- All right, I'm calling to order the Thursday, March 26, 2026 meeting of the Bloomington Historic Preservation
- Commission meeting or commission to order. Would staff please call the roll? Drew Herron? Jack Baker?
- Here. John Butler? Here. Ernesto Castaneda? Melanie Duesner? Karen Duffy? Here. Jeff Golden? Here. Jeremy
- Hackard? Here.
- Abby Hanson. Here. Perfect timing. Daniel Legel. Here. We have quorum. Excellent. I have a motion on
- the minutes for March 12. Motion approved. I'll second that. I have one. Oh. Oh. OK. Sorry. I would
- suggest on COA 2611, it lists the owner is attending virtually, but the owner was here in person.
- Thank you. Good eye for detail.
- to approve subject to that change. And I will second that. OK, so we have motion approved subject to
- my change, seconded by John Butler. Or was it already changed? I guess the petitioner was online. The
- petitioner was online and the owner was here in person. OK. All right, great.
- So we have a motion moved and seconded to accept the minutes with that correction. We'll go ahead and
- take a vote. Jack Baker? Yes. John Butler? Yes. Karen Duffy? Yes. Jeff Golden? Yes. Jeremy Hacker? Yes.
- Abby Hanson? Yes. Daniel Schlegel? Well, I'm staying. I wasn't here. The minutes are approved. OK.
- Next up, we have the election of treasurer. We are required by the city council to have a treasurer.
- For this commission, we have $0. But if anybody would like to nominate themselves or nominate someone
- for treasurer, I would be willing to hear a motion. Do we have a second to nominate? Commissioner Butler,
- we have a second. Any discussion? Any strenuous objections? Yes, are there any other nominees?
- Hearing none, I think we're ready to call the roll. OK, it's been moved and seconded to accept John
- Butler as treasurer. We'll take that vote. Jack Baker? Yes. John Butler? Yes. Karen Duffy? Yes.
- Jeff Bolden? Yes. Jeremy Hackers? Yes. Abby Hanson? Yes. Daniel Schlegel? Oh, yes. And may I please
- have, for the record, who made that motion and who seconded it?
- I made the motion. Thank you. And then second was Jessica. Thank you. All right. So it passes.
- Congratulations, Treasurer Butler. Thank you so much. Very important. Yes. We're one of those banker
- advisors. Yes. Please come prepared. All right. Next up, discussion point, procedural adjustments. We
- adopted Robert's rules at our last meeting. So there's a couple of things that we're going to need to tweak.
- Going forward, the basic format of how we've been doing things is pretty much on point. There's just
- some tweaks, so it's going to go over those just so we're all on the same page. Per Robert's rules,
- I'll be more formal in referring to folks. I'm going to try to do that so it'll always be Commissioner
- so-and-so, no first names. I encourage everybody to also adopt that sort of format.
- For comments, when we do the comments period, everybody is allowed to comment up to two times. So if
- you've said something we've gone through and you want to respond to something else, you're allowed to
- do that. I just ask people raise their hands and I can return to them. But it is a limit of two times.
- So just so we're all aware of that function. Whoever makes a motion is given the chance to speak first.
- So if anybody moves to approve or deny anything, I will start the conversation with them, and then we'll
- be able to go around the room and have our comments. For public comments, there's a three-minute time
- limit for when people are talking. That'll be regularly enforced. Going forward, I will restate the
- motion before asking for a second. That is a common thing.
- Previously, I should have said Commissioner Schlegel has moved that Commissioner Butler be named treasurer.
- Is there a second? So I'll start taking on that sort of format. So I might get tongue-tied on that,
- ask for a little bit of patience as I'm trying to get used to that. I'll also announce the results of
- the vote and state if it has passed or not. I have Robert's rules here and has got Robert's rules. So
- if we get into it.
- conundrum on something, we can do deep research. We typically don't need that level of detail, but we're
- going to try to adhere to the Roberts rules as best we can. So any sort of questions about that? No?
- OK. Just wanted to make sure we were kind of all on the same page. So next up, we have staff review
- of certificates of appropriateness. I will turn it over to Mr. Sandler. Thanks.
- So first up on the agenda this evening, 411 South Valentine in the Elm Heights Historic District. Petitioner
- is Michael King. This house is an excellent example of a Tudor revival slash English cottage style.
- Notable features include the asymmetrical facade and steeply pitched roof. The textured brick facade
- is unusual, though reminiscent of early English cottages, which inspired this style.
- The arch door and six over six wood stash windows are still present at this house. Um, and this house
- has not been altered since construction, not substantially. A wood deck protrudes over an edge at the
- back of the house. The design is very conventional. The request proposed is to demolish the existing
- deck and replace it with a wood deck of slightly greater dimensions.
- Um, let's see. So, um, it'll be extended nine feet, sorry, four feet in length from the rear of the
- house. Um, also the railing is to be brought up to four feet in height, which is slightly taller than
- 36 inches of the current railing.
- And staff approved COA 2616. This application does not involve the removal or damage of historic materials
- and would replace an existing feature to the rear of the property. The differences in design between
- the current and proposed decks is minor and would not inappropriately increase the feature's visibility
- or scale. I hope you enjoyed that because there's more decks I came from.
