- Yes. OK. Welcome to the Redevelopment Commission meeting for June 16, 2025. And it's 5 o'clock. We'll start meeting with the roll call, please. Cory McRobbie, present. Randy Cassidy, present. John West, present. Deborah Meyerson, present. And Susie Gamillary is not here for the record, unless she's online. Sorry. OK. Staff, present, please. Anna Tillian Hanson, Housing and Neighborhood Development.
- Thank you. OK, we're good.
- Now, typically, we would have the minutes, but they did not make it into this packet. So we will postpone that till our next meeting. But otherwise, next item on our agenda is the examination of claims or, sorry, still sorting through the bookmarks. June 6, 2025, any questions or comments from commissioners? If not, I'll entertain a motion. One quick question in regards to on MB205 on account 5390.
- It would be page 205. And I know this is very low-hanging fruit, but the Willow Creek Management Corporation for every village lot maintenance, as we keep that kind of in the back burner to try to figure out how we can get that HOA. So if that doesn't work. The HOA has not been receptive to taking over at this time. You mean the homeowners. The homeowners have not been receptive to taking over.
- taking over the HOA or the maintenance. So yeah. Oh, I understand completely. I just have to ask the question, because it's a reoccurring thing that will happen every year. You are correct. And then page 305, just on Middleway House, that's just a CBDG to help offset the wages. It'd be 56.305. 56.305. It's account 53.960. That is.
- Yes. It's part of their CDBG. Right. Grant. OK. Just wanted to verify, because one that had salaries. And then on the same page, 5900 for Fed Engineering, where it goes for Sudbury. Is that dealing with the trail, or is that specifically dealing with? We did a proactive environmental review in anticipation of being able to provide funding for CDBG or home in the future. OK. In that particular area, as we try to get housing. That is correct.
- That's that, and then the only other question would be on page five of five, under 4445, the Adams Crossing Tiff, the Rundell-Earnsburger, that is to finish up the Hopewell.
- Yes. So there were two different claims being paid to them, one for 31,000 and some change, the other for 27,000 and some change. So it included demolition labor, demolition phase expenses, infrastructure and site construction labor and expenses. And yes, that should be finished. That'll finish up the Hopewell Park. It's getting close. There's still a balance on that resolution of 226,000. So we're getting close.
- OK. And then U3, that's pretty much finishes up their particular contract. U3 is? I'm sorry. Never mind. I apologize. I was completely wrong on the vendor there. Thank you. Yep. OK. That's all. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Cassidy. Any other questions or comments? Well, Randy was on a roll. You got your questions. Yeah, I sent my questions in, by the way. Seen them. They're good. I'm not that good.
- I will entertain a motion if there are no further comments or questions on this claims register of June 6. Move approval of the claims register. Second. Move a first and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Motion passes unanimously. Next on our agenda is examination of payroll register from May 30, 2025. Any questions or comments from commissioners on this item? Move approval of the payroll register for May 30, 2025.
- First and a second, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. We are next on our reports of officers and committees to report from the director. There is no director's report tonight, but I am excited to show you the findings of our consolidated plan shortly. Awesome. Legal report? I'm here for questions as we have them. OK, thank you. Treasurer's report. Our favorite.
- Today I'm going to present to you the general ledger summary listing and the TIFF project update. You have asked to receive fund balances in your report, and I would like to start just using this report that is pulled directly from our financial system instead of typing the numbers into that spreadsheet. And I think that this gives a fuller picture. So I'm just going to go over this report with you, which is page 15.
- The first fund is, these are kind of hard to read. Under the column that says GL day, it says GL account number 2519. And then that is the RDC fund. At the bottom of that little group of dates, it says fund total RDC. So that's where your eyes need to go. If you haven't memorized the numbers, you need to look at the bottom of that subtotal of entries to see what the fund name is.
- So the first grouping is the RDC fund. And now the debit amount, that's the revenues. The credit amount, that's the disbursements. And then we have the actual balance. So the starting balance at the year for the RDC fund was $2.1 million. So far we've received $4.9 million. And a lot of that is the $4.6 million, which is the
- I get it mixed up all the time. It's either the Allouin or the just that. It's that trades district. Yes, the trades district parcels going to the mill. OK. So then we have a fund balance there of $6 million. The next fund is the consolidated TIF fund, the 4445. The consolidated TIF fund, when this report was ran, we still haven't received June property tax distribution.
- The revenues are $442,000. The expenses are $3.5 million. And the fund balance is $14 million and some change. And then the last fund is the Kinzer Prow Tiff, $4451. It says fund total Tiff Prow in green. And the revenues are $13,500, $13,500.
- Expenses there, the $2,000, that's just a correction done in January. As you can see, the January revenues are $4,500. That's not right. They did a correction, and they subtracted about $2,000. And that shows up as a disbursement, even though it's just a correction. All right, so the fund balance of the TIF Prowl Fund is $660,000. So I'll just continue that if that's OK, that report.
- I'm curious, is the Spider Tiff something that will have its own separate item when it starts having revenues? Yes, it already has its own fund. And so when it starts having revenues, we'll add that to it too. While we're on the ledger, what are we going to do with the 4.6? Where is that going to land? Yes. Yes, that is a very good question. Dana and I talked about it. Dana, what did we decide? We decided that I'm going
- I need to go back to the bond documents to look. And I haven't had a chance to do that since we talked. So we need to see what the bond documents will let the options be. And then we can present those to you to you guys to select how you want to move forward. OK. Thank you. So we would have an option where we go? Possibly. Possibly. OK. And then if you have a question.
- What is our expected revenues that we haven't received? Do you have a ballpark? Yeah. Consolidated TIF is about $17 million annually. OK. So we could identify, since we haven't got the June disbursement, then we would be looking at, if it's 17 annually, we'd be looking at approximately $8.5 million additional on top of what we've got in here at the $14 million. Correct. OK. Plus $8.5.
- So with that, that would give us, calculated throughout the rest of this year, from a fiscal standpoint, about $29 million. And project-wise, we have to identify what all that's going to, what we're already committed to. And then when we get into the Prow Road tip, I know everybody is busy with other things at Fresno, but we've got to start looking and identifying
- for projects that would be beneficial for that tent. This looks really good. Exactly. That's the plan. And we're not just, we are busy working on these things to bring to you. As soon as we have something that we're ready to bring to you and without getting too far ahead of you or too far down the road, we will bring that ideas to you. How does those general public education on us, the disbursements that occur
- Once they've been collected by the state, then dispersed back to the county, then it's dispersed to the city. Is there a particular time frame? Because I know being fiscally responsible that you are, you invest the money. So that additional lag time creates an issue. Is there just a certain criteria, time frame it has to go on? There is. It's collected by the county, so it never goes to the state. And it's all due May 10. And then they have to disperse it to us by June 30.
- So yeah, we should be getting it any time now. And then the county is allowed to invest it for that window that they have it. And then as soon as it gets to us, it goes into our investments. And those funds do get interest. OK. And the interest comes as well to us or to stay with the county? No. Yep. It stays with the county, yes. Given that time frame. Yeah, just for that time frame that they have it. So yeah, it's collected May and November 10. And then it has to come to us by June 30 and December 30.
