WEBVTT 00:00:00.546 --> 00:00:11.340 - This is the Bloomington Historic Preservation Commission meeting for October 22, 2026. To begin with, 00:00:11.340 --> 00:00:22.028 - let's call the order, please. And do a roll call. Thank you. Commissioner Cross? Here. Interim Chair 00:00:22.028 --> 00:00:29.118 - Baker? Here. Treasurer Butler? Here. Commissioner Castaneda? Here. 00:00:29.762 --> 00:00:39.463 - Commissioner Duffy? Here. Commissioner Golden? Here. Commissioner Schlegel? Here. We have quorum. 00:00:39.463 --> 00:00:49.363 - Thank you. All right, let's move on to approval of the minutes. Does anyone have anything to add to 00:00:49.363 --> 00:00:59.262 - or consider changing in the minutes? Chair, or interim chair, if I may. For the record, could I ask 00:01:00.258 --> 00:01:09.814 - What has happened to our previous chair? I don't think that has been discussed officially in front of 00:01:09.814 --> 00:01:19.464 - the HPC. Why is it that you're the interim chair? What has happened to our chair? I'm sorry. I did not 00:01:19.464 --> 00:01:29.020 - put my hearing aids in, so it's going to be a difficult evening for me. I can address that. Would you 00:01:29.020 --> 00:01:30.238 - please? Yes. 00:01:30.690 --> 00:01:39.758 - Chair Hackard resigned, so he's not with the commission anymore. With the effect from? Well, as he had 00:01:39.758 --> 00:01:48.914 - mentioned earlier, he's taken on some new roles at work, and it has taken up his time to volunteer with 00:01:48.914 --> 00:01:57.982 - his board. What I'm asking is, when was his resignation effective? What's the date on his resignation? 00:01:58.242 --> 00:02:08.636 - two weeks ago. I would have to go back and look it up. Yeah. Okay. I have the letter here. Um, September 00:02:08.636 --> 00:02:18.534 - 21st. Okay. And may I ask that since that is a public document that will be placed on the record of 00:02:18.534 --> 00:02:26.750 - the HPC placed in the minutes. Um, yeah, it's a email to city staff. Um, uh, so I, 00:02:27.650 --> 00:02:41.268 - That being the case, I'd like to raise a point of information as to when will we be electing the new 00:02:41.268 --> 00:02:48.414 - chair. Based on the guidelines, Article 2B, it says, 00:02:49.058 --> 00:02:54.995 - The vice chair shall have authority to act as chair of the commission during the absence or disability 00:02:54.995 --> 00:03:00.759 - of the chair. In the case of resignation or death of the chair, the vice chair shall succeed to the 00:03:00.759 --> 00:03:06.985 - office of chair until a new chair is selected from the membership at the next duly noticed general meeting. 00:03:06.985 --> 00:03:12.807 - Am I to assume that this would be the next duly scheduled general meeting? Next one we've had, yeah. 00:03:12.807 --> 00:03:18.686 - OK. So it would appear that by our guidelines, an election of a chair should be done at this meeting. 00:03:18.818 --> 00:03:28.283 - but I didn't see it on the agenda. And normally, traditionally, we do it at the start of the meeting. 00:03:28.283 --> 00:03:37.934 - So my question is, at what point will we engage with selecting a new chair? Would somebody like to make 00:03:37.934 --> 00:03:45.822 - a motion? I just want to make sure we're not in the middle of the minutes right now. 00:03:45.922 --> 00:03:52.363 - because a motion hasn't been made. I think we'd have to have someone that wants to put themselves out 00:03:52.363 --> 00:03:58.931 - there for sure. If there's anyone that would like to, they can speak up. Well, normally there is a call 00:03:58.931 --> 00:04:05.246 - for nominees. I'm just going based on how it normally happens. You can nominate yourself or you can 00:04:05.246 --> 00:04:11.687 - nominate somebody else. Can we make a motion to approve the minutes and then we could act on this? Is 00:04:11.687 --> 00:04:12.382 - that what? 00:04:12.802 --> 00:04:21.824 - the staff liaison is asking for. Yeah, we're getting off topic here a bit. Let's do that. I think if 00:04:21.824 --> 00:04:31.292 - there are any more comments on the minutes themselves. Do I have a motion to approve? A motion to approve 00:04:31.292 --> 00:04:36.830 - the minutes. I'll second. Seconds, all right. Then let's do a 00:04:36.962 --> 00:04:45.118 - Sure, that sounds good. OK, there's a motion and a second on the table to approve the minutes from the 00:04:45.118 --> 00:04:53.670 - August 27th HPC meeting. We'll do a roll call vote voting members only. Interim Chair Baker? Yes. Treasurer 00:04:53.670 --> 00:05:02.380 - Butler? Yes. Commissioner Castaneda? Yes. Commissioner Duffy? Yes. Commissioner Golden? Abstain. Commissioner 00:05:02.380 --> 00:05:05.310 - Schlegel? I need to abstain as well. 00:05:06.274 --> 00:05:16.284 - The minutes are approved with four yes, zero no, two abstentions. All right, thank you. Now, let's go 00:05:16.284 --> 00:05:26.980 - back to the presidency of the commission. Is there anyone who would like to put their name out as president? 00:05:26.980 --> 00:05:35.518 - We can't continue along as we are now, or we could elect a new president this evening. 00:05:41.026 --> 00:05:48.258 - I would like to nominate. I did have a question. Oh, sure. Go ahead. My only question is, do we have 00:05:48.258 --> 00:05:55.777 - all current members here today? Is this everyone? Yes, it is, in fact. OK. I just wanted to double check 00:05:55.777 --> 00:06:03.009 - in case we were missing someone, because then I would want to say, oh, if Bob is missing, let's make 00:06:03.009 --> 00:06:10.814 - sure Bob's here so we can nominate him, since he's not here. So we have several vacancies now? That's right. 00:06:13.154 --> 00:06:20.795 - Does it make sense to elect a president when we have so many vacancies? Well, we kind of have to, 00:06:20.795 --> 00:06:29.059 - don't we? Isn't that the procedural thing to do? I'm not sure we have to. It says here in our guidelines, 00:06:29.059 --> 00:06:36.856 - at the next regularly scheduled meeting. And if this is the next regularly scheduled meeting. If no 00:06:36.856 --> 00:06:41.534 - one puts their name forward, we would be unable to do that. 00:06:43.714 --> 00:06:57.304 - No, we would still have it because you could only remain chair if you were elected. Your position as 00:06:57.304 --> 00:07:11.029 - acting chair is up until a new chair is elected. You could be that person, but you have to be elected 00:07:11.029 --> 00:07:13.182 - to that office. 00:07:13.474 --> 00:07:20.521 - Right. Anybody who puts their name forward would have to be elected, of course. Right. That's the way 00:07:20.521 --> 00:07:27.567 - it works. Which means that you would have to either be nominated or nominated. Either way, you'd have 00:07:27.567 --> 00:07:34.683 - to be nominated and the process would go through for you to be the chair. But you don't remain interim 00:07:34.683 --> 00:07:41.246 - chair beyond this meeting. It's either you are voted to chair or another person becomes chair. 00:07:41.730 --> 00:07:51.525 - I am the elected vice chair. Vice chair is not chair. Can we continue with the agenda and put this under 00:07:51.525 --> 00:08:01.039 - new business? We have to go through the agenda first. I think that's a very good idea. I think that's 00:08:01.039 --> 00:08:08.222 - a very good idea. Let's do that. We can carry on and we will get back to it. 00:08:09.730 --> 00:08:22.273 - Well, I'd like to raise a point of order. Am I recognized? Let's see. I'm going to move into the certificates 00:08:22.273 --> 00:08:34.587 - of appropriateness. Chair, I would like to raise a point of order. Am I recognized? Yes, you're recognized. 00:08:34.587 --> 00:08:37.438 - What do you have to say? 00:08:38.370 --> 00:08:46.876 - Based on the guidelines, I believe that we're proceeding in a manner which is in opposition 00:08:46.876 --> 00:08:56.306 - to our guidelines. In that, it asks that we select a chair at the next meeting. And traditionally, we 00:08:56.306 --> 00:09:05.182 - have done so at the start of the meetings. Ever since I've been here, when a chair needs to be- 00:09:05.506 --> 00:09:12.519 - We're going to move this as suggested to the new business. We are proceeding in normal fashion. The 00:09:12.519 --> 00:09:19.883 - fact that it's been done one way or another way before makes no difference in that it's not in the rules 00:09:19.883 --> 00:09:27.037 - that we have to proceed that way. So we will continue on and we will bring it back up at a later time 00:09:27.037 --> 00:09:35.102 - in the meeting. Chair, I was raising a point of order. I had the floor. I was not finished with my point of order. 00:09:35.330 --> 00:09:45.664 - Mr. Golding interrupted me. You did not call him out of order. You're correct, but please finish your 00:09:45.664 --> 00:09:56.303 - comments. Thank you. Tradition has the force of a rule unless there is a rule which precedes it or which 00:09:56.303 --> 00:09:59.646 - prevents it and if traditionally 00:09:59.970 --> 00:10:07.710 - we've always selected our chair at the start of the meeting, then it has the force of a rule under our 00:10:07.710 --> 00:10:15.750 - guidelines as per Robert's Rule Section 4. So the fact that we have selected a chair since this commission 00:10:15.750 --> 00:10:23.340 - has been in effect at the start of the next regularly scheduled meeting, it has the force of a rule. 00:10:23.340 --> 00:10:29.502 - Now, if it is that this body would like to change that, it can do that by a vote. 00:10:30.434 --> 00:10:39.580 - But right now, the election of a chair at the start of a meeting is technically a rule of the HPC. Are 00:10:39.580 --> 00:10:48.549 - you finished? Sure. And also, we have our assistant attorney online. I'm trying to get her screen on 00:10:48.549 --> 00:10:58.494 - so she can speak and put in sharing. I'm just trying to put her on video right now. So just one moment, please. 00:11:04.194 --> 00:11:10.173 - Attorney Holmes, you are unmuted, but right now I'm trying to put you on video. Can you hear us? 00:11:10.173 --> 00:11:16.460 - I'm sorry. I'm having a hard time logging on with my laptop, so I'm on my iPad. Certainly. It doesn't 00:11:16.460 --> 00:11:22.747 - connect as well. This is Anna Holmes from the legal department. And weighing in on the issue of a new 00:11:22.747 --> 00:11:29.033 - chair, I think it's fine if you're going to put it in new business and keep it up. There's many times 00:11:29.033 --> 00:11:32.670 - at the beginning of the year where we have decided not to. 00:11:32.962 --> 00:11:38.960 - elected chair in the first meeting based on who was there or people wanting to give consideration on 00:11:38.960 --> 00:11:45.076 - whether they wanted to be nominated for that role or not. So Commissioner Cross, thank you for raising 00:11:45.076 --> 00:11:51.073 - the issue. I think it's fine if you want to have the election and it's also fine to do it at a later 00:11:51.073 --> 00:11:57.190 - time in this agenda and to move forward with the minutes and the approval of the items that are on the 00:11:57.190 --> 00:12:00.990 - actual agenda of the meeting if appropriate. I have a question. 00:12:04.962 --> 00:12:14.263 - Are you recognized as the chair? We are moving on. Point of information. I'd like to raise a point of 00:12:14.263 --> 00:12:23.381 - information. We are moving on. We are going to put the conversation about the chairman into a later 00:12:23.381 --> 00:12:28.670 - part of the agenda. Right now we are going into the COAs. 00:12:29.122 --> 00:12:34.468 - I'm going to read the statement before... Chair, for the purpose of the records, are you not recognizing 00:12:34.468 --> 00:12:39.611 - my request for a point of information? No, I'm not recognizing you at the moment I am moving on with 00:12:39.611 --> 00:12:40.222 - the agenda. 