- Okay. 1305 South Madison Street in the McDowell Historic District. This is for petition COA 2618. 1305
- South Madison Street is a severely altered 1925 California bungalow with an enclosed mid-century limestone
- front porch. A second story wood deck protrudes from the rear of the property. This application would seek to
- increase the length of the rear deck perpendicular to the back of the house from 16 feet in length to
- 20 feet in length, but otherwise the height and width would be retained. And staff approved CA 2618
- for the same reasons.
- This application does not involve the removal or damage of historic materials and would replace an existing
- feature to the rear of the property. The differences in design between the current and proposed decks
- is negligible. Thank you, Mr. Samweis. For those who were joining us online for those staff approvals,
- those are approved. So congratulations. Next up, we have COAs for commission review. I'm going to read
- our statement on procedure for this.
- For each item on the agenda, the Historic Preservation Program Manager will first present a staff report.
- We will then hear if the petitioner has any additional information about the request followed by public
- comment. Once public comment concludes, commissioners will be able to ask questions to staff, the petitioner,
- and the public. We ask that petitioners, the public, and commissioners refrain from speaking until addressed
- by the chair unless a question is directly addressed to them.
- Following commissioner questions, the chair will entertain a motion from a commissioner regarding the
- petition. Once a motion is made, we will then open up a discussion of the item for members of the commission
- only. Finally, once the commissioners have each had a chance to speak, actually a chance to speak twice,
- the commission will vote on the petition. We encourage all commissioners, petitioners, and members of
- the public to be civil and respectful at all times. All right. Mr. Samwise. Thank you, Mr. Hackard.
- All right, this petition is COA 2617. Petitioner is Craig Furman. Is the petitioner present? I am.
- Thank you. All right, great. 509 West Allen in the McDowell Historic District is a notable example of
- a colonial revival house. Notable features contributing to this house include the cornice returns, limestone
- sills and lintels, the brick siding, the front porch,
- the original wood windows and doors throughout the house, the limestone belt course at the foundation
- line, the limestone foundation, and that the house remains largely unchanged from the date of construction.
- This application would seek to replace the asphalt shingle roof with a matte charcoal gray standing
- seam roof. Existing trim and chimney would remain uncovered.
- recommendation from staff is for approval of COA 2617. The McDowell Historic District guidelines on
- roofs are somewhat unusual, as in some circumstances the specific roofing material can contribute
- significantly to a building's architectural integrity. This district includes a mix of folk Victorian,
- craftsman, and colonial revival style houses, most of which have either asphalt shingle or standing
- seam roofs.
- Although some of these are replacements, they're generally associated with these architectural movements.
- Nevertheless, the significance of historic roofing material needs consideration, particularly on a building
- of notable architectural significance. The contributing brick house next door has had its asphalt shingle
- roof replaced with a gray standing seam roof in the late 2010s. Some of the features that warrant this
- building's
- Notable rating on the state survey include its portico, crenellated stone fence, and original 4 over
- 1 windows. In the opinion of staff, the replacement of the existing roofing material would not result
- in a downgrading of this property's survey rating. Does the petitioner have anything that he would like
- to add? No, I think you covered it well, and I appreciate your considering this. All right. Thank you
- very much. Are there any public comments regarding this petition?
- room, online. Now is the time to make any comments, by the way, about this petitioner. Does staff see
- anybody? I do not. OK. Well, I think we'll start off with questions then. Commissioner Baker, do you
- have any questions? Yes. Is the intent of the petitioner to duplicate the roof that's next door? It
- looks like a standing seam.
- black, non-reflective. Is it your intent to pretty much be very similar or identical to that roof? I
- think in the ballpark, but the roof next to us is not standing seam. I don't know the right word for
- it, but it's the other kind of metal roof. So what we're trying to do is an actual standing seam. And
- the roof next door is kind of reflective and shiny. We're going to get one that is approved. We're going
- to get one that is
- not reflective at all, just so it doesn't blind neighbors. I think it'd be less of an issue with it
- being a two-story house in a neighborhood that's mostly one story, but still we want to get a premium
- roof that's actually standing steam and then has the sort of powdered, less reflective tone to it.
- Thank you. I see a color palette here with three different shades. Which color are you looking at?
- I think we're flexible on that, but my wife and I found ourselves going to the middle one, I guess,
- because we think it would complement the brick. And the brick is why we fell in love with the house,
- and I think what's most distinctive about it. So something that sort of doesn't take away from the brick
- and from the white trim. Thank you. Commissioner Golden, any questions? No questions. Treasurer Butler,
- any questions? No questions. Commissioner Schlegel? No questions. Commissioner Hanson? No questions.
- Commissioner Duffy? No questions.
- I have a question for our esteemed staff member. For colonial revival houses, how common is it to see
- a standing seam metal roof on them? So for this period, it would usually be either asphalt or slate
- shingle. It's not particularly unusual. A lot of colonial or colonial revival houses have in time had
- replacement standing seam roofs, which
- that technology has been in use in the U.S. I mean, increasingly, I'd say, since like mid-century. Okay.