- No, you would know that. Thank you, Jessica. Appreciate it. You're welcome. This looks great. All right. Thank you. All right. On the TIF project status report, we are, like Anna says, we are closing things up on HOPA. There's just still a few, some small things out there to finish up. Those numbers haven't changed much over the last couple of months. I added dimension mill wall shoring to your project list because you have approved a couple of.
- Resolutions, and that is definitely a project that you need to track and that we will track for you and report on. The technology center, the Forge, that is getting wrapped up too. We spent a lot of time going over the various resolutions from this body, from city council and the EDA grant, confirming what all of the balances are and that there is funding left that the RDC did commit to 5.8 million in funding and that
- We have expended $5.1 million. So there is still some money that the RDC committed to for this project that has yet to be spent. And the Kinzer Prowtiff, I just left that there just as a placeholder. That is that. Is there anything that you would like to ask me about or comment on?
- just for consistency purposes and for any public members, especially Downtown TIF. It's labeled in the project, but it's consolidated TIF otherwise referenced elsewhere, or am I missing something in terms of those two names? No, you're not missing anything. I mean, the Downtown TIF is in the consolidated TIF. And since my tenure here at the city has only been since 2024,
- I do tend to think of things only as the consolidated TIF and if there's something that you would like, can I ask for some like follow-up information on why you're asking about the downtown TIF? Mostly just for like when you're looking at the ledger where okay it says fund total consolidated TIF and then looking at the project status report just to kind of
- have some consistency between those two documents, which I realize there may be reasons for the inconsistency, but that's the reason for my question. Oh, I see what you're saying. I need to change downtown TIFF to say consolidated TIFF. Would that be it? Yeah. I just wanted to make sure that they were exactly the same. They're exactly the same thing. And so just, again, for anybody looking through these documents and not maybe having kind of been accustomed to it, just like, oh, those are the same thing. Those are the same thing. OK. Thank you for pointing that out.
- I appreciate the fact that you went to all the trouble to put this together. So we've got a very detailed basis of where the money is so that we know where we're going to in order to not overspend and put ourselves in a position. I appreciate it very much. Plan wisely. Thank you. Well, we are on to our new business. And we will be starting with.
- Resolution 25-67, which is approval of property management agreement with Choice Realty and Management Incorporated. Who would like to speak to that tonight? That's me. And so what I'd like you to know is that we do not currently have any property management agreements in place. They have all expired. We have stopped. Oh, wait. I think that we skipped over the first
- I had a business. That's why I was trying to share my screen, which is the consolidated plan public hearing. I can talk to you about both of them. Really, it doesn't. Yeah, now let's spin our public hearing on the 2025-2029 consolidated plan and 2025 annual action plan for presentation. Thank you. Sorry about that.
- Here we go. So as you know, we have been in the process of developing our new consolidated plan, which is a planning strategy tool to address housing, community development, and economic development needs. Since Bloomington's population is greater than 50,000, we are considered an entitlement community. This means we receive an annual allocation from Housing and Urban Development, also known as HUD, of community development block grants, CDBG, and home investment partnerships.
- Funds must be expended in a fashion that is consistent with community needs. These needs are identified through public outreach, needs assessments, market studies, and strategic plans which form the basis of this consolidated plan. You may remember that community development block grants objectives are to benefit low to moderate income persons, aid in the prevention of slums or blight, or provide urgent needs.
- 65% of the allocation go towards physical improvement projects and 20% towards social service agencies. Home investment partnership funds objectives are to provide assistance for construction, acquisition, rehabilitation, homeownership assistance, rental assistance, and housing counseling. The consolidated plan is a five-year spending plan to develop viable urban communities by providing decent housing in a suitable living environment and expanding economic opportunities to low to moderate income persons.
- This plan will focus on program years 2025 through 2029. Also remember that our program years do not actually start until June one, so we're not late, that is the start of our program year, but we are delayed this year due to the federal government's delay on allocation announcements.
- The consolidated plan process includes conducting citizen participation, needs assessments, and strategic plans to address community needs for the five-year term. However, we additionally provide two other reports, an annual action plan to indicate what our plan is for each specific year within the consolidated plan, and a CAPER report, which is the report of how we did.
- Through the public participation and outreach portion, we conducted nine meetings with topics ranging from affordable housing, fair housing, enhancing access to community assets for low to moderate income households, workforce development, housing for the homeless or near homeless, housing for special needs populations, healthy housing in safe neighborhoods, and several general meetings. Bloomington, in summary,
- Bloomington is the most housing cost burdened metro area in the state, high cost, low wage. According to census data, our population has decreased despite IU enrollment being the highest count cited in 10 years. This decline may be a result of the census occurring during the COVID-19 pandemic and the impacts on student housing. Despite the student growth, IU only provides around 13,000 beds on campus.
- During public outreach, significant concern was expressed that much of the newer rental housing built in the city is higher priced housing being built primarily for students. The demand for rentals, particularly the student population, does place additional pressure on our housing market. Single person households represent a significant portion of the population, including students, seniors, and individuals living alone. Many of these households face challenges related to affordability.
- access to resources and housing stability. Despite high occupancy rates, many of the studio and one-bedroom apartments in the city dedicated as workforce housing units remain vacant due to high cost and or being in student-centric complexes. One of the most pressing issues in Bloomington is the affordability of housing. A large portion of households in Bloomington spend a significant portion of income on housing costs
- The financial strain not only limits their ability to cover other essential expenses, such as food, health care, transportation, and also increases the risk of housing instability and eviction. Characteristics linked to housing instability and increased risk of homelessness include new housing increasingly targeting students, housing costs are rising, it is difficult to build housing due to costs, high interest rates,
- of material labor, land scarcity, zoning restrictions, and neighborhood resistance. And few landlords will accept vouchers. Vouchers assist low-income families, the elderly and disabled, afford decent, safe, and sanitary housing by providing rental subsidy. Bloomington Housing Authority and South Central Community Action Program administer the housing choice vouchers, while Bloomington Housing Authority administer project-based vouchers.
- The main differences that housing choice vouchers are attached to the tenant, not the unit and project based vouchers are attached to the unit and not the tenant. At the time of the development of this plan, there were 987 households on the waitlist for housing choice vouchers and 2168 on the waitlist for project based vouchers.
- In owner occupied units, larger homes align well with the need for larger families or those seeking more space. However, smaller owner occupied units are rare, potentially excluding single person households or smaller families with ownership opportunities. Currently 79% of our single family housing is three bedrooms or more with 20% having two bedrooms and only 1% having one.
- Like much of the nation, developers face scarcity of available land, rising construction costs and interest rate, making projects difficult to pencil out. We are experiencing the golden handcuffs currently where refinancing or selling to buy a new home with current higher interest rates with significantly increased monthly payments, making it financially difficult to move even if opportunities arise. Local zoning and land use policies limits the development of affordable housing.
- The UDO presents barriers for developers such as minimum lot size and the sheer number of requirements to meet hinder and slow progress. The Bloomington market also has a growing presence of short-term rentals, reducing the supply of housing further, complicating the housing market for low to moderate income households.
- The residential rental inspection program has demonstrated that it has helped mitigate housing problems in the city by ensuring there's no concentration of multiple housing condition problems. The highest priority needs identified in the con plan include improving access to and improving quality of affordable housing in the rental and sales market. This includes the development of new units for rent and ownership as well.
