- 14th 2026 regular session of the Bloomington Common Council to order. Will the clerk please read the
- roll? Stasberg here Piedmont Smith Zulek here. Sorry here daily here Rallo here rough Thank you
- Excellent. This evening's agenda is posted on the doors also online, but it includes one resolution
- regarding 2026 community development block grant funding, three ordinances including a salary ordinance
- and two amendments to the UDO.
- There's no legislation for first reading, and there will be two opportunities for public comment. At
- this time, I'd like to move for the approval of our minutes. Are there any corrections to the minutes?
- Hearing none, is there a motion to approve? Is there a second? Second. All right. We don't have anybody
- attending online. Can we approve the minutes by voice vote? Yes, but before you do so, I think
- the second was Councilmember daily Okay, and the first was there by councilmember Zulik, okay All right
- I have a motion and a second to approve the minutes from September 3rd September 17th and September
- 24th All those in favor say aye aye any opposed? that motion carries Thank you very much
- Moving on to reports, and we'll start with reports from council and council members. Does anybody have
- a report? All right, council member Piedmont-Smith. Yeah, two things this evening. First of all, I'd
- like to note the passing of Lee Williams, the founder of the Lotus World Music and Arts Festival. Lee was
- a huge figure in the art scene since the early 90s. He was one of the co-founders of Lotus, and he served
- as its director from 1995 till 2014, and as its artistic director through 2017. And he was really,
- I mean, Lotus has been such a
- a boon to the community, to those of us who live here, and also to many people who come from all over
- the Midwest and the country to enjoy the international musical acts that participate in Lotus. And it's
- thanks to his visionary leadership that that is possible and his legacy will live on as Lotus Festival
- continues.
- The second thing I wanted to mention is that on Monday is Martin Luther King Jr. Day. And as usual,
- the city of Bloomington is going to have a celebration of Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday with a guest
- speaker, Dr. Tracy Parker of UC Davis, who is going to speak on the theme of soul, spirit, and sacrifice
- honoring the legacy of Coretta Scott King and the women who faced America to save the nation or the
- United States. The presentation of the Martin Luther King Jr. Legacy Award will also take place. And
- that celebration will start earlier than usual at 5.30 on Monday evening at the Buskirk Chumlee Theater
- so that we can be finished in time to watch the college football championship at 7.30.
- So that is my report Any other councilmembers have reports councilmember Stasberg I just wanted to give
- everybody an update about Plan Commission We had our first Plan Commission meeting of the year on Monday
- night. It was a very long meeting because there were three Petitions on it that all generated lots of
- discussion and interest. So just wanted to give a short summary of those the first one
- is the Trades District Hotel, and that was approved by Planning Commission with a set of conditions.
- Basically, they were following the UDO, and the conditions just have to do with things that still have
- to be ironed out and those last things. I did make sure, if you remember, we vacated part of the alley
- for that hotel, kind of on the promise that there was then going to be an L-shaped alley, and so new
- alley dedicated, new right-of-way dedicated.
- is in the plan. The other two petitions were forwarded to second readings. One of them was about a new
- subdivision off of Dunn Street that is being proposed kind of between Matlock Heights and Blue Ridge.
- And that also generated a lot of public comment. And they're looking for a couple different waivers
- and then several variance approvals from the BZA ultimately. So sort of an interesting petition.
- And then the third thing that we talked about that also got forwarded was the Hopewell PUD. So y'all
- heard about that already. It is like formatted a little bit differently. And staff had a lot of feedback
- around how it was formatted. And so I expect a lot of that to change. But if anybody has any desire
- to talk to me about either of those two that have been forwarded on to second petitions, let me know.
- Thanks. Councilmember Ruff?
- Announce that this Saturday this coming Saturday. What is the date to? the 17th of January councilman,
- Raul, and I will be hosting our monthly constituent meeting and any constituent who's interested in
- Joining us and discussing issues city issues that are on their mind can go to the city's website and
- Find our the link directly to our our meeting on our virtual meeting. Thank you Any other council member reports
- Seeing none am I correct attorney later that we do not have any mayoral or office presentations today
- Excellent in that case we will move on to appointments to boards and commissions Council members may
- bring forward any motions at this point point of order next thing on the agendas council committees
- and then reports from the public
- Sorry read this wrong So so sorry say that say that one more time well council committees first, which
- I don't know that we have any and then Public comment. Yes, I have so so something for council committees.
- I have a quick thing for council committees I need to change officially the chair positions for the
- council committee on for budget and
- and the Council Committee for Special Processes. I had mentioned at the last meeting that Councilmember
- Piedmont-Smith was going to chair budget and that Councilmember Stosberg was going to chair the Committee
- on Special Processes and I'm going to switch those appointments at the request of the Councilmembers.
- And also just wanted to state for the record, because I didn't mention this when we made appointments at our
- organizational meeting that we're discontinuing the Budget task force This year, so that's why we made
- no appointments to the budget task force Anything else on council committees? To make for the citizen
- committee members for Jack Hopkins social service grants I moved to appoint Katherine and Tia Moa and
- to reappoint Cameron Greer and Eddie row Okay, there's a motion and a second to appoint three people
- to the Jack Hopkins Commission committee Is there any discussion Is that in our packet somewhere and
- I missed it Sorry, is that are there
- Those names in our packet somewhere and I missed it. No Okay, can you I I missed I I missed the names
- then could you yep Catherine and Tia Moa? Cameron Greer and Eddie Rue Is there any questions or discussion I
- Seeing none, we have a motion and a second, so will the clerk please? Actually, we can also do this
- by voice vote. So all those in favor, please signal by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? Any abstentions?
- That motion carries. Thank you very much. Are there any other motions for appointments? I believe none. Okay.
- moving smoothly along.
- That means, unless I'm incorrect, that we're now moving to a time of public comment. This is an opportunity
- for members of the public to address the council on items not on our agenda. You'll have three minutes.
- And if you wish, please state your name for the record if you want to say your name. But please do sign
- in at the dais. Those of you online, you can raise your hand to signal that you want to comment. And
- we will acknowledge you. So is there anybody in council chambers who
- would like to make public comment at this point? Seeing none, is there anyone online? To the people
- online then. My name is Kevin Keough.
- I'm a lifelong resident of Bloomington and I come before you again tonight out of genuine concern for
- transparency and accountability in our city government. Values that I believe most of you sincerely
- support and values that are essential to public trust. At the last council meeting I spoke of the city's
- fiscal year 2024 annual comprehensive financial report.
- That report was due no later than September 30, 2025, and was later promised by December 31, 2025,
- and yet, as of today, is still not public available. For residents who care about fiscal oversight,
- this delay raises reasonable and legitimate questions. Since that meeting, I read, just today, a report
- about the Board of Public Works adoption of a new special events policy, and it has further deepened
- my concern.
- During that meeting, a city official cited a very specific attendance figure for the 4th Street Festival,
- 1,700 attendees on Saturday and 1,600 on Sunday, based on data from a city's vendor, Placer.ai. These
- numbers were used to counter public testimony and to support policy decisions affecting a long-standing
- community event.
- A reporter in the past has requested records supporting these figures from Placer AI. The city has responded
- to that reporter that no records exist because the data is live and is not saved. Respectfully, that
- explanation is troubling.
- I want to be clear about the perspective I bring. I'm a certified information system security professional
- with over 25 years of experience as an IT auditor. In my professional career, data that is relied upon
- for decision-making, especially data cited in public forums, must be reproducible, retained, and subject
- to review. If information cannot be produced, examined, or validated, it should not be used as a basis
- for policy decisions.
- If data is reliable enough to be cited publicly and used to justify changes to a long-standing community
- tradition, then it should also be available for public scrutiny. Transparency is not optional. It is
- foundational to good governance.
- and are delayed, and when operational data is cited but cannot be produced, a pattern begins to emerge,
- one that erodes public trust, even among residents who want to believe in the integrity of their local
- government. I respectfully urge the Council and the city leadership to ensure that record-supporting
- public decisions are preserved, disclosed as required by law,
- and communicated clearly to the public. Bloomington's reputation for civic engagement and openness depends
- on it. Thank you for your time and your service to the community. Also, thank you for keeping time,
- even though the clock was not on. That was fantastic. Are there any other commenters online? Anyone
- else in chambers who'd like to make a comment at this period? Seeing none, we are going to move on.
- I'm sorry, I muted myself. We have no legislation for first reading. And so we are going to move straight
- into legislation for second reading and resolutions. Do I have any motions? I move that resolution 2026-02
- be introduced and read by the clerk by title and synopsis only. Second. There's a motion and a second.
- May the clerk please read. Oh, I'm sorry.
