- and so we will go ahead and get started. So I will call our meeting to order. This is the joint county
- council and city council along with our mayor and we have a commissioner joining us today.
- Today is Thursday, June 11th, 2026, and the time is 6.03. And so we have a quorum of county council.
- To my right here, we have counselors Wilts, Henry,
- We also have Deckard and Fidel and joining us virtually we have councilmember Hawk and I will kick it
- over to the City Council Vice President Sydney Zulek. Thank you Can we have the clerk call the roll
- or should I just okay? Nope, I will announce people Okay, we have councilmembers Rallo Stasberg Flaherty
- Zulek Daly and Ruff in attendance with us today and I'll kick it back to councilmember Crossley. Thank
- you very much
- game of kickball. Okay, before we go ahead and get started with this, I want to go ahead and have a
- conversation with saying thank you to our city colleagues who have
- taken to the invitation to come with us together. I also want to give a special thank you to Mayor Kerry
- Thompson for joining us. But the other thing that I want to make sure that we also note as well too
- is that we do have a county commissioner, Commissioner Madera, that is joining us as well. I know I've
- gotten some questions about who was invited and who's not. And so I wanted to say,
- as we had discussed on the 26th when we were making our decisions that we wanted to have a
- joint collaboration with our city colleagues, with us here in the county as well. We did invite the
- commissioners and the sheriffs as well. However, we do have commissioner Madeira here. Some individuals
- respectfully declined to participate, but nonetheless, we have what we need here to keep doing the business
- at hand. So we have that.
- Council President Crossley? Yes. I got a note that Councilmember Piedmont-Smith is on Teams. Oh, I am
- so sorry. No problem. I didn't notice either. Just wanted to read it for the record. Yay, we have everybody.
- Or just about everybody.
- wanted to make sure that we are saying this. Because in our last meeting, I know we kept saying, we're
- saying no to things, but we're saying yes. And saying yes is having this conversation, much as what
- we've had tonight. I think I dreamed about something like this, much so than we did a few years ago
- when the convention center expansion conversation was happening. We got in a bigger room to talk. And
- I think we need to do more of this. And I appreciated that. That was actually something that Mayor Kerry had said.
- way back when and I appreciate that. So without further ado, I will also say tonight's conversation
- is going to be a little different. I am not going to be chairing this meeting, but I think one of the
- biggest things that I wanted to do is sometimes leaders kind of have to take a step back and really
- try to look at some good things and people that really do some good work.
- And so I have asked for a co-facilitator, Kate Wiltz and Mayor Carey to collaborate together. And we
- will do this together in a collaborative approach. And they both said yes to this and I will kick it
- back over to them. So thank you very much. Thank you. I can get started.
- I want to start by just saying that while I am happy to help facilitate discussion here, this meeting
- is is really a collaboration session to see how the city can assist the county in getting a jail built.
- The jail is
- the county's project, obviously, the county runs the jail, the county will build the jail. But obviously,
- the jail impacts our entire community. And so while the mayor does not per se have oversight over the
- jail, nor does the city council. This is something that impacts our entire community. And I
- I won't speak for my council colleagues, but they have taken official action to express their desire
- to support innovative solutions around the jail.
- I am here likewise to make sure that we do everything we possibly can to make sure that when this new
- jail gets built, and that is a foregone conclusion, we need a new jail, that we carry that project out
- in the best way possible. And so to that end, we have a couple of framing questions that we wanted to
- pose to the group tonight.
- If we can, oh, I get to kick it over to Kate, who's gonna go through our operating assumptions and rules.
- Our community rules. Community rules. Two things. I agree that this is meant to be very deliberative,
- very collaborative, and I really appreciate the support that the city colleagues here
- have shown just by even coming tonight. But what I'd like to make sure that we do is especially for
- the county side of the table. But we've all taken time on this issue and said a lot of things. And I
- think we've been pretty clear on our opinions. And today I would respectfully ask that we stay focused on
- the questions that we're here to answer, and that we have goals at hand, which are coming in a moment.
- The other thing is, of course, respect and try to pass the little talkie baton, so to speak, in a generous
- manner. So we'll try to keep everybody on task, and we will
- try to keep us focused, and I just ask for your assistance with both those things. So when I was talking
- with Councilor Crossley and Mayor Thompson about what our goal today is, the things that came to the
- surface are we want to make sure that we, as a collective group here, align around
- where we are in this process and what's happening next. And in order to do that, I think we need to
- discuss and lay out next steps and a timeline for that and identify the actions each of us as individuals
- and collectively need to take to get to
- a jail, a construction of a jail, to be specific. So between today and jail construction, I'd like for
- us to think about what our roles are, what needs to happen, and we have some ideas on what needs to
- happen. That doesn't have to be whole cloth, but I think getting some agreement around how we get there
- and doing so in a way that
- we can maybe make a formal commitment together to work on what we come up with as those items. That's
- a lot of words. Usually goals are more succinct than that. But I want, first of all, to see if anyone
- has an edit or a concern around that purpose for this meeting.
- So I always have questions. So this one is, is there a timeline with which we think we're working? Yes.
- I think that what we need to do is get there as fast as we can and talk about what that looks like.
- So I think that our meeting won't have
- much impact if we don't leave having made some official decisions on next steps that we can agree to.
- Those steps may have steps on the city part and on the county part. And while it's great to have deliberative
- dialogue, we really are in a position now where the county
- has to make some decisions. And so I would just ask that as we're talking, we're talking tangibly about
- how we can participate in moving this forward and what that will look like for each entity, each of
- four entities. Hi. To that end, I think it might be useful
- for, in sort of a brainstorming way, us to go around and each identify something that you see that needs
- to be done to get us toward the construction of the jail, and meaning that you don't have to come up
- with the full list yourself. Come up with one tangible item, we'll list the items, assuming that there
- are markers. Are there markers for that thing?