- Would, in your opinion, do you think the standing seam roof with the color that they're choosing would,
- do you think it would match the appearance of the historic material? Yeah, in my opinion. Something
- that I mentioned in my staff report is
- Something that's a little unusual in the McDowell guidelines, the way that they handle roofing materials,
- is that the recommendation, the preferable recommendation, is to maintain the original materials or
- those used by contributing properties nearby. That's a little difficult because there could be instances
- where roofing material really does contribute a lot to what characterizes the architectural style of a house.
- I don't think that for this house, and in general, this style, although some exceptions, that this change
- to roofing materials would have much of an impact on its historic or architectural significance. OK.
- And because it's notable, could be eligible for National Register
- Nominations with the replacement with this roof material. Do you think it would affect? No That's that's
- really part of my consideration here. Um, I don't think that's One of the factors that really contributes
- to this building significance Okay Any other follow-up questions All right, I will entertain a motion
- on the COA I
- Okay, Commissioner Golden has moved to approve this. Is there a second? Second. Okay, there's a second
- by Commissioner Schlegel. Commissioner Golden, do you want to offer any comments? I think that there's
- not going to be much difference based on what I've seen before and the colors they're choosing and the
- appearance of the roof, other than the standing scene. So I think that this is acceptable.
- Commissioner Schlegel, you seconded. Do you have any other comments you want? I have nothing else to
- add to what Commissioner Golden said. All right, thank you very much. We'll go around there. Vice Chair
- Baker, anything? I agree that it just doesn't do really anything to change the appearance or the character
- of the house. It's a two-story house. Anyone walking by will not see the roof. You have to be some distance
- away to see it.
- I don't find the roof objectionable from a historic preservation point of view, and I agree with the
- staff recommendation. CHAIRMAN CLARE DUDA. Yeah, I think this is fine in terms of historical preservation.
- I don't see how it would interfere with that at all. I have a standing seam roof on my house. It was
- installed about 15 years ago, and we are going to have to replace it because it was poorly installed.
- So I would just warn the petitioner to,
- select a very good company because it can go wrong. So those are my comments. Commissioner Hanson. Yeah,
- per the staff recommendation, it doesn't seem like it would impact the state survey or national historic
- registry status if that were to come into play. So I have no objections. Commissioner Duffy. I would
- support it for the same reason. I think Mr. Samwise thought it through very carefully and very well.
- Yes. For me, I think our program manager's explanation of going through those questions and answering
- them satisfied my curiosity and easing my concerns. So I will be supporting this going forward.
- All right. Any other secondary comments anybody wants to make? All right. Wood staff, please call the
- roll for approval of COA 2617. OK. So that has been moved and seconded. We'll take a roll call vote.
- Vice Chair Baker? Yes. Treasurer Butler? Yes. Commissioner Duffy? Yes. Commissioner Golden? Yes. Chair
- Hackard? Yes. Commissioner Hanson? Yes. Commissioner Schlegel? Yes. That motion does pass 7-0. All right.
- That motion approves. All right. To our presenter, thank you very much for submitting this and for visiting
- us today. All right. Next up, we have COA 2619.
- I'm just seeing advice taken away. All right. This application for a certificate of appropriateness
- 2619 is for 301 East Glendora Drive in the Matlock Heights Historic District. Is the petitioner present?
- Yes, I'm here. All right. This is a contributing 1957 ranch, features three
- picture windows and a recessed side porch. In August of 2025, the current petitioner applied for the
- addition of a basement egress window on the east elevation. The commission failed to achieve a quorum
- of upcoming August 28th meeting, and the petitioner was informed that this item had been rescheduled
- to September 11th. Although the petitioner answered subsequent questions from staff, he was not in attendance
- for the subsequent meeting.
- between September 11th and October 5th, the city was informed that the work described in the application
- had been completed without the granting of a certificate of appropriateness. A notice of violation was
- sent to the listed address on October 6th, 2025, and a follow-up letter was sent on November 17th. Neither
- letter received a reply. The subsequent application for retroactive approval was received
- after the Department of Housing and Neighborhood Development established direct contact with a property
- owner. So as then, this application is for the now retroactive approval of a window installed at the
- basement level of the east elevation of 301 East Glendora Drive. You can see here where a window well
- has been installed and flashing along the limestone.
- as well as a layout of the new basement bedroom in which the egress window has been added. Does the
- petitioner have anything else that he would like to add? No. OK. So the staff recommendation in this
- case is for approval of 2619. While the added window is visible from the road east of the property,
- it's low profile and covered well, minimize its overall impact.
- A wide transom is the most noticeable part of the installation. Installed in a secondary elevation at
- the basement level below an existing window, its impact on the historic material and character defining
- features does not appear significant. That being said, without a sufficiently detailed description of
- the visible exterior alteration, it cannot be approved or exempted from review as a matter of faith.
- Any public comments regarding COA 2619? In the room? Looks like no. Online? OK. Well, we'll start off
- with commissioner questions. Vice Chair Baker, do you have any questions? For the petitioner, you put
- us in a peculiar position. Having to review this already done,
- My question is, why? Why did you go ahead and install this when you received notice at least twice that
- you needed to come before the commission? Yeah, I apologize about that. I showed up to the first meeting,
- and I didn't realize that it had been canceled. I hadn't received any notification, because there was
- no quorum. And then after that, I just forgot about it, and the letters were sent to the not to my home
- address. So I didn't actually receive them.