- We're with the clerk. Can we do this by voice vote as well? I'm sorry novice here Thank you very much,
- okay There's been a motion and a second I'm to introduce for this piece of legislation to be read by
- title and synopsis all those in favor Please signal by saying aye aye any opposed any abstained that
- motion carries. Will the clerk clerk, please read I
- Resolution twenty twenty six dash zero two to approve recommendations for distribution of community
- development block grant funds for twenty twenty six. The synopsis is as follows the city of Bloomington
- is eligible for an estimated seven hundred seventy eight thousand two hundred ninety three dollars in
- twenty twenty six community development block grant funds from the United States Department of Housing
- and Urban Development. This resolution outlines program recommendations from the Citizens Advisory Committee
- and the Redevelopment Commission.
- pursuant to federal regulations, CDBG allocations are made across the following general program areas,
- social services programs, physical improvements, and administrative services. I move that resolution,
- 2026.02, be adopted. Second. Excellent. Is there anyone from the administration here to present on this
- resolution? Hooray.
- Kylian Hansen the director of housing and neighborhood development and I am joined this evening by our
- dedicated and talented staff Matthew swimming our CDBG physical improvements program manager and Cody
- Toothman our social services program manager and
- Every year we come before you as part of our citizen participation plan to share the community development
- block grants known as CDBG Recommendations from the citizen advisory committee, which is why we are
- here tonight There we go
- The Community Development Block Grant is a federal grant distributed via formula from HUD under Title
- I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 as amended to states and local governments. Recipients
- use the grant funds to develop viable communities by helping to expand housing and economic development
- opportunities principally for persons of low to moderate income. Next slide, please.
- Since Bloomington's population is greater than 50,000, we are considered an entitlement community, meaning
- we receive an annual allocation from HUD of these block grants. HUD determines the amount of each entitlement
- grantee's annual funding allocation by a statutory dual formula, which uses several objective measures
- of community needs, including the extent of poverty, population, housing overcrowding, age of housing,
- and population growth,
- In relation to other metropolitan areas there are other factors that contribute to determining the allocation
- amount as well like the increase or decrease in the number of entitlement communities and past performance
- of the allocation recipients despite CDBG success more than 1.1 billion dollars has been cut from the
- program since 2001 and I have a feeling that we're not done with those cuts Next slide, please
- had awards grants to entitlement community grantees to carry out a wide range of community development
- activities directed towards revitalizing neighborhoods, economic development, and providing improved
- community facilities and services. But all activities must meet a national objective.
- activities must meet one of the following national objectives for the program benefit to low and moderate
- income persons prevent or elimination of slums or blight and or urgent need which fulfill community
- development needs that have a particular urgency because existing conditions pose a serious and immediate
- threat to health or welfare of the community next slide, please
- 70% of CDBG funding allocations are federally required to meet the low to moderate income national objective
- Benefit to low to moderate income individuals also known as low to mod is referred to as the primary
- national objective because federal regulations require that percentage next slide, please
- Projects can serve specific needs such as benefiting specific service areas where a population is more
- than 51% low to moderate income Activities that provide benefits to specific groups of persons designated
- as low to moderate income
- Activities that are undertaken for the purpose of providing or improving permanent residential structures
- which upon completion will be occupied by low to moderate income households Activities that are undertaken
- for purpose of creating or retaining permanent jobs at least 51% of are obtained by low to moderate
- income persons next slide, please
- Statutory regulation requires that the allocations be divided into three categories 20% for administration
- of the grant 15% for social services 65% for physical improvements next slide, please Overall in order
- to achieve the national objectives the city allocates CDBG funds on an application basis each year and
- sub recipients can apply for either physical improvement projects such as acquisition construction or
- rehabilitation or public service funding such as child care youth services food assistance as You likely
- know our head program year does not actually follow the calendar year In fact, we are still in the middle
- of last year's program. We start our next program 2026 which you're actually approving on June 1 and
- Applications are released in our portal called neighborly which is online and they start with initial
- information so we can get a basic understanding of the intended project and make sure that it qualifies.
- Every year we conduct mandatory training sessions to make sure that everybody is up to date and can
- comply with the regulations And to be be able to answer any questions that people have the CAC or the
- citizen advisory committees get organized and Review those applications and we have a public hearing
- where all applicants present their projects
- At that point the CAC gets together to provide scoring on the projects and then make their final recommendations
- Once the recommendations are made, they go to the RDC for approval, and that again is part of the Citizen
- Participation Plan for their involvement, and then finally we land with you guys here tonight. These
- are all based on estimated allocations, as we won't actually know until this spring what they are, so
- contingency language is included in our recommendations. Next slide, please.
- The citizen advisory committee is made up of two subcommittees one for social services and one for physical
- physical improvements Social service projects or are for programmatic needs where physical improvement
- projects are for physical construction or even land acquisition The committees are made up
- of a representative from the RDC and City Council and the remainder are mayoral appointments next slide, please
- Each year, the hand department gives the CAC an estimated allocation based on the previous year's final
- allocation with contingencies for more or less funding. Using last year's allocation of $778,293, which
- breaks down to 20% for admin,
- one hundred and fifty five thousand six hundred and fifty eight dollars and sixty cents social services
- at fifteen percent, which is one hundred and sixteen thousand seven hundred and forty three dollars
- and ninety five cents physical improvement projects sixty five percent at five hundred and five thousand
- eight hundred and ninety dollars and forty five cents Next slide, please
- Physical improvements, we had a lot of good projects again this year and I never envy the CAC for their
- difficult job of figuring out the allocations for the projects. The projects were for 2026, gym improvements
- and security access points added at Boys and Girls Club. Their request was for $169,000.
- The allocation ended up being $127,580. We had a project for group home flooring at 1701 East Winslow
- Road for life designs. They got an allocation of $19,420. We had a project for a new fire panel at 338
- South Washington Street for Middleway House. Their allocation was $11,334.
- We had a project for a build out of the basement area at the family shelter for New Hope for Families.
- Their request was 60,000. They received an allocation of 53,000. There was a project at Reverend Butler
- for redoing the playground and the courtyard. Their request was for 200,000 and they received an allocation
- of 150,000.
- And the last project was for my sister's closet, their new building at 1204 West Second Street. They're
- gonna be doing major renovations there. They had requested 190,000 and received an allocation of $144,556.45.
- Thank you. Oh, no, I'm not done.
- But wait, there's more. The contingency language. We always have to do the contingency language because
- stated earlier, we never know exactly what our allocation is going to be. The contingency language for
- physical improvements is as follows. If CDBG funding for physical improvements exceeds $505,890.45,
- the additional funding will be used to fully fund projects in this order.
- First would be New Hope for Families. Second would be Summit Hill Community Development Corporation,
- BHA. Third would be My Sister's Closet. And lastly would be Boys and Girls Club. If the CDBG funding
- for physical improvements is less than $505,890.45, funding shall be reduced as follows.
- The first 12,000 will be taken from Summit Hill Community Development Corporation, and anything over
- that will be taken from My Sister's Closet. And now I'm done. Thank you. All right. Thank you. For the
- social services projects for 2026, as you can see, it encompasses a lot of essentially child care, food,
- and homelessness or homeless shelters, sorry So first on my list is community kitchen with their free
- meals program receiving a full ask of 25,000 Next beacon ink the for the friends place emergency shelter
- for 20,000 Hoosier Hills food bank for their food distribution program at 20,000 as well
- Boys and Girls Club for the Ferguson Crestmont Center after-school child care and education programs
- 18,000 and new hope for families child care and early childhood education 18,000 And finally middle
- way house for the new wings emergency shelter at fifteen thousand seven hundred forty four dollars Next
- slide so for our contingencies as Matt was talking about I
- What was decided on is that if the 2026 funding level is greater than the one hundred and sixteen thousand
- seven hundred forty three dollars and ninety five cents the top six agencies will receive funding distributed
- evenly with no award to exceed their initial request and no award may also go over $25,000 Let's see here
- If the allocation is less than $116,743.95 and the amount is greater than $80,000 but less than $100,000,
- then we'd use the following percentages to calculate the award for the top five recipients. Community
- Kitchen would receive 22.5% of the total award that we are able to allocate. Beacon would receive 20%.
- Hoosier Hills Food Bank, 20% as well.
- Boys and Girls Club at eighteen point seven five percent and new hope for families at eighteen point
- seven five percent If the amount is less than eighty thousand dollars We would fund the top five agencies
- with no grant to go below fifteen thousand dollars any agency dropping below fifteen thousand would
- be eliminated and the funds Redistributed to the others to achieve the minimum part of the reason for
- that is because
- The amount of administration it takes to manage these grants, as well as the audit requirements they
- go through, does make it quite expensive. At a certain point, the dollar amount getting too low would
- sadly just be almost a waste of their time in some respects. But on that, I'll take it back to Hannah.
