- Okay, and it's five p.m. Welcome to the redevelopment commission meeting for the city of Bloomingham for August 18th, 2025. Let's start the meeting with a roll call, please. C. Scambaluri, here. Randy Cassidy, present. John West, here. Deborah Meyerson, here. Debra and Robbie, here. Oh, good. Okay. I wasn't sure if I heard you were coming on. You are. Awesome. Staff present, please. Anna Killian Anson, Housing and Neighborhood Development. Christina Finley, Hand Department.
- can be casual hand. Jane Coopersmith economic and sustainable development. And looking at the engineering. Thank you all. So the first item on our agenda this evening is. Minutes for both the executive summary for August 4th and the minutes for the.
- public meeting on August 4th. Any comments or questions, commissioners, if not, entertain a motion. Move for approval. Second. First and a second, all in favor? I'll do it by roll call, because McRobbie's online. So let's do a roll call. See Scambler, yes. Randy Cassidy, yes. John West, yes. Gloria McRobbie, yes. Deborah Meyerson, yes. Motion passes unanimously. Next item on the agenda is the examination of claims register.
- for August 15 2025. Any comments or questions or commissioners on the register? Okay, one question and I don't know if it can be answered. It may talk to maybe on the treasurers and that's the two bond principal payments, which particular bonds to those go to. If we don't know. Sorry, it's on page four or five under the consolidated tip on 4445 and 7 to
- We will have to look into that and get back to you. It looks like it's principle and interest, but I will have to get back to you on exactly which one of those are. Okay, appreciate that if you do that. Just want to try to look what we're dropping our interest down as we go. Thank you.
- that question anything else from commissioners if not entertain a motion for the examination of claims registers from August 15th. Move approval of the claims registers for August 15th 2025. Second. A first and a second we'll do a vote by a roll call please. C. Scambler yes. Randy Cassidy yes. John West yes. Loretta McPauley yes. Deborah Meyerson yes. Motion passes unanimously.
- Examination of payroll register, we have that for August 8, 2025. Any comments or questions from commissioners on this item? Move approval of the payroll register for August 8, 2025. Second. No first and a second. We'll do a roll call vote, please. C. Scambler, yes. Brandi Cassidy, yes. John West, yes. Lauren McRobbie, yes. Deborah Mayerson, yes. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Next, we have our reports of offices and committees. We have a report from the director.
- A very limited one. I just want to bring it to your attention that hand will be at Council for Budget on Wednesday night, starting at 630, I believe it is. It starts at 530. Is it 530? OK. 530, excuse me. So we'll be giving our presentation. This year, they're doing priority-based budgeting. So what we will be talking about is the bucket of affordable housing and homelessness. So stay tuned for that.
- I'm happy to answer any questions, no other reports at this time. When you're talking priority-based budgeting, can you explain a little bit of that in regards to general public? The administration has tried to respond to council's requests to have buckets of priorities. And obviously, in various different departments, work on the same issue. So they're trying to understand how many folks or how many departments are supporting each initiative and what piece of the pie that they have.
- What's that? Kind of like right choice voting. Yeah. So. And what are some of the major buckets? Housing is one. Yeah. Long term economic growth, I think, is one. Economic development is kind of its own bucket. High performing government. So what are we doing to invest in government efficiencies and those things, the dollars that we have to spend just to operate as an organization, housing and homelessness?
- I think are their own category. So I think that's it. Oh, and community health. Community health. And vitality, yeah. How does the priority-based budget affect our budgeting here at the RDC? It won't. OK. No, it's just a different way of looking at it. It's the same thing. It's just kind of identifying what the priorities are and who is dedicating their time and resources to what. To that.
- Sort of an initiative to eliminate some of the silos. Comprehensively all together. So when something comes that needs to be funded or something of that nature, then it would come in to be part of an overall priority for the community as a whole. I think it helps identify what initiatives are underway to support our community goals. Appreciate it. Thank you.
- If that's all for the director's report, we'll ask for a legal report. Just wanted to let everybody know that I sent out a memo earlier regarding the Red Cloud Cross, and I just had a discussion in the hall with one of their people. He's not in the blood donor section, but right now the agreement is back to them, and we're waiting on that signature from them, and then they will bring it back here.
- I informed them that since you had already approved that use, and these are in the details, that once we receive their signed MOU back, then they can proceed with having blood drives. So it's got to go through their
- risk department to be reviewed again. And so that's where it's at. It's in the hands of Red Cross, and hopefully they'll get it back to us. And when is your next event planned for? I do not know. I don't know of any right at the moment, but that doesn't. I don't run the schedule, so I don't know. But anyway, I think we've got that cleared up.