- Did we just get a white board with nothing? Sorry, that was cut from the budget. Don't worry, this is
- my time to take over with pink. Is that like an eraser? White board. Oh, that's rough. I thought that
- was a black pad. Yeah, it looks like we are getting some. Yeah, they're getting some. All right. In
- the meantime, I will write it on a paper.
- I can't even introduce myself with one thing. Well, okay. I think we need a shared vision of what it
- is we're building. That has been elusive on the county side. The city partners, of course, don't have
- a direct say in that, but ultimately when we say jail, which is what we were being sued over, or
- challenged about that is not a lot of the other things that have been added on over the past designs,
- right? So what is required versus what's desired, I think, and understanding that. Make sure we all
- share and understand that. Commissioner Madeira?
- I would say to build on that, we need that within a certain period of time. So we don't have forever,
- and it's not according to community preference. We also have that third party in the room. We need a
- deadline, but we also need something that's not just community preferable, but court preferable.
- So I'll state the obvious, which is location, location, location, because that obviously plays into
- a lot of things. But I won't take up too much longer because I think Councilmember Henry said it as
- well is what do we need, what's required and go from there. I'm going to jump on to location as well.
- And in the premise that I hear it from a lot of folks in the community that say,
- they're not sure we have exhaustively put a call to the community for any and all location that fits
- kind of a criteria within the city. And so I would sort of say that to all of us. What are those places
- that are not places that, or what are those places that could be viable, perhaps could be viable with
- a slight relook from where they are now. And for us to think a little bit exhaustively around that,
- with the demands that we have, which is that it's access to resources, et cetera, so that we're thinking
- creatively. And it could be the real estate communities engaged on that. It could be just some other
- folks not in this room. But truly, what is the end-all, be-all list of places that might factor into
- this so that we're not just siloed into, oh, we've been talking about that for a long time, so I'm just
- gonna keep saying that word. So that's what I thought. So I think size.
- I think we have to agree on what size of a facility we need and what's. So I think size, what size do
- we need and what is going to be in the facility, right? Oh, mine's not working. Might need to pull it
- as close as possible. So if I didn't need to say it again, size and
- What is the purpose of the size of the facility? What purposes are gonna be in the facility? Is it just
- the jail? What is it that's gonna be in the facility? Thanks. Is this working? Yes. Okay. I'll just
- cut to the chase. My preference has always been for a jail to be proximal to downtown or within the
- city at least.
- I voted against the Fullerton option. I'm open-minded about various options, but I've always thought
- for decades now that Thompson was the site, the preferred site. So, I mean, I'm in a position perhaps
- of a site location and zoning as, you know, any approval by council. And, you know, I'm looking forward
- to working with you to that end. But I'm sort of a tabula rasa if you have ideas about where else it might go
- You know, what we can do. I'm open for that. North Park is not preferred by me, and I appreciate the
- efforts that has been done to preclude that. Thank you. I have to jump on the location bandwagon. I
- think that that seems to be a huge question right now, and we need to figure out where something is
- going to go and go from there.
- I think some combination of several of county council colleagues, specifically what is required for
- a location. I think Councilor Feidl was getting at that. So depending on what your assumptions are about
- what is required as a bare minimum and on what timeline, that's going to dictate how creative we can
- be about location. And so narrowly scoping that to keep, I think, the locational options as flexible
- and as many as possible as
- Well, that's not a tangible step. That's a preference. But that's where I was going. I'm going to take
- us a different route. I am curious as to the number of beds that we actually need and how that number
- might change with different prevention efforts. I think that prevention is one of the opportunities
- that the city has to better collaborate with the county. If we decrease the amount of beds, the project
- is, in theory, less expensive.
- Kind of going back to the, you know, pulling back further what we need between now and the end of this
- process, you know, and other things that we need to kind of keep in mind and put on the table is we
- need community buy-in. We also need buy-in, you know, and support from the sheriff's office as well.
- We need to take their viewpoints all into consideration as well.
- Do you have to hold your finger on it the entire time? No. You just talk. Just talk. So there's probably
- 1,000 people in this town that know far more about this issue than I do, the practical nature of it,
- the history of it, the needs, everything. So I say this in all humility to weigh in in any way, shape,
- or form. But I think with any location,
- I really want to see, I would like to see, the community needs to see some, what I would call full cost
- accounting of what the full costs are. Not just construction costs, but impacts on
- incarcerated folks, their families, all the coming, environmental impacts of all the comings and goings,
- not just environmental impacts of materials and construction, of decades and decades of comings and
- goings compared to where it is now. Impacts on existing users in whatever area it might go. Put a dollar
- value to all these things. Some, I know it's hard, but come up with some kind of dollar value that if
- we move and build a new facility in a new place, it's going to have
- some real impacts on existing users and users, residents, business, whoever's there, any institution
- like this. And so I would really like to see accounting for those costs when we actually make comparisons
- for different possible locations. Thank you.
- I know we have two members who are joining virtually. Council member Hawk, would you like to offer input?
- Yes. What I'd like to make sure is for this is making noises here. I'd like to make sure that we recognize
- the purpose of this meeting was for location.
- At least that's what the agenda showed me. And I think that if you're ever going to get to the end of
- what we need to do, we have to start. And the start is finding the right location. And certainly, we
- already have property that's paid for. If we can make that work, I would like to see it there. If it
- doesn't work there, then I would like for us to move on to Fullerton.
- But what we need to see is which of those two would the county council and city council agree to because
- we know that planning has to help with that. And we also need to make sure that we are in agreement
- on that. And we understand starting the process is not having to do with
- what's going to be in the jail. It has to do with the location. We need to get that started first.
- Thank you. And Council Member Piedmont-Smith. Yes, thank you. I would just add concurrent to the construction
- of a jail.