- you know, I believe that they were sent. And then we had contractors line up so that they installed
- it. So as you can see, right, the window is there for the safety of that new bedroom. Thank you. Commissioner
- Golden. No questions. Treasurer Butler. No questions. Commissioner Seidler. Commissioner Hanson.
- No questions. Commissioner Duffy. No questions.
- I don't think I have any questions either. So I will entertain a motion on the COA. So moved. I'll read
- which number it is. 2619. 2619. To approve COA 2619. OK. Commissioner Schlegel has moved to approve.
- Second by Commissioner Golden. Commissioner Schlegel, would you like to offer any comments at this time?
- Commissioner Golden, you second. Do you have any other comments on that? No, I have no other comments.
- All right, Vice Chair Baker. I don't like being put in this position. It was close to being fined or
- a lien put on the house. It could have been avoided. That's all I have to say. OK. Treasurer Butler.
- I agree with Vice Chair Baker's concerns about the timeline of this.
- but I feel that Overall the change is Tolerable it doesn't seem to have affected the historic fabric
- and so I will vote to approve Commissioner Duffy I think my comments would be
- Just to, if you are going to do any other work on this house or if you have any other instar clones,
- just make sure you're checking in with our program manager on any COAs that might need to be done and
- make sure you get those submitted before you do any work on future things. I think perhaps maybe this
- time we lucked out on this one, but we just want to make sure we do everything in the order that it
- should be done. So I just ask that you think about that in the future.
- Yes, go ahead. That prompts me a comment. I thought that be sure, if that does happen, if you want to
- do more work, make sure that you give the office your correct address for any future contact. Yes. That's
- a great point. Any other comments? OK. Hearing none, I believe we're ready to call the roll.
- We'll take a roll call vote on COA 2619. There is a motion to approve. Vice Chair Baker. I'm going to
- say before I vote that if this comes up, anything like this comes up again from this House or others
- that the petitioner might own, might bring to us, the vote might be different. But I'm going to be easy
- this time and vote yes.
- Treasurer Butler? I vote yes. Commissioner Duffy? Yes. Commissioner Golden? Yes. Chair Haggard? Yes.
- Commissioner Hanson? Yes. Commissioner Schlegel? Yes. That motion is approved 7-0. All right. Thank
- you very much for coming in. I appreciate it. Next up, we have COA 2620, Mr. Sinales. All right.
- Petition for COA 2620. This is for 2320 North Fritz Drive in the Matlock Heights Historic District.
- Petitioner is Ian Yarbrough. Is the petitioner present? All right. This request is for the addition
- of four large contiguous windows on the front-facing facade of an enclosed addition and an additional
- large squarish window on the north end of the addition. I'll show you what I mean.
- Built in 1950, 2320 North Fritz Drive is a massed ranch with some populous modern features, including
- its front door and horizontally oriented transom windows. On its north stand is an enclosed carport
- or patio. As you can see here, this is for the request of the installation of the window so described.
- The staff recommendation is for approval of COA 2620. The additional windows on what appears to be an
- enclosed patio or carport would not alter the contributing features of the house. The fact that this
- addition has been visibly altered from its original appearance means that the addition of the new windows
- to this appendix of the building would not convey a false sense of history, while the new fenestration
- pattern complements the house's mid-century aesthetic and references the original open nature of this
- part of the house.
- Does the petitioner have anything that he would like to add? No. I have one recommendation from a friend.
- The smaller two windows on the north side, I'm probably going to move those up to align with that new
- window, and then move them back a little bit. I kind of have a sketch up here of just kind of make them
- more evenly distributed. But other than that.
- Are there any public comments on this petition in the room? Any comments online? No? All right. We'll
- start off with questions. We'll start. Well, Melanie just got here. Vice Chair Baker, do you have any
- questions? I heard what you said, but I didn't tweak. Could you go over that again? Right. So those
- two existing windows, the smaller, higher, I guess,
- Could you go up and point to them, please? If you wouldn't mind, it would make things a lot clearer.
- Thank you. We're going to kind of more evenly distribute them across that side of the wall and then
- bring them up to a line with the top of the new window. Are you planning, are these large plate glass
- without mullions, without any kind of grills, just plain. And as I understand it, the two end windows
- are hinged to open out. Is that correct? And they're somewhat taller. How much taller are they than
- the one window just around the quarter that's the original?
- It looks to be six or eight inches. It should be about the same. I think that's what we ordered, was
- 45 inches tall. And that's what the existing windows are. That's the height of that window that's existing?
- Right, the height of the front window. That double long. Thank you. Commissioner Golden, do you have
- any questions? No questions. Treasurer Butler. No question. Commissioner Schlegel. Could you go back
- one slide, actually?
- You mentioned that the addition had already had some alterations, I think, but I didn't catch what those
- were. So it was originally an open area that looks like it has since been enclosed. The inside wall
- of the original, I guess it's a brick molding going into the kitchen, and then there's also siding behind
- the wall board in there. So as part of the renovation, tearing all that out.
- but it used to be an exterior wall at one point. That answers my question. Thank you. Commissioner Duesner,
- do you have any questions? Commissioner Duffy. No, I was going to ask about those two little windows,
- so I appreciate that you thought that out. We'll be closing up the other two openings on the wall as
- well, the weird strange heater vent on the window you see there.