- best we can. So yeah, that's all I have. I'm here for questions. I think typically they were coming about once a week or once every other week, so. Oh wow. I didn't realize. I think we discussed that a little bit, but I didn't realize it was that awful. Yeah, because the primary objective is just to make sure that we're consistent and helpful at all in all areas of the community to make sure that we because once you get used to giving blood, you'll give blood. But once things stop,
- You know, given health circumstances, you never know when you're going to need it. So the more we can do as a community, the better we are. Quick question on legal, since we're on. Where are we at on our Showers West? We have sent out the letters, and we've gotten very few responses so far. We just got a response that I didn't
- have just got it today, didn't have time to get it ready for today, but where we've been negotiating, you know, and they came back with a little bit higher number, so Margie's been handling those negotiations. So we're still in the process. Moving forward on the process, and we still have a timeline in mind? Yes, yes. Yeah, the timeline's still in place.
- It's just balls in their board to respond to this. Thank you. I realize that Miss McClellan is next door this evening. Is there any other buddy here to treasures apart? OK, let's want to make sure no business development update. No business development update today. OK, well, we are on to our new business. Our first item. Can I ask one last question? Yeah.
- project that we're in with Real America. Do we have any timeline on that? Because again, as I drive by and I see these things, it's, you know. They are trying to get tenants moved in within the next month. So our hand inspector was out on Friday, and we did our preliminary inspection. My understanding is that county and fire are to follow after us.
- And so they're actively working on a C of O. They've had numerous snags, more than I've ever seen in any project ever. And they recently had a water intrusion issue that affected about half of the units. So they're going to have to be gutted. But they do have tenants that they're trying to move in within the next 30 days. So it'll probably be a temporary C of O if they can get there. Our inspector did not note a lot of issues when they were there. They were in good shape.
- It's moving through the process. Thanks. Okay, so we're on to our new business. We have resolution 25-102 agreement with the environmental for environmental remediation services. I would like to speak to that. I'll be glad to talk to you about that. And I would also like to congratulate the RDC on reaching over 100 agreements for consideration this year. Maybe I should have done that.
- No, you got candy and it was old, but you bet it out. It's not old. No one will ever take your candy. Just try to be nice. Look what that is. All right. So resolution 2502, as part of our environmental review for 24 CFR part 58 at blocks 4 through 7,
- that was connected by VET. Petroleum related soil, groundwater, and soil gas contamination was identified during investigations at the corner of Rogers and 2nd Street. This does happen to be the former location of a former filling station.
- VET worked with ITEM to reach an approved contamination plan. Technical information that VET has on the project would potentially be lost on a new contractor and it is very important that we follow the contamination plan. We must comply with ITEM. So it's likely that a new contractor would want to gather more information and potentially
- time and money. So we have negotiated this agreement with that for an amount not to exceed one hundred fifty two thousand four hundred eighty six dollars and twenty six cents. For the services to clean up the contamination which I was happily surprised by. Any comments or questions from commissioners of resolution twenty five
- having to clean the site? No. The contamination was not found as part of three separate phase ones, and I believe two phase twos. BET found it during their environmental review. So essentially, we've been skinned on the property when we bought it. So it was not a known UST site. Right.
- It was their investigative work that did uncover the exceedances in the soil. Yeah. This would be the north corner, east, west? Of Second and Rogers. Of Second and Rogers. Yes. Which, from a historical standpoint, had a bulk plant, two gas stations, and a laundromat, or a dry cleaner. OK. So it was inspected as part of the sale.
- And we just accepted, I mean, it sounds negative, but we accepted the results of that study. And if you'll remember, our offer on the Hopewell site was as is. Being tore down. Yeah, I think that there were some contingencies in there, but the language was that we were accepting the as is sale. So there was nothing that we could go back on and say.
- So we're stuck with what has to happen. Correct. I mean, as a community as a whole. Right. Already seen financially particularly. I am pleasantly surprised by the dollar figure in front of me. Initially, I thought it could have been 10 times more. And it could be lower if the world. We'll see. Part of this that I feel is very positive is that this is happening at the same time the Jackson Street on West is going in.
- So they are able to reuse some of the soil, the fill that's already there, which is what drives down some of this cost. So moving some of that dirt down to this site once we get off. Once we excavate it out. So it's efficient. So this 152, 486, 26 includes the excavation portion. So when they're done, will we be able to reuse the site
- and repurpose that dirt itself? Or will we have a vacant piece that we have to monitor in perpetuity? We don't know what kind of restrictive covenants will be there because we don't know what's there until we start digging. That's part of the issue. However, the end goal is definitely that we are able to reuse it. And so a lot of times with the covenants that get attached when we have environmental conditions, it will say something like needs
- not no main level residential living or you know there are. Methods to still get the housing not that we want to build on a contaminated site we're hoping for closure. You know we have the wonderful benefit of having former. Environmental attorney here Dana would you care to add anything. No you're you're saying some point so the one thing with the soil we're not sure we're
- It can go if it can be reused on site or if it would have to go to a facility. They have to do testing on it to determine that. But the hope is the more that you can use on site, of course, the lower the trucking and disposal fees will be. I read on the scope. Didn't it say that the price does include removing it and taking it out if we had to?
- based on what they feel is there. Yeah, it was like 60 trucks. Right. Exactly. And so just to be clear, with the installation of Jackson Street, part of their soil management plan is that as they're digging out dirt, they're placing it in stockpiles.