- Next slide, please. CDBG is a highly impactful program that allows us to craft locally driven solutions
- to address urgent and important community development needs while relying on our community to guide
- us. In Indiana, from 2005 to 2023, more than 31,000 jobs were created or retained, 25,000 low to moderate
- income households were assisted,
- 853,000 people benefited from public improvements and 2.7 million people benefited by public service
- Tonight as part of the final step step in our citizen participation plan We ask for your final confirmation
- of projects for our 2026 program year starting on June 1. Thank you very much Thank you so much for
- that presentation do any council members have questions Smith
- Yes. Thank you to all three of you for your work on this and the presentation. The Citizens Advisory
- Committee is pretty large for each program. Is that dictated by federal rules that it has to be that
- size? No, it's localized. So we adopt a citizen participation plan. And I believe the last time that
- it was updated was probably around 2023.
- 2022 2023, I believe so It's something that we adopt actually I Will say membership has been challenging
- for the CAC we there have been years where we haven't really had enough people and it's usually a lot
- of Calling folks to try and get them to apply so if there's anybody listening tonight that would like
- to participate in this really good cause but
- please sign up to do so. We could use as many folks to input as possible. So to follow up on that is
- that's not something we can change at this point. We would have to wait or how did we change that locally
- if we're having trouble recruiting.
- That is very good good question. I think that it is something that we would we are able to change It's
- not easily changed though. So we have to go through a process of having public hearings and making sure
- that The community has a chance to weigh in on those participation plans. I mean, I think that they
- really push towards as much transparency as possible to make sure that folks are really being involved
- from our community and we're not making decisions in silos and
- So I I note this Perennially, I suppose that CDBG funding has declined over the years and now it's really
- in threat of being eliminated if the Trump administration would have their way Fortunately Congress
- has resisted that however, it has been falling and I understand that
- Probably the reconciliation between the house and Senate will cut it even further Just to give a perspective
- when I joined the council about 20 years ago a little more We got a eight billion dollars was distributed
- Today, it's a 3.3 billion. It's gonna be less than that back in 1980s. It was 20 billion nearly 20 billion
- I guess my point is that
- These are our tax dollars that we send to Washington. We're getting fewer and fewer back for low-income
- earners basic needs in the community and We have some mechanisms to compensate one of them is Jack Hopkins
- funding and so that's why perennially again, I try to advocate for more even though I understand that
- we're under a crunch as well in terms of you know restrictions by state and
- and so forth. I guess my question then is, how do you see compensating in the future for these cuts?
- Jack Hopkins is one mechanism. Are there other things we can be doing to make up the difference? That's
- a really good question, and I think that will boil down to
- Each year's budget requests to be perfectly honest with you But I think that there are ways that we
- can work smarter and not harder with our funds I think that there if we are able to collaborate on which
- projects were funding and prioritize as a group not just with Jack Hopkins independently and
- CDBG independently, but maybe Collaboratively so that we can meet everyone's community needs I mean,
- I think that there are times when projects may be funded by multiple organizations and we don't necessarily know
- About it. So I maybe a little bit more collaboration could help stretch the dollar a little bit further
- would be my my hope but We haven't crossed that bridge and we haven't had to yet So I'm really actually
- dreading the time when the CDBG may or may not get cut because look we have two to three times the funding
- requests then funding and
- So it is incredibly challenging and our social service agencies really rely heavily on this funding
- every year but I also think that You know, we are restricted with our projects by big what what is applied
- for? So if we have community needs that aren't getting applications then we really need to start working
- smarter about how we're addressing them It's just my personal opinion Mine too. Thank you
- I wanted to just bring this up to be cognizant of our situation and hopefully people across the political
- spectrum will Contact the representatives and say this is unacceptable. This is our tax money There
- are people in need. It's unconscionable that it continues to be cut Thank you Thank You council members
- who look Thank you all so much for working on this. This is one that
- I think we're all excited to hear about every year. Could you please speak to the timeline that recipient
- should expect to receive their grants and what that timeline looks like in 2025 as well? Sure in in
- 2026 you mean or So for this upcoming year in this past year both of them, please It's always so challenging.
- So we don't start our program year until June 1st
- But we don't always get allocation recommendations from the federal government on time So we're required
- to close out the previous program year and we can't start the new program year until they approve an
- annual action plan So there are certain federally required steps that have to happen and sometimes there's
- delays on those like the government shut down We did not have any allocation recommendations on time
- this year. So everything was kind of pushed back and
- Add in, if it's a physical improvement project, we have to do, and there's ground disturbing activity,
- we have to do a pretty extensive environmental review. So that delays projects from starting. And so
- there are just these steps that we have to take before we can actually execute agreements and get them
- out the door. So this past program year, we also had some shutdown time as well, which we're not allowed
- to execute agreements during a shutdown. So there's certain,
- things that we can't do based on whatever the federal government is doing at the time. I'm a little
- bit worried about the January shutdown as well. We're timed on how fast we spend our money and how quickly
- these projects move, but we also have to meet these other federal requirements that slow them down.
- So for instance, this past, the 2025 program year that we're in the middle of right now, agreements
- just got executed. So a lot of them are just getting off the ground right now. So it's reimbursement only.
- It's not like we just write a check to them. They have to turn in receipts. They have to be vetted.
- They have to be vetted to make sure that they are qualified expenses as well. So there is a process.
- So they don't actually get their money until they've gone through our claim cycle, which is every two
- weeks. So we certainly try to get it out as fast as we can. But there's a lot of regulations to navigate.
- Thank you. May I please ask a follow-up question? Thank you.
- Beacon in particular. Let me know that they have not received their 2025 grants. Is that would that
- be fall under that same? Project. Okay. Thank you. I think most of them have not They're just they and
- as part of our citizen participation plan as well One of the slowdowns is that we have to wait for an
- RDC meeting to approve those contracts before they can ever get executed as well so there's just kind
- of a lot of hoops to jump through and as a matter of fact
- There are projects from previous program years that haven't even started and that's not our fault It's
- just the speed at which their projects are moving forward. So, okay. Thank you so much I'll let them
- know they should expect to hear shortly soon at some point. Yeah. Okay. Thank you customer Flaherty
- And I sent for the presentation I wanted to double check something which is that the 20% on
- the administration is a cap but not a requirement right we could spend
- Less or none that is a good question and I'm actually gonna defer to my colleagues on this one And just
- to clarify my question isn't how much it costs us to run administration it's rather Do federal laws
- require us to spend 20% of the funds on administration? It's a cap for sure Yeah, so on administration
- if we should not
- Expend the administrative part of it. It can turn into physical improvement money But you know just
- like everything else there are lots of costs that go into the administration of this You know software
- costs that we have and everything so we We rarely do not make it through our administrative money But
- to answer your question. Yes, it could be turned into physical improvement money only Okay. Thank you
- Social services funding is capped. They will not go above that percentage even though she they should
- Other questions colleagues comes from Stasberg Straight of money also a reimbursement then It is based
- on time. So we there's a whole federal system for tracking time and how we're doing that we have to
- draw down money within a certain amount of time to have it apply towards our
- Timesheets that kind of thing. So Yeah, there are a lot of regulations related to that And we also can
- use the admin money for things like phase ones Just to help prop up those environmental concerns Great.
- Thank you Any other questions Yes
- Membership in on one of the citizens advisory committees actually require citizenship since it's called
- citizens advisory committee Boy, that's I'm not sure about that. I don't I wouldn't think so And if
- not, can we call it something else like residents advisory committee? Yeah, it is in that CPP that citizen
- participation plan. So I
- Personally would like to change the CPP hopefully in the next year one of the things that our current
- CPP does not allow is that For instance when we put things out to public notice it won't allow us to
- use a website or Use online. I think we're spending quite a bit of money for publishing fees, which
- I think we could continue as well but there should be more than one mechanism that would count for a
- Notification so there are just some things in that that need to be adjusted to be more with the times
- in my opinion so when we're looking at that that would be the perfect time to kind of look at that verbiage
- and I That hadn't clicked for me. So I apologize
- So is that something that is periodically updated that citizens advisory plan or just something that
- you're looking to update in the next year or two? Yeah, it doesn't have to be updated. My predecessor
- had updated a couple things in there as well. And so we certainly can do that at any point. It's just
- going to take a little bit of time because there are those public hearing requirements and they have
- to review some of the language as well. OK, thank you.
- Any other questions? All right. Seeing none, we'll now move to a period of public comment. If any member
- of the public wishes to comment on resolution 2026.02, now is your time to do that. And I see some coming.
- So this is a reminder, if you'd like to say your name, please do. And otherwise, please sign in. For
- those of you online, please raise your hand.
- Even councilmembers, my name is Terry Amsler. I wasn't planning to speak with you. I'll try to make
- this brief. I speak as a resident of Bloomington. By her information only, I'll say I was part of the
- CDBG CAC social services committee, just informationally. And I will say also I appreciate the support
- of the staff
- for all the work that goes into this work for these CAC-like work. Just random, this is a random thought.
- It goes part to Council Member Rallo's concerns about the dollar amounts. And while I recognize the
- concern with working better, working well, working collaboratively, there is this dollar amount itself,
- what's happened over time. And so I would appreciate it within reason, within the world that we live
- in, for the city to make statements about this back to decision makers who decide on the
- matters about this issue and what it means for these dollar amounts to be reduced to the significant
- degree that they are given the already limited amount, particularly because of my particular interest
- in the social services side. Lastly, I swear, the issue of participation.