- So I think I will entertain a motion on COA 2620. I have one. Yeah, please. You described this house
- as a ranch. Yeah. Thank you. I actually, if you don't mind me asking a question, or point of order,
- I just wanted to clarify whether any motion that would be made, and I guess this would be up to whoever's
- making the motion.
- would include the described additional work, moving those two existing windows and any changes to the
- exterior mechanicals. It'll be up to whoever makes the motion, so we'll see what we get. I move to approve
- COA 26-20, including the exhibit presented to us today, moving the two small windows on the side of that. OK.
- Golden has moved to approve COIA 26-20 with the additional windows. And Commissioner Duffy seconds.
- All right, Commissioner Golden, you have any comments? It looks like a good project that's not going
- to change the appeal of this house and probably make that room a lot more functional. So I'm going to
- support it. OK, Commissioner Duffy. I like the way it complements the mid-century modern look. All right.
- Commissioner Duesner, any comments? Commissioner Hanson. Commissioner Schlegel. I agree with Commissioner
- Duffy and her comments, so I'll support it as well. Treasurer Butler. I really like this proposal. I
- think this is exactly in the style and flavor of the house. And so I'm very happy to support it. Vice
- Chair Baker. I agree with the staff recommendation and the changes to the two small existing windows.
- And as for me, I think it's a contributing house. This is already an addition that's had work done on
- it. And they're just kind of making it better. So I really have no issues with this at all. So OK. Any
- other second comments from anybody before we move on? No? OK. I believe we're ready to call the roll.
- All right. We'll take a roll call vote on COA 2620. Vice Chair Baker? Yes.
- Treasurer Butler? Yes. Commissioner Duesner? Yes. Commissioner Duffy? Yes. Commissioner Golden? Yes.
- Chair Hackard? Yes. Commissioner Hanson? Yes. Commissioner Schlegel? Yes. That motion is approved 8-0.
- All right. The motion passes. All right. Thank you very much for coming in and talking to us and giving
- us all the plans. Appreciate it. All right.
- Next up we have on the agenda is old business. Mr. Sanlis, do we have any old business to discuss? I
- don't have any old business. Anybody have any other old business they'd like to go over? The way you
- said that. All right. New business. So last time we met, we talked about being able to go through and
- review the rules and procedures document.
- Mr. Sandweiss uploaded into our Google Docs some documents that showed some changes, proposed changes
- that I had kind of written out. I was gonna go through some of those, talk through sort of like my reasoning,
- open up the floor, see if people have different reasoning or other sort of areas where they might wanna
- make suggestions.
- My goal here is to have a conversation. We're not going to vote on anything tonight because I think
- what we want to do have a conversation. No one need to prepare something like what we did last time
- where it was kind of like a resolution of we're going to adopt this kind of stuff. And we'll see if
- we need to continue this to a discussion to another meeting or if you will make up something for the
- next time. I just want to lay that out for everybody. But so first off, if you go into the document itself,
- Article 1 is meetings. So Article 1A, that's where it had previously said we always have two meetings
- every month, or the second and fourth Thursdays of every month. That does not apply in November, because
- that would be Thanksgiving. And then in December, I mean, that's right around Christmas. We never meet
- then. So my suggested wording changes in that was,
- from January to October, the commission shall meet the second and fourth Thursdays of every month of
- five. And then for November and December, the commission shall meet on the second Thursday of the month
- only. Just to make that very clear and clean up anything, and I can't imagine how mad would a petitioner
- be if we were doing something on Thanksgiving? And I wouldn't be here, so. Also in that section, Article 1D,
- I've made a slight change. The agenda, and I entered it, for regularly scheduled meetings shall be set
- at least six days before each meeting and emailed the members. I think for other meetings where I think
- there's a possibility of calling an emergency meeting or whatever, that time frame might not hold up.
- So I was trying to be clear of if it's regularly scheduled meeting, it needs to be the six days, just
- to make sure we're all on the same page for that.
- Section 1F, where it's talking about decisions and recommendations shall be by roll call vote. And then
- I put in who is keeping track of that stuff. And I was suggesting this secretary indoor hand staff shall
- record the vote of each commissioner. So just saying who's doing it and making that perfectly clear
- in that section. Let's see. Section 1I.
- This might be old, because I don't know if this, I did this on the part where we adopted some of the
- new rules, so just bear with me a little bit. Section 1 I said all minutes or tape recordings of the
- proceedings. I just said recordings. Like, we're not tape recording anything. And I don't think we need
- to start doing that again to meet this. I think that would be insane.
- And then toward the end of that section, there's 1K. It's just talking about basically there's places
- where we're saying hand staff or staff liaison. I was just trying to clean it all up and make it consistent
- throughout. And any place where it was in between, I just kind of made all of them hand staff, I believe,
- just to make it very clear.
- That's who this is. We're always consistently referring to those folks in that way. And then the last
- item that's in that section 1L, it said, upon resignation of a commission member, the mayor within 90
- days shall appoint a new member for the remainder of the resigning member's term. We have no power to
- compel the mayor to do that at all. So I think this is kind of a, it doesn't hold weight
- So I'm just suggesting we get rid of it. It's also already in state law and in our code. So we need
- to have it here. We could say something like we shall request the mayor to leave that one alone. I think
- just based on practice and what has happened, I mean, we can't compel whoever is the mayor to make any
- nominations.
