 --> 04:00:22.278 - Where you so in other words down any area a bicyclist would be expected to be riding So if there is 04:00:22.278 --> 04:00:28.234 - a bike lane We would be maintaining a bike lane if there is no bike lane bikes would either ride in 04:00:28.234 --> 04:00:34.428 - the vehicle lane That would still be maintained or on the sidewalk that would be enhanced Okay, so they 04:00:34.428 --> 04:00:40.444 - should be sharing the lane with a car or riding in a sidewalk that and they would be doing that with 04:00:40.444 --> 04:00:43.422 - or without these projects Uh-huh. Okay. Thanks. I 04:00:44.482 --> 04:00:55.813 - Thank you so much. Other questions. Okay. This is on the amendment. Okay. Is there any public comment 04:00:55.813 --> 04:01:07.367 - on the amendment. Councilman question. So this is for staff. So on the 10th Street project the document 04:01:07.367 --> 04:01:14.366 - provided says reconstructing sidewalks curb ranks drive aprons 04:01:14.466 --> 04:01:21.051 - widening sidewalks adding full height curb tree plots grass buffers between the sidewalk and street 04:01:21.051 --> 04:01:27.966 - second raised intersections and uncontrolled intersections along the corridor installing traffic calming 04:01:27.966 --> 04:01:35.210 - closing driveways where it's feasible installing traffic calming. That's that's too general for me installing 04:01:35.210 --> 04:01:41.598 - traffic calming. And that's what a lot of the things we're seeing around town are. And again I'm 04:01:42.082 --> 04:01:50.641 - I know I hope I don't come across as trying to be even be critical of staff. I just because I know it's 04:01:50.641 --> 04:01:59.283 - all meant to make Bloomington better and safer. But from what I'm experiencing and from what I'm hearing 04:01:59.283 --> 04:02:07.924 - from lots of people it's not coming out that way. It's not working out that way. And if you look through 04:02:07.924 --> 04:02:09.982 - these projects there are 04:02:12.034 --> 04:02:18.153 - References to things like bump outs curb bump outs and traffic calming just kind of randomly in the 04:02:18.153 --> 04:02:24.577 - places and just in the project descriptions, right with that and If we're if we're at the comment period 04:02:24.577 --> 04:02:30.757 - I can make a kind of make a final comment. Okay. Okay. I was gonna kind of make a final so let me go 04:02:30.757 --> 04:02:31.614 - to public and 04:02:31.810 --> 04:02:39.918 - And then we'll come back if you want to make your final comment here Okay, so public comment on the 04:02:39.918 --> 04:02:48.351 - amendment would anybody like to make a comment on the amendment And don't don't hurt yourself take your 04:02:48.351 --> 04:02:56.460 - time Paul or so again briefly I think the fundamental problem here with what's been discussed about 04:02:56.460 --> 04:03:01.406 - the trade-off between pedestrian safety and bicycling safety 04:03:01.634 --> 04:03:10.232 - is that we're fundamentally asking engineering to do something that's really difficult to do, that should 04:03:10.232 --> 04:03:17.776 - be done by enforcement. And that's underlying so many things that go on in Bloomington these 04:03:17.776 --> 04:03:26.293 - days, unfortunately. Mr. Seaborg is suggesting that if there are bump outs, then the safe way to proceed 04:03:26.293 --> 04:03:30.430 - down the street is to what's called take the lane. 04:03:30.562 --> 04:03:38.605 - becomes a more tenable proposition if the Driver of the car does not have an expectation to go down 04:03:38.605 --> 04:03:46.809 - that street faster than the speed limit Which they do? Thank you Anyone else in chambers like to make 04:03:46.809 --> 04:03:55.174 - a public comment Anyone online Okay, there are two people online First person I assume you'll know it's 04:03:55.174 --> 04:03:56.702 - you you can go and 04:04:04.642 --> 04:04:12.440 - Maybe we don't know it's you. Sorry, I was not clear that my name is Iris Bull. I recognize that... 04:04:12.440 --> 04:04:20.395 - I didn't catch your name. I'm so sorry, and we'll give you your time back. It's okay. My name is Iris 04:04:20.395 --> 04:04:28.349 - Bull. Thank you, Iris. Yeah, I just wanted to observe that the video that council member was shooting 04:04:28.349 --> 04:04:32.638 - is in an active construction zone that is not finished 04:04:32.770 --> 04:04:40.683 - and so some of the payment markings will be changing. Just think that it's not a really fair comparison 04:04:40.683 --> 04:04:48.368 - to criticize the experience of riding on the roadway when there's so much contributing to confusion. 04:04:48.368 --> 04:04:56.433 - But also I think that the whole purpose of the Transportation Commission is exactly to bring up questions 04:04:56.433 --> 04:05:01.150 - like when and where do we install bump outs? I think that the 04:05:01.314 --> 04:05:08.843 - The financing question here is to enable our staff to do anything. But cutting them off at the knees 04:05:08.843 --> 04:05:16.521 - is not a good use of staff time. I just don't know what we're supposed to do in the city if individual 04:05:16.521 --> 04:05:24.050 - council members are allowed to target projects this way. I don't know. It just feels like what's the 04:05:24.050 --> 04:05:29.566 - whole point of the Transportation Commission if this is what city council 04:05:30.082 --> 04:05:40.085 - conversations are, this is where we're supposed to have those conversations. So thank you. Thank you 04:05:40.085 --> 04:05:49.989 - very much. Next person online. I think that's me. We will assume so as well. Okay, because normally 04:05:49.989 --> 04:05:58.110 - there's a prompt that says you can unmute yourself, but there was no such prompt. 