- which was a comment about the numbers and so forth and so on. As you know, I have sometimes spoken before
- about this whole question of the city's attention to public engagement and public participation. I would
- just say that for myself, I've done this a couple times now. I got robbed once because I didn't see
- the email about saying I wanted to re-up.
- and it was too late to do it, so I waited, and the next administration, the mayor kindly appointed me
- back again. So I think there's a fair amount of work yet to be done across city agencies, commissions,
- and boards and related about participation and recruitment, if you will, and knowledge of community
- participation and who participates. I think particularly speaking only for myself, for the Social Services
- Committee of the CDBG Fund Development Committee,
- The numbers there were really helpful to have a perspective across of these decisions that had to be
- made about recommendations. It could be done more effectively and efficiently, yes. Could it be done
- as well with a smaller number? Maybe not. So it goes back to what the old public engagement interests
- and perspectives are and learnings by the city. Thinking back, finally I swear,
- now really, to the city's comprehensive plan and what it says there about public engagement and how
- very little attention is ever given to what it says and how we're doing. And I'm done. Thank you very much.
- Councilmember daily, I just realized I was muted that whole time. Sorry You speak loud enough fortunately
- Thank you Yes, so I was I was fortunate enough to serve on the social service side of the CDBG this
- this term and I really enjoyed
- It was very very different work than the way we approached the work in the Jack Hopkins Social Service
- grant funding So it was really enlightening to be a part of both of those teams to see how this is done
- It was also incredibly hard work and frustrating first. I want to I want to give a big shout out to
- the staff Thank you so much for all of that hard work you do Cody I think you probably have the patience of
- I don't even know what you had unbelievable patience with us, because I know we were all over the map
- at times. So thank you very much. Mr. Ansler served with me. Thank you. That was really good work that
- you did, too. But like I said, it's really frustrating, because there's not enough money to go around
- for all of these requests. The social services were so low funded. We only get the 15% of that. And
- it was not a lot of money to work with. And we had so many requests coming in.
- for so much more than we had to give out. And many agencies, unfortunately, were excluded. And that
- was not something that we took lightly. I just wanted to let any of the agencies who might be listening
- know who did not receive any of the funding that it weighed heavily on us. And we really wished we could
- have done more. But thank you for this opportunity to be able to serve and be part of this. Anybody
- else with comment?
- Councilman brother First I want to say thanks to mr. Amsler for Always being an advocate for public
- engagement and also transparency and I agree with you that You know these sorts of things can be kind
- of arcane or obscure over time and people don't necessarily follow what we're doing But it should be
- we really shouldn't be talking about
- the the erosion of Much needed funds for the for our community and the implications of that and this
- takes the form as You know, you know, we know of incremental cuts over time so Perhaps this year the
- federal government will only cut a couple hundred million from 3.3 to 3.1, but the trend has been a
- reduction and
- And and it's significant over time and it also should be reflected that We're getting less money simply
- because even if it was frozen Inflation, of course will eat away at at those at that dollar amount.
- So I Do I also want to thank staff director Killian Hansen for your work on this and I guess it's incumbent
- on us to make this known
- both to the public, I hope the press covers this, and also to our representatives, and it's probably
- also incumbent on us to make sure that we try to fill the gap in the form of Jack Hopkins funding and
- whatever other means that we have to do so, because the need remains or increases over time, and so
- we have to do what we can
- So that's all. Thanks. Thank you. Any other comments? Excellent.
- I would just like to say that I know we've had a lot of discussions and I think it might be useful for
- all of us to continue to maybe work on this, but both the question of how do we share information better
- between Jack Hopkins and CDBG. I know they're on different timelines, but maybe that actually might
- help a little bit in sort of feeding information from CDBG into Jack Hopkins and vice versa. And then
- similarly, if any of
- my colleagues would like to think about, for example, writing a resolution that we can send once passed
- to our members of Congress and Senate, sort of just showing the support to this and what it's done in
- our community, I think, would be a welcome thing to do as a council. So if there's no motions and no
- comments, I will ask the clerk to... Oh, can I do this one by a first vote? Let's call the roll then.
- Piedmont Smith. Yes, Zulik. Yes. Sorry. Yes. Bailey. Yes. Rallo. Yes. Ruff. Thank you. That motion passes
- 8-0. Thank you very much for your time as tag teaming in WrestleMania 2026. We will now move on to Ordinance
- 2026-03. Are there any motions? I move that Ordinance 2026-03 be introduced and read by the clerk by
- title and synopsis only. Second.
- There's a motion in the second. Will the clerk please read? All right. Sorry all those in favor of reading
- ordinance 20 2603 by title and synopsis, please signify by saying aye aye any opposed That motion carries.
- Will the clerk please read? There we go ordinance 2026 that I'm gonna try this again ordinance 2026
- Dash zero three to amend ordinance 20 2025-40 to fix the salaries of appointed officers non-union and
- AFSCME employees For all the departments of the city of Bloomington Monroe County, Indiana for the year
- 2026 the synopsis is as follows ordinance 2026 Dash zero three amends ordinance 2025-40
- Be 2026 appointed an AFSCME employee salary ordinance to align with the approved 2026 work agreement
- between local 2487 CB ME AFSCME and the city of Bloomington and makes other amendments to formalize
- the salary ordinance with city pay policy I Move ordinance 2026-03 be adopted second Thank you. I believe
- we have dr. Pechak here to present on the ordinance
- Yes, good evening. Shar Paycheck, Human Resources Director. Happy New Year, everybody. I am here to
- present the salary ordinance amendments tonight, and these amendments align with the AFSCME, the newly
- negotiated AFSCME work agreement. And I just want to take a moment to reiterate that this agreement
- has already been voted on, and it was passed 82 to seven in December.
- And I just want to stress this because I believe that the highlights that I will share tonight really
- represent the voices of the union leadership being heard and the response from the administration. And
- this was nine months of conversation with the negotiation team. And so it's interesting to me how you
- can have nine months worth of meetings and then I can summarize everything in like one sheet of paper.
- So I just want to stress that.
- What you will see in the salary ordinance amendments is like some administrative cleanup. So there's
- some language that we cleaned up, outdated language or language that we just basically just did not
- use. For example, like gain sharing information. We don't have a policy. We don't have a procedure related
- to that. So it was just lending itself to more confusion than it was clarity. So you'll see changes
- like that.
- We also addressed some of the concerns that we've heard since I started with some of the great designations
- in the salary ordinance so there were you designations from the utilities employees those AFSCME positions
- and so we clean those up so that we just had like more
- more consistency more synergy across the different departments that have these employees represented
- so that was a response to some of the Concerns that we've heard so we were able to manage and clean
- those things up You will also see in this salary ordinance amendments some pay structure changes one
- of the things that I definitely want to highlight is that we
- Updated and enhanced the steps the step the longevity step progression for the AFSCME employees This
- is an opportunity for basically for them to earn more money faster
- And who doesn't want to do that? So that was a great recommendation that we have from our consultants
- that worked on this project and We adopted it and we think it's a great thing because not only is it
- a recruitment tool, but it is also a retention tool So again, it primarily will allow employees to earn
- money faster. So that's a good thing you'll also see some adjustments related to premiums and allowance
- and some additional training and professional development report
- opportunities within the contract. Some of those increases include on-call pay,
- tool allowances shoes and clothing allowances and also shift premiums so increases to basically address
- Our our desire to be competitive and to actually respond to some of the requests that we received There's
- also some incentives that are represented in this salary ordinance for ask me and that includes like
- CDL incentives. So if the city needs additional CDL employees to address
- Projects or just on-demand need we have additional employees that can earn a CDL and get some additional
- compensation for that to help out with City operations and there are other Training and recertification
- costs that are also included that I believe are going to be beneficial for ask me employees And so those
- are the highlights related to that ask me agreement and
- In addition the salary ordinance also includes information related to relocation Incentive and so that
- is something that maybe existed in the city before I don't know it's new since I've been here But it's
- an opportunity for us to have additional tools in our toolkit to recruit hard to feel safe
- Positions specifically hard to fill positions and then we also have some clarity in here about a cap
- at step three for great 14 positions Those are department heads and that is a compensation management
- decision and it is considering budget constraints for our highest paid position, so I
- I'm happy to answer any questions that you have. I have Deputy Mayor Knapp here, and City Attorney
- Brittingham is here, and HR Assistant Director Kanye to help me address questions, depending on what
- questions you have. Thank you so much. Are there any questions? All right, with that, if there's no
- questions at this time, we'll go to a period of public comment. Same as last time.
- Second verse, same as the first. If you would like to comment, please come to the microphone. If you're
- online and would like to comment, please tell us so by raising your hand. Are there any commenters online?