00:12:44.258 --> 00:12:49.963 - Procedure for certificates of appropriateness and demolition delays. For each item on the agenda, the 00:12:49.963 --> 00:12:55.723 - Historic Preservation Program Manager will present a staff report. We will then hear if the petitioner 00:12:55.723 --> 00:13:00.030 - has any additional information about the request followed by public comment. 00:13:00.258 --> 00:13:05.565 - Once public comment concludes, commissioners will be able to ask questions to staff, the petitioner, 00:13:05.565 --> 00:13:11.239 - and the public. We ask the petitioners, the public, and commissioners refrain from speaking until addressed 00:13:11.239 --> 00:13:16.545 - by the chair, unless a question is directly addressed to them. Following commissioner questions, the 00:13:16.545 --> 00:13:21.799 - chair will entertain a motion from a commissioner regarding the petition. Once a motion is made, we 00:13:21.799 --> 00:13:25.950 - will then open up a discussion of the item for members of the commission only. 00:13:26.082 --> 00:13:34.696 - Finally, once the commissioners have each had a chance to speak, the commission will vote on the petition. 00:13:34.696 --> 00:13:42.828 - We encourage all commissioners, petitioners, and members of the public to be civil and respectful at 00:13:42.828 --> 00:13:50.959 - all times. Noah, would you present COA 26.68? Okay. Certificate of Appropriateness 26.68. Petitioner 00:13:50.959 --> 00:13:53.374 - is Heather Hales. This is for 00:13:54.210 --> 00:14:01.874 - 800 West 6th Street in the Near West Side Historic District. The application, 800 West 6th Street is 00:14:01.874 --> 00:14:09.765 - a slightly altered gabled L house with a brick front porch, two over two mid-century wood sash windows, 00:14:09.765 --> 00:14:17.580 - and a picture window on the gable end. There are two front doors, one entering each wing of the house. 00:14:17.580 --> 00:14:24.030 - This request is for the installation of a new solar array on the street facing roof. 00:14:25.666 --> 00:14:33.369 - and this application has been approved by staff. The proposed solar installation is set close to the 00:14:33.369 --> 00:14:41.225 - roof surface and the pitch would not, sorry, close to the roof surface and pitch. It would not obscure 00:14:41.225 --> 00:14:49.081 - or damage any historic features. Our next item is COA 2669. This is for 221 North Walnut Street in the 00:14:49.081 --> 00:14:53.886 - Courthouse Square Historic District. Petitioner is Greg Elgar. 00:14:55.266 --> 00:15:03.854 - 221 North Walnut Street is a five-bay break commercial building with a limestone facade facing Walnut 00:15:03.854 --> 00:15:12.948 - Street and a storefront with picture windows and wood ground floor level panels. The applicant is proposing 00:15:12.948 --> 00:15:21.789 - to install a sign on the current storefront location of the existing Blacks McInteele sign. The proposed 00:15:21.789 --> 00:15:24.062 - sign will be fabricated by 00:15:24.354 --> 00:15:30.760 - from 0.08 inch aluminum sheet. Measure approximately two feet high by seven feet wide. The aluminum 00:15:30.760 --> 00:15:37.167 - face will be finished black with the cinder name and logo rough cut through the aluminum panel. The 00:15:37.167 --> 00:15:43.637 - side will be mounted to the existing building facade using six metal standoffs, one near each corner 00:15:43.637 --> 00:15:50.556 - plus one at the top and one at the bottom center. Exteriorated mounting anchor wear and anchors appropriate 00:15:50.556 --> 00:15:53.054 - for the existing masonry will be used. 00:15:53.666 --> 00:16:02.524 - The sign is non-illuminated and will not contain any internal lighting, external lighting, electrical 00:16:02.524 --> 00:16:11.730 - components, plastic faces, or digital displays. COA 2669 has been approved by staff. The proposed signage 00:16:11.730 --> 00:16:20.848 - will be mounted in the location of existing signage on existing anchors, and its materials meet district 00:16:20.848 --> 00:16:22.238 - guidelines. OK. 00:16:25.058 --> 00:16:33.057 - COA 2671 for 635 South Walnut Street in the Elm Heights Historic District. 635 South Woodlawn is a two-story 00:16:33.057 --> 00:16:40.615 - 1930s colonial revival house with a second-story sleeping porch on the south gable end and a one-story 00:16:40.615 --> 00:16:47.954 - shed addition on the north end that appears to have been added in the 1960s. The house demonstrates 00:16:47.954 --> 00:16:54.558 - a high degree of integrity with most of the original features intact. This request is for 00:16:54.978 --> 00:17:05.993 - the replacement of a street-facing window on that shed addition with a new wood aluminum clad window 00:17:05.993 --> 00:17:17.227 - to match the previous design. And this petition, COA 2671, has been approved by staff. The replacement 00:17:17.227 --> 00:17:22.462 - of this window on a side addition with the most 00:17:22.626 --> 00:17:32.686 - Faithful design and materials commercially available would have a relatively minor impact on a building 00:17:32.686 --> 00:17:42.358 - that otherwise retains most of its original design and materials. Okay, one more of these. For 1122 00:17:42.358 --> 00:17:51.934 - East 1st Street, this is also in the Elm Heights Historic District. Petitioner is Rebecca Dirksen. 00:17:53.026 --> 00:17:59.691 - This is for 1122 East 1st Street. This is break four square with original three over one and four over 00:17:59.691 --> 00:18:06.227 - one windows and a second story door opening onto the porch roof. The backyard faces Hawthorne Street 00:18:06.227 --> 00:18:12.892 - and is enclosed by wood privacy fence. The plan replacement fence would be very similar to what exists 00:18:12.892 --> 00:18:19.621 - with some necessary adjustments. First of all, the original fence separating our lots was around easily 00:18:19.621 --> 00:18:21.886 - built well onto our property line. 00:18:22.178 --> 00:18:28.501 - approximately four feet. Our property was professionally surveyed and the goal is to correct that error 00:18:28.501 --> 00:18:34.581 - to respect the property line. Secondly, we're in the position of having to fix the fence anyway. We 00:18:34.581 --> 00:18:40.661 - are considering slightly adjusting the northernmost border of the fence where it is attached to the 00:18:40.661 --> 00:18:47.044 - house on the west side facing Hawthorne Street. The goal would be to cover the basement window and offer 00:18:47.044 --> 00:18:48.990 - a bit more privacy and security 00:18:49.314 --> 00:18:55.149 - especially during the winter when the oak leaf hydrangeas along the house foundation are not in leaf. 00:18:55.149 --> 00:19:00.985 - Additionally, the new placement would hide the exterior radon mitigation pipe from the street to make 00:19:00.985 --> 00:19:06.877 - it look a bit tidier and protect the hydrangeas from the deer who love to graze on them. Overall, this 00:19:06.877 --> 00:19:12.827 - would not be a dramatic change, but it would mean extending the west-facing fence approximately 12 feet 00:19:12.827 --> 00:19:19.006 - north. If permitted, this would add a total of about 12 feet of fencing. Third, from a cosmetic standpoint, 00:19:19.874 --> 00:19:25.943 - we will eventually stain the fence to protect the wood and avoid the current worn out weathered gray 00:19:25.943 --> 00:19:31.953 - look. The stain will be as natural as possible and will be selected to match and harmonize with the 00:19:31.953 --> 00:19:38.082 - brown brick on our house. On the walnut street facing portion of the fence, we have asked Value Fence 00:19:38.082 --> 00:19:44.151 - to provide us with a slightly more elevated finish than the current version. Namely, this would be a 00:19:44.151 --> 00:19:48.478 - finished top frame style rather than the current dog-eared style fence. 00:19:49.602 --> 00:19:56.482 - And Kirk has strongly recommended that we use fence post caps to extend the life of the fence and protect 00:19:56.482 --> 00:20:03.298 - the wood posts from rotting. The entrance gate would be in the same location and would be the same size, 00:20:03.298 --> 00:20:09.919 - double wide, as it currently is, but it would be nicer with the boards completely filling in the gate 00:20:09.919 --> 00:20:16.734 - rather than wide gaps between the boards as currently. And with the gentle arch cut in, sloping downward 00:20:16.734 --> 00:20:19.006 - to connect the height of the fence 00:20:19.522 --> 00:20:26.267 - to the gate opening rather than the abrupt and disharmonious gate opening at about half the height of 00:20:26.267 --> 00:20:33.012 - the full fence. So this application has been approved by staff. Overall, the alterations proposed for 00:20:33.012 --> 00:20:39.823 - this privacy fence are fairly minor. Although the change in footprint does require review, neither the 00:20:39.823 --> 00:20:45.246 - existing fence nor the proposed replacement would go against district guidelines. 00:20:50.594 --> 00:21:03.016 - Thank you. Let's move on then to demolition delay. TD 2614 at 331 South Grant. Is there someone to present 00:21:03.016 --> 00:21:15.902 - the petition this evening? Somebody to speak for the petition. Please go ahead. State your name first, please. 00:21:20.994 --> 00:21:27.600 - Oh, it's usually the... Usually I present the staff presentation first. Oh, well, I'm all right. Well, 00:21:27.600 --> 00:21:34.014 - let's... I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm new to this, obviously. If you don't mind, I'd like to say a few 00:21:34.014 --> 00:21:40.940 - words about our demolition delay process first. Would the chair allow that? So I have records of demolition 00:21:40.940 --> 00:21:47.482 - delays going back to 2005. And I've always tried to be consistent with the way that it's been handled 00:21:47.482 --> 00:21:49.214 - by previous staff members. 00:21:49.858 --> 00:21:56.358 - Some of the goals and lines in the sand that we draw are about protecting buildings with outstanding 00:21:56.358 --> 00:22:03.180 - or notable significance or buildings that are located in national or state historic districts that aren't 00:22:03.180 --> 00:22:09.680 - otherwise protected by our code. There could also be exceptional historic interest that may not have 00:22:09.680 --> 00:22:16.116 - been picked up by the state survey. Also, the survey changes sometimes if members of the commission 00:22:16.116 --> 00:22:17.982 - disagree with a staff report 00:22:18.114 --> 00:22:24.652 - or want more information or second opinion, you can always make a motion for that. We've just been getting 00:22:24.652 --> 00:22:31.008 - a lot more of these for full demolition than we used to. Used to be maybe about half of the number that 00:22:31.008 --> 00:22:37.179 - we get a year now. And it can be a frustrating process, but I don't want people to be discouraged by 00:22:37.179 --> 00:22:43.657 - it because, you know, serving on this commission, you do make a difference, and there are a lot of people 00:22:43.657 --> 00:22:47.262 - sitting around this table who have made a real difference. 00:22:47.874 --> 00:22:58.979 - Your comments and your votes matter. And I hope that you consider these carefully. I did ask Noah recently 00:22:58.979 --> 00:23:09.876 - if it would ever be possible for this commission to be given the power to designate historic structures. 00:23:09.876 --> 00:23:16.830 - And the answer came back pretty definitely that no, it has to be a 00:23:17.282 --> 00:23:26.855 - like City Council, a political body can do it so it could not be transferred to us. So that possibility 00:23:26.855 --> 00:23:36.428 - has flowed, I'm sorry to say. We'll continue on with what we have. Okay. Would you like to present this 00:23:36.428 --> 00:23:46.462 - first one? Sure. This is for CAO A2614. I believe the petitioner is present. This is 331 South Grant Street. 