04:05:58.274 --> 04:06:06.035 - Good evening, my name is Eric Ost and I appreciate this opportunity to speak with you again. I was intending 04:06:06.035 --> 04:06:13.439 - to be in chambers, but it was not to be. I applaud council member Ruff for saying what needs to be said 04:06:13.439 --> 04:06:20.915 - out loud in public. I'm a bicyclist, a pedestrian and also an automobile driver. I speak with confidence 04:06:20.915 --> 04:06:27.038 - and based on my lived experience when I say that the traffic calming Greenway program 04:06:27.266 --> 04:06:35.297 - and delegation of authority for traffic control and regulation has resulted in outcomes that are questionable 04:06:35.297 --> 04:06:42.598 - at best. There are insufficient warrants for many of the traffic safety projects. Accident data and 04:06:42.598 --> 04:06:49.899 - other data is critical to ascertain warrant. I'm a big believer in trusting but verifying. Accident 04:06:49.899 --> 04:06:54.718 - data is being intentionally withheld under a presumed prohibition 04:06:54.882 --> 04:07:02.547 - that is proven false by the fact that accident data or accident reports, let me use the correct term, 04:07:02.547 --> 04:07:10.061 - accident reports are being published by other municipalities. The transportation plan was a general 04:07:10.061 --> 04:07:17.952 - and imprecise prospectus that is being repeatedly referenced as council approval for all of the projects 04:07:17.952 --> 04:07:24.414 - that staff and consultants design. I respect our staff. I know that they are sincere. 04:07:25.474 --> 04:07:35.327 - I sympathize with the previous comment in regards to staff's role and charge. But I also want to point 04:07:35.327 --> 04:07:44.893 - out that not too long ago, plans and projects came before the council. At this point, the council's 04:07:44.893 --> 04:07:53.790 - only authority, remaining authority, until it restores it, which it can and should do, is to 04:07:54.050 --> 04:08:02.594 - not appropriate money. The Safe Streets for All Plan, which a lot of this is being driven by, states 04:08:02.594 --> 04:08:11.224 - an unattainable goal, which is zero fatalities and injuries on public streets. It's noble, admirable, 04:08:11.224 --> 04:08:20.106 - but terribly naive. I have some other things to say. You know, the seven line project should be a golden 04:08:20.106 --> 04:08:23.998 - example. The Hawthorne Weatherstone Greenway, 04:08:25.346 --> 04:08:32.200 - The proposal for East Rogers Road, an arterial, is going to propose to have vertical deflection devices 04:08:32.200 --> 04:08:39.187 - installed on it. The common council should require all projects that make permanent changes to the public 04:08:39.187 --> 04:08:46.107 - right of way to come before the council for final review and approval. It is their legislative authority 04:08:46.107 --> 04:08:52.764 - under Indian code. Furthermore, the council should change Bloomington municipal code if necessary to 04:08:52.764 --> 04:08:53.950 - require follow-up 04:08:54.498 --> 04:09:04.605 - that the proposed outcomes are actually making streets safer. I appreciate this opportunity. So I support 04:09:04.605 --> 04:09:14.522 - the amendment, and I request that you do so as well. Thank you. Thank you so much. All right. Are there 04:09:14.522 --> 04:09:23.390 - any other commenters online? No. More in chambers? Is that OK? It is OK. It is the time. OK. 04:09:24.162 --> 04:09:32.378 - I said my name, I've never done this, I didn't plan on coming up. I'm Hank Ruff, and I plan to just 04:09:32.378 --> 04:09:40.759 - come to see Dave give his AI presentation, but after seeing and listening to this, my question is, or 04:09:40.759 --> 04:09:48.318 - comment is, why, you know, I've lived here 27 years now, and you know, I've never heard of, 04:09:48.546 --> 04:09:55.869 - pedestrian, tons of pedestrian accidents, maybe I'm just uninformed, but it seems like the city's always 04:09:55.869 --> 04:10:02.982 - obsessed with fixing things that aren't broken. You know, we put speed bumps all over on High Street, 04:10:02.982 --> 04:10:09.956 - all through, off of Eagleson, or First Street, and I just, it seems like these type of things don't 04:10:09.956 --> 04:10:17.070 - really do anything that is, there's no issues right now, it seems like. So, I guess that's all I have 04:10:17.070 --> 04:10:18.046 - to say on it. 04:10:18.146 --> 04:10:27.676 - tried to fix things that aren't broke it seems like so yeah thank you so much anyone else like to give 04:10:27.676 --> 04:10:37.021 - public comment all right we'll come back to council for comment on amendment one all right your time 04:10:37.021 --> 04:10:42.942 - for your comment but noting the time we almost made it you know 04:10:44.898 --> 04:10:52.054 - I'm not just talking about a bike. I'm just using example because I do bike like but I drive all the 04:10:52.054 --> 04:10:59.493 - time too and I find them dangerous my mother my 87 year old mother hit one of those bump outs and Really 04:10:59.493 --> 04:11:06.577 - it was traumatized by it by hitting one of those things in her, you know in her car So it's I'm not 04:11:06.577 --> 04:11:13.662 - just talking about bicycle. I'm just talking about the overall on the roadways and the I understand 04:11:13.794 --> 04:11:20.328 - This is an important funding source. But again, we're borrowing money. We're still borrowing money and 04:11:20.328 --> 04:11:27.115 - paying it back with interest. It's a bond Right. It doesn't make sense to say because this is an important 04:11:27.115 --> 04:11:34.029 - way to get money So we're gonna borrow it and do projects that aren't that aren't really worth and providing 04:11:34.029 --> 04:11:39.294 - the return in benefits to the city to the community to the people of community and 04:11:39.682 --> 04:11:47.132 - To justify it that doesn't make sense to me Maybe I've heard talked at the bus that there there's some 04:11:47.132 --> 04:11:54.728 - kind of crisis at transit all of a sudden and they're gonna be cutting cutting roots and you know, maybe 04:11:54.728 --> 04:12:01.961 - Full sure take all this the whole bond Not my proposed half but the whole thing and and and use it. 04:12:01.961 --> 04:12:08.254 - Can we not use it for for transit? Rather than then more of what we've been seeing and 04:12:09.858 --> 04:12:18.301 - And finally last