- as the preservation of existing units in addition to providing rental assistance for families. Public facilities and infrastructure improvements were also identified that deliver services such as solid waste disposal, flood drains, water, sewer, streets, sidewalks, neighborhood facilities, and park and recreational facilities. There's a need to make improvements particularly in low to moderate income areas for elderly residents in which the local jurisdictions
- are less able to leverage resources or attract investment that are necessary to improve the quality of life. Delivery of public services for seniors, persons with disabilities, youth, victim of domestic violence, abused and neglected children, as well as childcare services, health and mental health services, food access, broadband access, transportation, non-homeless special needs and employment training.
- Affordable child care and food security were cited by stakeholders as particular needs. Housing and services for persons experiencing homelessness and near homelessness, including domestic violence victims and youth transitioning out of foster care. Many have difficulty getting into stable housing with very few landlords willing to take on formerly homeless or addicted persons as tenants.
- Successful implementation of any strategy addressing homelessness includes stemming the inflow of people experiencing homelessness. Market influence can occur per our con plan through tenant-based rental assistance. Cost burden is the most dominant housing issue in Bloomington.
- tenant-based rental assistance would facilitate housing individuals on the housing choice voucher list, especially for individuals facing difficult circumstances. According to stakeholder input, there is a need to provide safe and accessible housing and remove barriers for elderly, persons with disabilities, victims of domestic violence, and persons with substance abuse and mental health diagnosis. New unit production would help alleviate cost burden and lack of inventory.
- Bloomington's greatest housing issue by increasing housing supply. Additional units would also help mitigate competition between the city's student population and low to moderate income households. Cost burden can be mitigated through rehabilitation. The cost to rehabilitate units in distressed areas are the same as in affluent areas. The difference in neighborhood rehabilitation projects is the return on investment between the two and can be zero or negative for improvements made
- to a property located in distressed housing market, thus making it economically unattractive for private investors to rehab houses in impacted areas. Incentives for private developers to preserve existing vacant units in distressed areas could alleviate this challenge. Efforts to acquire and rehab units for sale would provide affordable homeownership opportunities for city residents. As subsidized units reach the end of the period of affordability, there is a need to preserve these units
- The primary focus of implementation for this consolidated plan will be to sustain neighborhood stability, prevent homelessness, increase and improve housing supply, ensure accessible affordable housing for people throughout the city. The consolidated plan has been developed with community input and reflect the needs of our beloved vibrant culturally diverse
- things up there. Sorry about that. So thank you for that presentation. I do want to make sure. Is this an opportunity for either public question or public comment or public hearing? Yes, we are welcome. I mean, public comment is a public hearing. So again, public either in person or online is invited to be part of the public hearing. But not seeing any certainly invited commissioners as well as part of that.
- But we will otherwise close the public hearing. Thank you for that presentation. Five-year plan? Five-year plan. Five-year plan. Excellent presentation. Are there slides available on the hand website? They can be, yes. And we can put them in the maps. And then we'll add them in the minutes as well, yeah. I, again, had kind of jumped a little bit.
- in my previous management of the agenda. Thank you to Commissioner West for noting that we actually have two other reports that we are part of this evening's agenda, and that includes a business development update. Director Coopersmith is online. Hi, everyone. I don't have a business development update tonight. I'm happy to answer questions.
- Yeah, listen to the rest of our agenda. Thanks. OK. Thank you very much. And last, a Hopewell update as part of our. There is no Hopewell update, but I will report back from the last meeting that there was conversation about the grass at Hopewell East, and that is actually being covered by Milestone's current contract. So we're working on that. Anna Dragovich is working on that now. Thank you. OK. Real quick question just for Jane. Just to make sure, as I was looking through the,
- Convention Center agenda that will be going on Wednesday. They will be looking for a hotel update. I'm sure she's aware. I just want to make everybody aware. Thank you. Yes. Thanks, Commissioner Cassidy. I am aware, and I mentioned that to Anna Killian Hanson to let her know. And I think they just wanted to have some space for updates on that agenda. And yeah, so I think we'll offer just a current
- status report, which would be about the resolutions that the Redevelopment Commission has passed and that we're meeting regularly with the developers. Thank you. Yeah. OK. Well, now that we have fully completed number five on the agenda, we will move on to number six. And we've had our presentation. So we are indeed now on to resolution 25-67, which is approval of property management agreement with Choice Realty and Management.
- And I'll turn that back to Ms. Kelly Nancy. Yes. So our RDC properties do not have any current agreements for property management services. So we sought out three bids. We had two responsive bidders. Choice Realty was the lowest and most responsible bid that we received.
- And therefore, we do have a contract before you. It would be starting July 1 and going for 18 months so that we don't have to keep coming back. Consistency in management is very important, just making sure that we don't have anything fall through the cracks. Their attorney did respond back with a couple of minor changes to the agreement, which Dana can explain.
- A few requests for changes. Many in my mind are just reworking and not an issue. The one that I did was concerned with was they wanted to have in there that all documents, anything that was prepared is their property until paid for. So if there was a termination, they had to be finished being paid for whatever service they had rendered at that time before you could get them.
- issue with that being a public agency is that should be our, we should have retained that ownership period. And if they have a dispute over funds, because if they had a dispute over funds, then they could say, well, we just are going to withhold this information from you. And not that they would, but that is at least what the contract would allow. So again, that's more of a technical thing, all the terms, amount.
- duration are all the same. It would be a monthly fee as established in the exhibit. I will say that there is a scrivener there in the exhibit that mentions a different realty company name, but that was what was sent to us, but that would need to be changed, technically changed.
- You have three choices. One, approve it as it is and see if they accept it. Two would be to reject discussing it tonight or passing anything on it tonight. And a third would be to approve with the condition that legal approves of technical changes
- legal changes in the document, so that if you approved it and then I worked that out with them, we could go ahead and enter into that contract, valid contract, so that they could start on July 1. Thank you. Yes, questions or questions? Can you further explain how the $3,900 in this contract, the $3,900, how that works? Yes.
- In the scope of services listed in the exhibit, they list all the services that they're going to provide for a flat monthly fee. And to the extent they have issues that arrive that are outside of that scope of services and would need additional funds, like to authorize
- had that vandalism that occurred, and so windows had to be replaced. Something like that might happen. Then the contract says that they must get approval from the RDC or the RDC's designated representative or director prior to expending those funds. So for any of that additional $3,900, and again, that covers 18 months, they would have to bill
- Well, they'd have to get authorized prior to, because it would be over their monthly amount, because they're set at that monthly amount. So if there's something additional, they would have to get approval for it before they could do the work. So at the front end of their contract, we just give them $3,900 that sits in their account? No. No, sir. It's retained in.
- our accounts, they only get there. Why don't we even have that language in there? Because it allows there to be those incidental things that come up that allow the department to just. But there's no cap on it. So I don't see the point. Well, there is the $3,900 cap on it. That's for 18 months. There's $3,900 extra that if they need some services above and beyond what they have bargained for,
- then they can go and ask for approval for additional funding. But the entire contract's limited at $30,000. And so of that, $26,100 is in their flat B monthly charges. So that just leaves $3,900. And that was basically added for flexibility on the part of the department to be able to
- take care of things as they came up and do that in a timely manner as opposed to needing to come back to amend the contract for some additional services that might be $200 or something like that. I think it also provides the ability to be nimble. As we know, when we're dealing with any property, there are certain conditions that come up that if you don't address them right away, you have degradation in your property.