00:23:47.810 --> 00:23:53.635 - built between 1890 and 1897, 331 South Grant Street, is a two-story Queen Anne style house with a hip 00:23:53.635 --> 00:23:59.575 - to roof and cross gables. The house has a wraparound corner porch and few distinctive features. There's 00:23:59.575 --> 00:24:05.514 - a low limestone retaining wall on the edge of the property, a wrought iron fence installed in the early 00:24:05.514 --> 00:24:11.225 - 2000s. The property is rated as contributing on the Indiana Historic Sites and Structures Inventory 00:24:11.225 --> 00:24:15.166 - and exhibits a high degree of integrity judging from historic photos 00:24:15.618 --> 00:24:22.121 - and materials including original doors and two-over-one windows. Well, the first possible owner of the 00:24:22.121 --> 00:24:28.814 - house is listed in the 1900 city directory as Marie Fuller. The house does not appear in the 1900 census, 00:24:28.814 --> 00:24:35.317 - and nobody by that name appears in later directories or newspaper references. I will note that there's 00:24:35.317 --> 00:24:39.358 - a significant Bloomington individual named Matty Jacobs Fuller. 00:24:40.098 --> 00:24:47.015 - The best that I could tell, this is not one of the houses that she lived in. She lived in General Morton's 00:24:47.015 --> 00:24:53.479 - house on North Walnut, and then subsequently moved into the house that became her barbershop across 00:24:53.479 --> 00:25:00.007 - from Rose Hill Cemetery. By 1909, this house passed into the hands of real estate agent and landlord 00:25:00.007 --> 00:25:06.665 - William Andy Hazel and his wife Laura. The couple lived in the house until 1920, and after moving out, 00:25:06.665 --> 00:25:08.734 - rented rooms through the 1920s. 00:25:09.538 --> 00:25:16.306 - In 1929, the house was bought by Joseph W. Robertson, a retired blacksmith for the Monon Railroad, working 00:25:16.306 --> 00:25:22.631 - as a custodian for the Bloomington Eagles Club. His wife Laura, described as a lovable woman, lived 00:25:22.631 --> 00:25:29.019 - with him in the house alongside their boarders, most of whom were Indiana University students. Their 00:25:29.019 --> 00:25:34.206 - son Layden and his wife owned the house until 1979, continuing to rent out rooms. 00:25:35.138 --> 00:25:41.567 - In 1973, the House received the distinction of being one of the first rental properties to appear before 00:25:41.567 --> 00:25:48.119 - the Bloomington Board of Housing Quality Appeals to address multiple safety violations. The recommendation 00:25:48.119 --> 00:25:54.364 - from staff is for the release of demolition delay 2614. This two-story Queen Anne House is larger and 00:25:54.364 --> 00:26:00.793 - perhaps older than most of the properties that are considered for demolition delay by the BHPC. It needs 00:26:00.793 --> 00:26:02.814 - to be considered in its context. 00:26:03.938 --> 00:26:09.454 - The area between 3rd and Smith has a number of similar Queen Anne style homes, rated contributing notable 00:26:09.454 --> 00:26:14.709 - and outstanding for their architectural character. Two notable and one outstanding Queen Anne houses 00:26:14.709 --> 00:26:20.329 - can be found, for instance, at the intersection of Smith and Dunn, which exhibit a high degree of integrity 00:26:20.329 --> 00:26:25.688 - and a number of distinctive original features. One block north are two Queen Anne houses, which retain 00:26:25.688 --> 00:26:28.030 - some characteristic spindle work and siding, 00:26:28.610 --> 00:26:34.691 - but have been labeled as contributing by the state DHPA survey for displaying a lower level of integrity 00:26:34.691 --> 00:26:40.657 - and distinction. 331 South Grant is closer to these properties in terms of architectural significance. 00:26:40.657 --> 00:26:46.449 - Barring any outstanding historical significance, or unless there's a reason to reevaluate 331 South 00:26:46.449 --> 00:26:52.646 - Grant's architectural significance, staff does not believe that it is eligible for individual designation. 00:26:52.646 --> 00:26:56.990 - Does the petitioner have anything that he would like to add at this point? 00:26:58.082 --> 00:27:06.712 - Let's just add quick that if you walk by the property, many of the historical items that were at one 00:27:06.712 --> 00:27:15.428 - point have been removed, changed. It is six units now. It's not a single house anymore. They have six 00:27:15.428 --> 00:27:23.972 - different rentals, I believe. And just from observing, it seems like there's a variety of different 00:27:23.972 --> 00:27:27.134 - materials that have been used on it. 00:27:27.266 --> 00:27:37.089 - Just taking that as far as, you know, what comes out. Thank you. Would anybody from the like to speak 00:27:37.089 --> 00:27:45.853 - to this demolition delay? You state your name first, please. Jenny Southern. I live in the 00:27:45.853 --> 00:27:56.158 - Heights Neighborhood Association on the committee is outside our district by very familiar with the house. 00:27:56.642 --> 00:28:04.296 - I guess it stated this is 1900. I would have guessed it a little older, but if that's as far back as 00:28:04.296 --> 00:28:12.252 - we can track it, that's, I believe that. I've been in this house many times. It's got a dug dirt cellar, 00:28:12.252 --> 00:28:19.982 - or at least it did when I was in college and I was in it. It has some fine features on the inside, at 00:28:19.982 --> 00:28:25.438 - least it did, and it's housed a lot of people. It's a really, it's not, 00:28:27.170 --> 00:28:33.738 - I'm just wondering how far over we're going to demolish into that area. There are some neighborhoods 00:28:33.738 --> 00:28:40.502 - that have been kind of eaten away. And it's always said, oh, well, there's some other nice ones farther 00:28:40.502 --> 00:28:47.200 - up the block, up the street. And then that one goes. And then it's inched around this way. And there's 00:28:47.200 --> 00:28:53.768 - some very fine houses in that area. And I, as a single person, can't say, oh, we should have another 00:28:53.768 --> 00:28:55.134 - district down there. 00:28:55.394 --> 00:29:03.112 - But I'll remind everyone, this is where the Wiley house is. There's some very nice, as Noah said, some 00:29:03.112 --> 00:29:11.055 - buildings in there. There's a beautiful arts and law. So I'm not going to say, oh, let's save this house. 00:29:11.055 --> 00:29:18.698 - I don't really know that much about the house. I love the house. It's got a nice walled pool. But I'm 00:29:18.698 --> 00:29:21.470 - worried about that whole area there. 00:29:23.234 --> 00:29:30.739 - And it extends down to Third Street Park. There's some really fine houses down there, big, great, beautiful 00:29:30.739 --> 00:29:37.689 - ones with sleeping porches and stained glass, and it's all still there. But it won't be for long if 00:29:37.689 --> 00:29:44.708 - we keep going in the same direction. So I would like you guys to start thinking about possibly maybe 00:29:44.708 --> 00:29:49.086 - we could designate something in that area before people invest 00:29:49.890 --> 00:29:56.601 - with the idea of tearing things down and replacing them with larger things. I know it's zoned pretty 00:29:56.601 --> 00:30:03.444 - highly there, so it's pretty open for everybody there. I believe it's, is it H? Okay, I'm not familiar 00:30:03.444 --> 00:30:10.088 - with it. It used to be RH. I'm not sure what the district is now. Do we know what the planning zone 00:30:10.088 --> 00:30:16.932 - is in that area? It's not important really for this discussion, but it is high. So these could go down 00:30:16.932 --> 00:30:19.390 - with apartment buildings, I believe. 00:30:19.522 --> 00:30:27.754 - at any time, and it's just according to how we envision this area in the future. We no longer have very 00:30:27.754 --> 00:30:35.748 - many owner-occupied houses down there. There are few, very few. So it's not like we as the people at 00:30:35.748 --> 00:30:43.901 - Elm Heights can get together and say, hey, we all live down there. We want you to save it because it's 00:30:43.901 --> 00:30:46.750 - been a rental area for a long time. 00:30:47.650 --> 00:30:55.673 - So the city would like to say this is for future generations, that somebody else in the nest will have 00:30:55.673 --> 00:31:03.463 - to take a look at it and step up and think about this as a future idea. That's what I had to put in 00:31:03.463 --> 00:31:11.720 - there. Oh, and my husband, Tim Miller, lived in that house. When I dated him, I was in college. So that's 00:31:11.720 --> 00:31:17.406 - the only person I ever looked at him. So thank you very much. Thank you. 00:31:18.018 --> 00:31:27.440 - Would anyone else from the public like to speak? We're back to the Commission. Commissioner, questions 00:31:27.440 --> 00:31:37.502 - at this point? Commissioner Castaneda? No question. Thank you. Commissioner Golden? No question. Commissioner 00:31:37.502 --> 00:31:46.832 - Duffy? I have a question about, do we know what the plan would be for the limestone wall? Well, first 00:31:46.832 --> 00:31:47.838 - do we know 00:31:48.386 --> 00:31:58.618 - anything about the age of the advanced number? Age, I'm not sure. I mean, to answer Ms. Southern's question, 00:31:58.618 --> 00:32:08.006 - the house is built between 1890 and 1897. So we know it shows up the 1897 fire tracks map. Does not 00:32:08.006 --> 00:32:16.830 - show up in the 1890 census, or I don't think there's a good map for fire that will show that. 00:32:18.818 --> 00:32:27.042 - But it's definitely 1890s. The wall, I don't know. There's a picture from the History Center, which 00:32:27.042 --> 00:32:35.512 - still has the watermark because I didn't pay for it, that shows the wall along with the older, I guess 00:32:35.512 --> 00:32:44.065 - you'd call it a classic queen porch. They spend their while as to what the plan is for whether the wall 00:32:44.065 --> 00:32:48.670 - is going to be demolished. I'm not sure. OK, thank you. 00:32:50.658 --> 00:33:00.189 - Well, I think the most important question and for probably the historic perspective is the Maddie Fuller 00:33:00.189 --> 00:33:08.630 - connection or possible connection. So it seems to me that we don't know who built the house. 00:33:08.630 --> 00:33:10.718 - Is that correct? Okay. 00:33:11.202 --> 00:33:18.452 - And we don't know anyone who owned it or lived in it until the first one listed up there, which is, 00:33:18.452 --> 00:33:25.919 - what, 1909, I believe? 1900. Or 1900. And the first one is Mary Fuller. OK. So she could have been the 00:33:25.919 --> 00:33:33.314 - builder or could have owned it for some time. We don't know who this Mary Fuller is. So Maddie Fuller 00:33:33.314 --> 00:33:38.462 - is very important in African-American, local African-American history. 00:33:38.978 --> 00:33:48.519 - She helped build the church by Fairview, the AME church with money that she made as a singer, I believe. 00:33:48.519 --> 00:33:58.332 - So she's someone very important. And so if she built this house or was renting out this house as a boarding 00:33:58.332 --> 00:34:06.782 - house for African-American students at IU, that would be an important and exceptional thing. 