- there should be continued collaboration on prevention efforts and also on well this is more just county
- but continued support of the current jail and immediate remedies to any unconstitutional aspects of
- the current jail because whatever it is that we agree to no matter how fast we go it'll be
- a few years before there's a new jail. Thank you. Have any other council members joined online that
- have not been called upon yet? No, we're good. Okay. I'll add my two cents. I would agree location is
- the most important
- thing for us to figure out that is, of course, impacted by the various other questions that have been
- brought up by these bodies. And I would say the way I would frame the location would be we need to expedite
- the process for a single alternative location. And I would
- I frankly recommend doing that with a smaller body that comes back to a larger body, because with the
- court case as it is, we've already run out of time. And so an exhaustive process on many different properties
- is probably unrealistic, especially because that process would warrant a design
- specific to each one of those sites. And so I think if we want to make some progress, my two cents would
- be, let's pick a single alternative site fairly quickly. Not in this meeting, to be clear. Thanks. And
- I think one of my... You should carry it.
- I think what the mayor said actually kind of sums up a lot of what's here, not everything of course.
- That in order to streamline our work tonight, that we should focus on how we get to the location because
- that's a tangible
- that we know we have to have before we can go any further. And we have a lot of information from the
- work that our transition teams have done. And so we do have a lot of information about size and related
- purposes for the design that exists. And we know kind of preferences from the various
- county departments involved in a justice center and what they have said they need and the scaled back
- version of what they say they need as well given, you know, budget constraints. So we've had a lot of
- that information gathered. I totally see how that is related to and will inform what happens on a site
- that we choose.
- But we need to get to a site. And in order to vet sites or a site, there are probably some key things
- that have to be either discussed, decided, or just have happen. I'm thinking around, I think it was
- Councilor Aralo who said something along the lines of zoning. We know that there are processes
- If we are looking in city limits, and I'm kind of gathering that from the letter, from what I've heard,
- that is a preference that we build in city limits. If we can make that assumption as a boundary, then
- we can take a next step and look at what are the processes and steps that get us from
- Just having some ideas around what properties might work to building on a site. Reactions and thoughts
- about that. So are we looking for factors for a site? I honestly don't think that we can... I think
- we've already... I think we've vetted a lot of the factors already. And that's what a lot of this is.
- Really? Yeah. I don't see a whole lot up there that I would put on a list. So I would summarize six
- factors for a site just to be bold. I will take notes on those. I would say that we need site control.
- The county owns it and can acquire it immediately. I think we need legal permissibility. The zoning
- or permitting path is clear and fast.
- I think we need construction feasibility. There's no or few known utility, road, environmental, geotechnical,
- or design barriers that cause major delay. The second is, so we need site control or county ownership,
- legal permissibility, or clear zoning or permitting paths, construction feasibility,
- So no known utility road, environmental, geotechnical, design, major delays. We need operational adequacy.
- In other words, sheriff and design professionals confirm that it can support their needs, classification,
- circulation, intake. We need a fiscal path. Can we fund it and vote on a timeline? And is it defensible
- to a court?
- In other words, can council present it as a reasonable, timely remedy in federal litigation? I'm guessing
- that six hangs on the rest of them. Yeah. But I think that that's a good independent consideration too.
- Can I ask a clear question? Is that OK? That's related. And pardon my ignorance on this, because I just
- Don't follow this issue as closely as you all do, of course. Implicit in a lot of what's being talked
- about is that the urgency of ensuring we have a constitutional justice or jail and that we need to have
- a plan in place. Is it impossible or is it possible? And how much have you all explored? And again,
- I don't mean to derail. I'm just curious because it informs this.
- flexible that timeline is, not based only on what the plan is, but how much we are resourcing an existing
- building that may be unconstitutional in this level of care now. I don't know. But I guess I'm asking,
- is it possible with a real investment, several million a year, I don't know, something, to buy yourselves
- two years while you think more creatively? So I'm seeing a head shaking no, so someone thinks it's impossible.
- Can we kick that back to our county attorney who probably knows the answer to that? Molly's right there,
- so. Yeah. So just to make sure I understand the question, is your question inquiring whether it's possible
- to remedy the current conditions to an essence by time on building the lawsuit? Yes, even on a temporary
- basis. OK. So let me pull up.
- In 2020, the county had a study commissioned by Mr. Kinray. And that study lists several unconstitutional
- or conditions that would need remedied. I haven't read that. Most of those conditions require the addition
- of space. And so I don't think that it would be possible to add space to the current facility. There
- is a cost, and I can try to find it, a cost analysis of what
- of those conditions we could fix, what it would cost. If you give me a second, I can try to find it.
- I think Mr. Cockrell is going to come way in while I look for that document. Maybe the consensus view
- of county elected officials is that it's impossible to buy time through investment in the current facility.
- I see some heads going either way. I guess my response, and Jeff Cockrell, County Attorney, my response
- is there's probably not a way to avoid additional litigation, but I would anticipate that once the litigation
- begins, if we had some kind of settlement agreement, there would be some interim steps. I mean, I think
- it's been mentioned before, we're not going to be able to build this jail
- in the next few years, right? So there has to be some interim steps that we could take as that process
- is going forward. What those are, I mean, that's a matter that we'll have to get to. Does that answer
- your question? It is very helpful. Thank you. Again, I didn't mean to derail. It sounds like there is
- a little bit of a diversity of viewpoint. It has bearing just like how many beds has bearing on site
- selection. And so I'm not in a position to say one way or another.
- If that's possible. But I wanted to ask. Thank you. I have a different clarifying question. I've heard
- different. All on you next. Councilmember Rallo. Go ahead. That's OK. I just actually following up on
- Councilmember Flaherty's his question. There was overflow of space located in the county parking garage.
- Is that being utilized right now, and is there any possibility for that to be expanded on? I don't think
- that they're really... That's where the Stride Center is, and there's no other space allotted to...