- Any commenters here? With no comment, I will move back to council. Are there any comments amongst council
- members? Please, Council Member Piedmont-Smith.
- Just thanks to everybody who was involved in this nine months of negotiations and discussions Also,
- I'm pleased to see The relocation incentive be included in the ordinance It's always good to
- be as transparent as possible about the tools that the city is willing to use for employment and I know
- Relocation is very expensive and I'm glad that we have that option to get good folks here. Thanks. Thank you. I
- appreciation to all of the folks on the negotiation team the AFSCME union leaders and all the city staff
- I know that that was really hard work doing those negotiations I I heard about it from a distance and
- I'm just really glad that that there was agreement reached that Everybody seems really happy with so.
- Thank you All right, there are no more comments going once any others all right
- Will the clerk please call the roll? Councilmember Stasberg Piedmont Smith. Yes Zulick. Yes. Sorry.
- Yes. Daily. Yes Rallo. Yes rough. Yes clarity Yes, thank you that passes with a vote of eight to zero.
- Thank you very much Yeah, thank you for your continued support
- We're now moving to the next thing. Are there any motions? To be introduced and read by the clerk by
- title and synopsis only There's been a motion and a second all those in favor, please signal by saying
- aye Any opposed? All right, will the clerk please read? Yes Ordinance 2026-02
- To amend title 20 the unified development ordinance of the Bloomington Municipal Code regarding response
- to resolution 2025-17 related to amending the eligibility subsection the qualifying standards for plan
- unit development subsection and defined term section of title 20 the synopsis is as follows this ordinance
- amends title 20 the unified development ordinance in the following manner
- One, it reduces the area median income eligibility percentage requirements for incentives in 20.04.110C2.
- Two, it revises the qualifying standards for plan unit developments in 20.02.050B3. And three, it eliminates
- the definition of workforce housing from defined terms in 20.07.010, Title 20, the Unified Development
- Ordinance.
- 2020 602 be adopted Wonderful. We have director Scanlon here to present take it away ma'am. Thank you.
- Good evening Jackie Scanlon assistant director of planning and transportation We are looking at 20 2602
- maybe here we go. I'm gonna see if this will work No, I don't think it's going to work. Oh did it no
- Okay Okay. Thank you. At least it's gonna help me. Thank you miss Larner. Okay Ordinance 20 2602 is
- in response to resolution 2025 17 as was said in the synopsis and there are three relevant sections
- In that resolution that dictate what is in the ordinance? So I'm just gonna briefly go through
- What those three are before I do that this petition was heard at the November 10th 2025 Plan Commission
- hearing and The Plan Commission did vote to amend the petition in order to adjust percentages to whole
- numbers that is reflected in the version you got and then
- The Plan Commission voted to send the petition to the Common Council with a positive recommendation
- So there are three items here That are discussed. The first is section 2 with an amendment to the section
- of our unified development ordinance Which is Bloomington Municipal Code twenty point zero four point
- one ten c2 with a very specific directive to include an AMI requirement within tier one and tier two
- as follows and
- Tier one to include at least some of the units priced below 90% of area median income
- While using whole percentages, which the amendment corrected and then tier two to include at least some
- units price below 70% of area median income again using whole percentages section three Calls for the
- Planning Commission to prepare a proposal to amend the text of twenty point zero two point zero four
- zero B three Qualifying standards for a plan unit development to adjust the minimum qualifying standards
- for affordability so that such developments
- using the plan unit development section will meet or exceed tier one affordability standards and Section
- four required that we obviously make any other changes in the udio that are necessary to Achieve the
- objectives in the sections above. Okay next page. So I'll show you I know it's kind of small and also
- obviously you can find the udio online this is the text from 2004 110 c2 and
- So 2004 once into 110 c2 has two sections a and b and so you can go to the next slide Lisa for section a
- We this is where we are amending the to the 90% for tier 1 and the 90 and 70 For tier 2 so the way tier
- 2 has worked historically Half of the units have to be at or below one level and half of the units have
- to be at or below another level So again, we changed that instead of half and half housing and neighborhood
- development was finding that difficult So we changed those to full
- percentages seven and eight and then we change the percentages of AMI to 90 and 70 to reflect more accurately
- The numbers here in Monroe County so that we are capturing those that could benefit from this type of
- incentive being used
- You can go to the next slide, please. So then in the qualifying standards for PUD number three is the
- one that is to be changed When residential dwelling units are proposed previously in a plan unit or
- right now in a plan unit development a minimum of 15% of the total dwelling units must be permanently
- income limited and then it
- References earning less than 120 percent of HUD AMI which was used to be analogous to what our tier
- one percentage was But because we're changing that instead the resolution dictated that we change this
- language to match Tier one so you can go to the next slide, please. Oh I think you're stuck in the zoom
- Yeah, there we go. Thank you So we changed the language to do just that so total dwelling number units
- proposed must include at a minimum the percentage of permanently income limited units required in the
- tier one section in a different part of the code So we added that reference directly and there's one
- more We found as you know, the workforce housing definition is not used in the code and because it references
- tier one and the 120% we next slide, please are proposing to remove that
- The Plain Commission is and that's all I have I can answer any questions. Thank you so much. Um, are
- there any questions? If there are none I Will go to public comment now is the time if any member of
- the public wishes to comment on ordinance? 2020 602
- You may do so at this time. Is there anybody in Council Chambers who would like to comment? Anyone online?
- All right, we'll come back to Assistant Director Scanlon. And does anyone have any questions at this
- time? All right, are there any comments? Council Member Slosberg.
- I'll go ahead with a comment. I was the one that authored this resolution in the beginning and it's
- been quite quite a journey and so I just want to thank the Planning department. I want to thank miss
- Scanlon. I also want to thank the hand department and director Killian Hanson for helping Craft the
- original resolution and come
- There were several planning Commission meetings and etc. Etc. And so I just want to express
- that appreciation. I'm really glad that this change is Officially happening. Thank you. Thank you others
- All right, well the clerk please call the roll Councilmember Piedmont Smith Sorry, yes daily
- Rallo yes rough. Yes clarity Stasberg That motion passes 8. Oh, thank you so very much. You'll have
- one more item Introduced and read by the clerk by title and synopsis only There is a motion in a second
- all those in favor, please signify by saying aye any opposed
- extensions seeing none Ordinance 2026-01 to amend title 20 the unified development ordinance of the
- Bloomington Municipal Code regarding response to resolution 2025-12 related to amending the affordable
- housing incentives and payment in lieu Provisions the synopsis is as follows ordinance 2026-01 amends
- title 20 the unified development ordinance in the following manner
- One, it increases the maximum impervious surface coverage allowance for single family detached and duplex
- residential lots in the R1, R2, R3, and R4 zoning districts for owner occupancy projects using the affordable
- housing incentives. Two, it increases the maximum impervious surface coverage allowance and decreases
- the landscape area for projects that meet tier two affordability standards.
- And three that increases the dollar amount of an eligibility for payments in lieu of providing housing
- I Move that ordinance 2026 so one be adopted Fantastic to you again Jackie Scanlon assistant director
- planning and transportation We are now looking at ordinance 2026 01 which is in response to resolution 2025 12
- We can go to the next one All right, so similar to the previous ordinance we just discussed resolution
- 2025 12 specifically dictates sections to be amended And so there are two that were discussed in this
- resolution So the first oh, I'm sorry. Let me tell you what playing commission said just a sec All right.
- This petition was also heard at the November 10th
- 2025 Plan Commission hearing And they voted to amend the petition in order to add wording that requires
- reference to the administrative manual which is included in what you received They had a harder time
- with this one and they voted to send the petition to you with no recommendation Alright, so resolution
- 2025 12 Again, which this ordinance is based on Common Council directing the Plan Commission to prepare
- a complete
- proposal consistent with the resolution to amend the text of UDO twenty point zero four one ten c five
- To assess the incentive structure and consider creating additional incentives for affordable housing
- including but not limited to expected owner occupied unit development section to the council further
- directs Plan Commission to prepare proposal to amend UDO twenty point zero four point one ten c seven
- the payment in lieu section to assess the payment in lieu option and consider an increase
- and the qualifying standard for developments utilizing a payment in lieu procedure. Next slide, please.