00:34:07.234 --> 00:34:13.428 - But since we don't know about it, it really gives me pause one way or the other. I know that you've, 00:34:13.428 --> 00:34:19.684 - I'm sure you've done a pretty good search. My question is, can you think of any other places we could 00:34:19.684 --> 00:34:25.878 - turn to to try to pin this down? Do we have some oral history or just any other avenue? Anything you 00:34:25.878 --> 00:34:30.846 - might be able to think of at the history center? Like any documents you have on? 00:34:31.458 --> 00:34:39.483 - I would if you haven't talked to Liz Mitchell yet, because she's done extensive oral histories with 00:34:39.483 --> 00:34:47.749 - some of the older black families that have been long established here. And so she may remember someone 00:34:47.749 --> 00:34:56.015 - talking about something. We haven't gotten those from Liz yet, but we're dying to get our hands on and 00:34:56.015 --> 00:35:00.670 - just transcribe them so we can have it at her fingertips. 00:35:01.058 --> 00:35:08.481 - But Liz would be where I would, I'm guessing Megan and Hillary would feel the same. We would start with 00:35:08.481 --> 00:35:15.761 - Liz and move on from there. Thank you. That's my question. That was my question. Commissioner Schley. 00:35:15.761 --> 00:35:23.113 - Nope. That was my question as well. I'm just sad to see him out. I don't know when it's going to drive 00:35:23.113 --> 00:35:28.894 - around the neighborhoods to look at. Well, it's more of a comment. I'll save it. 00:35:31.394 --> 00:35:43.021 - Mr. Cross. So we have options at this point. If no motion is made, then all of these DDs are on their 00:35:43.021 --> 00:35:54.990 - own time limit and will time out at some point and be released for demolition. Or we could have a motion 00:35:54.990 --> 00:36:01.374 - that could go up or down. Yes? When was this one filed? 00:36:02.146 --> 00:36:10.789 - I believe this was September 9th. I have a question, just a procedural question. Do we do commissioner 00:36:10.789 --> 00:36:19.601 - comments before we make any sort of motions? Yes. Let me get through what I'm trying to say. The options 00:36:19.601 --> 00:36:26.398 - we have available are also to ask Noah to go in deeper, try to find information. 00:36:27.906 --> 00:36:35.411 - for us and then pursue it at some other time. So we have three or four things that can be done this 00:36:35.411 --> 00:36:43.141 - evening. With that, I think our question period is over. We're ready to go into comments. Commissioner 00:36:43.141 --> 00:36:45.918 - Cross, would you like to start that? 00:36:51.010 --> 00:36:57.788 - I have a feeling I'm thinking very similar along your line, just because we have so little African-American 00:36:57.788 --> 00:37:04.189 - history that has been saved in our town. Most of it has, unfortunately, at times with intention, been 00:37:04.189 --> 00:37:10.715 - raised when it was known. I know that's not the case right now. Please know that. But if there is, like 00:37:10.715 --> 00:37:17.116 - you mentioned, Treasurer Butler, if there is potential that Maddie Jacobs Fuller had a hand in having 00:37:17.116 --> 00:37:20.254 - this house built, I mean, I think that I would be 00:37:21.282 --> 00:37:28.314 - willing to make a motion if we could delay our vote. I don't know proper procedure interim chair Baker, 00:37:28.314 --> 00:37:35.210 - but if we be able that's why I was asking about the time frame to see if we can give Noah enough time 00:37:35.210 --> 00:37:42.309 - until our next meeting to check with Liz or anyone else she may recommend to see if we can find if there 00:37:42.309 --> 00:37:46.366 - is a link or if we can definitively say there's not a link. 00:37:46.946 --> 00:37:54.748 - that would ease my mind considerably. But raising a house like this and then finding out she had a hand 00:37:54.748 --> 00:38:02.700 - in it, it's not going to look very good. Let's go through the rest of comments and come back. My comments 00:38:02.700 --> 00:38:09.527 - concur with what Commissioner Schlegel said. And I plan on making a motion to delay when I 00:38:09.527 --> 00:38:15.678 - get the opportunity. So I just want to put that on the table that I intend to do. 00:38:17.666 --> 00:38:27.286 - I don't have any additional comments. Thank you. My only comment is I did look up his own units RH so 00:38:27.286 --> 00:38:37.095 - it would be torn down. Most definitely. Let's go back then. If you wish to make a motion at this point. 00:38:37.095 --> 00:38:44.734 - I would like to make a motion now. How do I phrase it to be to give Noah time to 00:38:46.850 --> 00:38:54.908 - But what are you wanting to do? I would like to give Noah time to look into perhaps this oral history 00:38:54.908 --> 00:39:03.125 - avenue to see if we can more fully delineate whether or not she had a hand in this building. So I don't 00:39:03.125 --> 00:39:11.025 - know if I need to frame that as a motion to continue. Is that what I would do? Frame it as a motion 00:39:11.025 --> 00:39:13.790 - to ask Noah to do further research 00:39:14.242 --> 00:39:22.254 - into the house. If we want to put a time limit on that. So the next regular meeting. Yes, that would 00:39:22.254 --> 00:39:30.267 - be great. So I'd like to make a motion to continue for NOAA to have time to look into this angle and 00:39:30.267 --> 00:39:38.200 - to be able to report it at the next meeting. Point of information. What do the guidelines say about 00:39:38.200 --> 00:39:43.198 - what's required for demolition delays? The guidelines speak to 00:39:43.298 --> 00:39:53.281 - the process that needs to happen when a request is made for more time. I think it's 1K. Could you check 00:39:53.281 --> 00:40:03.359 - that for me, please? If I could jump in for a minute with Chair, I'm sorry, Commissioner Butler. I think 00:40:03.359 --> 00:40:10.078 - if your motion is clear that what you would like to do with these two 00:40:10.274 --> 00:40:17.908 - Continue the demolition delay and provide an opportunity for staff to do some additional research and 00:40:17.908 --> 00:40:25.617 - continue the case to the next meeting. That would be a proper motion at this time, because you do have 00:40:25.617 --> 00:40:33.102 - that option to ask for additional time for research. And that's what the 90-day demolition delay is 00:40:33.102 --> 00:40:39.838 - for, is to provide that opportunity. All right. That is IK Chair. Did I have a floor? No. 00:40:39.970 --> 00:40:49.953 - I didn't have a floor. We have a motion on the floor that we need to carry through first, and then we'll 00:40:49.953 --> 00:40:59.935 - decide in a moment. Right. The motion is for Noah to do further research and report by our next meeting. 00:40:59.935 --> 00:41:03.358 - Let's call the roll on that motion. 00:41:03.650 --> 00:41:13.198 - Okay, so we have a motion on the floor in Demolition Delay 2614 to continue this item to allow additional 00:41:13.198 --> 00:41:22.205 - time to be for the next meeting of the HPC. We'll take a roll call vote on that motion to continue. 00:41:22.205 --> 00:41:31.482 - Interim Chair Baker? Yes. Treasurer Butler? Yes. Commissioner Castaneda? Yes. Commissioner Duffy? Yes. 00:41:31.482 --> 00:41:33.374 - Commissioner Golden? 00:41:34.754 --> 00:41:42.037 - Commissioner Schlegel? Yes. That motion to continue passes. 6-0. All right, thank you. Motion passes. 00:41:42.037 --> 00:41:49.891 - Chair. I'm going to move on to... Chair, I raised the point of information and I asked that the guidelines... 00:41:49.891 --> 00:41:57.173 - We are in the demolition delays... Points of order, Chair. We need to continue on with the demolition 00:41:57.173 --> 00:42:03.742 - delays. Chair, I can raise a point. We'll get to your questions when we get to Commissioner 00:42:03.970 --> 00:42:11.910 - Chair, are we going to follow the procedures and guidelines in Robert's rules, or are we not? We are 00:42:11.910 --> 00:42:20.478 - going to proceed with demolition delays right now. So you're denying my point of order? I am not recognizing 00:42:20.478 --> 00:42:28.339 - you. Okay. Let's move on with demolition delay 26-15. Demolition delay 26-15 for 503 North Grant. A 00:42:28.339 --> 00:42:31.326 - petitioner is Alexa Lewis, I believe. 00:42:32.034 --> 00:42:40.788 - Somebody is present on the petitioner's behalf. If I may. Built in 1930, 503 North Grant is a side gabled 00:42:40.788 --> 00:42:49.129 - buff scratched brick four square with three tapered porch posts and original three over one and four 00:42:49.129 --> 00:42:57.387 - over one windows. These unusual bricks can be found on several contemporaneous commercial buildings 00:42:57.387 --> 00:43:00.030 - built by the Mitchell brothers. 00:43:00.834 --> 00:43:08.929 - The house is a small rear shed addition. This house replaced an earlier single story house with a similar 00:43:08.929 --> 00:43:16.719 - footprint. 503 North Grant was first owned by barber Alfred Bryant and his wife Klaue, proprietors of 00:43:16.719 --> 00:43:24.738 - Bo Bromwell Barber and Beauty. After several years, the couple sold the house to Marie and Ruth Scherer, 00:43:24.738 --> 00:43:28.862 - an express delivery man. Maurice moved to the country 00:43:29.058 --> 00:43:35.459 - in the late 1930s where he and his wife were active in the Monroe County Agricultural and Horticultural 00:43:35.459 --> 00:43:41.675 - Society and other local volunteer organizations. From the 1940s through 1955, the house was occupied 00:43:41.675 --> 00:43:47.953 - by the Dess family. Morris and Sophie Dess were Jewish immigrants from the former Russian Empire, and 00:43:47.953 --> 00:43:54.600 - Morris worked as a purchaser for Fell Iron Works. Their son, Dr. Howard Dess, worked as a division director 00:43:54.600 --> 00:43:55.646 - at Union Carbide 00:43:56.034 --> 00:44:02.291 - prior to becoming a library science professor at Rutgers University. The desk sold the house to salesman 00:44:02.291 --> 00:44:08.309 - Thomas Lafferty and his wife, Jo. The couple's son, Mike, grew up in the house and will later become 00:44:08.309 --> 00:44:14.626 - an active member of the Brown County, Indiana music scene. From 1975 through 1977, the house was occupied 00:44:14.626 --> 00:44:20.764 - by Elizabeth Noyes and her two children. At the time, Noyes was earning her JD from Indiana University 00:44:20.764 --> 00:44:25.054 - and would go on to serve as a judge in the Monroe County Circuit Court. 00:44:26.338 --> 00:44:48.780 - The staff recommendation is for the release of Demolition Delay 2615. Do we have a petitioner that wants 00:44:48.780 --> 00:44:52.414 - to say anything? 00:44:52.642 --> 00:45:01.631 - Hi, Tim Kober with Legate Architects, just representing Alexa Lewis. Again, we are just requesting the 00:45:01.631 --> 00:45:10.445 - demolition delay be released. The house has been modified over the years in addition to put onto the 00:45:10.445 --> 00:45:19.521 - back of it as well. So I guess that's all I have. Thank you. Anyone from the public would like to speak 00:45:19.521 --> 00:45:21.790 - to this demolition delay? 00:45:24.994 --> 00:45:35.073 - to the Commission. Questions? Let's start with Commissioner Cross. No questions. Mr. Slagle. No questions. 00:45:35.073 --> 00:45:44.492 - Commissioner Butler. I have procedural questions. We don't have anyone online tonight. The only two 00:45:44.492 --> 00:45:48.542 - people that we have online, well right now 00:45:48.770 --> 00:45:55.682 - For a moment there it was our corporate council, but right now the only other person online is Anna 00:45:55.682 --> 00:46:02.664 - Holmes. OK. I guess I'll just save it for comments. So I don't really have any questions. Thank you. 00:46:02.664 --> 00:46:09.922 - Commissioner Duffy? No questions. Commissioner Quigley? No questions. Commissioner Stostedad? All right. 00:46:09.922 --> 00:46:16.903 - Let's start in with the comments. Let's go back the other way. That's right. First chance. I have no 00:46:16.903 --> 00:46:18.078 - comments either. 