- Okay. Just checking. Thanks. It's not significant square footage either. Is Thompson zoned for a jail? Yes.
- I don't know if everyone else is thinking this, but that does seem like one of the more appealing properties
- out of the ones that we have. And it's currently on the table, so it might be worth starting there.
- I'd like to make a public motion that we stop referring to it as the Thompson property. It's Thompson
- with a P. It's not Thompson with a P. Did somebody else have their
- hand up now that we missed. Okay. Yeah. I'll just go ahead and say, I think the idea for us, because
- which is why I'm kind of not kind of, I am glad that we have our city colleagues here is the fact that
- we've heard so much assumptions of what the city's process is. And so for me personally, I kind of want
- to hear from the city in terms of like, what is the process because
- you all know best, especially if we're talking about properties within city limits, what does that look
- like? Because we need to know. I think everybody needs to know. And it would be great to hear from city
- to say like, you know, from county's perspective, this is what we need from you all in order to make
- things work. Because again,
- There's been a lot of assumptions and a lot of things that have been said maybe not by city. And I'd
- like to hear from city how that would work. The process and how long it takes depends entirely on what
- kind of zoning changes need to be made. And so, you know, some things can get done
- at the administrative level. Other things have to go to plan commission and even council. I have and
- will recommit to the administrative side being as expedited as we possibly can. We would put this at
- the top of the stack and absolutely work in an expedited fashion.
- And I'll leave it to council colleagues to reflect on their process. But it really is site dependent
- and what's going on that site. Thank you. I maybe want to put a hypothetical out in the room because
- we need to test how a plan commission in the city would take a request. And I know
- Councilmembers Rallo and Ruff were on council, I think, when the county purchased the Curry Building,
- which is right next to the current Zillow Building. In 2003 and 2005, the county committed to investments
- in that building to add it into the justice system. We had the family court in there. Suppose we said
- that we owned that property, Curry and Fight, what is now
- the garage, but was to fight this building. We said, look, if we were to level that and build a vertical
- or a different jail, compact urban form in that space. We own the property. It's right next door. It's
- surrounded by probation and clerks. And it's down here. But it's urban. It would clearly be a problem
- with Ingrassi Egress for a while to do such a build verse in the Knott Thompson property.
- What would that look like coming to the city where if the county were to say, we own this property,
- it's in the urban core, it's next to our justice building, it has a historical piece to it with the
- Curry building being a historical building. What does that mean for plan commission, historic preservation?
- Like to me that, like let me just throw that out there to test what that sounds like across the table
- if that was a solution.
- Is it a historically designated building right now? I believe the Curry part is, or at least the facade,
- but I'd have to check that, yeah. It can be undesignated through request of the owner, I believe, but
- that's a process that has criteria. That's a few weeks. What's that? That's like weeks or months. My
- gut would be a couple of months, maybe faster if expedited. I think I'd have to go through HPC and then
- to the city council. That's my... I'm not certain of that, I guess.
- I am the Historic Preservation Commission liaison. I'm happy to check with our staff liaison and the
- chair of the commission and get back to you on that. I'm sorry. I was just going to say the other part
- of that site is I don't actually know what the downtown
- zoning layer says about jails. I mean, I know the jail is currently listed there, but I'm not sure what
- it says now in terms of something being new. So I don't know if that would be. So I mean, I'm trying
- to look it up right now, but UDO is really long, and I don't usually look at that overlay layer. It's
- kind of in a different spot than what I end up usually being faced with. I feel very favorable toward
- it personally. I wonder if the proposal would be
- And this might add to expense, of course, to maintain some kind of the historic facade of the building
- might be possible. And that might expedite it too with the HPC, et cetera, but. Zulek? Oh, I was just
- wondering if there were any types of grants for that type of thing. No, okay.
- Councilmember Piedmont-Smith has her hand raised. Thank you. Councilmember Piedmont-Smith. Yes,
- thank you. I wanted to go back to the Thompson site. I'm sorry, I don't know what else to call it, Mayor.
- But I did want to relay some information that I received from the City Director of Planning
- and Transportation, David Hittle.
- So he said, a jail is allowed as a permitted by right use in tract D in the Thompson PUD via approval
- of case PUD 1202, which amended the original Thompson PUD. One condition of approval requires that the
- site plan for any jail must be approved by the plan commission, unlike other by right uses, which require
- only approval from staff.
- Another condition of approval states, quote, any jail facility will be a public, not a private facility
- and will generally conform to the size, location and population density proposed by the petitioner at
- this time. And the associated staff report references plans showing an approximately 170,000 square
- foot, 400 bed jail. So I just wanted to relay that information. So,
- It was a conditional approval that it would be similar in size to what I just said. I don't know.
- I mean, I think if it went back through planning commission, like the site plan has to go through planning
- commission anyway. So I don't know if a PUD amendment would be required to go to planning commission
- first, if you don't stay within the 170,000 and 400 beds. And I don't know what,
- uh, the latest proposal of the size of the jail is, but I wanted to relay that information. Thank you.
- The council member Stossberg kind of related to that. Um, if we're talking about the, uh, uh, site off
- Roger street, formerly known as the Thompson site,
- that anything there would have to go to planning commission simply because it's above a certain size,
- so it has to go through planning commission. And as long as you work with staff and tick the boxes,
- I mean, we had one last night that essentially it was by right because it checked all the boxes, but
- because it was more than a certain size, it had to have that public hearing piece. Planning commission
- tends to have two hearings is kind of a thing. You can always waive the second hearing depending on
- what the build is, how well it ticks the boxes. If you come at the first hearing and it's like an impeccable
- plan and it meets all of the necessary guidelines related to design and all of those things for the
- zoning, often they do end up skipping the second hearing. We just waive the second hearing and approve
- it through. That is a process that doesn't involve council at all. It only involves plan commission.