comment. This is my realest comment We say I see this a lot And I hear it all the time 04:12:18.301 --> 04:12:26.419 - City Council adopted plans City Council did not adopt a plan that shows the details of What will be 04:12:26.419 --> 04:12:34.780 - done or what is proposed to be done or what on for these projects? The Hawthorne Weatherstone Greenway 04:12:34.780 --> 04:12:39.326 - was a line on a map saying all this would be a greenway 04:12:40.802 --> 04:12:49.485 - Right. What it turned into in my opinion was a fiasco and a waste of eight hundred thousand dollars 04:12:49.485 --> 04:12:58.341 - that we have a lot of demands and use for in this community. So it is to me it is disingenuous to say 04:12:58.341 --> 04:13:06.590 - point to council council approve approve these plans. We never approve the kind of detail that 04:13:07.586 --> 04:13:14.054 - Ends up being done. We don't and anymore. We don't even get any say in it like we used to so thank you 04:13:14.054 --> 04:13:20.333 - Thank you councilmember councilmember, we'll just go down the line then go ahead. Yeah flirty first 04:13:20.333 --> 04:13:27.051 - I know it's late. We don't need to labor all this suffice to say we have some very very different opinions 04:13:27.051 --> 04:13:33.456 - up here on the Council I do want to address a few things I think Conceptually, I think it's important 04:13:33.456 --> 04:13:34.398 - to think about 04:13:35.202 --> 04:13:40.870 - how we approach things. I appreciate Iris Bull's comments. I try to take an approach of evidence-based 04:13:40.870 --> 04:13:46.484 - decision-making rooted in community-defined goals and data. And communities are very good at defining 04:13:46.484 --> 04:13:52.207 - high-level goals. We have defined some of them, like, you know, trying to have fewer deaths and serious 04:13:52.207 --> 04:13:57.545 - injuries in our streets. The younger Mr. Ruff commented and asked about that. From 2019 to 2023, 04:13:57.545 --> 04:14:02.718 - we had 10,291 crashes in Bloomington. 443 of those ended in life-changing injury or fatality. 04:14:03.394 --> 04:14:09.184 - Nate Stratton, an IU student, was killed on North Walnut because we didn't have safe infrastructure 04:14:09.184 --> 04:14:15.321 - for scooters and bicycles. We had a law student, Perva Sethi, killed at 3rd and Washington Street because 04:14:15.321 --> 04:14:21.285 - someone was turning right on red and didn't look. These things happen all the time. We've had multiple 04:14:21.285 --> 04:14:26.206 - deaths on Indiana Avenue. They do happen all the time, and the cost is catastrophic. 04:14:27.618 --> 04:14:34.533 - Our vision zero goal, which is legislatively established is what staff is trying to achieve with with 04:14:34.533 --> 04:14:41.719 - these evidence-based data-backed Strategies that are not based on guesses. They're based on meta analysis 04:14:41.719 --> 04:14:48.702 - of worldwide design infrastructure choices things like bumpouts that shorten cross distances that save 04:14:48.702 --> 04:14:53.854 - lives things that shorten turn radiuses things that block off the turn from 04:14:54.018 --> 04:15:00.060 - Across a lane of traffic to get to the gas station at the southwest corner of 6th and Rogers these things 04:15:00.060 --> 04:15:05.988 - do save lives and prevent crashes And we're not guessing to mr. Ost's point about You know the evidence 04:15:05.988 --> 04:15:11.689 - for these things we can look to peers that are ahead of us That's true about their cities in the US 04:15:11.689 --> 04:15:17.560 - and it's true of Europe where in the 90s they had 75,000 plus deaths a year in their streets more than 04:15:17.560 --> 04:15:20.638 - two and a half times what the US had at that time and 04:15:21.090 --> 04:15:26.664 - That has plummeted through their Vision Zero goals to less than 20,000 a year. In the same amount of 04:15:26.664 --> 04:15:32.182 - time, the US has increased by about 30%. Now, we have double what they have, 40,000 traffic deaths, 04:15:32.182 --> 04:15:38.032 - fatalities a year. And with much respect to Mr. Russo, I really do believe that design is the predominant 04:15:38.032 --> 04:15:43.881 - factor. And I think that's borne out even greater than enforcement. That's not to say enforcement doesn't 04:15:43.881 --> 04:15:48.958 - have a role. It does. But I don't think we can rely on that. I think design is the biggest. 04:15:49.058 --> 04:15:54.697 - biggest feature. Again, I know Mr. Ruff, Council Member Ruff, disagrees with me about this. I believe 04:15:54.697 --> 04:16:00.281 - he's well-intentioned in the same way he's crediting staff for being well-intentioned. I don't think 04:16:00.281 --> 04:16:05.921 - anybody's questioning that for any of us. But for me, it's not about whether or not we bike ourselves 04:16:05.921 --> 04:16:11.449 - and what our experience is. I also bike. That's all well and good. To me, it's about statistics and 04:16:11.449 --> 04:16:16.978 - evidence in a kind of larger sense. And I generally, you know, is staff going to get it right every 04:16:16.978 --> 04:16:17.918 - single time? No. 04:16:18.114 --> 04:16:22.336 - Overall, they're doing a pretty dang good job on following those evidence-based strategies 04:16:22.336 --> 04:16:26.558 - for implementation. And we'll also just note that I do think the Transportation Commission 04:16:26.754 --> 04:16:31.835 - Is a good venue that has been an improvement of process to field these kind of questions and input from 04:16:31.835 --> 04:16:36.917 - residents do change design Considerations just recently between how and or between second and and third 04:16:36.917 --> 04:16:41.998 - on Rogers There were some adjustments to the final design choices. They're based on resident input from 04:16:41.998 --> 04:16:47.177 - the neighborhood for instance So I know those things do happen. I know not everybody's gonna be satisfied 04:16:47.177 --> 04:16:52.112 - with all this. I don't doubt that Councilmember rough mr. Ost here from residents neighbors that are 04:16:52.112 --> 04:16:53.822 - disgruntled about these things and 04:16:54.114 --> 04:17:00.446 - You know, some people don't like to walk their dogs on a leash. Some people don't want to drive the 04:17:00.446 --> 04:17:06.778 - speed limit These these things are all true. But you know to me the the life saving Evidence behind 04:17:06.778 --> 04:17:13.363 - all this is it makes it strongly worth it. So I won't be supporting the amendment. Thank you Thank you, 04:17:13.363 --> 04:17:19.948 - um, I wanted councilmember Flaherty to go first because I kind of knew that I could second most of what 04:17:19.948 --> 04:17:21.214 - he said in terms of 04:17:21.346 --> 04:17:28.990 - the aspects of safety and just kind of I think having to agree to disagree with councilmember rough 04:17:28.990 --> 04:17:37.017 - over his perspective and some other community members I'm sure too in terms of how some of these changes 04:17:37.017 --> 04:17:44.814 - have impacted the streets and whether or not it's I Mean data will tell us whether it's safe or right 04:17:44.814 --> 04:17:48.254 - but data can't tell us that for a little bit 04:17:48.418 --> 04:17:54.613 - I appreciate as a cyclist that yeah, sometimes you go slower and there's a car behind you that's kind 04:17:54.613 --> 04:18:00.748 - of riding up your butt and it's really uncomfortable. Well, you know what? That's the car's problem. 04:18:00.748 --> 04:18:06.944 - That is the driver's problem. And we have a horrible epidemic of really, really inconsiderate drivers 04:18:06.944 --> 04:18:13.321 - who don't care to share the road, who don't care to slow down. And as Council Member Flaherty just said, 04:18:13.321 --> 04:18:18.302 - enforcement only goes so far by design. Design has to force drivers to slow down. 04:18:18.786 --> 04:18:25.285 - And that's not a Bloomington problem. That is a nationwide problem right now in terms of crashes and 04:18:25.285 --> 04:18:31.848 - Accidents and all of those things have have gone up nationwide. It is it is an issue so Second all of 04:18:31.848 --> 04:18:38.540 - that but as an aside in terms of actually thinking about this as a bond that that we're borrowing money 04:18:38.540 --> 04:18:41.886 - so two things first of all, I said last time at the 04:18:41.986 --> 04:18:47.078 - the first reading that one of the reasons why I decided that I would sponsor this, first of all, everything 04:18:47.078 --> 04:18:52.169 - needs a sponsor at this point, right? So I'm not necessarily going to agree with everything that I sponsor, 04:18:52.169 --> 04:18:55.422 - but I think it's really important to put things before folks, right? 04:18:55.554 --> 04:19:02.178 - But one of the things that struck me was this idea of we only have so much money. And if we were thinking 04:19:02.178 --> 04:19:08.428 - about a capital investment of our own, like personal finances, I'm going to buy a car, I'm going to 04:19:08.428 --> 04:19:14.740 - buy a house, I'm going to put a new roof on, whatever it is, you're going to save money up, and then 04:19:14.740 --> 04:19:21.176 - you're going to do it. And that that just doesn't really work in municipal finances, because then what 04:19:21.176 --> 04:19:24.926 - you're doing is you're saving tax dollars that these people 04:19:25.410 --> 04:19:32.600 - Paid but then you're using it over here and these people are going to take advantage of it so the folks 04:19:32.600 --> 04:19:39.652 - that paid for it aren't getting to take advantage of it and so by borrowing by doing that bonding the 04:19:39.652 --> 04:19:46.634 - people who are paying for it also get to take advantage of it and so the thing that we can you know, 04:19:46.634 --> 04:19:53.548 - potentially debate is these these projects, but I Don't think that it is wise to reduce the overall 04:19:53.548 --> 04:19:54.654 - bond amount and 04:19:55.010 --> 04:20:03.271 - Because as Mr. McKim said, that our fees, our overhead, all of that is going to be the same no matter 04:20:03.271 --> 04:20:11.775 - what. And so if we're just looking at it from a very straight financial perspective, it makes zero sense 04:20:11.775 --> 04:20:19.550 - to reduce the bond. And if we want to have, if the majority of folks up here don't want to fund 04:20:20.802 --> 04:20:26.741 - these particular projects with it, then I think that that should be the discussion, not the overall 04:20:26.741 --> 04:20:32.799 - bond amount. But secondly, in terms of what the cut is, it's the 10th Street money and the 3rd Street 04:20:32.799 --> 04:20:38.857 - money, essentially. But that 3rd Street money, to my understanding, is about signal modernization, is 04:20:38.857 --> 04:20:44.856 - about those traffic signals there. And I've noticed, since I was at the first bond meeting, and I've 04:20:44.856 --> 04:20:50.142 - gone through that intersection, and I've gone, oh yeah, those are the old ones up there. 04:20:51.074 --> 04:20:56.902 - And it's a really huge difference. I was in, I think that I mentioned at some point, I was in Michigan 04:20:56.902 --> 04:21:02.955 - a few times recently. And I hadn't really, you know, we have the new traffic signals with like the orange. 04:21:02.955 --> 04:21:08.726 - They're like color different, right? And they really do stand out. And I didn't realize how much they 04:21:08.726 --> 04:21:14.724 - were standing out until I went through a town with all old signals. And I was like, oh yeah, I can barely 04:21:14.724 --> 04:21:15.742 - see those at all. 04:21:16.002 --> 04:21:21.976 - those modern modern signals make a make a really big difference and that's the majority of I mean that's 04:21:21.976 --> 04:21:27.722 - half of what Councilmember Ruff is proposing to cut and that doesn't necessarily have anything to do 04:21:27.722 --> 04:21:33.469 - with curb ramps and puff outs or bump outs so I think that I mean I'm certainly not going to support 04:21:33.469 --> 04:21:39.386 - this amendment and I would urge my colleagues not to you and if there are a majority that have concerns 04:21:39.386 --> 04:21:45.246 - over those particular expenses that This get figured out a different way not by cutting the bond money 04:21:52.578 --> 04:22:00.781 - As a follow-up to public comment Mr. Seabor I just so so that but the transportation plan was Published 04:22:00.781 --> 04:22:08.905 - seven and a half years ago. So we've implemented a lot of these projects Are there are there and we're 04:22:08.905 --> 04:22:17.345 - data driven. I agree. We should be Do we have reports that show that these changes have reduced accidents? 