- At all and this being in here is not gonna do anything one way or the other except for set up a false
- expectation in my opinion so that is why I suggested we strike that but People disagree that's totally
- fine Okay Next up was officers. This is where we've added the treasurer and secretary. Yes, please. I
- So I went back and looked at all of your edits, and I had a couple of things to add to you to be consistent
- with the changes from the council and your M. You had an M in there that was the removal for cause.
- So as you know, losing your residency in the city or too many absences, you forfeit your seat. And so
- we're trying to do more training and kind of get people up to speed. So one of the things in the new
- code of conduct
- is the attendance policy, and that that would constitute cause for removal. So there's language in there
- now that just says exactly what the changes say to the code, which basically is that you can be removed
- for cause, and that cause is violation of the code of conduct or absenteeism, and that it describes
- what absenteeism is. So it's just to make it consistent. I have a question about the absenteeism. Who
- keeps that record?
- You know, who's watching whether we're here or not? And who notifies us? I found the language kind of
- stiff. So the secretary or the recording secretary keeps it in the minutes. The clerk's office actually
- is in charge of all of our boards and commissions. And so the deputy clerk has been the one assigned
- to boards and commissions. And that's like 100% of her job, is looking at all of that. The letters come
- from the clerk's office.
- to notify people if they have been removed due to absenteeism. So we'll be running everything through
- the clerk's office from now on. You mean we send the minutes to the clerk's office? She will either
- work with the staff liaison, either she gets in and looks at them, or she'll ask for a report, or I
- don't know. I think these are things that we're still trying to figure out, like whether it's on the
- staff liaison to notify that somebody's been absent twice in a row, those kinds of things. I mean, we
- are staff.
- required to keep a record of who attends. So I mean, the way that this has worked in the past and that
- I anticipate it working in the future is if this becomes an issue that we will have to actively share
- that with the clerk's office. OK. I've also been kind of, I just kind of keep an eye on who's coming
- and going as well and might just mention something to Noah on have we heard from someone in a while.
- Good. Just to kind of.
- Because sometimes stuff happens and people can't do anything. So they might need to move on. But I kind
- of will check in on that. Commissioner Schlegel. So I actually have a question on that. So I'm not sure,
- Anna, if it's for you, for Noah, or for Jeremy. For instance, since I have a board I report to at the
- History Center, they will
- at least twice a year, shift our meetings, which are always Thursdays. So I guarantee you, twice a year,
- I'm going to miss them two meetings, which already puts me half down. And if I take a two-week vacation,
- that's going to strike me down again. I mean, I'm going to have strike, strike, strike out. So I just
- wanted to clarify, is there an excused absence for when I let Noah know, like, hey, Noah, my board moved
- a meeting. As executive director, I have to attend this.
- There actually is a process for extenuating circumstances, which you send it to the council, to whoever
- appointed you, and basically explain that you have the two meeting conflict because of your
- job responsibilities. And I don't think that that gets you out of being removed, but it gives you at
- least a placeholder.
- so that they would consider that if they were to consider removal based on absences. The fact that you
- had given them that notice. And then same with vacay, because there's almost no time where I can take
- two weeks of a vacation to go overseas and not miss one of these because of the frequency. So would
- that be very similar as well to be able to say, hey, I have this trip planned. Don't remove me, because
- I would like to go do something fun.
- These meetings aren't exciting. Yeah, exactly. But I mean, I think that's going to be a huge thing for
- anyone else that would be interested. When I've had people ask me if I would join the HPC or the commission
- again, things like that. I mean, I'd flat out say no if I'm like, hey, I got removed because my board
- moved two meetings, I took a vacation, and then I got sick. They gave me the boot. I mean, I think that's
- going to be a big black mark on the city because I know I won't be the only one with that issue. Sure,
- for sure. Could you read?
- what that means. Could you please restate it, please? Do you want me to read all the removal for cause
- or just that last bit? Just the absenteeism. Excessive absenteeism is a failure to attend three consecutive
- regularly scheduled meetings of the board, commission, or council, or four regularly scheduled meetings
- in any 12-month period, provided that any member may submit in writing to the appointing authority any
- extenuating circumstances.
- Such written submission may be made within five business days before the formal decision to remove is
- reached. Acceptance of extenuating factors by the appointing official or body puts the member on notice
- that a further excessive absenteeism shall result in removal. And as I've seen, the clerk's office in
- these cases does reach out to the board member, board or commission member. So it won't be done with
- zero notice.