- If something has to have a change of zoning,
- which I don't think the Thompson site would actually need a change of zoning, then it would have to
- go through planning commission and then through council to approve a zoning change because council is
- the body that has to approve the zoning changes, but it has to come as a recommendation from the planning
- commission. So it really does, as Mayor Thompson said earlier, depend on which site you want to do and
- what the current zoning is of the site.
- as the member of the planning commission from council, I don't think that that body would be a crazy
- impediment, especially depending once again on the zoning and how well it kind of ticks all of those
- boxes that are pretty standard. It just takes working with our planning and zoning staff or our planning
- and transportation staff.
- to help you do those guidelines because, I mean, the UDO is complex, just as the county development
- ordinance is also complex, and those staff members are the best ones to help lead any development project
- through. Mr. Madera? So in the interest of process and getting back to the purposes of this meeting,
- I would like to
- suggest that we move on from discussion of specific properties to discussion of the process. I do think
- that the power lines property is going to be a political fig leaf that ultimately buys us six months
- of process before it collapses before a federal judge because of the two years of poll moving that I
- think that we have at the end. I spoke with Duke on Monday, and I'm happy to go into that at a later
- time. I do think that that's something we need to discuss in front of a smaller body at a later time.
- But that is, I think, outside the ambits of this meeting. But I would like to hear more about the city
- process. And going back to Mayor Thompson's
- comment about putting us at the top of the stack. When we are at the top of the stack, what happens
- from that point on? How long is that process? Assuming we would need to go through the Planning Commission
- and then through the City Council. If you had everything in, if the file was absolutely complete, when
- it was submitted, I would say the fastest we could probably, and
- somehow waived the second plan commission. And the council now can discuss on first reading, which means
- they, in theory, could decide on a first reading. So if all of those things happened feasibly, you could
- get through in four months. That's a lot of ifs.
- But that is, I would say that's the fastest expedited process that I would anticipate. Council Member
- Crossley? Yeah, so I'm glad you mentioned that because we got the current plan commission person here,
- or council member here, Council Member Susberg, because that was going to be my next question, because
- we've heard so many times it's a six to nine month process.
- But from what I gather, what you just said, if there's no changes that needs to happen, it technically
- doesn't have to have the two-prong approach where it goes for planning and then it goes to council.
- Is that my understanding? If there's no need for a zoning change, it doesn't go to council. If there's
- a zoning change need, then it does have to go to council because council's the only one that can make
- that kind of legislative change. OK.
- Including an adjustment to the PUD. So just because a jail is allowed, if you change the size, that
- is a change to the PUD, which does have to go to counsel. But not the false evidence appearing real
- factor of an idea of it going beyond a six to nine month process. It really does depend on how much
- you have your ducks in a row.
- in the beginning because there are boxes to check in terms of staff and bringing things to plan commission.
- Until the package is complete, staff won't bring it to plan commission. It just really depends on how
- well you have your ducks in a row in terms of that six to nine month. Mayor Thompson said four months.
- I would say that that almost could be faster if you really have your ducks in a row. There's a planning
- commission meeting every month, and except for summer recess, there's at least two council meetings
- a month that it can get dealt with. If there was a great deal of transparency and communication, if
- there did have to be a zoning change, thus necessitating it going through council, if there was a great
- deal of communication
- with both plan commission and city council kind of at the same time, so when city council gets it, it's
- not like starting from scratch, then that process part can be expedited too in terms of the minimum
- amount of turnaround between plan commission and council. Because I mean, sometimes, you know, and I
- as the plan commission person, I'm like, okay, I'm gonna be strategic about when this goes to council because,
- it's something big, or I think that council is going to want to put amendments on it. And so let's give
- it a little bit more time before it goes to council. If council is really aware of it, then I mean,
- it can go to council pretty quickly after the planning commission meeting. And it really just depends
- on how good the communication is beforehand, and then just timing the process out in terms of when meetings
- are. I'll tell you, it would be kind of rough to try to throw this in in August.
- because of budgets. Right. So some of that has some dependency to in terms of council schedule. So I'm
- going to encourage us to move out of the nitty gritty details of a planning process. And it may be that
- you ask for commitments on
- you know, expediting to the best of our ability and engaging, et cetera. But I think for the purpose
- of this meeting, we'll get bogged down in a lot of details that may or may not need to happen. And I
- think we have some sort of broad timelines. And so I'm going to invite Council Members Zulik to comment.
- Sure. Question. Thank you. Would it, at this point in time, be best to set up a working group to work
- through some of the more nitty gritty details?
- I think that is a that would be one of a positive a group of positive outcomes from this meeting. Yeah
- Do you want do you want to make a proposal on delegation to that group Like yeah, how many from each
- body who needs to be on it, etc I would recommend
- a city executive, if somebody from county executive wants to be a part of it as well. And then of course,
- representative from city and county council, I would think sounds good. Good plan. I would agree. County
- executive as well. You mentioned. Okay. More people. Yeah.
- unless other people have other objectives. Because I think sometimes when we have bigger, bigger groups
- of things, it's not to say that we can't have the smaller working group come back to the larger body
- and have a conversation. But I think that could happen where we have a smaller working group that has
- the task of what we are all saying
- and taken from this meeting, go work on it, and then bring it back to the larger body, unless anybody
- else has any other suggestions. I think that would be. And is that larger body this group, or is it
- the county council, county commissioners? What is the next step?
- I think it would be worth meeting all together again. Okay. I'm going to suggest that while we're proposing
- this, we make it time bound so that we know we're getting a team together that's available in the near
- term and whoever's volunteering can make appropriate time commitments. So, Kate?
- Yeah, I was just going to ask that because what would the subgroup of four, what would their purpose
- be? Because I think Councilmember Zulek said like for that nitty gritty kind of detail stuff. So is
- that like a site selection? And then you go, okay, like on this site, what would the steps all be? And
- is that the same subgroup that we should have discussing what those sites are? Do you know what I mean?