- I'm happy to revisit this if you feel so. Well, I can agree with everything you just said. I just don't understand the cap. I don't understand $3,900 because if you look at the pick any one of these you want to pick, let's just take I've got the trades garage open and it's $250 a month. And one of the services is
- prompt general maintenance services for repair and minor construction as necessary. I don't think that D is going to be handled within that $250 a month. So they're going to come to you and say, we've got to fix something, and it's going to be $500. Right? It's going to be $500. But the $3,900 isn't like a budget number,
- If you take all three of these properties, you may very well run over the 3,900. I mean, I just don't know what the point of having that in there. It's just kind of superfluous to me. Sure. And the other thing, too, is if you'll remember, I think it's 2,502, is the maintenance of resolution, or the maintenance of RDC property that says,
- that we would only come to you if it was more than $5,000. So. Yeah, I'm talking about you. I'm not suggesting that stuff comes to us for a vote. That wasn't the goal of that at all. As long as somebody in your department checked the box. I just think that the way some property management companies operate is when you, as a client, you would establish a reserve account
- with them and you would front load it. And they would be able to do exactly what we're talking about. They'd write the check right away, get it paid for. And they wouldn't have to necessarily get your approval up to a couple hundred bucks or whatever the case may be. That's how they operate. I think that this is kind of a hybrid that they might be trying to create, but it doesn't make any sense. If they're not gonna get the money in their account to write the check against them,
- We don't even need it in the contract. I don't think that they cared about that piece at all. I really don't. So I don't think that will make or break this particular contract if you were to approve it minus the $3,900. It just allowed some additional flexibility if it were needed. Yeah, as you pointed out. Then it's a good point out because it
- But what it would do is limit them to $3,900 under this contract, which would take it away from being able to approve the additional $5,000, anything less than $5,000, because that's a separate thing. If they come to in and say there's this extra service that needs to be done and it's under $5,000, then it could be
- Approved and that could happen several times this actually limits that to only 3900 so they can't keep coming back with with projects without You being aware, but it's okay However, you would prefer it to be is fine. We can take out that whereas I Don't know I just don't it doesn't serve a purpose in my mind. That's my guess
- I don't know that it hurts us. It just doesn't serve a purpose. If you need work, they're going to ask you. And it may get to $4,000, but they're going to keep asking because it's probably legitimate work that needs to be done. I just don't think unless we're going to let them hold the money, then that serves no purpose. Any other questions or comments or questions? So from a limit standpoint, if we get rid of that, they're going to come ask no matter what.
- and you can approve and then bring it to us in the claims just in the claims. It'll be in the claims. It'll be in the claims. Because anything up to $5,000, you can do anything based upon what the statute allows. So with that, we get ready. I do believe there's a limit on that resolution, though. I think it's $250,000. Totally. Yeah, for all RDC property. For all RDC management, which all comes out of the 444 account. It does. OK. It used to be 444.
- Not 2519. 2519, okay. We're having a hard time remembering. All right, good enough. So with that, if we get rid of that, you're still gonna be able to prove up to 5,000. Any major thing that comes similar to- Doesn't change a thing. Doesn't change a thing. Okay. Okay, well, if there's no further questions or comments, I'll open it for public comment. Any public comment, either online or in person. Seeing none, I will request a motion
- I'll make a motion to approve it, getting rid of the whereas of 3,900. Well, also, I'd like it to be subject to legal final review and delete the section. I think all the documents need to be ours. I don't think that's negotiable. OK. I'll amend that motion for resolution 2567 to 12345678
- delete the eighth clause of whereas on the 3,900 and to make it subject to everything being owned by the RDC and subject to legal approval. So first, is there a second? First and a second? All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you.
- Next item. With that, you are able to continue to maintain our properties. Yes, sir. Thank you. Next item on our agenda is resolution 2568, which is determination of no excess assessed value in the allocation areas and ratification of notice thereof. Who would like to explain this? OK. Yeah. I was making those changes. OK. Every year.
- it's necessary for the RTC to determine if there's any excess funds that are being collected that could be passed through to the underlying taxing authorities. And so we got with the controller's office, and the controller had determined that based on the current projects and proposed projects and such that there
- is none at this time. And so this is just a statement that is saying that you agree with that, that there is no excess assessed value from either the consolidated allocation area, the North Concert Pike Road and Pearl Road allocation area, or the Meridian allocation area that may be collected
- are allocated to the respective taxing units and that all potential capture assessments will indeed be captured. And so the county auditor, the common council, the officers who are authorized to fix budgets will all receive or have received a letter from the treasurer
- stating that, so basically what you're doing is you're ratifying that you agree with the statement that she has given and that you declare there are no excess valuation at this time in any of the four TIFs. We do this every year, don't we? Yeah. Thank you for that report. Questions or comments from commissioners?
- Just to verify, just for the public knowledge, all the other taxing entities have been notified according to this. And we've had no remonstrance accordingly. No remonstrance from any of those taxing districts. Oh, no. We've had no response from them. OK. Thank you. If there are no other questions or comments from commissioners, I'll open it for public comment, either online or in person. Seeing none, I will entertain a motion.
- Move approval of resolution 2568. Termination of no excess assessed value. Second. First and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Next item on our agenda this evening is 2569. My bookmark just jumped to the wrong one. Let me just back it up.
- Sorry, let me just get it in front of me. 2569. Thank you. There we are. Do you want to take all of those physical improvement projects together? That would be terrific. That would be great. I love that suggestion. So that is very cool. Actually, Anna and I have discussed the fact that on these particular, this go round, instead of,
- The RDC signed all the contracts. Since the money's actually not flowing through the RCD, it's going through the city, the hand will sign the contracts, the grant agreements. And then next year, I propose that maybe we can have one resolution that lists all of these and approves all of them at one time. And that way, it'll consolidate some of them. So then we just have to sign off on the resolution? Right.
- Yeah, so part of this is related to our citizen participation plan, which is required by HUD. And so we'll need some amending. But for now, I will let Mr. Swinning take it away. So you guys have already seen all these when we brought the initial allocations through. Some of them have been separated out into multiple agreements for the different organizations.
- And that just makes it easier for us to keep them separate as far as the accomplishments that we have to report to HUD. But they were applied for within the same application for the same year. So I'm happy to answer any questions on any or all of them. Not sure how much detail you guys want more than what you've already heard in the initial approval.
- I think it would be good to mention each one and the amount for the record. So 2569 322 South Grant Street. That is flooring for one of Centerstone's group homes, as well as the next one, 2570, which is 809 West 1st Street, also flooring. 2571 Life Designs Coby Lane.
- That one is a kitchen rehab at their 1826 Covey Lane. Swapping back and forth in between.
- And Horace is a roof? Yeah. 2572 is Horace Drive is a roof replacement. 2574, Pathways, Compass Early Learning Center. That one is for playground water fountains. And 2575, the Middleway House.
- Property of the Rise, that is for elevator rooms that they need to be in compliance for one of their audits. 2576, New Hope for Families, that is for outdoor classroom shade structures and play equipment. And 2579 is another center stone.
- a group home at 120 North Hopewell, which is also flooring. And I believe, oh, I skipped 2578, which is Summit Hill Development Corporation, and that is the Walnut Woods playground. I believe I caught them all. Nope. 2577.