- So that does provide the opportunity for writing to have a copy. So for instance, if they noticed that
- I was gone for being sick, the board shifting, took a vacation, they'd reach out to me and then I have
- to reply within those five days or within five days of each of the times I missed. Sorry, I was processing
- all of it. I'm not sure, but if you already know what
- Do you know the meetings that your board has already moved those dates? It's always March, so I missed
- that one last month. And then sometime around between October, November, December, there's usually something
- weird that pops up, and we shift it. And then I know, for instance, in October, my plan right now is
- to go overseas, but things might have gotten complicated. So may or may not pull that off. But I'm just
- getting over being sick. I almost stepped down today, but I wanted to make this exact point is,
- Because other places I've been, at least if you have a valid excuse, like, hey, I was throwing up. I
- didn't want to be there, make everyone else sick. Or hey, I had this other obligation that happens every
- so often. There's excused absences. So it doesn't sound like the city's granting that. And I just wanted
- to make sure there was something with that. I think that language is actually intended to allow for
- those circumstances. It doesn't exactly read like that, which is something we probably do need to address with our
- Committee on Council Processes is the committee that works on this. But what I would do is I would go
- ahead. I mean, you know what the agenda is, you know what the date is, and you can do that five days
- before a meeting notice. So I would go ahead and do that on an individual basis unless you have all
- your dates for the calendar year and you want to submit that one time at the beginning of the 12-month
- period. And it's a rolling 12 months.
- So that's the other thing, too, is that sometimes it just ends up being one of those things where it's
- like, yeah, from December to December, it might have been an issue. But since it's a rolling 12 months,
- you end up being in OK shape. So the intent is not to remove people who are actively participating.
- The intent is to have a trigger for those that are just not showing up because they just didn't feel
- like coming. Yeah, I think I would also just, in those sort of situations, I would pipe up in support
- of that sort of stuff.
- In your situation in particular, I mean, you attend pretty regularly. So I think it would be nuts if
- we just kind of were like, OK, we've got to give Commissioner Schlegel the boot now because he got sick.
- That's not what anybody's trying to discuss. So when it says appointing authority, do I have to literally
- write a note to the mayor then, if I was appointed by the mayor's office? I would go ahead and write
- it to the mayor's office with the CCD NOAA. Here's why I'm going to be absent, and thank you for, and
- to the clerk's office.
- So that the clerk's office has a record of it and Noah has a record of it that you've explained your
- extenuating circumstances. So I know it sounds very procedural, but I think people who are
- active participants like you will go through that effort of doing that. And the ones that aren't showing
- up are probably not going to bother to do this process either. I think to your point, I feel like the
- one meeting
- Missing consecutive meetings over a long period of time, I get. But I think that every once in a while,
- everybody deserves a vacation. So I hope so. I'm hopeful this city is flexible on this kind of stuff,
- because we don't want to punish good public servants for doing stuff that we need done. So thank you
- for bringing that up.
- I'll be testing that this year for sure. I know I'm fine being a test case, but I just wanted to publicly
- state that, because I know this is on the record, not tape recorded, but on the record. So I just want
- to make sure that was really clear really early, because otherwise I'd just resign instead of getting
- kicked off. So just to make it easier. Commissioner Duesner, did you have a question? I know that attending
- by Zoom, we can't vote doesn't count toward crime. But does it count toward our attendance?
- So yes, it counts towards your attendance. It doesn't count towards quorum. You have to have 50%. You
- still have to have 50% in the room. But you can vote, though. But you can vote unless there's a list
- of things you can't vote on, like a budget or a personnel appointment or something. There's a few things
- like that that you cannot vote on. But since we don't have any money, that's not going to happen. Yay.
- So I just wanted to clarify that in terms of like,
- illness or travel, I may be doing some research travel and that kind of thing. Attending via Zoom is
- not a problem, and I'm a little less worried about it now that we have more people, so we're more likely
- that people, but anyway, that's good to know. I can bring some additional information. There are some
- limitations about how much you can do that, so I think it's like two meetings in a row, no more than
- 50% of the overall meetings.
- that they wrote into the state law after they kind of removed all the COVID restrictions, which allowed
- you to do it all the time. So we can definitely talk about that, but it is allowed on a limited basis,
- and it doesn't count towards Quorum. OK. Any other questions on this first section? Any other things
- that we've covered thus far? OK. So next up.
- Obviously, in the Article 2 as officers, we've added the treasurer and the secretary since we've already
- voted those in and noted that the commission, well, a non-member can serve as secretary. I think we're
- still working through how exactly we're going to phrase that. But hopefully, maybe by the next meeting,
- we'll have that sort of figured out as to how that appointment process will work and move forward with that.
- What are some of the other major things that I changed in here? A lot of the stuff for certificates
- of appropriateness, some of the sort of like the management of those things was kind of put onto the
- vice chair. I went through and suggested all the edits that it be hand staff that is handling a lot
- of that sort of administrative stuff that seems much more a staff thing rather than
- a commissioner sort of appointment. Let's see, what else? And then I think we might want to talk about
- the procedure for if a petitioner is not attending in a meeting. So I don't know if you want to talk
- through how we might need to make some edits there. So a petitioner has their thing on the agenda, but
- they don't show up.
- is continuing it considered action or not. So how are we going to handle it? Could you kind of talk
- through that for me? So we were talking about a situation where you all have a 30-day clock, where if
- you don't take an action on a certificate of appropriateness, it's deemed approved. And that's a state
- law requirement.
- And so what about the situation where you accept an application, the person doesn't show up, they don't
- show up again, you don't have a quorum and all of a sudden 30 days are over and they're basically approved
- even if some of the lack of effort was on their end. And so we are trying to figure out a way to address that.