00:46:19.202 --> 00:46:32.186 - Mr. Gold? Again, this is the zoned RH, and it is in an area of town that has been significantly changed. 00:46:32.186 --> 00:46:44.552 - So I don't support releasing the demolition delay. Commissioner Duffy? I just thought of a question 00:46:44.552 --> 00:46:46.654 - I had. Go ahead. 00:46:47.074 --> 00:46:57.061 - This is the one with the brick that's like Mitchell Brothers. The wire cut. Yeah, it's really an interesting 00:46:57.061 --> 00:47:05.857 - brick. Does that suggest to you that it was built by them? And does that have any significance? 00:47:05.857 --> 00:47:13.278 - Hard to say. So I know of four buildings in town that have this scratched brick. 00:47:14.178 --> 00:47:20.672 - Two of them are commercial buildings built by the Mitchell brothers. One of the ones is, you know, the 00:47:20.672 --> 00:47:27.166 - one that the car ran into earlier this year, if you remember that. They were actually looking for this 00:47:27.166 --> 00:47:33.596 - kind of brick, so. If demolition delay is released, you know, you might consider finding a purchaser. 00:47:33.596 --> 00:47:40.342 - Anyway, a digression. There is one other house that has this style of scratched brick, which is a bungalow 00:47:40.342 --> 00:47:44.062 - that is locally designated along North Walnut. So this is, 00:47:44.898 --> 00:47:55.907 - I believe it's actually now within the boundaries of the Cottage Grove Conservation District. So all 00:47:55.907 --> 00:48:07.787 - of these houses were built around 1930. OK. Thank you. I don't have any comment. Well, I have some comments. 00:48:07.787 --> 00:48:11.166 - First of all, I agree the area 00:48:11.554 --> 00:48:17.953 - Near it, some of the houses have been lost and there are some apartment buildings, but right around 00:48:17.953 --> 00:48:24.544 - this house and going the other way, it's very much still a neighborhood. So it's sort of on this cusp. 00:48:24.544 --> 00:48:31.263 - So I wouldn't just throw it out because there's some bad bath water up the street. Individually, I think 00:48:31.263 --> 00:48:37.086 - this house is very interesting, particularly because of the bricks. It's an unusual house. 00:48:37.378 --> 00:48:45.296 - The fact that the house adjacent to it is also coming up for demolition delay. And the two houses work 00:48:45.296 --> 00:48:52.984 - together. If you take the time to look at both of them, the front porches sort of mirror, they each 00:48:52.984 --> 00:49:00.672 - have the same style of columns. One has the three, one has the two. It's very interesting how these 00:49:00.672 --> 00:49:05.438 - houses work together. And so for those reasons, it's actually 00:49:05.826 --> 00:49:11.921 - would qualify for either E or G on our list of things that we can use to save buildings. It contains 00:49:11.921 --> 00:49:18.318 - any architectural style, detail or other element in danger of being lost. There's four of these buildings 00:49:18.318 --> 00:49:19.102 - in the city. 00:49:19.586 --> 00:49:26.327 - of however many hundreds, thousands of buildings, that's in danger of being lost. It's a visual feature 00:49:26.327 --> 00:49:32.874 - of the neighborhood, that's the rest of E, which I would argue those two anchor that block. And then 00:49:32.874 --> 00:49:39.615 - G portrays the environment in an era of history characterized by distinctive architectural style. These 00:49:39.615 --> 00:49:46.227 - houses are very, it has an addition on the back, but otherwise it's very architecturally pure. And so 00:49:46.227 --> 00:49:47.134 - I'm going to, 00:49:47.330 --> 00:49:58.524 - seek to continue this one as well when I get a chance to. So those are my comments. Thank you. Commissioner 00:49:58.524 --> 00:50:09.512 - Slater? I have nothing to add. Commissioner Cross? No. All right. We're back ready for something I forgot 00:50:09.512 --> 00:50:17.182 - to say when I said we had options. The obvious option is to make a motion 00:50:17.378 --> 00:50:27.466 - and send it to City Council for designation, which we also can do. So at this point, is there a motion 00:50:27.466 --> 00:50:37.750 - on this demolition delay? I'd like to make a motion to continue this so that we can have more discussion 00:50:37.750 --> 00:50:44.606 - and debate about recommending it to the City Council. Again, a motion 00:50:44.802 --> 00:50:53.050 - Appropriate motion would be to ask NOAA to do further research and report back the next meeting. But 00:50:53.050 --> 00:51:01.543 - also I would just encourage. So a motion for NOAA to do further research and report back. And my fellow 00:51:01.543 --> 00:51:09.709 - commissioners to take a minute longer to look at it and then ask. Do we have a second? We do have a 00:51:09.709 --> 00:51:12.894 - second. We have a motion and a second. 00:51:14.178 --> 00:51:24.631 - Okay, so this would be for demolition delay 2615. A motion to continue has been seconded. We'll take 00:51:24.631 --> 00:51:35.291 - a roll call vote on this. Interim chair Baker. Yes. Treasure Butler. Yes. Commissioner Castaneda. Yes. 00:51:35.291 --> 00:51:42.846 - Commissioner Duffy. Yes. Commissioner Golden. No. Commissioner Schlegel. 00:51:44.258 --> 00:51:55.574 - The motion to continue passes five to one. Thank you. Motion passes. All right, let's continue on with 00:51:55.574 --> 00:52:06.891 - DD25-16. OK, so this house is next door. Same petitioner. Very similar style. Built in 1931, so a year 00:52:06.891 --> 00:52:14.142 - later. 509 North Grant Street is a hip to roof brick four square. 00:52:14.754 --> 00:52:21.240 - with a half-width porch and tapered posts and six-over-one wood windows and two stone accents protruding 00:52:21.240 --> 00:52:27.603 - from the wall beneath the centered second-story windows. The house was a small shed addition. Like the 00:52:27.603 --> 00:52:33.842 - house next door, it replaced an earlier single-story house with a similar footprint. I checked. They 00:52:33.842 --> 00:52:40.082 - had similar footprints, but they were single-story. And they were wood, so I don't know what's going 00:52:40.082 --> 00:52:43.294 - on. The house was first owned by Harold P. Burgess, 00:52:43.586 --> 00:52:50.688 - a salesman for Shell Petroleum and his wife Violet. From 1936 to 1940, they rented the house to several 00:52:50.688 --> 00:52:57.791 - other young families. The house was bought in 1940 by Clarence Parrish, a cobbler and farmer who raised 00:52:57.791 --> 00:53:04.825 - chickens and pigs, had a second property in the country where he and his wife Grace moved in 1943. The 00:53:04.825 --> 00:53:11.722 - house was then bought by Helen Noel, a secretary for the zoology and economics department at Indiana 00:53:11.722 --> 00:53:12.542 - University. 00:53:13.378 --> 00:53:21.489 - at Indiana University, who rented spare rooms to students. In 1964, Paul Andremma, aka P.G. Stevens, 00:53:21.489 --> 00:53:29.922 - bought the house. Paul was a mailman who had spent time as a prisoner of war in Germany, and P.G. served 00:53:29.922 --> 00:53:38.113 - as a state delegate for the Indiana Democrats. The Stevens moved out in 1985. The recommendation here 00:53:38.113 --> 00:53:41.406 - is for release of demolition delay 2616. 00:53:44.898 --> 00:53:52.462 - Does the petitioner have anything he would like to add about this property? No, thank you. Anyone from 00:53:52.462 --> 00:54:00.320 - the public like to speak to this violation of the law? All right, we're back to the commission. Questions? 00:54:00.320 --> 00:54:08.179 - I think we'll start with you. No questions at this time, thank you. All right. No questions. No questions. 00:54:08.179 --> 00:54:13.246 - Commissioner Duffy? No questions. Commissioner Butler? No questions. 00:54:13.954 --> 00:54:25.256 - Well, the same thing I said about the last house, I think applies to this house. There's sort of this 00:54:25.256 --> 00:54:35.783 - match set. And so I think if we're going to consider the one, we should consider both of them. 00:54:35.783 --> 00:54:39.550 - Once again, this is a unique era. 00:54:39.682 --> 00:54:48.231 - 1930s houses are hard to come by. It's just it was a decade when not a lot was built for obvious reasons. 00:54:48.231 --> 00:54:56.377 - So there's that, there's the unique style. There's also sort of, it's a worthy house to save. It's a 00:54:56.377 --> 00:55:05.007 - story of the three little pigs. You start out with a house of sticks, and then you have a house of boards. 00:55:05.007 --> 00:55:08.798 - But the house with bricks is supposed to last. 00:55:09.058 --> 00:55:17.596 - I think that it's worthy of consideration. So once again, I'm going to make a motion to continue this 00:55:17.596 --> 00:55:26.470 - so the commissioners and NOAA can have time to do a little more research until next week or next meeting. 00:55:26.470 --> 00:55:34.924 - Yes. Commissioner Duffy? Comments? Well, my only comment is this reminds me of the pair of houses at 00:55:34.924 --> 00:55:37.854 - the corner of Eagleton and Walker. 00:55:39.106 --> 00:55:52.461 - And I remember commenting on the relationship between the houses. And my understanding was that there's 00:55:52.461 --> 00:56:05.301 - no way to propose a set. But we can propose them, well, unless you can do some research into it. Is 00:56:05.301 --> 00:56:07.998 - that a question? No. 00:56:08.194 --> 00:56:17.219 - comment is, if it might be possible, maybe there's a better justification for it in this case, if you 00:56:17.219 --> 00:56:26.244 - find some information that gives you reason to believe they're built by the same person, for example, 00:56:26.244 --> 00:56:35.181 - which we knew those two were not. So I would support looking into this a little further. Mr. Golden? 00:56:35.181 --> 00:56:36.862 - My only comment is 00:56:37.026 --> 00:56:47.796 - The demolition delay is a high bar. If we start sending multiple properties to the city council, maybe 00:56:47.796 --> 00:56:58.253 - they're worthy, maybe they're not. I think in this process, we need to be really careful about what 00:56:58.253 --> 00:57:05.886 - we save. And what I heard about both of the last property in this one is 00:57:07.714 --> 00:57:21.230 - They're distinctive homes. There was no historic, as far as we live there, of note, and that we can't 00:57:21.230 --> 00:57:33.950 - save everything. That's all. All right, let's come back. I'd like to make a motion to continue. 00:57:34.082 --> 00:57:42.943 - this into our next regularly scheduled meeting so that staff and commission members can have more time 00:57:42.943 --> 00:57:51.717 - to investigate the house. With that we have a motion on the floor. If you would call the roll please. 00:57:51.717 --> 00:58:00.406 - Certainly this one is on demolition delay 2616. The motion to continue this item to the next meeting 00:58:00.406 --> 00:58:01.438 - of the HPC. 00:58:01.538 --> 00:58:10.807 - We'll take a roll call vote. Interim Chair Baker? Yes. Treasurer Butler? Yes. Commissioner Castaneda? 00:58:10.807 --> 00:58:20.439 - Yes. Commissioner Duffy? Yes. Commissioner Golden? No. Commissioner Schlegel? Yes. The motion to continue 00:58:20.439 --> 00:58:30.526 - passes five to one. All right. The motion passes. Thank you. Moving on to DD 26-17 and 714 East Cottage Grove. 00:58:31.554 --> 00:58:38.394 - This is going to be the last one of the evening. 714 East Cottage Grove Avenue. Petitioner is Ernest 00:58:38.394 --> 00:58:45.302 - Chi. Is there anybody present online or in the room for this petition? I am. OK. Then I'll begin with 00:58:45.302 --> 00:58:52.210 - a report. Built shortly after the turn of the century, his neighborhood was platted in 1900. 