- Mother Hubbard's covered that as acquisition of the lot next door to them so they can expand their services. OK. So thank you for enumerating each of those. Any further comments, questions from commissioners on the collective physical or CDBG grants as well as also physical? No, it's just CDBG.
- CDBG physical improvements, right? So any questions or comments from commissioners on any of these resolutions, please? It's just a point I could do the math to, but do you happen to have a total for all 11 of these, Andy? So actually, I have to take that.
- One of them didn't come tonight because it needed additional preparation. That was the CBU agreement. The total with the CBU agreement is $517,232.95. What's our total allocated? That is the allocation. I'm sorry. What's the total we have available?
- The 2025 total available for physical improvements is $517,232. The citizen advisory commission that Randy sat on vote on these projects. It's an application process in the fall. And so they do it in anticipation of funds. And then once we get our allocations, which just happened,
- they narrow down the dollar amounts to meet the actual allocation. I didn't know if they used it all or not. Well, the 65% that goes towards physical improvement projects, they do. And that encompasses resolution 2569 through 2579. And we'll have the one in there for the CBU that's not in here.
- We'll bring that at a later date. OK. So that will add on top of the 517. No, that's a date. Just making sure. But we do need to see the resolution and act on it at a future meeting. Yes. But the money will be allocated. Right. Yeah. OK. That works. So we have an RDC represented on the Physical and Pregnancy Ministry. Randy. That's Randy. That's Randy. OK. That's it. Matt, did a great job. Thank you.
- We have any public comment or questions on these resolutions for CDBG physical improvement grants? Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion on resolutions 25-69 through 29-79. 25-79, excuse me. Move approval of resolutions 25-69 through 25-79 of CDBG grants.
- And I will just say it just doesn't matter if clarification minus resolution 2573. Thank you. With that change, second. OK, we have a first and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. OK, next item on our agenda is resolution 25-80, which is approval of tenant renovations of the dimension mill. Who would like to speak to that?
- OK, so for the record, I'm John Fernandez from the mill. So we're going to share a little bit of information that is pretty well covered in the memo that was included in the packet. But Victoria is head of operations. She's been working with the city staff on a whole bunch of stuff related to the operations of the mill.
- for the last year. It's a little over a year. So I'm going to hand it off to her. And then if there's questions that I can answer, I will. Thank you. I'll kick off with just a little bit of background. Last fall, Indiana University was awarded a $16 million grant. The city of Bloomington and Dimension Mill are both subawardees of that grant. And one of the commitments the mill made
- was to expand capacity of the mill by about 30 to 40 workstations. We've seen growing demand for membership in our space, and we need to make room for everyone who wants to be part of everything that is building and growing in our space. So the grant originally contained a proposal for a 2,000 square foot addition on the south side of the mill.
- the wall that's currently under construction or renovation and on the side of the parking lot. Once we started to look into preliminary costs, we recognized that that was going to be a much larger investment than was originally articulated in the grant. And at the same time, we were learning about the structural issues with that wall. And so we took the opportunity to really imagine what we could do with the existing space in the building. So that's what we're presenting to you today. As part of our lease,
- There are a few steps we need to go through to get your approval as our landlord. So Article 4, Section 4.01 says we need advanced approval. We are to get written approval and consent from Redevelopment Commission. And before construction, we need to submit plan specifications and design. And all of the improvements should be completed at our cost. So we will be covering the cost of everything we're proposing to you today.
- Here is a glimpse of the revised plan. And we are achieving the requirements of the grant to expand capacity by 30 to 40 workstations. This assumes we have 34 new workstations built in. And we also get lots of other benefits to our space. One of those, I'm going to zoom in on the event hall, which is that blue shaded area in the bottom right hand corner.
- Part of the structural issue that was uncovered by the structural engineer was that we believe when the floor was taken out to expand that space to a two story building that weakened the wall structure. And so something needs to be done after the wall is reconstructed to further stabilize that wall long term.
- All of the vendors you all have on that project are having conversations about that currently, but we also wanted to do what we could from an interior perspective to increase that stability long-term as well. So this contemplates putting the floor back in. You'll see on the first floor here, this will still be meeting space, but it'll be a single story. And then on the second story, we have
- sketched out the addition of three office suites. These are each 250 square feet, which is the office size that is most in demand from our customers. It's perfect for a founder who's made their first couple hires. They're not yet moving over to the forge or a larger space, but they need a private room to be able to huddle as a team and be collaborative. You'll notice there are also nine additional workstations here. So all of this will sit on top of what is currently the event hall.
- There's connectivity to the social hub here and host room over on this side. Then if we zoom back out for a minute, I'll call your attention to a couple other changes. That is the most structurally significant change in the building. Everything else is some minor modification, a lot of kind of furniture investment, modular solutions that we can move around as needed based on the demands of the space. There will be a little bit of work in the lobby here
- to open up this entryway. It's pretty dark when you walk into our space, and we're really wanting to create a warm, welcoming environment that draws you in. So we're looking at opening this up and having some glass panels here. The yellow shading here is very faint. I'm not sure if you can see it, but there are four desks here, five desks here, and another five desks here that will go into this space. And then office 113, which is currently
- occupied by a future forged tenant. As soon as tenant improvements are done, they'll be moving across the street. We'll build out 10 dedicated workstations there. We're increasing collaboration space over here close to the social hub. So these will be open air meeting pods enabled with technology. So confidential meetings, you still need to go to a private conference room, but we're hoping this proximity to the social hub will really increase collaboration and pull in
- members of different organizations to start to be more collaborative, which is what we're trying to achieve in this space. And then the last change is an Ostrom room back here. For those of you who have been in our space, you'll know it is underutilized. It's dark. It feels very closed in. And that's in large part because there's a row of skylights here in the hallway and then a wall here that blocks off all of that natural light. And so we are going to reduce the height of this wall down to eight feet.
- allow that sunlight to come in, also reduce the height of these workstations to four feet, which will match the rest of the space and just open that up and make it feel like it's part of everything else happening at the mill. So we're very excited. Again, all of this aligns with the grant requirements.
- We are confident that this is going to enhance the long-term integrity of the building structure itself. It supports growth of our recurring revenue with events. Right now, we're reliant on grooms and brides and other people booking social activities to book a one-day commitment with those three office suites, which are in high demand. We'll have additional recurring revenue, which is great for us financially. And then it's also going to increase the long-term value of the asset you have at 642 North Madison.
- Assuming we get approval to move forward with these modifications, we have a few next steps. We do need to finalize specs with our vendors, finalize the budget, align our grant funding, go through the permitting process, and then our goal is to begin construction on January 1st of 2026. Happy to answer any questions you have. That's great. Well presented.
- Very well. I don't have any questions. Thank you. And this matches what was anticipated in the expanded building, right? It does, and then some. I think it's a much better plan, honestly. The original concept, and that was almost two years ago when we first came up with that, would add 2,000 square feet. We probably would have looked at some of these other internal changes as well.
- But with this plan, it just feels like a much more cost-effective way to do this. I mean, we did some preliminary discussions with the historic preservation specialists here at the city. I mean, it's doable, but with the investment that's going into the wall right now, it's like, we don't really want to mess with that. Yeah. Do you think there's going to be much of an impact on income from not having the kind of meeting space or the event space that you're currently at?