04:22:17.345 --> 04:22:20.894 - could you point to like 7th Street and say I 04:22:21.570 --> 04:22:28.769 - we have fewer accidents there or to other projects to say it's worked? Yeah. We're talking about a lot 04:22:28.769 --> 04:22:35.829 - of projects. Some of which have absolutely nothing to do with the bond. But we in engineering do try 04:22:35.829 --> 04:22:43.098 - to collect before and after data on our projects to assess their impact. So what were the speeds before 04:22:43.098 --> 04:22:50.158 - a project? What were the speeds after the project? Crash data takes more time to collect. Seven line 04:22:50.158 --> 04:22:51.486 - over time crashes. 04:22:51.586 --> 04:22:59.419 - They are down compared to where they were before they project significantly, especially since the always 04:22:59.419 --> 04:23:07.327 - stops have gone back up So accidents have decreased on 7th Street. Yes. Okay, and is that data published? 04:23:07.327 --> 04:23:14.787 - Can we can you can we view it like tomorrow? There is a I know online public forum where people can 04:23:14.787 --> 04:23:21.054 - see crash data Okay That is available. Okay, great so we can put that out to people 04:23:21.954 --> 04:23:33.173 - Okay, thank thank you that that helps I'll just make a very brief comment because I think I have a Maybe 04:23:33.173 --> 04:23:43.858 - a different view and I'm probably wrong, but I not you know not being an engineer You know, I think 04:23:43.858 --> 04:23:51.230 - that the the broader issue is that we're making systemic analysis of 04:23:51.938 --> 04:23:57.651 - a small portion of things and I think that a lot of the things we're trying to do I think is councilman 04:23:57.651 --> 04:24:03.198 - Ferdi's pointed out really is a whole of system approach and you know, I think our biggest challenge 04:24:03.198 --> 04:24:08.691 - really is that like we haven't finished a lot of our projects and we're like really behind on a lot 04:24:08.691 --> 04:24:13.470 - of our projects and I think you know even in the video that councilmember rough showed 04:24:13.602 --> 04:24:19.123 - I mean, the thing that's remarkable to me is the inconsistency, right? So you're on a road that's like 04:24:19.123 --> 04:24:24.538 - this, and then you're on a road that's like that, and then we have a bump out here. And so you don't 04:24:24.538 --> 04:24:30.059 - know what to expect. And I've been saying for three years, and try it a whole different way this year, 04:24:30.059 --> 04:24:35.581 - and fail. And I guess I just fail all the things. But this is an area where we need to be putting more 04:24:35.581 --> 04:24:41.102 - money, simply stated, far beyond what we're investing right now in our infrastructure. And I wish that 04:24:41.102 --> 04:24:43.568 - we could accelerate a lot of this investment. 04:24:43.568 --> 04:24:50.137 - place to either reallocate funds or spend some of our reserves. I don't know how much of a swing that 04:24:50.137 --> 04:24:56.706 - would make something I'd love to hear, but generally speaking, I just think the issue is that you can 04:24:56.706 --> 04:25:03.146 - sort of take a snapshot of a thing that's a part of a broader system and then make a judgment about 04:25:03.146 --> 04:25:06.430 - the whole system by just looking at that snapshot. 04:25:07.010 --> 04:25:15.545 - Though I very much appreciate the approach here. I also very much appreciate the concerns that Councilmember 04:25:15.545 --> 04:25:23.689 - Ruff has brought up. I won't be voting for the amendment but I'm very grateful for all of the work that 04:25:23.689 --> 04:25:31.598 - you've put in. Thank you sir. OK. With that will the clerk please call the roll on the amendment and 04:25:31.598 --> 04:25:36.062 - then we'll come back and then we'll do some more things. 04:25:36.930 --> 04:25:45.831 - I believe you're on council member. I don't know. It doesn't really matter to us. For bond council they've 04:25:45.831 --> 04:25:54.399 - asked they've requested that we go ahead and close the public hearing at the end before we vote on any 04:25:54.399 --> 04:26:03.550 - amendment so that the vote on the amendment is not part of the additional appropriation of the bond proceeds. 04:26:03.938 --> 04:26:11.432 - But so but we'll have another time of public comment we will have another time of public comment for 04:26:11.432 --> 04:26:19.001 - the entire ordinance That's correct. Do we have to listen? Do we have to listen to my jokes jokes? Go 04:26:19.001 --> 04:26:21.598 - ahead and close it sir Yes, please 04:26:21.954 --> 04:26:31.315 - This officially closes the time of public hearing for the appropriation of bond proceeds. That was a 04:26:31.315 --> 04:26:40.213 - notice in Gateway and properly now we can proceed with the vote. Thank you very much. So regal. 04:26:40.213 --> 04:26:49.853 - Thank you. Will the clerk please call the roll. Council member Ruff Flaherty Stasberg no Piedmont Smith 04:26:49.853 --> 04:26:51.614 - sorry no daily no. 04:26:52.034 --> 04:26:59.993 - No Okay, thank you very much that does not pass but thank you councilmember Ruff for your work on this. 04:26:59.993 --> 04:27:07.876 - Okay, we are back Where are we we did the questions we did all that let's do public comment now on the 04:27:07.876 --> 04:27:15.529 - on the bond This is your last chance to give public comment on the proposed bond. Would anyone like 04:27:15.529 --> 04:27:18.590 - to give comment on the proposed bond? I 04:27:22.018 --> 04:27:31.864 - Anyone online. Oh Well, that comes back to us Okay question from councillor Pima Smith Yes, mr. McKim 04:27:31.864 --> 04:27:41.710 - the tax rate accompanying the bond is point zero two four nine Per hundred dollars of assessed value. 