714 East 00:58:52.210 --> 00:58:58.982 - Cottage Grove is a pyramidal roofed cottage with two gabled wings, a two-side wraparound porch with 00:58:58.982 --> 00:58:59.998 - three entries. 00:59:01.154 --> 00:59:07.963 - Alterations include the replacement of windows and porch posts. 714 East Cottage Grove changed hands 00:59:07.963 --> 00:59:15.243 - frequently in the early 1900s, first appearing in the city directory as the residence of Indiana University 00:59:15.243 --> 00:59:22.321 - janitor Cooper Ellsworth in 1916. Over the course of the following decade, the house was sold to machine 00:59:22.321 --> 00:59:29.534 - operator Forrest Hall and grocer John Mahan. In 1928, the house was bought by Frank and Catherine Harrell, 00:59:30.178 --> 00:59:36.580 - a semi-retired farmer, Frank sold livestock and worked at a furniture store owned by a relative. The 00:59:36.580 --> 00:59:43.172 - couple rented out the house through the 1930s, including their son Ralph, who worked as the chief clerk 00:59:43.172 --> 00:59:49.574 - for the Indiana University Purchasing Department, and Harry Krigler, the director of the Bloomington 00:59:49.574 --> 00:59:56.039 - Community Bank. Frank and Catherine moved back in in 1938, and Catherine lived in the house until her 00:59:56.039 --> 00:59:56.990 - death in 1950. 00:59:58.210 --> 01:00:05.779 - The house was then bought by a landlord named Joseph Crouch, whose mother, Mamie, moved in in 1957. 01:00:05.779 --> 01:00:13.801 - Mamie was a milliner, in other words, a haberdasher by trade, who allegedly learned her trade from Louisa 01:00:13.801 --> 01:00:21.370 - Frederici, the wife of Buffalo Bill Cody. This is from her obituary, so maybe it's a family tale. I 01:00:21.370 --> 01:00:27.198 - don't know. She operated her own store prior to retirement and lived at 714, 01:00:27.362 --> 01:00:40.346 - from after her retirement until her death in 1984. The recommendation from staff is for the release 01:00:40.346 --> 01:00:51.902 - of demolition in 2016-17. Thank you. Comments from the petitioner? Comments from public? 01:00:53.090 --> 01:01:01.281 - the question because it says cottage go on it. This is not an historic district. No, it's not. OK, I 01:01:01.281 --> 01:01:09.797 - was just confirming that. Thank you. Sometimes it's a little confusing. They have the same names. Anyone 01:01:09.797 --> 01:01:18.394 - else like to speak? All right, we're back to the Commission for questions to start with you. Mr Kostanow. 01:01:18.394 --> 01:01:22.206 - No questions, thank you. Mr Goldman. Mr Duffy. 01:01:22.914 --> 01:01:38.761 - Mr. Schlegel. I'm just curious what this one is rated or zoned. I'm looking at it. You are? OK. Sorry. 01:01:38.761 --> 01:01:51.838 - I mean, the rating is contributing. It's zoned. RM. Which one's that one? I'm sorry. 01:01:52.226 --> 01:02:05.598 - Not quite as high as our age, but it's. OK, thank you. No other questions. Commissioner Cross, do you 01:02:05.598 --> 01:02:18.708 - have questions? Alright, that's reverse. So do you have comments? No. Not the moment. Mr Butler. So 01:02:18.708 --> 01:02:21.854 - Commissioner Golden was 01:02:22.018 --> 01:02:29.250 - saying earlier, we can't save them all. I agree. This is one that I think that, you know, I'd love to 01:02:29.250 --> 01:02:36.412 - be able to save it. I don't see an avenue that would be reasonable in trying to save it. But I think 01:02:36.412 --> 01:02:43.715 - that, you know, not being a rubber stamp is good and forwarding things to the city council is good and 01:02:43.715 --> 01:02:49.246 - it is a two part process. And so if we let them do their part of the process, 01:02:49.890 --> 01:02:56.044 - I don't think that that's, you know, abrogating our responsibilities. We don't need to be the judge, 01:02:56.044 --> 01:03:02.746 - jury, and executioner of every single building that comes before us. We don't need to make all the decisions. 01:03:02.746 --> 01:03:09.022 - So, you know, even if we recommend something that we're just recommending it for step one and then the 01:03:09.022 --> 01:03:15.114 - public debate and the city council will still weigh in. But in this case, I'm not going to make any 01:03:15.114 --> 01:03:19.806 - motions. I'm going to just let this one go. Commissioner Duffy. No comments. 01:03:24.450 --> 01:03:40.414 - Does anyone wish to make a motion regarding DD? 01:03:52.290 --> 01:04:02.941 - We have a motion and a second to release DD-2617. With that, I think we call the roll. Okay, so there's 01:04:02.941 --> 01:04:13.489 - a motion on the floor for demolition delay 2617 at 714 East Cottage Grove. We'll take a roll call vote 01:04:13.489 --> 01:04:20.350 - on that motion to release interim Baker, interim Chair Baker. Yes. 01:04:21.122 --> 01:04:33.263 - It's 714. 714, that's right. Sorry. Thank you. I thought I said 714, my apologies. Treasurer Butler. 01:04:33.263 --> 01:04:46.246 - Yes. Commissioner Castaneda. Yes. Commissioner Duffy. Yes. Commissioner Golden. Yes. Commissioner Schlegel. 01:04:46.246 --> 01:04:50.814 - Yes. The motion to release passes six 01:04:51.202 --> 01:05:04.407 - All right, DD 2617 is released. And we have a document that needs to be. Do I read that now? Today regarding 01:05:04.407 --> 01:05:11.070 - the property located at 714 East Cottage Grove Avenue. 01:05:11.394 --> 01:05:18.516 - The Historic Preservation Commission declares that it got notice of proposed demolition and, after today's 01:05:18.516 --> 01:05:25.305 - discussion, sees no need to review the plans any further and waives the rest of the 90-day demolition 01:05:25.305 --> 01:05:32.027 - delay waiting period for one year. The HBC may later recommend the property for historic designation 01:05:32.027 --> 01:05:38.683 - to the Common Council. Thank you. All right, we're moving on to old business. Noah, do you have any 01:05:38.683 --> 01:05:40.414 - old business to bring up? 01:05:40.738 --> 01:05:48.562 - It's something I put under new business, but I think it might be worth bringing up under old business, 01:05:48.562 --> 01:05:56.461 - because it is pretty old business, if you don't mind. That is, do you folks remember the core building? 01:05:56.461 --> 01:06:04.133 - The old Bloomington Hospital building? It is now listed on the National Register of Historic Places. 01:06:04.133 --> 01:06:08.766 - So this application was part of a tax credit application for 01:06:08.962 --> 01:06:18.091 - turning it into affordable apartments. And they're getting their approval from National Park Service, 01:06:18.091 --> 01:06:27.041 - so that's some positive news. That's great. Anything else you have? For old business, oh no, unless 01:06:27.041 --> 01:06:35.006 - there's any questions. Let's move on to new business. I have something for old business. 01:06:35.394 --> 01:06:44.338 - It's been brought to my attention by a member of the public that the April 9th, 2026 meeting packet 01:06:44.338 --> 01:06:53.730 - that is published online right now has a mistake about a property at 1101 North Lincoln. The description 01:06:53.730 --> 01:07:03.390 - for the property is not the description for the property. It says it's a colonial revival. It's that little 01:07:03.778 --> 01:07:12.188 - 1950s three or four room house up in Garden Hill that we released. So it's got the wrong description 01:07:12.188 --> 01:07:20.931 - on it. So it's like a clerical thing, but people were concerned. So I'm bringing that. Yeah, I can amend 01:07:20.931 --> 01:07:29.424 - that. OK, thank you. Thank you. All right, let's move on then to new business. Anyone, would you like 01:07:29.424 --> 01:07:31.422 - to start with the vote? 01:07:32.546 --> 01:07:41.595 - Is there a motion for the vote for electing the chair? Well, that's where I'm heading with the new business. 01:07:41.595 --> 01:07:49.980 - Because I have some new business as well. So we can resume the discussion on the chair. I may not be 01:07:49.980 --> 01:07:59.112 - completely up to date on the rules here, so I may need some advice from Noah and from legal. My understanding 01:07:59.112 --> 01:08:00.606 - was that the vice 01:08:01.154 --> 01:08:09.763 - The vice chair continued until there was a new executive, a new chairman was elected. Apparently, there's 01:08:09.763 --> 01:08:18.048 - some discussion that that's not the case, but when the timing is right to do that, if someone, as far 01:08:18.048 --> 01:08:26.494 - as I know, if someone wants to put themselves out there, they can make a motion at any time that they'd 01:08:26.494 --> 01:08:29.662 - like to be nominated for the chairman. 01:08:30.178 --> 01:08:37.391 - Without that, as far as I know, we continue on with the vice chair replacing until someone is elected 01:08:37.391 --> 01:08:44.674 - into that position. And I had some questions about that before we go too far. I don't know if that was 01:08:44.674 --> 01:08:51.745 - an okay time. Yeah, please. Please, we're here for discussion. Okay, I wanted to confirm and know I 01:08:51.745 --> 01:08:55.422 - know you've told us and I'm sorry I have forgotten. 01:08:56.034 --> 01:09:03.059 - Do we just have two more meetings because November and December are all, I'm correct in thinking this? 01:09:03.059 --> 01:09:10.084 - Unless whoever the chair happens to be after this meeting has a reason to call a special meeting, then 01:09:10.084 --> 01:09:17.110 - we have two left. Okay. Okay. And then how many, we have six voting members. Like we're just shy. Like 01:09:17.110 --> 01:09:19.838 - one person can miss and we make quorum. 01:09:20.610 --> 01:09:28.434 - With City Council, they have to approve our new folks. So how many open positions do we have? And then 01:09:28.434 --> 01:09:36.029 - also in that vein, how close or where are they in the process of getting us more folks so we're not 01:09:36.029 --> 01:09:43.777 - running such a... So there's three unfilled voting positions and three unfilled non-voting positions. 01:09:43.777 --> 01:09:48.638 - We have, I would say, at least three very qualified applicants. 01:09:49.250 --> 01:09:56.720 - I've given recommendations to city council or sorry to the mayor's office because I think we're sort 01:09:56.720 --> 01:10:04.116 - of more urgently in need of filling more voting positions. What I've heard and this may or may not, 01:10:04.116 --> 01:10:11.511 - I can always be surprised is that they want to vote until or they want to wait until positions roll 01:10:11.511 --> 01:10:14.174 - over at the beginning of next year. 01:10:16.642 --> 01:10:24.014 - We don't have anyone rolling off of their current folks, right? Like, unless anyone resigns. Oh, my 01:10:24.014 --> 01:10:31.387 - term ends this December, yeah. Oh, you do? Yeah, which I'm hoping will reapply for it, so yeah. OK. 01:10:31.387 --> 01:10:38.907 - Have you submitted your application for your term? I have not. Yeah, you'll have to do that. It's not 01:10:38.907 --> 01:10:44.510 - on there. Usually, yeah, I would get an email for the request if I do that. 01:10:46.690 --> 01:10:56.789 - the mayor they don't want since we only have two meetings left there's no real intention on getting 01:10:56.789 --> 01:11:07.191 - us some folks they want to restart I could be wrong that's just the last that I heard thank you no any 01:11:07.191 --> 01:11:09.918 - other comments on this yes 01:11:12.898 --> 01:11:20.959 - Accepting that, we have accepted Robert's Rules of our parliamentary process. Robert's Rules 4120 says 01:11:20.959 --> 01:11:29.411 - matters that the bylaws required to be considered at a particular meeting, such as a nomination or election 01:11:29.411 --> 01:11:37.237 - of officers, may be regarded as a special order for the meeting and be considered under the heading 01:11:37.237 --> 01:11:41.854 - of special orders in the order of business. Robert's Rules 01:11:41.986 --> 01:11:52.248 - also lists in 41.5 the sequence of meetings unless the body has adopted a different order of business, 01:11:52.248 --> 01:12:02.310 - which to my knowledge, that is not the case. It starts with reading and approval of minutes, reports 01:12:02.310 --> 01:12:09.982 - of officers, boards, and standing committees, reports of special committees, 01:12:10.626 --> 01:12:21.584 - and special orders, which means that by Robert's rules, the election of offices, which is a special 01:12:21.584 --> 01:12:32.871 - order, should come after the approval of minutes. And I see nothing which would indicate that that can 01:12:32.871 --> 01:12:40.542 - be set aside. So, it also speaks to points of order and the fact that 01:12:41.762 --> 01:12:49.081 - points of order is a privilege of the member and cannot be dismissed. It must be heard and it goes on 01:12:49.081 --> 01:12:56.688 - and on and on. My concern is, are we going to follow Robert's rules or are we not going to do it? Because 01:12:56.688 --> 01:13:03.864 - Robert's rules defines the process in very specific ways. It defines roles and responsibilities and 01:13:03.864 --> 01:13:09.246 - who has the right to do a thing, like a point of order and make a request. 