- I think it's just the opposite, John. I think it's the opposite. As Victoria said, that space, the way it has been historically, it's nice for certain kind of events, but has very low utilization. Because it's so open, it's really a hard space to program during the day, especially if you're trying to do something that you don't necessarily want the entire world watching you do.
- from like corporate retreats, big board meetings, other kinds of meetings. It's just not, so this will actually, we believe, increase revenue flow because it'll be more consistent and we'll have a higher utilization of the space over time. We did lose a significant amount of revenue this year during what's currently happening. We had a number of events booked that we had to move
- We had thought about just starting construction as soon as we could get through all of this. But we have the ability to book several events. And we've booked several events through the end of this year. And we've figured we should go ahead and do those and capture as much revenue as we can and then make the changes starting in January. And that honors the commitments that we've already had, which is key on our committee.
- Yeah, Nick, our event manager, is booking events right now through the end of the year just to try and catch up on some of the lost revenue before we go offline again. And how long will this take? I think you said. I'm not sure. We'll know that when we get our final specs. Some of it will go faster than others, because Victoria mentioned some of the internal work is more furniture-based than construction.
- But then I wouldn't want to guess how long it will take to put the floor in and some of the other changes. I'm very supportive for two reasons. One, we're still down in the building. And that structural integrity of putting that floor back seems to be a really good idea. And then the basis of from our consolidated TIF, any of the TIF dollars,
- The grant funding that was given to the university is being used wisely and in a capacity that it doesn't impact the redevelopment commission from a financial standpoint. So I think it's a good plan. Appreciate you guys putting that work into it. Thanks. So in the resolution before you, the RDC would find that the project will enhance the development and economic development of the trades district and will ensure the long-term integrity of the building.
- enable growth of the mill's recurring revenue, and increase the long-term value of this Bloomington Redevelopment Commission asset. Pursuant to 4.01 of the lease agreement, the RDC is approving and consenting to the project by Dimensions Mill to make renovations to the mill that are substantially consistent with those outlined in the exhibit as shown in the presentation.
- Dimension mills shall provide planned specification and design of the project to the RDC prior to performing any work on the mill. And the mill shall comply with all applicable regulations, ordinances, and rules, and shall obtain any necessary permits and approvals as required by law. And that the RDC acknowledges that the project construction is likely to occur on or about January 1st, 2026.
- been putting in the delegated authority to city staff to perform any and all necessary actions to effectuate the purpose of this resolution. OK. If there's no further comments or questions from commissioners, I'll open up to public comment, either online or in person. Seeing none, I will entertain a motion for a resolution 25-80. I'll move approval of resolution 25-80. Second.
- First and a second, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Thank you. Next item on our agenda is 25-81, approval of expenses for furniture, fixtures, and equipment for the forage. It's Jane Cooper Smith. I'm happy to speak to this agenda item. So resolution 25-81 in the whereas clauses explains that
- There was an approved budget of $150,000 for furniture, fixtures, and equipment in the forage budget that was approved in resolution 2372. There wasn't a particular vendor named at that time. And as the project has progressed, it's just become time to wrap up some of these last items. And so earlier this year, construction manager Chris Seeley solicited
- bids for furnishings for the forge and Office Works was the lowest bidder with that package. Sorry, just in transparency, this is like a retroactive approval because the furnishings were purchased and I didn't realize that we were not in process and that we needed to go back and get approval of the specific vendor. So this resolution today
- approves the vendor that was selected. And again, at the time, there were three bids, and we selected the lowest of the three. The second component to this resolution is regarding remaining small wares to finish out the kitchen and audio equipment needs for the meeting space. And in the interest of not coming back with a laundry list of vendors, the mill has suggested that they would
- provide receipts and we can reimburse them for those costs. And staff is supportive of that strategy. And so that's the second component. So the furniture that is from Officeworks is in the amount of $98,489.20. And then the remaining small wares is $13,021.87. We had two other items that were previously approved from this budget.
- So that leaves the remainder of $22,101.93 in the furniture, fixtures, and equipment budget. I'll be happy to take questions. Thank you. Any questions or comments from commissioners on the approval of expenses for furniture, fixtures, and equipment for the forage? Based on the $22,000 that's left over, is that something that may be coming back to us for smallwares in the future?
- We anticipate having a few more items, but no. OK, but those few items that we're discussing in regards to not sure, we don't expect them to overspend at the $22,000. No, we can't. Well, no, we can't. That's why they're verifying. I just want to make everybody aware. We've got $22,000 left, and after that, there's nothing. That's right. The only other item that is out there that we're investigating is tenant signage.
- side, just with the logos. If the tenants want to do bigger signage, they have ability in their lease, but that's on them. But we think it might make sense to have a small monument that'll signage in the front that just shows the logos of the companies that are there. We've been investigating that, but we don't have a proposal. Just fiscally be responsible. You guys very well are. All right. Thank you.
- There are no further questions or comments from commissioners on resolution 25-81. I'll open it up to public comment. Seeing none, entertain a motion on this resolution. I'll move approval of resolution 25-81. Second. Got a first and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you.
- Next item on our agenda is resolution 25-82, approval of TIF funding for the Second Street Sanitary Sewer upgrades for future Hopewell West development. Good evening, commissioners. Kendall Kanoki, engineering department. I'm here with Jane Fleig of the utilities engineering department. And we're here today because Hopewell West, so I've been tasked with preparing the plat, preparing phase one. We're actually out to bid right now, so that project's moving along.
- But as part of the subdivision approval, like any subdivision in the city, utilities evaluates water and sewer and storm sewer capacities, not only on the site that you're developing with the infrastructure that you're installing, but also downstream. So they evaluate, does our water plant have enough capacity for this project? Does the sewer plant? And for Hopewell West, they evaluated the downstream sewer, and they determined that the second street
- The sanitary sewer that serves Hopewell West is going to need some upgrades if the site is developed as the master plan is dictating, which we all anticipate it will. And that was of great interest to me because I am about to fully reconstruct Second Street in 2026. And I would very much appreciate if the Hopewell West development didn't then cut into the brand new roadway, if possible.
- So this request is for the cost of the sanitary sewer upgrades that are needed. This is for CBU to do it in-house, so this would pay for their time and materials for that work, but they would be doing the project, and they would do it in advance of the Second Street project, which is great, and I think would be just better for the community, better for costs overall. There are other options, though. If you don't want to go ahead and fund this at this time, the RDC could fund it at a later date.
- The developers that come in and develop Hopewell West could also fund these improvements. So they're needed in anticipation of future higher demands that will be generated by Hopewell West. They're not imminently needed right now. I think there's probably some public benefit to doing it now just because the sewers are aging and you know it does give the community higher capacity in the sewer. But that's why we're coming for you today to request this funding.
- I think that's all I had. Do you want to add anything, Jane? No, I think you've covered it very well. Thank you. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you. You commented on the master plan, and the master plan's got proposed density. Is that, in part, what directs your decision to need the upgrade? Yes. What would happen if that, if for some reason, this is a hypothetical question, but what would happen
- we opted at some point not to try to reach that density. Is there a magic number somewhere where you say, well, didn't you do that upgrade? Or? We could certainly run calculations to see if changes were made. We're basing everything on what has been published so far, so the information that we have. If there is a feeling that what is
- what the master plan says is not going to be what is developed there, then we would be happy to take a look at that. What's really driving the need for it imminently is the Second Street project and not wanting to tear that street up twice. But yeah, all we have right now is the numbers that are in the master plan. And when does that project begin? So Second Street utility relocation is going to start this year. So you're going to see
- gas mains being moved, water and sewer being moved, electric, all the utilities will be working. But the actual construction will start 2026 and will be finished by the end of 2026. And I think, CBU, you will get, if this funding is approved, you can do this work by the end of the year, right?