- So we'll go over section one. This is a very specific section called affordable housing incentives That
- includes an a and a B One is reduced bulk height requirements for developments occurring in the r1 r2
- r3 and r4 zoning districts so we were tasked with looking at those and section B as well is applied to
- Across the zoning districts and we looked at that section as well. Next slide, please Okay, so the first
- set of amendments under a we clarified that The single-family referenced here was intended to be detached
- single-family and put in the reference
- After the zoning districts saying that are also intended for owner occupancy So again the following
- dimensional standards shall apply to single-family detached and duplex residential lots in the r1 r2
- r3 and r4 zoning districts that are also intended for owner occupancy that meet either of the criteria
- and subsection 2 above and so what we did here was
- We added an additional potential incentive, which is having the maximum impervious surface coverage
- being increased to 80% So we can go to the next slide, please That does sound like a lot. So here is
- a little visual that's kind of like maybe Trying to explain the justification for allowing that so if
- you have, you know X number X number
- Acres of land and you are in a zoning district that requires 60% of that to be set aside Then if we're
- saying the smaller boxes on top of the black line on the left are the sizes of the houses that are being
- built And the rest of it is being set aside to meet the 60% in a subdivision situation Then if all of
- those houses are of similar size, you'll get six houses if you reduce the area
- That has to be set aside for impervious surface coverage. You can greatly increase in this case double
- The number of units that can be built This is also written as a may the maximum impervious surface coverage
- may be increased to 80% So it is something that the Plan Commission they are the ones that would be
- seeing petitions involving this potential incentive would have to weigh if they felt that
- It would be beneficial in order to allow it to increase up to 80% for each particular petition
- and additionally in a subdivision situation Those areas required for detention or retention are required
- on their own common area lots and so those Would still be set aside to meet whatever the drainage needs
- are of that subdivision I
- We had another question about the language that are also intended for owner occupancy. As you know,
- in Indiana, we cannot regulate who owns what, but because this is an incentive, if in order to use it,
- you're opting in, it's not a requirement. So we, legal doesn't love when we talk about whether or not
- something is owner occupied, so we've put it in in this manner, and we're thinking that it would most
- likely be used
- In such a way that the developer would they would know that that's what they were intending and then
- they would Record some sort of zoning commitment to run with the land that we would have to obviously
- come to an agreement with them in the plan commission about what intent means and how How long they
- have to agree to that? So this is just kind of soft entry into including on our occupancy as something
- that could
- Give you greater incentives that you then you could get otherwise and what else was I gonna say about
- that? One of the projects that we looked at was the matte press project on the beeline by hopscotch
- And so the single family lots there are over 90% covered and so this would be
- less than that. One of the things we also looked at was Trailview, which was a Habitat project up on
- the beeline northwest of here. And most of those lots were about 60%. And so one of the things we kind
- of talked about internally was, you know, if it was 80, those houses could just be bigger for more people
- to be in. And also for someone like Habitat, who some has in the past talked about potentially moving
- to a duplex model.
- having 80 may be able to just allow a home for one one unit or two to just be larger and allow more
- space living space as a lot of those houses for example have a lot of outdoor storage and That this
- could potentially allow for those to be greater Okay
- Yes, this is okay. So this is the other change in this section. Thank you So in the tier two projects,
- we are also proposing an increase in impervious. So same argument as the one I just described And that
- would just be an allowance of a 10% increase from whatever is allowed by the zoning district Okay,
- next slide, okay
- So the other objective of the resolution was to amend the payment in lieu section Next slide, please.
- So this is what it is and we are only proposing an amendment to section a So the dollar this I'll go
- ahead and read it out loud the dollar amount provided as a payment in lieu of providing housing must
- be based on the minimum percentage of eligible Eligible units as described in the administrative manual
- Payment in lieu option is only available in petitions for projects that contain more than 30 dwelling
- units. So The department reading of the resolution was that the council was looking for less payment
- in lieu and more units on site And so one way to do that is to limit who can do payment in lieu we have
- heard numerous times from hand director Killian Hansen that they do not have good luck with large projects that have
- units on site So we still want to leave obviously an option for them to be able to use payment in lieu
- Even if we are limiting for the whole Scape of who can do it. We don't want to limit it for larger projects
- Are less successful with having their own units. We have also heard her say that smaller projects usually
- are successful with units on site And so we were trying to respond to the resolution here by in some
- way kind of limiting the payment in lieu Availability that we thought the resolution was calling for next
- Okay, so part of this is that the specifics live in the administrative manual So this is a red line
- is in the packet of what the changes to the administrative manual would
- The first is clarifying that the count we're using For percentages is units not beds because they didn't
- used to match in the administrative manual and the unified development ordinance We would be proposing
- to increase the eligible unit calculation to 30% of the total project dwelling units So if you're building
- units on site, you have to set aside 15% of your units and
- the percentages listed in whichever tier you're using if you don't want to build them on site and you
- want to give us money instead then we want we want the equivalent of 30% of your units to be the base
- for the calculation of what you are giving instead of giving units and So we are proposing 30% here
- again clarifying that it's units and we are proposing this says that the current is 20% by
- Excuse me 20,000 per unit, but it's actually 30,000 and we are proposing to increase that to 50,000
- This number has been on the books since I believe 2021 So almost five years. It's only been increased
- once last year it was not increased in the first year of the new administration and
- and the old administration didn't increase it either. The intent, as you can read in the administrative
- manual, is that it is to be revisited and increased every year. So Director Killian Hansen did increase
- that last year to 30,000.
- We are proposing to raise that to 50,000 and that would apply to units containing one to three bedrooms
- and by suggestion of director Killian Hansen We also included that for units with four or five bedrooms
- an additional $5,000 be required for each of the additional bedrooms over three And so that would be
- a much more impactful amount In the payment in lieu amount than we currently receive there have been
- questions when we have
- Presented here before about what is the actual cost of the losing a unit for a lifetime? And are we
- getting close to that cost? We probably aren't based on numbers that I've heard mr. Flaherty for Explain
- here before and so we feel like moving from 30,000 to 50,000 is not inappropriate Considering we have
- only upgraded at once in the last five years and considering the actual loss of
- Money that the city the actual loss from losing the unit is probably far greater than we are capturing
- here last slide, please Today while I was at my son's soccer practice I received an email potential
- amendment. So I have not had time to look at it The idea is to address a difference of how the you do
- treats multifamily and single-family units and
- And that it's hard to do Permanent affordability in single-family. So This is the amendment Let's see
- As most of you know The administration can't propose an amendment to something the Planning Commission
- send you it sends you but the mayor would like counsel to consider an amendment to this legislation and then
- Planning and council staff can work together to potentially create a proposal for the February 4th council
- meeting One question we've had here many times that I do think needs to be addressed and I feel obligated
- to say with my ICP is that I don't actually know if this amendment can be done because your resolutions
- were so specific about which sections can be edited and that's an ongoing question that I think
- Council Council and Administration Council will have to figure out. But I think the idea here is to
- be more careful or thoughtful about single-family development and how our incentives affect those and
- allow them to still be, you know, functional for their potential owners. And I can answer any questions.
- Thank you so much. Council, are you okay?
- Are there any questions amongst councilmembers? Councilmember Rallo Yeah, I like to ask a question about
- the increase to 80% of impervious surface Which is pretty dramatic I can't see the table now But our
- one had formerly 30% and it goes incrementally up. I think to 50 by four, right? So that's pretty dramatic
- And you know, of course we have stormwater problems ubiquitously throughout the community It's something
- that we're obviously trying to Compensate for for lack of attention to this in the past. So I'm quite
- reticent to To make that leap of 80% So what would be a stormwater retention requirement for 80% coverage
- of say an acre?
- You said that they would have a retention pond of some kind but let's just imagine that you've got Like
- successive rain events in the spring which we do it's almost monsoon all the times right you have rain
- every day and every other day I mean is this something that Would be deployed to Realistically speaking
- that it wouldn't overwhelm
- Retention sure. I think it's a great question. Yeah. Sorry. I didn't mean to cut you off. Go ahead Okay,
- I I Think it's a good question in a subdivision situation where they're creating new lots My understanding
- is that the city of Bloomington utilities typically uses the maximum of what could be built as the base
- for figuring out what the detention requirement is I don't know that they always
- Did that when they weren't sure what was going to be built there? But that has been I believe the process
- for at least the last couple of years So basically when they're sizing the detention pond for a new
- subdivision They will if they use these incentives and again, these are only for single-family and duplex
- projects only in the r1 through r4 They would be using the assumption that 80% is covered in order to
- size the appropriate detention so I think that in a subdivision situation that would be
- Adequate because that is how they do it now, right? They size the detention based on how much is covered.