01:13:09.794 --> 01:13:17.641 - where it can be made and what the responsibilities of the chair is. None of that has happened today. 01:13:17.641 --> 01:13:25.643 - So I would just like it to be clear. Are we going to follow Robert's rules? Because Robert's rule says 01:13:25.643 --> 01:13:33.956 - here clearly that this election should have taken after the minutes. But I was told, or we were instructed 01:13:33.956 --> 01:13:38.462 - to do otherwise, but no citation reference precedence was 01:13:39.714 --> 01:13:52.443 - used to support that. I didn't hear that. Right? I raised points of information and I was cut off. I 01:13:52.443 --> 01:14:05.171 - raised points of order and was cut off. Do we still have legal or law? She'd like to know. Could you 01:14:05.171 --> 01:14:08.574 - speak to it, please? Sure. 01:14:09.122 --> 01:14:16.590 - So in our own article, our bylaws, we do talk about officers. We talk about electing them annually at 01:14:16.590 --> 01:14:24.205 - their first meeting, which, again, as we've discussed, we don't always do at the first meeting if there 01:14:24.205 --> 01:14:31.673 - is a reason to delay that vote because of membership or because people want to take a minute to think 01:14:31.673 --> 01:14:36.798 - about things. And this is our first meeting. You're right, Mr. Pross. 01:14:36.994 --> 01:14:43.163 - But this is the first meeting since the retirement of the chair. We have put it on under New Business 01:14:43.163 --> 01:14:49.272 - so you all can have a thorough discussion about whether you want to take that up or whether you want 01:14:49.272 --> 01:14:55.380 - to put it on the agenda to have a vote on a chairperson for the next meeting. I think that's totally 01:14:55.380 --> 01:15:01.489 - fine to do it that way. And you can take, or you can take it up now. I mean, we do have a vice chair 01:15:01.489 --> 01:15:06.206 - that is perfectly capable of serving until such a time as that in your chair. 01:15:06.498 --> 01:15:15.702 - is selected. So if you want to take that up, you can. Thank you. If I may, Chair, may I? A special order 01:15:15.702 --> 01:15:24.906 - is an order of the day. The Chair has an affirmative duty to take up the election in the proper sequence 01:15:24.906 --> 01:15:34.110 - before unfinished business and new business. He has that duty, even if no one raises the point of order. 01:15:39.394 --> 01:15:49.561 - doesn't give us the authority to decide to do this in a different way. It does not. It doesn't allow 01:15:49.561 --> 01:15:59.829 - us to do it. And if it is that you are going to argue tradition, then if there is a rule which speaks 01:15:59.829 --> 01:16:08.990 - against that tradition, and there is a conflict, the rule wins. Robert's rules again. So I 01:16:12.610 --> 01:16:26.139 - I am confused. I am essentially a rule follower. And especially when the people's business is at issue 01:16:26.139 --> 01:16:39.931 - and legislation is made to empower us through the democratic process, I have an issue with just sweeping 01:16:39.931 --> 01:16:42.558 - these things aside. 01:16:42.658 --> 01:16:52.751 - have adopted Robert's rules, we should follow them. And if we don't, there should be some sightable 01:16:52.751 --> 01:17:03.247 - authority which allows us to not follow them, to bend them, to delay them. And I do not see where there 01:17:03.247 --> 01:17:11.422 - is that authority granted to delay a codified requirement in our bylaws to elect 01:17:11.938 --> 01:17:22.660 - a new chair. If it is, I suspect if the interim chair wants to nominate himself and he votes for himself 01:17:22.660 --> 01:17:33.075 - and he wins by one vote, then that process has been followed. Right? I honestly do not see and I open 01:17:33.075 --> 01:17:40.734 - myself to be enlightened as to a reason that prevents us from obeying what 01:17:41.154 --> 01:17:49.525 - or own guidelines mandate us to do. I raised a point of order. It was not heard. Robert's Rules does 01:17:49.525 --> 01:17:57.978 - not allow someone who raises a point of order to be dismissed. It is the right of the member. He must 01:17:57.978 --> 01:18:06.349 - be allowed and the chair must rule in one of a few very specific ways as itemized in Robert's Rules. 01:18:06.349 --> 01:18:10.078 - But I had the floor. Persons interrupted me. 01:18:11.874 --> 01:18:21.773 - But if I had insisted that I not be interrupted, one of several adjectives would have been used to describe 01:18:21.773 --> 01:18:31.031 - my defending my right under the rules. And I could go on and list the number of things that happened 01:18:31.031 --> 01:18:37.630 - in this meeting up to this point that were in breach of Robert's rules. 01:18:39.490 --> 01:18:52.693 - So it needs to be made clear. Are we going to be servants of our guidelines, of our rules, or are we 01:18:52.693 --> 01:19:06.157 - just going to just fly by the seat of our pants? I'm exhausted. Are you finished? Yes, sir, I am. Then 01:19:06.157 --> 01:19:08.510 - I have the floor. 01:19:10.050 --> 01:19:19.173 - I want to respond to you as best I can. Robert's rules are not a law. It's a flexible structure. It 01:19:19.173 --> 01:19:28.479 - needs to be a flexible structure. Yes, it says we should do things at certain times, and we do to the 01:19:28.479 --> 01:19:37.602 - best of our abilities. We try to follow it here, and I think we do a pretty good job of it. When it 01:19:37.602 --> 01:19:39.518 - comes to the voting, 01:19:40.418 --> 01:19:48.652 - for president, someone has to put their name out there, and they can do that at any time they want, 01:19:48.652 --> 01:19:57.051 - and we can take it up. No one has, and I've asked. So, I mean, to belay the, to keep making the point 01:19:57.051 --> 01:20:06.026 - that we're not following it is to say, I can't force someone to put their name out there to become president 01:20:06.026 --> 01:20:07.838 - of this organization. 01:20:09.346 --> 01:20:15.573 - If it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen. John, please, go ahead. I have two points. My first point is 01:20:15.573 --> 01:20:21.678 - Robert's Rules is incredibly cumbersome, and I think it was probably a mistake on our part to adopt 01:20:21.678 --> 01:20:27.966 - it with, I mean, I thought we had a gun to our heads that we had to adopt it, but it's really an awful 01:20:27.966 --> 01:20:34.193 - lot of rules to adopt, and it's really hard for everybody to navigate that. Having said that, I would 01:20:34.193 --> 01:20:35.902 - like to put my name forward 01:20:36.194 --> 01:20:43.495 - for the chair position, let's have an election. I'd also like to nominate Commissioner Baker. And then 01:20:43.495 --> 01:20:50.867 - we can have an election and then we can move forward. Do I need to make that into a motion? So I'd like 01:20:50.867 --> 01:20:58.026 - to, well, so first I'm making two nominations and then I would like to make a motion that we have an 01:20:58.026 --> 01:21:02.846 - election. Is that possible? Oh wait, they need to be seconded, yes. 01:21:03.554 --> 01:21:20.858 - Yes, I would like to nominate Commissioner Baker for chair. If I. I'm sorry for what for chair I nominated 01:21:20.858 --> 01:21:33.310 - you for chair no. I don't accept. I'm vice chair. Yes. Chairman no. I think. 01:21:34.434 --> 01:21:42.062 - that I reach out. I say that I've given it a lot of thought, and I have considered it. Early on when 01:21:42.062 --> 01:21:49.841 - I came in, I made a motion to nominate myself. I did that to get things moving. I was voted down. That 01:21:49.841 --> 01:21:57.393 - was fine. I was happy that commissioners didn't want me for chair. They wanted someone else. But it 01:21:57.393 --> 01:22:00.414 - got the process moving. And since then, 01:22:00.706 --> 01:22:08.681 - I'm happy to serve the organization, and I'm happy to do it as vice chair. But I would like to see someone 01:22:08.681 --> 01:22:16.283 - younger than me, preferably by about 20 years, would be good that has the energy and the time to take 01:22:16.283 --> 01:22:23.886 - this on. We've had two good chairmen, I think. Two people, unfortunately, that just couldn't continue 01:22:23.886 --> 01:22:26.718 - to serve, and I wish they could have, 01:22:27.042 --> 01:22:34.460 - felt like both of them were very good. And I think we need someone like that to put the energy into 01:22:34.460 --> 01:22:42.101 - the organization. So I'm sorry, that's my answer to you. Would anyone else like to be nominated? Well, 01:22:42.101 --> 01:22:49.668 - first, I'm going to make a nomination. But I'd like to correct the record. You said that you asked if 01:22:49.668 --> 01:22:55.454 - anyone wanted to nominate anyone. So you asked if there were any nominations. 01:22:56.226 --> 01:23:02.669 - Earlier in the meeting, when I brought up the whole issue of voting for a chair, you asked that question, 01:23:02.669 --> 01:23:08.807 - and I said, yes, I would like to nominate somebody. And then there was a discussion, and then it was 01:23:08.807 --> 01:23:15.128 - moved. It was decided to move to the end. So when you said that, you asked for a nomination, and nobody 01:23:15.128 --> 01:23:21.206 - indicated that they wanted to nominate anyone. I just wanted to correct that record, because I said 01:23:21.206 --> 01:23:25.886 - I wanted to nominate someone. As an advisory member, you can't make a motion 01:23:26.658 --> 01:23:35.248 - or a nomination. Sorry. Where does it say that? That's what the Anna Holmes, our assistant... Yes, but 01:23:35.248 --> 01:23:43.671 - I checked the record and there's nothing which says, I can't vote... I'm just reading what I'm being 01:23:43.671 --> 01:23:52.428 - told to say. I know. It's clear that I can't vote on... I can't make motions, second motions, or there's 01:23:52.428 --> 01:23:54.430 - something else I can't. 01:23:55.298 --> 01:24:02.928 - But with regards to the election of officers, that's a nomination, that's not a motion. In any event, 01:24:02.928 --> 01:24:10.483 - I can make my opinions noted even without making a nomination. Maybe somebody else can pick it up as 01:24:10.483 --> 01:24:16.542 - a nomination. I think you're looking at me and probably you're trying to address 01:24:16.834 --> 01:24:24.063 - somebody that has a say. I'm just a staff person taking notes. In any direction that I look, I'm going 01:24:24.063 --> 01:24:31.363 - to be looking at somebody. Please stop the conversation between the two of you. You should be directing 01:24:31.363 --> 01:24:38.451 - to me. Oh, yes. Sorry. I believe that John Butler would make an excellent chair for this commission. 