- Hopefully, yes, we would have to approach the Board of Public Works. The sewer runs right down the middle of Second Street, so it'd be nearly impossible to try to keep Second Street open. We can complete the job much quicker if we can close the road, so that would be an issue for us. And I anticipate there's gonna be some lane restrictions and possible closures just for other utilities as well. So we're gonna try to minimize those as much as possible, but that is coming.
- In regards to, first off, just to give us the geographic, us and the general public, what's the distance on Second Street? Is it from where Jackson Street is to? It's from about 150 feet west of Rogers all the way to College. OK. So it's that main section. And then on that, approximately what is the age of the existing we have?
- Um, it is vitrified clay. Um, I don't have that in front of me, but it's, it's old. It's old. Okay. And if it's vitrified clay, the chances of inflow and infiltration are high. So in order to actually keep capacity on our plants doing this long range for the city as a whole is beneficial. Yes. And then when we're looking at our cost allocation at this particular point, since we're doing it in an in-house situation, that cost could actually be less because we're utilizing existing
- labor existing equipment with the city. And we're working within our public works and our utilities cohesively. And we're putting something together that then will benefit. If the density lowers, it doesn't hurt. If the density increased, it would still have additional capacity based on what your calculations are. So we're forward thinking for the next 50 years. Thank you.
- I will caveat that if you deviate substantially from the master plan, so let's say you build 40-story towers in there, we'll have to come back and upgrade it again. I'm pretty sure planning's not going to allow that. If you want to have a discussion with planning about that. I just want to say there is a small amount of risk in doing something in advance of whatever you know is going to be there. But not tearing up a future project in order to go backwards, it absolutely
- personal basis or community basis, it drives me crazy when I see cutouts in our roads, because it gaps the tooth, and when we have it, we want Bloomington to have a big smile. So. All right, pretty done. I'm afraid to jump in. This may be a legal question.
- I mean, the TIF funding, at the end of the day, is really for infrastructure. Would this been a project that we could have entertained, regardless of Hopewell even being there? Yes, because it would have served the economic interest of the community as a whole. So even without Hopewell, you could have. But with Hopewell, I mean, it's not. I understand that. Yes.
- This is the kind of thing, infrastructure is the kind of thing that you can, if it's going to serve the economic development, redevelopment of the area, then it can be, the funds can be used from artists. We've put down a lot of sidewalks without putting in new structures. So I mean, it's kind of the same thing. Yeah, an example would be the Cars Farm Trail that is paid out of the West Side Tiff for the county.
- And it extends towards Ellisville, outside of the TIF area. But it does serve the draw of that area of the TIF to employers because of that extra amenity and other things that they have said that attempt to validate that. But yes, so that's a similar kind of thing, where you're outside the actual TIF, but you're
- doing infrastructure changes that advances the interest of the TIF. But here we're not outside the TIF. So, I mean, this is part of the consolidated area anyway. Yeah, I think this, of the 28 listings, I think, or 26, I think this is like number one or two. So, the listing uses for funds. So, this project is inevitable. It's just more of a function of timing, and timing is because you're
- turn up the street anyway, why do it twice? Any other questions or comments from commissioners? If not, I will ask for comments from the public, online, or in person. Seeing none, I will entertain a motion, please, on resolution 25-82. Approval of resolution 25-82 infrastructure improvements on Second Street.
- I'll second. First and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. This is a not to exceed. Correct. Yes. OK. Can go lower, won't go higher. OK. The last resolution in our agenda this evening is 25-83, approval of conveyance agreement with Allen IU Trades District Hotel LLC for redevelopment commission property located within the Trades District. Who would like to speak to that? Danny, do you want to kick this off?
- Yes, I can. What has occurred is there was the agreement that the RDC had with OUN and Peer Development to work on the hotel here. And there was an extension of the due diligence period. Originally, it was 120 days.
- It was extended another 30 days. And we are past the end of that extension. And the contract, conveyance contract, strictly says that you must close within 30 days from the end of that feasibility period. And that did not happen. So simultaneously, while that's going on,
- Peer Development is having some legal issues. They are owned by two people, 50%, 50%. They are deadlocked. They are in court. The court case does not list this as one of their projects. And so I have no idea what their intentions are. However, since the 30-day closing did not occur, there was no extensions given.
- to that in writing by the parties. I believe that the best step going forward is to acknowledge that that contract, that commands contract is void, it's terminated on its own terms, and just go ahead and enter into a new contract with just all you in and let them, I'm not sure how you pronounce that right, but all you in and just move forward with them instead of them
- And Peer was one of many people who could have done what Peer was doing so they can be replaced. But this is a very clean way to do it because, again, that other contract technically terminated on its own terms. And now you can enter into this new contract. You don't need anything from Peer Development. They were appointing a receiver, but that got appealed, so they don't even have receiver. So there's no one really to even work with with Peer Development.
- So this is, by far, a very clean way to just move forward with the project without having to worry about period development because, again, their contract terminated. So this is just a replacement contract, updated a few of the provisions, updated the due diligence period to the end of this year.
- There were the issues with vacating the alley and so forth that kind of kept things from proceeding as fast as they had hoped that they would. And so they would like some additional time to complete the due diligence period. But yeah, thanks, Dana. I think this was a really creative solution to something that was kind of challenging. But I will say that, you know,
- issues aside, there's been a tremendous amount of progress. We've gone through the environmental reviews. We've had preliminary meetings with planning to get started on a pathway to get the site plan and development plan approved. As Dana said, things did kind of hit pause for maybe about an eight-week period or so while we were exploring and then ultimately
- the partial alley vacation. So you couldn't really do any design work until we resolve that. But at the same time, the work with the flag, if you will, for the hotel, the financial stack, all that work has been continuing at a pace. And we're actually in a really strong position to move forward. We do anticipate hitting the gas now.
- that we have some of the parameters on how the building can be better configured on the land by removing that alley. And we're anxious to get moving. Just a little bit of a history, because I know several of the commissioners weren't on the redevelopment commission at the time that the original conveyance agreement was entered into.
- We had went through the redevelopment commission. The city went through a notice of offering for the property. We had three proposals. Aluen had submitted an individual proposal. They had been working with the city for a number of months prior to the natural formal notice. Pure had submitted a separate proposal. And then there was a third party, that hotel group that was
- has Bloomington ties with their Morgan Indianapolis firm. When we looked at the three, Aluin by far had the deepest experience in developing this type of a hotel. They've done, I don't know, probably two dozen hotels across the country. Their bid was the lowest in terms of actual purchase price. Pure came in with a really nice proposal, and they have deep,
- construction experience, doing large-scale development. But they've only been involved in one hotel. And it's currently, I'm not sure what the SAS is. It was under construction at the time in Denver. Then the third group had a lot of hotels, but they've never built or operated a full-service hotel. They have a nice portfolio of like courtyard dance and other kinds of product.