- Do you know what I'm asking? Or should there be?
- I guess I'm kind of looking at that and going, should we only have a subgroup of those four debating
- or discussing the different possible locations versus a subgroup of those four running through the details
- of the chosen possible locations? Sounds reasonable. But should there be? I think for highest efficiency,
- my proposal would be that
- that subgroup is going to propose the best two or three locations and come equipped with the zoning
- and other implications of each of those sites for a larger group to make a single recommendation to
- move forward? I think that there are only two or three locations possible.
- not saying that there can't suddenly be from the ether someone arriving with another location, but in
- all of our discussions, it has narrowed to really only two or three, three or four max maybe, that could
- possibly work if we are talking about within city limits. Councilmember Henry.
- I would add, and this is more procedural, to help that group conduct its business. We have two types
- of government sitting in the room here. A strong mayor system can release notes from your office on
- your administrative tasks. The County Council has never been privy to the full set of notes that the
- Board of Commissioners have used to determine and disqualify sites over the past six months. I have
- really asked the Board of Commissioners to release
- all the documentation from executive session to that body so it can look and not reinvent the wheel
- and duplicate effort that's already been done to dismiss or include sites.
- We've never seen that material. And so, Commissioner Redire, I just ask respectfully if we can take
- that back to your peers. It would be rather great to see those notes because we did bring, I think,
- up to six sites between January and May that never came into the public view. They were an executive
- session. You all need to know that. Otherwise, you're going to be flying blind. We need to see those
- notes. Jeff, have those been released? Are they on the drive?
- I'm not aware of any executive session that the commissioners have to discuss property that didn't involve
- the county council. So I guess I'd start with that. I don't know what we're talking about with the six
- sites. I mean, I will tell you, I get emails every, I got emails a couple weeks ago about
- People who say, hey, what about this site? What about that site? I guess maybe I'm missing what you're
- asking. Yeah, well, I'll ask it again. And if I have to go as far as actually naming the sites we talked
- about in the executive session, I'll do it. I mean, we brought multiple sites to those meetings and
- discussed them. They were eliminated for different factors. One, I believe, had a DLZ overlay that we
- never saw made public off of TAP.
- I think was one of the properties. So those are the list of properties that our peers would need to
- look at so they're not flying blind and making the same assumptions and reinventing the wheel. I thought
- I heard that there was meetings outside the council that had... It's loud in here, Jeff. And I apologize.
- I'm screaming over a fan. But I guess I have no problem having those. I mean, we have those notes.
- I mean, you have those notes. I think we can share them with the group as long as
- We have legal guidance not to share those, but if we can get those released is what I'm asking. This
- is in the weeds, but all I'm asking is that we provide that subcommittee the same information so they
- don't reinvent the wheel. I guess from my perspective, some of those are held by private individuals.
- I would want to reach out to them first to make sure they're aware that we're releasing that information.
- I'm not sure any of them will have any concerns with that.
- But that's just the courtesy that I would do, to let them know that that is occurring. That doesn't
- stop it from occurring. It's just reaching out to them first. OK, so I'm going to assume that legal
- counsel will make an attempt to release all possible documents. And we have Zulek Flaherty. Thank you.
- Overall, I think the thrust of where this
- the structure that's being proposed could work. To make it effective, it seems like we need to spend
- more time in this meeting trying to at least get a fuzzy universe of assumptions that are shared, because
- it seems like the different tangible steps that people were outlining all impact any site location.
- So flexibility of timeline, number of beds, these kinds of things. And then Commissioner Madeira kind
- of laid out
- her six factors as a synthesis of that. But I think there's a diversity of opinions. So one factor,
- like acreage. Is there a minimum assumption that people have in mind about acreage? And does that vary?
- Is there anything credible we can actually all agree on for that committee to be working with? I don't
- know how much progress we can make on those types of questions. I still have questions about
- the constitutionality thing. And if it's mainly space related,
- What are outside the box options of transporting some people or, you know, in the near term? Maybe that's
- not possible. Again, but just like putting it on the table is like, if we're talking about creative
- solutions like Councillor Deckard encouraged at the beginning, knowing how much those factors can move
- depending on some different pieces really impacts a lot the viability and possibility of different sites.
- And so if we can't like get somewhere on that,
- Or at least people can't, at minimum, I'd love for the county electeds to all kind of share what they
- think are the requirements, kind of in a similar way that Commissioner Madera did, so we can at least
- get that out there and hear the viewpoints and see what Koala. I'm going to just take a point of privilege
- in response to that, that I think it
- To that end, it would be good to have at least to invite and I know we invited sheriff tonight, but
- somebody from the sheriff's team and judge.
- if they're able to participate. They are the insiders who have the most knowledge about the building
- and how things operate. And so while we're getting creative, it would be good to have at least invitation
- extended to members of those two groups, I believe. Council Member Zulek. Thank you. Council Member
- Daly and I both have to leave at 7.15, and I realize that we will no longer have quorum for council
- at that point in time. So I just want to raise that.
- Thank you for letting us know. Council Member Rallo. So this may be a naive question, but have you all
- resolved on the county side whether everything needs to be co-located because you were talking about
- a site location where it would be a campus. But does it preclude things like having courts here, having
- the Curry Building utilized, phasing things?
- In other words, then attending to the justice building, renovating that, then having another site in
- process that could then expand occupancy of the jail. Is that part of the menu here, or are we looking
- at one single site for everything? Where are we? So I'll take a hit at that.
- Listed into the general conversation of everybody in county government, I think there is a strong desire
- to co-locate because we see the needs for having everything in one particular location. We see the need,
- as we have it so good right now currently downtown, of ensuring that attorneys, public defenders,
- You know, everybody in the same area would be able to get to certain things, because I understand caseloads
- and things like that. With people kind of going back and forth, it's a lot. With co-location, and I'm
- not saying one way or another, so if somebody hears something, please don't at me or send me an email
- about it. I'm just saying the general question, since you asked it. What I think I've heard concerns
- from colleagues is the co-location amount.