01:24:38.451 --> 01:24:45.470 - And regardless of whether I can or cannot nominate him, I believe that it is my opinion that he has 01:24:45.858 --> 01:24:56.027 - all the qualities, the bearing, the intelligence, the experience, the knowledge, the temperament, that 01:24:56.027 --> 01:25:05.802 - would make an excellent chair. So I'm hoping that somebody who can nominate someone will nominate. 01:25:05.802 --> 01:25:15.774 - Thank you. So are you formally making a motion to nominate yourself for president of the commission? 01:25:17.538 --> 01:25:26.361 - And do we have a second? We have Commissioner Duffy seconds. All right, fine. Then let's vote. Let's 01:25:26.361 --> 01:25:35.445 - call the vote. OK, there's a motion on the floor to nominate John Butler as the commission chair. We'll 01:25:35.445 --> 01:25:45.054 - go ahead and take a roll call vote on that. We'll start with interim Chair Baker. Yes. Treasurer Butler. Yes. 01:25:45.762 --> 01:25:53.732 - Commissioner Castaneda? Yes. Commissioner Duffy? Yes. Commissioner Golden? Yes. Commissioner Schlegel? 01:25:53.732 --> 01:26:01.547 - Yes. Okay, that motion passes 6-0. All right, thank you. The motion passes. You are president of the 01:26:01.547 --> 01:26:09.440 - commission. Now, as far as my role is concerned as vice, as far as I know, I continue on? Yes. Unless 01:26:09.440 --> 01:26:15.166 - you want to step down, but you can continue on. I'll continue on until... 01:26:16.098 --> 01:26:27.458 - Can we nominate Schlegel, Commissioner Schlegel, as treasurer? Since he just stepped in. Have we lost 01:26:27.458 --> 01:26:39.597 - our treasurer? We lost our treasurer. All the books are in auto. I turn over the books to the commissioners. 01:26:39.597 --> 01:26:45.054 - I nominate him as treasurer of the organization. 01:26:45.186 --> 01:26:54.314 - You have seconded. All right. Do we have a motion on the floor? Please call the roll. I will. There's 01:26:54.314 --> 01:27:04.067 - a motion on the floor that's been seconded to nominate Daniel Schlegel, Commissioner Schlegel, as treasurer. 01:27:04.067 --> 01:27:13.374 - We'll take that roll call vote. So much movement going on today. Vice Chairman. Yes. Chair Butler. Yes. 01:27:13.826 --> 01:27:19.650 - Commissioner Castaneda? Yes. Commissioner Duffy? Yes. Commissioner Golden? Yes. Commissioner Schlegel? 01:27:19.650 --> 01:27:25.417 - Yes. That motion passes 6-0. We also have a new treasurer. All right. Thank you very much. That's our 01:27:25.417 --> 01:27:31.241 - responsibility. Do we have any commissioner comments? Oh, do you mind if I bring up some new business? 01:27:31.241 --> 01:27:37.065 - New business. Yes, please. You should. I don't want to take up too much of people's time. I'm speaking 01:27:37.065 --> 01:27:41.758 - about this because it's something you should all be aware about, but I can't speak 01:27:42.338 --> 01:27:51.263 - as a representative city, even though I believe the mayor has commented on it. There is a Senate bill 01:27:51.263 --> 01:28:00.713 - that's been proposed for the U.S. Senate to deregulate a number of, I guess, federal regulatory procedures. 01:28:00.713 --> 01:28:09.463 - I believe the last section of the bill deals specifically with Section 106 of the National Historic 01:28:09.463 --> 01:28:11.038 - Preservation Act. 01:28:11.586 --> 01:28:20.282 - which basically what section 106 does is, if you're not familiar, when there's a federal undertaking, 01:28:20.282 --> 01:28:28.808 - so money being spent or a permit being issued, there has to be an investigation of if it's going to 01:28:28.808 --> 01:28:36.738 - impact any historic archaeological or Native American religious sites. And then there has to 01:28:36.738 --> 01:28:40.830 - be a consultation made with the public and with 01:28:41.186 --> 01:28:47.915 - state and tribal historic preservation officers to determine whether there will be any adverse effects 01:28:47.915 --> 01:28:55.035 - on any of those resources. And then there has to be a discussion about how those effects could be mitigated. 01:28:55.035 --> 01:29:02.221 - The federal agency does not necessarily have to mitigate those effects, but they at least need to demonstrate 01:29:02.221 --> 01:29:07.774 - that they've had a public conversation about it and why they decide not to mitigate. 01:29:08.578 --> 01:29:19.135 - Some of the changes that are proposed in this new Senate bill, which is SB 5653, would include basically 01:29:19.135 --> 01:29:29.893 - hands over all the power to each federal agency to make these decisions at their own discretion, including 01:29:29.893 --> 01:29:38.238 - contacting or consulting with anybody besides state historic preservation offices. 01:29:38.850 --> 01:29:46.696 - It would also allow the Department of the Interior to speak on behalf of tribal historic preservation 01:29:46.696 --> 01:29:54.619 - offices, even though they don't necessarily have information that is privately held by tribal historic 01:29:54.619 --> 01:30:02.389 - preservation offices. It would get rid of requirements for public notice of federal undertakings. It 01:30:02.389 --> 01:30:08.158 - would prohibit injunctive relief if a mistake is made by a federal agency. 01:30:09.026 --> 01:30:21.391 - And there's other things in there, but I mean, that's the gist of it. I think you should all know that 01:30:21.391 --> 01:30:33.516 - this is going on, and it's a very big deal for historic preservation in the US. It won't affect what 01:30:33.516 --> 01:30:38.078 - we do in this room for the most part. 01:30:38.818 --> 01:30:49.483 - But I encourage you all to look into it. Would you characterize this as a weakening of historic protection? 01:30:49.483 --> 01:30:59.851 - Yeah. That's what I have the impression. I was like weakening is maybe an understatement. Anyway, that's 01:30:59.851 --> 01:31:06.270 - my new business, Core Building in SB 5623. Thank you. All right. 01:31:08.898 --> 01:31:22.138 - Mr. Comments, any? Was that you? That was a yes, I have a comment to make. May I? Yes. Okay. Our new 01:31:22.138 --> 01:31:35.641 - chair made a comment a while ago about Robert's rules being, what's the adjective you use? Cumbersome. 01:31:35.641 --> 01:31:37.214 - Cumbersome. 01:31:38.370 --> 01:31:48.604 - I agree it is. It is about an inch thick, probably over 500 pages, and it is not easy to read at all. 01:31:48.604 --> 01:31:58.737 - But we have adopted it, for good or for bad, right? If we don't want it, I suspect there's a process 01:31:58.737 --> 01:32:04.958 - to eject it from our guidelines. But until we do, it's there. 01:32:05.762 --> 01:32:14.700 - And it's only one portion of the guidelines. We do have another four or five pages of the guidelines 01:32:14.700 --> 01:32:23.903 - that existed before Robert's Rules was included. And that carries precedence. Robert's Rules comes into 01:32:23.903 --> 01:32:32.753 - play when our own guidelines are silent. I am a policy wonk. No small order. I live off this stuff. 01:32:32.753 --> 01:32:33.726 - I read it. 01:32:35.234 --> 01:32:44.398 - It's my North Star. It keeps me honest. And it's necessary. Process is boring. Process is tedious. But 01:32:44.398 --> 01:32:54.097 - it is necessary. Or constitutional rights live in the black and white in these processes. Or First Amendment 01:32:54.097 --> 01:33:04.062 - rights. Or a right to due process. Or a right for equal protection. Or a right to free speech and secret dress. 01:33:04.354 --> 01:33:13.363 - lives in the process. So the Constitution is all well and good. It fits on a single page. But how you 01:33:13.363 --> 01:33:22.637 - enjoy those rights, how you defend it, is all in the process. Robert's rules exist for only one purpose, 01:33:22.637 --> 01:33:31.558 - to facilitate debate. It is not a checklist that you just go down. If you look at what's in Robert's 01:33:31.558 --> 01:33:33.854 - rules, there are specific 01:33:34.210 --> 01:33:42.292 - process is designed to allow members of a deliberative body to have their say and to not have the right 01:33:42.292 --> 01:33:50.297 - to that say taken away from them without good cause. That is essentially what the entire parliamentary 01:33:50.297 --> 01:33:58.380 - process is. When somebody has the floor, he has the floor and nobody is allowed to interrupt him unless 01:33:58.380 --> 01:34:03.198 - he's ruled out of order. And somebody must raise an objection 01:34:03.394 --> 01:34:10.580 - And it must be ruled on by the chair. And the chair cannot arbitrarily or capriciously rule on it. The 01:34:10.580 --> 01:34:17.556 - chair is restricted in how he can rule on that objection that's raised. Because the aim is to allow 01:34:17.556 --> 01:34:24.742 - you, each of us, to enjoy our First Amendment rights, to free speech and due process. That's what it's 01:34:24.742 --> 01:34:31.230 - there for. Whether you like the speech or you don't like it, whether it's loud, whether it's 01:34:31.426 --> 01:34:44.536 - argumentative, whether it's combative, whether it's distasteful, you get the right to speak. And that 01:34:44.536 --> 01:34:57.518 - is fundamental. It also has other procedural guidelines in there. And they're there for a reason. We 01:34:57.518 --> 01:35:01.374 - have a duty to become experts 01:35:02.274 --> 01:35:09.462 - Not only in the particulars of historic preservation, but once you become a member of a commission or 01:35:09.462 --> 01:35:16.649 - a board or a deliberative body, you have to become expert in the rules that govern how such a body is 01:35:16.649 --> 01:35:23.837 - operated. The HBC is a creature of statute. The rules that we adopt are done with the authority given 01:35:23.837 --> 01:35:30.954 - to us by statute. So I don't know what the technical legal term is, whether it's a law or regulation 01:35:30.954 --> 01:35:31.870 - or whatever. 01:35:32.226 --> 01:35:40.219 - But these are rules that we are obligated to follow. We do not decide unless we are given the discretion 01:35:40.219 --> 01:35:48.135 - or authority to waive or set aside something. We must assume that we don't. The people who decided that 01:35:48.135 --> 01:35:56.052 - did so through a democratic process, whether you agree with it or not, that's how democracy works. They 01:35:56.052 --> 01:35:59.934 - vote on it. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. 01:36:00.674 --> 01:36:09.181 - But once you win and it's there, we have a duty to follow it. We also have a right or a duty to hold 01:36:09.181 --> 01:36:18.446 - ourselves accountable and to allow for debate, especially when it comes to the rules that were democratically 01:36:18.446 --> 01:36:24.510 - adopted that are put in place in defense of our First Amendment rights. 01:36:30.562 --> 01:36:38.493 - Thank you. Does anyone from the public have any comments? Very none. We have an exhibit on First Amendment 01:36:38.493 --> 01:36:46.053 - rights at the museum. Second thing is we have a disability exhibit with the reception open two nights 01:36:46.053 --> 01:36:53.762 - from 6 to 8. So you can go see our disability exhibit just to help raise awareness. People always think 01:36:53.762 --> 01:36:58.654 - it's just someone in a wheelchair. You have to have 36 inch wide. 01:36:59.298 --> 01:37:03.885 - so much more than that, and our exhibit goes into that. And while you're there, pop over and see the 01:37:03.885 --> 01:37:06.974 - Christian Amendment exhibit. Thank you. Thank you. We're adjourned.