- but nothing at the level that we were looking for. So at our suggestion, Aluminum and Pure came together, and that's how they ended up together. It was more of us kind of going, hey, they've got a better offer. You've got better experience. Maybe you should team up. And so the current agreement that we're asking to approve is at that higher purchase price. So we get the benefit of that.
- Nothing else really changes other than the diligence period. And that's really, really it. And it takes pure out of it. It's just the IUN. They've got plenty of options in terms of construction partners that have deep experience in Bloomington and in our larger regional sectors. So we're not concerned about losing any of those capabilities.
- So we're getting kind of a benefit of the original proposal and having a stronger partner to move forward with. So the delay that caused the original agreement to lapse really was because of PURE's issues? No, I wouldn't say that. It just coincided. I think the delay was mainly the, you know, almost the two, several weeks, almost two months that we were on pause while we were pursuing the alley vacation.
- Everything else has been moving on track. Knowing what you know now in terms of how this evolved and I realized like you said the delay was not so because of peers issues but nonetheless just in terms of having the three proposals and then finding merits and two of them and having them come together on the actual
- Is there anything that you might do differently in the future in terms of simplifying stuff, in terms of essentially not having fewer cooks in the kitchen? Or is that just kind of the cost of doing business? No, I'm not really sure if we would do anything differently. I mean, it kind of worked out better because the purchase price was higher than what Alouan put in. So we're getting the benefit of that and having the partner that we wanted, honestly, from the beginning.
- I wanted to go back and look at our first contract and I didn't have time.
- The general, the payment terms, are they identical? Yeah. Everything else is, everything's the same. So we get a little bit more money, but the payout's gonna be the same. Yeah, and I'll just say that, you know, at the time when we did that, we were looking at a couple of things, just sort of the general economic environment for these kinds of projects.
- and the lack of any, we're not offering any kind of incentive packages for this hotel. Since then, interest rates, I think, right now for this kind of project are probably gonna be north of 7%. So we just kept the terms the way they were, in part because we think that's a good way to do it. We showed that the real upside on this project for the city, for the redevelopment commission,
- is much more on the TIF revenue generation, which as the project has evolved, it's going to be higher than we originally projected because it's going to be probably a bigger investment than originally estimated. Well, and I'm sure I had the same conversation with you the first time around because this is just exactly where my mind goes. But we're going to get paid over four payments, correct? Quarterly payments, yeah. Quarterly payments.
- But if they take the timeline pretty much as written and use all of that time, then our first payment isn't until June of 2030. So it's ways out there. If you look at the building time and the due diligence time, and then they have to operate for 18 months before they have to make a payment, it comes out
- about that. And I'm sure I had said the same thing the last time, so I'm just repeating myself. But I guess I'm throwing that out for everybody to keep in mind that it's a better price tag, but we don't have the payouts way down the road. So just. And that payout is not also delayed.
- In other words, originally, again, I wasn't here, but the original payout, the original payout was... The program was the same. According to John, the terms haven't changed. Everything's been delayed. Everything's been delayed. We're reticking the clock on this. So it was a five-year payout originally. It's a five-year payout. Well, I don't say it's a five-year payout. They don't have to start paying.
- and then the payout starts in June of 30 and then they have a year to pay. That part isn't bothersome. So the only thing that causes a little bit of heartburn, I guess, is that you've got an entity that we hope does a great job and is a great asset, but we're not gonna get paid and they'll have a chance to get underway
- who knows what happens, and then they have to operate and make sure that they can get over the hump, but you don't know what happens. And we haven't paid for the ground yet. So yeah, we'll have a lien on it, but that's as good as it gets. I'm done. I did my speech.
- based upon the fact that we've got a contract that ended. We have the ability to approve this, because that was one of the partners originally. The dollar amount is higher, but we are not legally required to put it back out for an RFP. No, no. It's already been out. It's been an accepted amount. This is just a restructuring of that.
- same deal because the other agreement was terminated. OK. Restructure the deal with the lowest best group to build the hotel. Yes. We've already gone down. No, I'm sorry. The best one for what we're looking for long term. That's purchase price. That's purchase price with the? And both parties, especially them, have put in a lot of
- time funds to get the project as far along as it already is. And it definitely would be inequitable to try to say that you can't. I just want to make sure legally from an RDC standpoint that we are within the parameters of what we've approved, discussed. As John pointed out, it's approximately four years to get paid out. And the only other question I have in regards to it is, in the discussions with all you in, how
- their timeline is looking in regards to what they're actually thinking now that this has been, I'm assuming you've had discussions with them in regards to if this gets approved, what they're looking for. Yeah, I mean, we want to, I mean, their objective is to be open by September, you know, early September 27. Okay. And so we, and we, we have in the discussions we've had with city planning, utilities,
- and others is that we've kind of put a stake in the ground to get everything buttoned up as early as possible, but certainly no later than the December date of 25. Yes, yeah, yeah. So we had a really good meeting with everybody to kind of co-develop a review schedule, so that everybody knows when things are due, what the expected turnaround time is on reviews,
- so that we can bake in that predictability to the schedule. Because that's the only thing I'd like to see in regards to this is the approval of this and then have a realistic time frame that we're looking at. So as we start looking at the funding that's going to have to occur, that we can say, OK, everything happens and no one can predict the future. But that we have at least a realistic time frame that we can say, hey, this is the general public, the populace, and the RDC from a financial standpoint.
- will know where we're looking at for repayment of the land to get it back in the funds to be reutilized and what that additional TIF revenue is. Because part of my concern is the fact that as we approve these projects and we have these timelines, that the TIF would run out prior to us starting to generate funds into it, which the tax base will still increase to all the other individual community taxpayers or tax recipients.
- And there are timing requirements in the agreement. I was going to say, what you just said is actually accelerates a little bit what they actually are obligated to. And so that building, I think this calls for a two-year construction period. And they'd probably have to beat that to get open to when they want to. So that makes my June of 2030 actually potentially a fallacy. It'll be ahead of that. Hopefully, yeah.
- I think that's a season that there's going to be an extra home game or two. So there's a lot of incentives. Oh, I see. Oh, really? That's good. Whatever it takes. And we're still on the same number of units, full service. Oh, yeah. We're going to stay the same, all right? Yeah, I mean, I've got a bunch of different folks. I mean, as recent as last week, who are coming into the project, and I think it's going to be
- It's going to exceed expectations. Thank you for that discussion. Any public comment either online or in person? Seeing none, I will entertain a motion on resolution 25-83. I'll make a motion on 25-83 as presented. I'll second it. We have a first and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Thank you all.
- That's the end of our new business for this evening. Is there any additional items of business to entertain before we adjourn? Seeing none, I'll take a motion to adjourn. So moved. I have one comment. Sorry, Randy. Based upon the circumstances of what we've had to pay for the forged windows and damage that was created over the weekend to the building and the army recruiting
- station across the street here. I just want to make the public and everybody aware that vandalism to public buildings and private buildings should not be accepted in any capacity. Because in this geographic area, the city's paying for it. The government will be paying for it over there also in some capacity. And vandalism to our community buildings in whatever fashion should not be accepted. So if anybody in the public or sees anything,
- Let's try to stop that, because that's not the type of community that we are. Thank you. I apologize, but I can't keep breaking windows in areas. It moves the smile. It does. That was good. Well, I mean, that's kind of it. OK, motion to adjourn. Thank you, John. So moved. OK. Meeting is adjourned. Thank you, everybody.