- I think a long time ago, I think the idea and the crystal ball was to have everything all at once right
- where. And then SB1 came into the situation and kind of changed the game for a lot of different things.
- I think maybe the idea, and colleagues can jump in if I say anything different, was to try to do that.
- And then SB1 with the restrictions of a lot of different things really kind of put a pause on that.
- Plus, the cost, as we talked about so many different times, with everybody wanting certain things that
- we've asked for, that just kept ballooning. And so right now, I think the general consensus is, what
- does that look like? Because it goes back to the beginning of what is required in this whole ordeal
- versus what we need to bring along with it in the beginning.
- The idea is to try to potentially do things in phases, maybe to get to that co-location. But again,
- I think it also depends on the location aspect of everything as well. And again, colleagues, please
- feel free to jump in if I need to add anything or misspoke. One thing we know from our system is that
- even if you choose not to do co-location,
- you're still managing and paying for not being co-located. So when Councilor President Crosley talks
- about that proximity and location, you've got everything from transportation to transportation of your
- prosecutors, your public defenders, and every other apparatus to it. And so while the SB1 has set us
- back on how we would do this, we know the county will be figuring out
- all of those details alongside every elected official in the system. Council funds it, but they will
- have to figure out the management and logistical system because we've been co-located since, well, at
- least since they've been in the Justice Building and maybe even when they were near the old City Hall.
- I'm going to jump in because we know we will lose
- city council quorum in 10 minutes and suggest that someone might want to make a formal resolution for
- the record on our next steps that we can commit to. I think we have some elements up there. We still
- haven't talked about a timeline for
- when this group would have its first meeting and then when it would be prepared to come back to the
- larger group? I think that it would be a good idea for the working group to evaluate two to three locations,
- assess the pros and cons of each of them, and come back to this body with a recommendation on a location and
- and an explanation on the thresholds and the criteria that were considered. Commissioner Medeira? Yes,
- and I'll just note that since I'm the only commissioner present tonight, I will have to take this back
- to my colleagues and consult with them as well. Thank you. But to be fair, though, we can still move
- forward with the working group. OK, all right. That's what I want to make sure because, yeah.
- And since we have a working motion that we're drafting here, I would add to President Zulik's comments
- that if any of the entities specified, Commissioner, Mayor, County Commissioner, Bloomington Common
- Council, Sheriff, or judges for any reason cannot participate or opt out, that the commission would
- continue its work under the timeline to come back. I propose three months.
- Okay, do you have a clarifying question? I was just wondering if the working group would be public meetings
- or not, just as a logistical. I don't think there's likely to be a requirement of that because it's
- not going to be a quorum of any body.
- Just to tell you, I'm concerned about that approach. I think the public's going to demand more transparency
- and more knowledge about just the whole process of selecting these locations and a small group bringing
- forward. We've already said here that location is the critical element. I just have concerns about that approach.
- I'll just say that I kind of share those concerns, but I think on the timeline that we're doing, I don't
- think that it's necessarily practical to have all of those meetings public. And that was kind of why
- I was asking is that, you know, if they did have to be public, then that would, I think, change our timeline.
- some kind of mix of those in terms of that transparency of going here's our big list and then privately
- whittle down to a smaller list and here's the smaller list and why might be a compromise on that kind
- of thing that could make sure that the public is well informed about what is happening. Daley? Yeah,
- I think that sounds reasonable as long as like the reasoning for each of the locations, why they were
- looked at and why they were rejected or moved forward. So would this magic group take input from the
- public? I think we need to make it public who is on that group.
- You should probably come to the microphone. I can summarize what Jeff's going to say. I think the attorneys
- in the room conferred, and I believe if you formally form this group, it's subject to open doors. So
- these have to be public meetings. It's not true even if there's only one council member on the group,
- or do there have to be two city council members in order for it to have to be public? But regardless,
- why would it not be public? Why would that slow this down?
- you just advertise a series of meetings once a week for the next six weeks and then come back.
- And to me, you just do it. And I realized- So who will be doing that? What body is going to publicly
- notice? I think much like we did this meeting today, it would be a joint effort, like working with county
- council and then working in tandem with
- I know the clerk's office has to do the notices and staff also has, we have to make sure that the biggest
- thing is making sure that staff is available to be at these meetings before, we can commit to that,
- but the biggest thing that we need to make sure is that staff from county and city clerk's office is
- available for those as well too. Okay, so it's been decided that there's going to be public meetings.
- We know who's doing the noticing.
- I think we're down to four minutes and I think we have a somewhat formed resolution, but I haven't heard
- it. What is the deadline for? I would. Is it realistic that the group could meet for the first time
- within one week from today? An initial meeting that I think that goes to who which which council members
- should be on the group? I mean, it's pretty we don't even know who we're talking about here.
- And then Commissioner Madeira, of course, has to go back to the commissioners. So maybe that doesn't
- matter. But is there a particular county council member or city council member that anybody would like
- to nominate or self nominate or think makes most sense in this working group? Councilor Decker. I recommend
- that we trust the presidents of both of the councils to appoint a member. Those presidents would likely
- pull their members and
- The rest would take care of itself. City Council has no more regular sessions, and so somebody has to
- do it now. I'm happy to do it. I'm also happy to appoint one of you. I'm in town for all of recess,
- so I am available. I'm not in town for all of recess, but I'm wondering how much my involvement with
- Plan Commission matters right now. I can keep you informed. Supplemental. Yes, that's true.