04:27:41.710 --> 04:27:50.494 - Is that correct? Yeah, I'm actually going to I could answer too, but I am going to allow a 04:27:50.850 --> 04:28:00.167 - Justin Chang since he's been here all evening Okay, perfect, thank you Justin Chang was really financial 04:28:00.167 --> 04:28:09.484 - group been outside the entire night happy to be here Totally fine I'm sorry. It was the question whether 04:28:09.484 --> 04:28:17.470 - the tax rate on the bond point zero two four nine was that if you could just give us some 04:28:17.890 --> 04:28:25.296 - Information about the actual impact to rate payers so impacts of the taxpayers are really going to be 04:28:25.296 --> 04:28:32.847 - minimal for the reason number one is 0.24 that's a really small change to a tax rate if you think about 04:28:32.847 --> 04:28:40.398 - that that is you know less than point to adjust about point two of a percent right, so it's a very it's 04:28:40.398 --> 04:28:43.230 - a very small change and secondly, it's 04:28:44.098 --> 04:28:51.796 - If we talk thinking about residential residential property so homes that we live in we are already at 04:28:51.796 --> 04:28:59.494 - the tax caps. So that means regardless of how the rates are change go up or down. That doesn't really 04:28:59.494 --> 04:29:07.117 - affect our tax rates. What really will be affected are the commercial and business properties. Those 04:29:07.117 --> 04:29:12.702 - will have a little bit of an effect. So just to clarify for the public so 04:29:13.218 --> 04:29:23.260 - Point zero to four nine Dollars is the rate that of the tax per one hundred dollars of assessed value 04:29:23.260 --> 04:29:33.303 - That means for every hundred dollars of assessed value that is to two point four nine cents increase, 04:29:33.303 --> 04:29:38.718 - okay But it'll mostly be felt by commercial properties 04:29:38.946 --> 04:29:47.126 - Yes, so this two point four nine cents increase at most it could be none depending on your on your property. 04:29:47.126 --> 04:29:54.855 - Yes Thank you Thank you ever so much any final comments councilmember Susper. Well, I just also wanted 04:29:54.855 --> 04:30:02.509 - to address that a little bit because of if this 2026 go bond that is being proposed is that two point 04:30:02.509 --> 04:30:03.710 - four nine cents 04:30:03.842 --> 04:30:11.845 - per hundred dollars of assessed value the thing like from a taxpayer perspective really you want to 04:30:11.845 --> 04:30:19.848 - know like the total of how The tax rate for all of the bonds that the city might have and so one of 04:30:19.848 --> 04:30:28.092 - the things that they have done in terms of scheduling is it's this idea that like some things get paid 04:30:28.092 --> 04:30:33.534 - off as new things come and so then there's relative consistency and 04:30:33.634 --> 04:30:42.259 - Yeah, so that's part of you know that slideshow and that thing so it's this very small Increase that 04:30:42.259 --> 04:30:50.883 - has a rough relative consistency in terms of rate over the next several years and we do see the 2024 04:30:50.883 --> 04:30:59.166 - bond rolling off at the end of this year and then several bonds also rolling off in 2028 as well 04:31:03.394 --> 04:31:13.017 - On this bond ordinance not because I don't think the product projects Have merit I do generally I have 04:31:13.017 --> 04:31:22.641 - like a broader concern about accountability in relation to bond ordinances This has come up over time. 04:31:22.641 --> 04:31:32.638 - It came up recently in the budget context with this administration in particular both the the Showers West 04:31:33.122 --> 04:31:38.885 - expenditures that were By by law meant to be limited exclusively to public safety purposes, and I don't 04:31:38.885 --> 04:31:44.537 - believe that's done I think the but we've actually probably violated the bond ordinance and the other 04:31:44.537 --> 04:31:50.078 - is Ordinance 2024 24, which is about Indiana Avenue, which mr. Ruff was asking about And it was the 04:31:50.078 --> 04:31:55.674 - subject of negotiations in the 2024 budget where the council wanted to see more action on the things 04:31:55.674 --> 04:32:01.326 - and we we agreed that that should be the priority project because people are dying on that street and 04:32:01.326 --> 04:32:02.878 - being seriously injured and 04:32:03.074 --> 04:32:08.882 - And it's kind of been subject to fits and starts. I talked about it recently. Staff developed some concepts. 04:32:08.882 --> 04:32:14.584 - They had a clear conception of what they thought would increase safety for all road users in a significant 04:32:14.584 --> 04:32:19.965 - way. And then a handful of stakeholders among hundreds opposed it, specifically a couple of folks at 04:32:19.965 --> 04:32:25.294 - Indiana University in the capital planning and facilities world, two of whom have now moved on from 04:32:25.294 --> 04:32:31.102 - Indiana University. And it became clear through the Transportation Commission meeting that those individuals 04:32:31.522 --> 04:32:37.409 - the ones who led to this project being presented to the Commission in a way that did not meet the charge 04:32:37.409 --> 04:32:43.240 - of the Commission to ensure compliance with city goals and and so the Commission did unanimously reject 04:32:43.240 --> 04:32:48.847 - the proposal from staff which had clearly had like a thumb on the scales and what they were allowed 04:32:48.847 --> 04:32:54.510 - to present and Asked for a new concept and never heard another word until I started asking about it, 04:32:54.510 --> 04:33:00.734 - you know six months later and As mr. C Bercher tonight and I appreciate he's in a tough spot with all this and 04:33:01.378 --> 04:33:07.921 - you know, now it's not being pursued, and it's part of a sort of downtown corridor conceptual thing, 04:33:07.921 --> 04:33:14.982 - which, by the way, isn't what the transportation plan calls for. It calls for a design process for Kirkwood. 