- So even if less is covered they aren't You know, they aren't necessarily factoring in the open space
- to decide what the detention is. It's just the coverage space I think the one where it may be more Maybe
- more concerning to maybe it's like a one-off Project but you think about this
- the affordability incentives it doesn't Really make a lot of sense for someone. It's not going to happen
- really in a one-off situation because why Why are they? Needing incentives usually so that they can
- get more units right so that the lots can be smaller and they can have put more in So we think that
- we will mostly see this in subdivision situations Additionally, we don't really No one has we don't
- see very many of these. I think we've seen one in the
- The similar Similar regulations were in the old udio as well Not the previous surface, but the other
- ones in this section related to setbacks and they just aren't typically widely used So yeah, we would
- have expected in a subdivision situation where they were expecting to provide some probably high level
- of low-income housing How did you land on 80% well
- I looked at as I said, we've looked at some of the other projects in town I was looking mostly at the
- affordable projects actually Which seemed to hover? The ones I looked at seemed to hover around 60 to
- 65 and then I was trying to look at the sizes of the actual houses there Compared to other
- similar single-family housing. That's kind of how I got to 80 like if they were if they were grown or
- What would still be a reasonable size coverage? How much would they actually be covering on those lots
- for example in Trailview? we met with councilperson Piedmont Smith and That's when she she asked about
- the mass map press project and then I thought oh, yeah I guess I should also be looking at market rate
- in my mind. It was thinking of it as affordable and Yeah, the map press project covers quite a bit more
- and obviously, you know had to work with city Bloomington utilities to figure out the detention at that
- location and
- I've got another question, but I can continue Okay. Well, is this one of the reasons it was punted to
- us? And what what do you mean with our recommendation? So the plan commission said Sure council. Yes
- What was what was the reason that's a great question? It was so long ago, but yes, I do believe this
- was one I'm sorry. I should have reviewed that Yeah, there were just some questions like for example
- you can see in the packet and
- Plan Commissioner Holmes had an amendment to just only require pavement and loop for everything to just
- switch and so there was some discussion about that, you know, how deep do we want to get into all of
- these little incentives or Or do we just want to kind of scrap the on-site? incentives so I think it
- was it's just a complicated issue and they couldn't come to an agreement and I believe I Don't believe
- all nine were there
- Appointed contention the the impervious surface. I Do believe eight. Yeah that the 80 was brought up.
- It was not the only but yeah, it was discussed for sure Okay, thank you for that customer suspect Real
- quick on that question because I'm the playing Commission representative in my memory the impervious
- surface part was not the the problem it was the the payment in lieu of
- issue that had the most conflict. But my question is, I guess my first question, I'm trying to go back
- to it now. When you're talking about the tier two projects and the maximum impervious surface increase
- Allowance by 10% and then it says may decrease the landscape area by 10% Does that mean you're actually
- increasing by 20% like the same 10%? Yes, it's the same as two sides of one coin Okay, I just wanted
- to make sure if that's what I thought but I wasn't sure and then the other question that I have can
- I ask the second one is
- Whether the proposed changes to the administrative manual have actually been changed in the administrative
- manual because council of course doesn't do that That's just up to the hand director. So has that officially
- been changed for 2026 at this point? No, so we're waiting till this goes through and We will change
- it based on What happens here? Okay. Thank you Other questions
- What I ask you you said that the the mayor and I saw the mayor come in right as you started had a proposed
- amendment I'd be interested to hear maybe from the mayor about what what that amendment what what the
- concern is trying to address so there Thompson Yes, thank you for your consideration the proposed amendment
- and we are totally fine
- doing this at a later time and tabling this discussion. But the proposed amendment seeks to make this
- feasible for owner-occupied as well as rental. And what's happening in the finance community, what has
- been happening for a long time, is when you put a deed restriction on something that says permanent
- affordability, what the mortgage market does is say,
- We're not lending on it and it suppresses the It suppresses the comps if you can get a mortgage on it
- Frequently in my experience local lenders will not lend on it Because it's such a limited market that
- you can sell to the amendment essentially
- It gives flexibility so there's not a deed restriction and so that we can find other mechanisms to ensure
- that the property stays affordable without limiting the mechanism by which we are ensuring affordability.
- So, for instance, we could do a shared equity agreement with a second soft mortgage, et cetera, et cetera,
- but we would need to set up some kind of infrastructure to do that if it is the intention of the plan
- commission and the council
- to in essence make these permanently affordable. So this amendment was seeking to be a happy medium
- so that we could still get people who don't already have wealth into owner-occupied units. I also just
- wanted to make a small correction to the record about the impervious surface on the Trailview neighborhood,
- which I was the developer on and spent years
- Looking at those potential plat maps We would not have increased square footage on those houses
- My recollection is if we could have gotten up to 80% impervious on that we would have had six additional
- units thereby reducing the total cost of land and infrastructure per unit quite significantly so
- The more units you can get into a neighborhood, it directly affects the affordability of each of those
- units, obviously. Thank you, Mayor Thompson. Yes. Any questions regarding, we should use different language
- here, but the concern that the mayor has raised, if any. Please, Council Member Flaherty. Just to clarify
- a question.
- It was something was displayed on screen, but we don't have an amendment drafted or anything in our
- packet, correct? That's that's why that's why I just said we should use different language Sort of proposed
- change exactly. Exactly. Yeah. Okay, just confirming. Thank you Council member Sasberg. Yeah mayor Thompson
- would you started out your sentence by? Saying that it makes this feasible for owner occupancy and I
- was wondering what you meant by this because the
- like whether it specifically meant the Affordable part that we're amending right now in terms of the
- r1 through r4 with single-family and duplex or whether it meant the larger affordability incentive section
- which also includes multifamily structures, yeah, so I
- I am suggesting that in all of our ordinances, this is the one in front of us, that if we're talking
- about affordability incentives, we need to have consideration for owner-occupied. And so my ask would
- be change the language to accommodate owner-occupied. If we want people to actually be able to climb
- out of poverty,
- and end generational poverty, the way that we do that in this country frequently is through ownership.
- And I believe it's what people need in our community. I don't know if it's a follow-up or a whole other
- one, but just for clarification, since we don't have the amendment in front of us, and this might be
- a question for Attorney Laener,
- This amends a section of the UDO that is not currently being amended by this ordinance Received This
- this language so we've not had a chance to really study it and this is a legal question That would need
- to be answered
- Will state that the Plan Commission Came up with this challenge on Monday night when considering One
- of the projects in front of them on Monday night the affordability question in owner occupied came up
- and And whether or not we could lend on it Because we're Puma Smith Yeah, so just to clarify I mean the
- the ordinance in front of us tonight does have a section trying to incentivize owner-occupied affordable
- housing. So what you're saying is there needs to be a better mechanism to ensure the affordability of
- those units? Is that what I'm understanding? To ensure that you can actually build them in the first
- place. If you can't lend on them, you can't build them. And what we're trying to do, obviously, everybody's
- intent is to incentivize affordable housing
- And so as a government we want to do that in a way that it can actually be accomplished and writing
- into any any code Restrictions that end up making it impossible to develop that way does not achieve
- the goal Mass a quick clarifying question mayor Thompson Maybe which sort of clarifies the questions
- that have been asked
- what is it in the amendment to the UDO, so not the proposed amendment, what is it in the language that
- we're voting on today that presents the problem that you're seeing? Is this a thing that exists in the
- UDO currently, or is it a change that we're voting on today that you think is going to lead to this
- problem? It exists in the UDO today, and you are confirming it by changing
- Part as well. So I am suggesting let's not continue to confirm a problem Thank You councilmember Zulik
- I'm certainly not opposed to the change I'm mostly asking a question about is this feasible to do the
- change today or is this something that we would need to hear for a third reading in order to make that
- amendment correctly and
- would be to have a third reading on this question on February 4th. The 90-day deadline expires after
- February 4th. By our calculation, it's February 18th, so there is sufficient time for council staff
- to review this and resolve any legal questions while also communicating with the planning department staff
- Potentially with the legal department at the same time. This would provide an opportunity in the event
- that a council member is interested in potentially sponsoring an amendment of this nature Thank you.
- May I please ask a follow-up question? Mayor Thompson does that timeline work with you? It does I'm
- not able to be here on February 4th, but I think it can be handled by staff. I mean, it's a we just
- need to get the
- Theory into practice so we can actually build affordable housing Thank you. That's my brother Your questions,
- I'd like to make a motion It's a postponed consideration of Yes Councilmember Rallo, did you say if
- there are no other questions? So I think I got a nod from the chairs I
- You can to be clear you can make a motion any time you want But it's so if you want do you do you want
- to make the motion debate if I make a motion and have a second? You can motion and we can discuss it
- Well, mr. President if there are other questions, okay, let's let's respect your wishes other questions
- Councilor Pima Smith Yeah regarding the payment in lieu revision
- So am I, and I, this is probably for Ms. Scanlon. So do I understand correctly that the proposal that
- would be in the administrative manual to increase the amount to $50,000 is not based on the actual value
- of that the affordable housing would provide, that the lower
- rates attached to the lease of the affordable housing over a period of 99 years. That was not considered
- when coming up with the amount for payment in lieu. Is that correct? Correct. Because I understand and
- I've had some back and forth conversations with Ms. Kellyanne Hansen about payment in lieu. And so I'm
- I'm just wondering, I'm not fundamentally opposed to payment in lieu, but could we consider a more rational
- mathematical basis for the amount? How would we do that? Whoever you'd like, yeah. But since this is
- in the administrative manual, how would we go about doing that? Sure, I think we would have to probably rely on
- Calculations done by the Housing and Neighborhood Development Department related to how much that particular
- unit Loss is over time Sure if we if you do decide to postpone we can work on that before the February
- hearing as well Yeah, I guess I'm just since it's administrative manual I'm just like
- Do we have any impact on that since it's not in code? Sure. Yeah understanding that we then develop
- or something That's a good question. I mean, yes, so the administration gets to set that number So ultimately
- the way that we have done it since it was written five years ago the directors of
- Hand and ESD have determined what that number is So yes, they would have to be on board with that but
- we can work with director Killian Hansen director Cooper Smith and see it You know if there's a way
- to present to you What that number would be and then a reasoning why or why not we would be changing
- to that Okay. Thank you. You're welcome Other questions or motions
- Postpone ordinance twenty twenty six oh one to our next meeting on February 4th Second I have a motion
- and a second. I is this a debatable motion? Yes, it is. Okay any discussion? Please council member Sasberg
- I just want to say that the purpose of my
- Once again, this was my resolution in the beginning that led to this ordinance was to actually get more
- affordable housing accomplished and I agree with the mayor that Lending can be a roadblock. I have some
- hesitancy about whether putting an amendment into the
- This like this kind of amendment into this ordinance is the right legal move But I'm really happy to
- give it a couple weeks and have the attorneys figure that out and if it you know is decided I'm happy
- to Help work on that and sponsor that amendment and if it's decided that that's not the way to go I'm
- also happy to work on this through the Plan Commission with an entirely new modification to the udio
- Thanks In terms of discussion, I'm here I might ask it's
- It's totally up to you all, but I think it might be worth having public comment just because
- we're considering amendments. I think our intention is clear to postpone. Whether or not we vote for
- that is a different question, but I would ask that we rather have public comment and then postpone if
- at all possible, but leave that to the motion maker. Motioner? Motioner? Oh, so you want me to withdraw,
- so then we can have public comment and then I'll make the motion again.