- Would you guys have recusal issues? What? Sorry? Would you guys have recusal issues? So for example,
- if Hopi served and this later came before the plan commission, would there be recusal issues? I think
- it's been decided that Zulik's serving. OK, great. I will keep you informed. OK. And I will appoint
- myself to serve on the working group. But I believe we have to have a motion first to actually
- formed the working group? When I agreed at the fairly last minute that I would sit here and help facilitate,
- I admitted that Robert's Rules was not my thing. There was a motion. I'll move. On city council's behalf,
- I'll move to participate in a working group with the other Monroe County officials
- that are in the mayor. I don't know how to say it. I mean, Monroe County. Technically, she's the mayor
- of Bloomington. She also lives in Monroe County. So anyway, to have a county council member or city
- council member on the working group, as is listed on the whiteboard right now. How about that? That's
- a long motion. I know. Right. It was horrible. Did you get that? Really? Sorry, Clerk Bolden. We can't
- hear you guys because of the fans. Oh, oh.
- Sorry, I'm not used to this room. So I'm moving that that city council participate in the working group
- as is listed on the white board right now. And so we call for a vote of just city council once we get
- a second on that. Yes, we can second daily seconded. Will the clerk please call the roll? Sure. Council
- member Rallo. Yes.
- Sasberg? Yes. Clarity? Yes. Zulik? Yes. Daly? Yes. Ruff? Yes. Piedmont? I can't see the white board,
- so I'm going to pass. Thank you. OK, thank you. That passes, and I will appoint myself to be on that
- working group. I also just want to note that we should add the prosecutor's office and the public defender's
- office to that group to be invited. Uh-oh, does that change?
- And can I also say, Hopi, Councilmember Salzberg mentioned sort of what she called a compromise approach
- to being very public on the larger number of sites and the accessibility to information for why a site
- was selected or rejected, and then taken to the smaller group. Yeah, but then I think the attorneys
- decided they all had to be public meetings, so it doesn't really apply anymore.
- And so we also need to have a motion from our side. So I'm looking into my colleagues to see how that
- will work. I'll do my best here. And I do this, Madam President, in the spirit that this moves us towards
- resolution in collaboration with our city partners who are graciously here today. Thank you. I would
- move that the county council similarly appoint a representative via the appointment of the president
- of the council
- to join with the other county entities, Commissioner, the sheriff, judges, prosecutor, public defender,
- as well as the mayor and the Bloomington City Council to make recommendation on moving this forward
- towards two to three locations with a recommendation of one second. Other timelines. OK, we got a motion
- and a second. Is there any other further discussion from council colleagues on this? Seeing none.
- Michelle, may we please have a roll call vote? I didn't hear who seconded. It was Councilmember Henry.
- Thank you. Councilor Crossley or Deckard? Yes. Councilor Fiddle? Yes. Councilor Hawk? Yes. Councilor
- Henry? Yes. Councilor Wilts?
- Yes, motion passes unanimous. And so before we end, would it be okay for us to say within the next,
- let's have a goal line of maybe no later than one month to reconvene since I know there's travel sessions
- and you all are on council recess, but you will be here so that we can get back in the saddle of things. So yes.
- I think that's a great suggestion. I just want to maybe clarify a little bit. In one month, this body
- will reconvene to hear the recommendation on a site from the subcommittee that we just formed. That
- sounds correct. Got it. Want to make sure I had it understood. It might be worse.
- meeting several times to one talk about the criteria that we decided on and then come back to it as
- a group, have that discussion, and then go back in and apply it to those site plans just so that we're
- all on the same page with what we decided on immediately. I don't think we have time. But I think the
- idea for us right now for this subgroup and for the Tomland that
- we are kind of on is making sure that we get this done and reconvene within the next month. Does that?
- So the subgroup was going to meet, and then we could all come back and meet, right? Correct. Is that
- what you were getting at? Yeah, the subgroup will meet as many times as they want between now and then
- in public meetings, figuring out. There is so much information that hasn't been shared publicly about
- sites that are possible.
- And I have a feeling if we can work through that, to Councillor Henry's point, and share it with that
- small group and hopefully the public, that will change the trajectory of all of this. Because it will
- become clear, I think, what the negotiables are and what the pros and cons are.
- I mean, that's all I can really say. Sure. I have faith. Ms. Sherman, do you have a question? So I'll
- just reiterate the position of my colleagues that as we get closer to litigation, we will be consulting
- with litigation counsel. And that litigation counsel will also have reflections on the property and
- the propriety of characteristics. So that will also come into the conversation. Thank you.
- keeping that in mind, but also knowing that we still have a work in progress to do. So with that being,
- yeah. Are you appointing somebody now? That's what I was just going to ask. Do we know who that who's
- going to volunteer so I can put that in our notes? Are you working on that tonight? President Crossley,
- are you going to appoint somebody tonight? I will look at two colleagues to see who would like to volunteer
- themselves. It is not me.
- Step up if no one else wants to. Okay. Or no one else can. I'm available. Does anybody have any objections?
- No objections? Okay. Tag your council member title. Thank you. All right. Clerk Bolden, can I get a
- read on exactly what the resolutions said about is it a member of the administration or is it me in
- particular?
- that's gonna participate in this body. My calendar can be prohibitive to rapid fire public meetings
- with less than a month's notice. Okay, I had heard it as a member of the administration. So shall we
- just make sure that we clarify
- that we are happy to accept a delegate from your office. The mayor or her designee? That's a good word.
- And I'll note that my motion was what was on the board, and the board did get truncated in a couple
- of ways. So the mayor, admin, and commiss will just, yeah. I would similarly say on our end,
- that we would. That's awesome. And that we would accept the commissioners and their designee as well
- in the spirit that we're moving collaboratively to move this forward. Yep. That is the goal. And that
- was the goal of this meeting. Do we have a motion for adjournment? So moved. Second. Thank you. Awesome.
- Thank you, everyone, for your collaboration tonight. Do you all have to vote to?
- Leave. Thank you. Thank you.