04:33:14.982 --> 04:33:21.913 - It doesn't say a whole downtown consideration. This is sort of morphed and evolved into something nebulous 04:33:21.913 --> 04:33:28.456 - that isn't what's called for in our plans. And so that's essentially a political decision being made 04:33:28.456 --> 04:33:30.270 - outside of public meetings. 04:33:30.818 --> 04:33:35.526 - I pretty much disagree with the political decision that was made. And I just don't, so it gets back 04:33:35.526 --> 04:33:40.280 - to accountability. I mean, this was negotiated in earnest in good faith. I even said at that time, I 04:33:40.280 --> 04:33:44.988 - watched the hearing recently, you know, I was, you know, fool me once, you know, kind of thing. And 04:33:44.988 --> 04:33:49.790 - I felt like I didn't want to get fooled a second time. And here I have been fooled a second time. And 04:33:49.790 --> 04:33:54.592 - I won't be fooled a third time. I'm not going to vote for the ordinances. And I'll be hard pressed to 04:33:54.592 --> 04:33:59.582 - support many appropriations from this administration at all until I feel like there's real accountability 04:33:59.682 --> 04:34:05.307 - For these things if it there's a specificity question when it comes to bond ordinances and getting you 04:34:05.307 --> 04:34:11.151 - know We want to have certainty about which projects are being implemented Administration wants flexibility 04:34:11.151 --> 04:34:16.721 - because things change. That's all well and good. That's something different though. I think then what 04:34:16.721 --> 04:34:22.237 - I'm talking about here and I just don't really find it acceptable that Once we appropriate the money 04:34:22.237 --> 04:34:25.022 - counsels out of the picture and sort of whatever I 04:34:25.122 --> 04:34:31.567 - Happens from there and you know, maybe it passes legal muster. Maybe it doesn't if nobody holds you 04:34:31.567 --> 04:34:38.141 - accountable to it who cares so that I just not happy with it with obviously with how The actions that 04:34:38.141 --> 04:34:44.714 - follow from our approval of Bonds have gone in recent years and for that reason I'm voting no tonight 04:34:44.714 --> 04:34:52.126 - again, not a not a Indictment of the projects themselves, but rather procedural shortcomings in my view. Thank you 04:34:57.026 --> 04:35:07.007 - Any other comments? Councilmember Stossberg. Thank you. I just want to thank Councilmember Flaherty 04:35:07.007 --> 04:35:09.502 - for for kind of staying. 04:35:09.794 --> 04:35:17.948 - staying consistent with his values in this respect. I am planning on supporting this. While I agree 04:35:17.948 --> 04:35:26.102 - with that, I also know that in my discussions with staff, we discussed that issue in terms of let's 04:35:26.102 --> 04:35:34.419 - make sure that the money is being spent in transparent ways, in consistent ways, in ways that we know 04:35:34.419 --> 04:35:39.230 - exactly what is there. And I asked that details be put in. 04:35:39.426 --> 04:35:49.840 - so that we could know what to expect. And I think that there is more that we could do as a body to demand 04:35:49.840 --> 04:35:59.862 - accountability around different things. I think that it's hard sometimes to figure out how exactly to 04:35:59.862 --> 04:36:03.006 - do that, I'll say, because it's 04:36:03.842 --> 04:36:10.733 - easy to say it, and harder to keep track of making sure it happens, and there's like a lot of, there's 04:36:10.733 --> 04:36:17.757 - a lot of stuff, there's a lot of moving parts in the city, and because there are nine of us, it's really 04:36:17.757 --> 04:36:24.648 - easy, I think, probably too easy to think like, oh, I think so-and-so's handling that, and so-and-so's 04:36:24.648 --> 04:36:31.806 - not actually handling that. And they don't realize that you think they're handling that, and it just gets, 04:36:32.162 --> 04:36:40.041 - gets busy and because of the nature of this position, it's not full time. We don't have special offices 04:36:40.041 --> 04:36:47.692 - that we go to every day, so we don't end up seeing each other necessarily. And it can be challenging 04:36:47.692 --> 04:36:55.344 - to manage to get in touch sometimes to connect about those things because availability is so varied. 04:36:55.344 --> 04:37:00.798 - And I'm not making an excuse about that. I think that we can and should 04:37:00.994 --> 04:37:08.809 - do more as a body to figure out how to make sure that accountability is there, how to make those check-ins 04:37:08.809 --> 04:37:13.118 - there. Honestly, I think that the special fiscal committee 04:37:13.282 --> 04:37:20.386 - can play a role in that. And I think the hard thing for me as chair of that committee this year is that 04:37:20.386 --> 04:37:27.491 - I'm seeing a lot of things in that committee that it's like, oh, we could play a role in that. We could 04:37:27.491 --> 04:37:35.005 - play a role in this. How many roles can we play? And we run out of time in those meetings. So it's definitely 04:37:35.005 --> 04:37:37.054 - something that's on my radar. 04:37:37.410 --> 04:37:45.694 - as something that I want to improve upon. But in the meantime, I don't want to jeopardize some of the 04:37:45.694 --> 04:37:53.816 - capital investments that I think need to be made. Firetruck, very essential. The crosswalk stuff is 04:37:53.816 --> 04:38:01.938 - also like, especially I'll say that East Covenanter and the Auto Mall Road intersection over there, 04:38:01.938 --> 04:38:03.806 - that's like by Kroger. 