- so that a petitioner can't just not show up enough times to be deemed approved just because our bylaws
- say that they have to be present, which is actually not part of the state law, that they have to be
- present in order for their petition to be considered. So something like you guys could have a denial
- without prejudice,
- which if they miss one meeting the next time you take it up, you deny it without prejudice if they're
- not going to be there and say, we're denying without prejudice, we will allow this person to come back
- with the same application if they notify NOAA within that 12 days prior to the next agenda. Something
- like that so that we can allow the person an opportunity not to have to submit a whole new application
- and get a new application number, but to stop that clock so that people aren't just getting
- their certificates of appropriateness granted just because they're not showing up. Now, if it's an issue
- of a quorum or you guys don't get to it or something, you know, you guys are on break and it's something
- that's a commission-related delay, then I think we take our lumps, right? Because then that's exactly
- why that 30-day shot clock is in there is so that a petitioner doesn't have to wait if the commission
- is unable to get to their business.
- I think that makes a lot of sense of just making sure we have some kind of action. And at least for
- me, I think it would be nice if you would be able to draft maybe some of that language that we could
- look at. I'd feel much more comfortable coming from you of making sure that it kind of complies with
- all the laws and ordinances and things of that nature. And sorry, I should have mentioned this at the
- beginning.
- A continuation is not considered an action for the purposes of this statute. The action is either approve
- or deny. The continuation is just considered kind of a procedural move. So you cannot do it unless you
- have the approval of the outside party. So if the petitioner for some reason said, oh, yeah, I agree
- to 30 days. I really want to come back. I'm sorry. I was sick, or I couldn't be there.
- then they could submit in writing the fact that they would agree to a continuation. And in that case,
- that does toll the 30 days. But otherwise, a continuation that's just done on your end does not stop
- that clock. OK. I think that's good, just to make sure we're kind of on the right side of all this stuff,
- especially if somebody comes back and challenges something. We've had the right procedure and have done
- the right thing, just to ensure the COAs are approved appropriately.
- So thank you for that. Throughout this section, again, most of these changes were hand staff is being
- responsible for doing things. Trying to see if any other major tweaks, like there are a couple places
- where I put in like commas and stuff. I don't know if we need to go into the specific line of where
- that is. And then let's see if there was any other massive change that I had suggested. I don't think
- so. I think that kind of,
- was the majority of my sort of major changes that I had suggested. Did other people when they read through
- this, were there any points of sort of they had questions or they wanted clarification or something
- or perhaps had some suggested language that they think should be added? Or if you didn't do it,
- that's okay. I like what you're doing here and I think that
- by tightening up and the imaginary force is being removed and it's becoming a person from hand or you
- know, I think that's straightforward and I think it's the right direction. So I appreciate what you've
- done and I'm on the same page. Okay. So I think maybe next time around if you can kind of maybe figure
- out that language for the person not showing up and what we need to do and maybe share that with Noah
- if we could put together sort of that
- I don't know. It was a resolution or something. Right. I could write another version of that resolution.
- Yeah, too. Then we could look at it one last time and vote on accepting it or denying it at that time
- if people are comfortable with it. Or if you'd like another meeting to think about it, I'm OK with that,
- too. I'm happy to hear suggestions on that. Does next meeting sound good? It seems like by consent,
- that seems all right. OK.
- Well, that brings us to the end of that section of the agenda. Next up, commissioner comments. Do any
- of my fellow commissioners have any things that they would like to share? I just want to thank all of
- you guys. I think you're a really great commission to serve on. I appreciate all of your personalities.
- I think this has been, I don't know, enjoyable.
- It's sort of weird, but I appreciate you guys. Thank you, Treasurer Butler. Any other comments? If not,
- I would like to share a couple of comments. We have had a changeover in commissioners for advisory positions.
- So we have a new commissioner who will be joining us, Carrie Champion. She's the director of the Wiley House.
- Unfortunately, that means that we are losing Duncan Campbell. And I wanted to take some time to thank
- Duncan for his decades of work on historic preservation around the state. His time at Ball State where
- he taught, and then all of the work that he did in town for this building, Wiley House, Johnson's Creamery.
- Historic preservation in the city would not look the same if it wasn't for him.
- And so I just want to thank him in this venue for all of that work and all of the years that he spent
- on this commission in voting and non-voting roles. He is a font of knowledge. And I hate to see him
- go, but I just want to send thanks to him. I will miss his opinion, for sure. So ineligible. Yes, very
- knowledgeable.
- All right, next up is public comments. Are there members of the public who would like to speak? If you
- would like, you can state your name and you have three minutes. My name is James Ford. I just wanted
- to comment about something that was discussed earlier today. And maybe this is something that has to
- work at the state level. But in a secondary school, if a teacher is absent, there's a pool of substitute
- teachers that they can call and say, hey, will you come in and sit down for my class that day?
- It seems like there could be some knowledgeable people or non-voting people who could stand in for a
- voting member who's going to be absent. They know they're going to be, so it wouldn't count against
- their. Oh, like have a proxy vote? Like each person could have a proxy? Maybe. That would be an issue
- for the mayor, because the mayor appoints all the voting members. It's something that we've looked at
- in the past. It just sort of runs into a brick wall there. No.
- Is there any other public comments in the room? Any public comments online? No? Okay. Well, we have
- come to the end of our agenda so this meeting is adjourned.