- That would be my preference, but I have no say in this matter. Just that's fine with me I'll withdraw
- my motion so that we can have public comment and then I'll make it again Okay, so with that I might
- like to move to a period of public comment on resolute an ordinance 20 20 2601 if you're wanting to
- speak on this online also raise your hand and please sign in and state your name for the record if you're able to
- Good evening. Mr. President. This is Christopher mg from the Greater Bloomington Chamber of Commerce
- and I want to thank the mayor for stealing my thunder I was just about to bring up the deed restrictions
- that was talked about the planned Commission meeting on Monday from Stephen Bishop the bish from First
- Financial Bank on what that means as far as the lending market goes and What we have to do is make sure
- the process works to achieve our goals and I originally
- was going to talk about sort of adding from the last amendment with the PUDs and affordability of housing
- and how I don't think that quite works. But I punted for this one just to bring up a couple things from
- that same November plan commission meeting. Commissioner Holmes' amendment, which I was for, which was
- kind of get rid of the units on site aspect. And while I think it's commendable and the intentions were
- great, I think
- The collection recovery the admin cost to do it was just not feasible to what the goal was so the payment
- in lieu I think was just a much cleaner version and Miss Hanson made a great report I think sometime
- last year and where those funds were being used and it just is a much cleaner fit and I think one thing
- on these when we talk about affordability and we're talking about developers is Somewhat some flexibility
- and not adding complication there was an interim report from IU on housing and how
- Monroe County, which does include the the county government as well as ours a you know our Development
- takes I believe it was 14 months compared to the rest of the state which is five so Complexity is our
- enemy and to make sure that we are sort of streamlining the processes on
- And then we want to get our goal. We want to make this more affordable and we do want to get owner-occupied
- We want to build wealth and the best way to do that so I think it's just important to sort of look at
- some of these things and Kind of look at some of the collateral damages that may be caused by the process
- itself and so When we have some time between the the next meeting sort of look at some of these things
- Because I think we're just sort of understanding like the deed restrictions
- that I learned about on Monday, which I said that it's been talked about, but I had not really considered
- that more. If you don't have a mortgage market, you don't have a market. And what then you're doing
- is sort of making the process much more difficult for the developer and making it just harder to forget
- our achievable goals, which goes to the point of just making sure when we've talked about
- what that payment in lieu should be. Let's talk to developers. What kind of makes sense on that? Because
- you're also not putting into that administrative cost that takes every year that we've heard about to
- just make sure that there's compliance. And compliance costs money. That's why we tax some things that
- are easier than other things. Like sales tax is easy to collect. There's other things with deductions
- that are not. And I thank you for your time tonight.
- Perfect other public comment Anyone online anybody else in chambers Fantastic coming back. I'm to counsel
- and I'll hear any motions or I'll again move to postpone ordinance 20 2601 to our next regularly scheduled
- meeting on February 4th There's a motion in a second any discussion
- Seeing none will the clerk please? Sorry notice. I'm so sorry. I mean I said seeing that but I wasn't
- looking to be Bang my gavel Well, just to say I I mean I appreciate the fact that streamlining is a
- good is you know works and I'm interested in that proposal however
- in the past we've had certain Objectives of streamlining for instance at the Blooming food site where
- we gave up a PUD for negotiation of the previous administration Which rendered now the current at Latimer
- Square apartments, which it has been a massive disappointment for a lot of people Yes, we got a lot
- of apartments
- student apartments, but we were what we were hoping for is a mixed-use development with Other housing
- types and so forth which didn't manifest Because the promise was streamlining would be a process which
- would you know Give us a good outcome. So anyway, just to say that I I look at that proposal with caution
- put it that way Any other comments
- I think in ideally specifically about the motion All right, I'm seeing none will the clerk or can we
- do this by forcefully sad, please call the roll Okay, yes councilmember Zulek Sorry, yes daily Rallo,
- yes rough Flaherty Stossberg Piedmont Smith
- Motion passes 8-0 that will be postponed to our next meeting which is February 4th February 4th, and
- thank you all so very much unless I'm ill-informed that concludes our period of legislation for second
- reading and resolutions and
- That means that we're moving on to our additional period of public comment If you did not comment the
- first time and you have something you'd like to say This is your opportunity to do so to comment on
- matters not on the agenda Is there anybody in the chamber that would like to comment on matters not
- on the agenda? Anyone online please Take it away person online
- Hello. We can hear you. Wonderful. Thank you. Hello, Council. This is Steve Olin. Thank you for hearing
- me tonight. I'm sorry I can't be there in person, but I just wanted to say that too many of our local
- giants like Charlotte Zitlow and Dan Combs are falling. I wanted to note the passing this week of yet
- another Bloomington institution, Lee Williams. He was a promoter of live music at the now defunct clubs
- Second Story and Jake's in the 80s and 90s.
- According to the former Herald Times reporter and Lee's close friend, Andy Graham, Lee was responsible
- for bringing a wide variety of seminal musicians to this Humbleburg often before they became stars.
- Acts from K.D. Lang to Coco Taylor, from Robert Hitchcock to The Replacements, from John Lee Hooker
- to John Prine. The first two acts he ever booked were Richard and Linda Thompson, followed by a novice
- band called R.E.M.
- As a DJ at the then new community radio station WFHB, I remember in 1994 being assigned to represent
- the station to talk with him, Shahyar Dineshkar, and James Combs about the idea they were brainstorming.
- A festival for musicians from all over the world. I soon got sucked into helping, along with 20 or so
- other people, bring the festival to life. Eight artists at three venues on the 100 block of West 4th
- Street on one night,
- that October. The Lotus World Music and Arts Festival was such a big hit that it became an annual event
- and Lee its executive director. Over the next 20 plus years, much of that time sharing office space
- with Lotus, I got to watch Lee grow the festival into dozens of artists annually over four days all
- over downtown Bloomington.
- The testament to his stewardship of Lotus is the tremendous impact it's had on the life of Bloomington
- to this day, both cultural and economic. By 2013, a proclamation naming it Lee Williams Day in Bloomington
- said that he was doing economic development, bringing visitors from far-flung places who then became
- ambassadors for Bloomington. None of it would have happened without his intellect, his music business
- acumen, his impeccable taste in music,
- his heart of gold, and his love for this community. I was proud to call him my friend, but I was one
- of hundreds. My deepest condolences to his wife, Carol, and his family. The city this week is much poorer
- for his loss. Around the same time as the beginning of Lotus, Lee also founded one of the first radio
- shows on WFHB called The Old Changing Way, specializing in the Celtic and Anglophile music he loved
- during his youth growing up in England.
- other DJs continue it to this day. If you'd like to actively remember Lee Williams, you have but to
- tune in during the same time slide it's had all this time, every Tuesday night from 9 to 11 PM.
- Thank you. Thank you for those kind and moving words. Are there anyone else who would like to issue
- public comment? No one online? Anyone in chamber? Hey, well,
- That does that then moving on to Issues of council schedule colleagues. Are there anything that you
- would like your colleagues to be aware of? Anything honorable clerk anything council schedule wise Council
- committee meetings that are coming up Thank you so much for getting those on the calendar and communicating
- with deputy clerk Crossley Promptly it has helped. Yes attorneys any
- things for the agenda? Nope. All right. Well, if there's no objection, we are adjourned. All right.