04:38:03.906 --> 04:38:11.563 - The the college mall croaker that is a horrendous Intersection it is massive. It is horribly unsafe 04:38:11.563 --> 04:38:19.373 - for any user going through and I am That cannot happen soon enough and that may be like a small piece 04:38:19.373 --> 04:38:26.494 - overall of of these bond dollars But it is going to make a hugely positive impact over there 04:38:26.562 --> 04:38:32.653 - So there are lots of pieces of this that I am that I am very I'm excited about and I also want to mention 04:38:32.653 --> 04:38:38.860 - the lighting because you know, we had a couple deliberation sessions about public safety and I was actually 04:38:38.860 --> 04:38:44.664 - meeting with Councilmember Piedmont Smith about that today and realizing like yeah, that was a theme 04:38:44.664 --> 04:38:50.411 - that people Felt less safe when you know in certain dark places and one of the pieces of this is to 04:38:50.411 --> 04:38:55.870 - improve lighting and in different spaces and that is something that you know, I've talked with 04:38:55.970 --> 04:39:02.543 - engineering and about a couple other times I remember council members who look mentioning that that 04:39:02.543 --> 04:39:09.379 - is something that that she Helped with it and I'll straighten her district to get better lighting there 04:39:09.379 --> 04:39:16.412 - and that not really Gets at several different pieces of safety and service to our residents and ultimately 04:39:16.412 --> 04:39:23.774 - We're here to serve our residents, so I will be supporting this. Thank you Thank you so much any other comments 04:39:25.346 --> 04:39:34.887 - All right with that will the clerk councilmember although I'm sorry I'll make it brief that I'm very 04:39:34.887 --> 04:39:45.090 - conflicted about this I I think at a time when we're dipping into reserves that The transportation projects 04:39:45.090 --> 04:39:55.198 - I find could be shelved for the time being I have I'm very conflicted because of the the need for the fire 04:39:55.586 --> 04:40:03.820 - Which I think is necessary It wouldn't be necessary. I think if we if I mean to me it always represents 04:40:03.820 --> 04:40:11.974 - a cost of growth because when we build tall buildings or we allow tall buildings be built I should say 04:40:11.974 --> 04:40:20.129 - There's a cost associated with that. That's never of course internalized and so it's always passed off 04:40:20.129 --> 04:40:24.958 - to the to the general taxpayer so I am conflicted about this 04:40:25.058 --> 04:40:34.479 - I'm not sure how I'll vote. Thank you. Do you need more time or should we call the vote. Right. OK. 04:40:34.479 --> 04:40:44.182 - The suspense is fairly exciting with any other any other comments. All right. For our last vote of the 04:40:44.182 --> 04:40:53.886 - night potentially will the clerk please call the roll. Council member member Flaherty no Stasberg yes. 04:40:54.658 --> 04:41:10.630 - Pete Mott Smith? Yes. Asari? Yes. Daly? Yes. Rallo? Yes. Ruff? No. OK, that motion carries six. Five, 04:41:10.630 --> 04:41:24.254 - two. Thank you all so very much for all of your time. Thank you, thank you, thank you. 04:41:24.354 --> 04:41:31.482 - We now come to the final moment of public comment. And if anyone would like to make, you've been sitting 04:41:31.482 --> 04:41:38.339 - here and you're just like, man, you know what I'd like to do at 1130? Make a public comment. Anyone? 04:41:38.339 --> 04:41:45.263 - Anyone online? Are you coming to make a public comment, Ms. Rousseau? Come on, then. Round us out. If 04:41:45.263 --> 04:41:52.188 - it's on the agenda, though, we're going to call the Sergeant of Arms. I'm joking. Go on. Because he's 04:41:52.188 --> 04:41:53.342 - not here. Go on. 04:41:53.858 --> 04:42:01.687 - It's tangentially related to something that came up my in in in in watch in watching both the Historic 04:42:01.687 --> 04:42:09.592 - Preservation Commission and the Transportation Commission and then following up on some of the comments 04:42:09.592 --> 04:42:17.270 - that were made at the Historic Preservation Commission and the problems I Wondered why is it that we 04:42:17.270 --> 04:42:19.550 - use Roberts rules of order? I 04:42:22.530 --> 04:42:29.267 - And I looked it up online to say, well, maybe it's an Indiana State requirement. And it's not. And then 04:42:29.267 --> 04:42:35.810 - I started reading more about Robert's Rules of Order and found out that it was actually designed for 04:42:35.810 --> 04:42:42.287 - large parliamentary bodies by someone from the military who wanted deficiency prioritized. And it's 04:42:42.287 --> 04:42:48.960 - inappropriate for small bodies, generally. So I want to raise that question. It may not be appropriate 04:42:48.960 --> 04:42:51.486 - for you, since you have long meetings. 04:42:52.546 --> 04:42:59.039 - But there are other ways to do business. There's complete consensus, which takes a long time. There 04:42:59.039 --> 04:43:05.727 - are modified consensus models and everything in between consensus and Robert's Rules of Order. And you 04:43:05.727 --> 04:43:12.740 - can do whatever you want, apparently, and so I'd like to put that out there, especially for the committees. 04:43:12.740 --> 04:43:19.038 - I don't see, the committees don't have the kind of agenda that you have, and I see no reason why 04:43:19.330 --> 04:43:28.175 - Committee meeting that's usually an hour and hour or an hour and a half can't be done with a more modified 04:43:28.175 --> 04:43:36.524 - consensus more congenial Process so that's all thank you. Thank you so much. Is there anyone online? 04:43:36.524 --> 04:43:44.955 - Oh All right. Well guys, thank you one important note about council schedule We our next deliberation 04:43:44.955 --> 04:43:48.510 - session is on Tuesday not on Wednesday and 04:43:49.154 --> 04:43:56.191 - You like me or just a habit person so Tuesday not Wednesday wouldn't Tuesday the 10th And we're gonna 04:43:56.191 --> 04:44:03.160 - be discussing Public safety again. We may also have a little bit of a time just to brainstorm around 04:44:03.160 --> 04:44:10.335 - Housing we all voted to withhold the housing fund and so maybe worth us generating some thoughts around 04:44:10.335 --> 04:44:16.062 - what we'd like to do there, but any other announcements about council schedule and 04:44:17.378 --> 04:44:20.126 - Wonderful, this meeting is adjourned.