- They're testing it to confirm what's there. They don't anticipate finding contamination beyond something that's found in base levels, arsenic that's found in our soil. Yeah, everywhere. So if that's the case, then they can reuse that dirt and put it back where we're digging out on the contaminated site. So that's sort of the dominoes we're playing here. At the present moment, that particular
- piece of dirt is already platted out as a separate lot. So any way it goes to this particular point, from a community standpoint, is we needed to move forward to try to get something done on that. It would be a separate piece anyway. It would not stall the entire movement on OPL. No. But we must follow our contamination plan before we do anything. So we're hoping to get a closure from IDEM. But we don't know what's there until we get in there.
- The most important thing is let's get it out of there so we can keep moving. We want some progress. Yeah. And they've committed to having it done by the end of the year. Now that's this portion that doesn't necessarily mean closure. Right. We can't predict what government office will do. I'm just trying to get to physical deadline versus potential in the future because as we try to get this site and hope well done,
- every little thing like that just pushes us back farther. That's right. That's why we got to get one now. OK. Perfect. OK. We got the message. Time's running. This is where we sleep. OK. There are no other further questions or comments from commissioners on resolution 25-102. I'll ask for anything from the public, either online or in person. Not seeing anything, I'll entertain a motion for this resolution.
- I'll make a motion to approve. Resolution 25-102. Oh. And I'll second. OK, we've got a first and a second. We'll do a roll call vote, please. C. Scambaleri, yes. Brandi Cassidy, yes. John West, yes. Lori McRobbie, yes. Deborah Meyers, yes. Motion passes unanimously. OK, next item on our agenda is resolution 25-103, approval of amended secondary plat for Hopewell West. Mr. Kenoki.
- Hi, Kendall Kenoki, engineering department again. So this is an amended plat for Hopewell West. The RDC has already approved the secondary plat for Hopewell West, which has legally established all the lots. They're out there. You can see them on GIS. The problem is that another surveyor started going out and doing some work and realized they didn't have enough information to find the lots in space. So of course, we reached out to the surveyor who did our plat, and they had omitted some very critical information to the plat.
- If you look at sheet 47 in your packet, I guess page 47, this is where they had highlighted all the changes between the two plats. Unfortunately, it's in black and white, so it's really hard to see. But in the color version, it really pops. But all the meets and bounds have been added to all the lot lines. And then there were two dimensions that when they checked every single lot, they found needed to be updated. So those are also noted on here.
- But that is the only changes between the two plots are just the addition of this information. There's no cost to the city. The surveyor wanted to write this and we wanted to get this updated as soon as possible to ensure that all future development can move forward without any issues. The other property owner in the subdivision, BHA has already signed the plot.
- So as soon as the RDC approves and signs it, I can go ahead and get it recorded and done with. I think that's it. Happy to answer any questions for you. We're not paying twice. No, no, no. There's no charge for this at all. OK. The only charge is really my time, but other than that. Which is a charge. OK. The cost of the charges.
- Any other questions or comments from commissioners? Quick question. You said VHA. That's who's got the core building. It's not Brinshore. That's why I'm asking. Brinshore is the subcontractor of VHA. Yeah. OK. Because just like we're here, this is dollars that's going to Brinshore. But it's also part of the VHA agreement. That's correct. OK. So it's duality in construction. And then the administration will be done by the Booking and Housing Authority. Slash Summit Hill Community Development. Summit Hill Community Development. OK. And that's who's got the core building.
- then meets and bounds, and going back to the previous resolution, we're dealing with lot eight on this. Is that correct statement? I always get confused when you talk blocks. I would say, Anna, correctly, eight, nine, and 10, right? Yes, that's correct. Our environmental will take those three lots at the corner, second, Rogers, on them.
- Northwest corner. OK. Got it. These three. OK. So those will be determined. Because the reason I ask that in that depth of that is those will be three lots that really can't have anything done until such time as we get cleared to ride in. We won't move that fast anyway. Right. I know. As you said, time and speed and trying to allocate things. Right. But where are they?
- There's no way that we will have anything going there before we get some coordination with IDEM. We'll have an answer either way. So that could be six months. No, they've been very responsive. And that's part of one of the reasons to continue on with VET is that they've
- have a relationship with IDEM. They have an assigned consultant there. So things will move much quicker as opposed to bringing somebody else up to speed and getting them going. So I am good with all that. I'm just trying to identify if somebody came and said they wanted to bring 500 people and build a five-story building right there. We still can't do that because we haven't issued any offerings on West yet. So we have time for that.
- What you're thinking about would definitely be a conflict if we were off and running, but we're not off and running on West. OK. Well, the RFP will come after we clear this up. Yes. OK. Then last question for Kendall, specifically on Second Street. As we look at the plat and how that affects, is any of this, now that you've got the final, does that assist, help, hurt? And then on Second Street, where you're redoing it,
- How is that Brinshaw or is it the city that's doing the internet coming up at Roger Street at the present moment? That's the city and the city is also doing second street. It's an end up project officially, but everything's being done within the existing right away. This will only help because any surveyors on that project will have accurate information to go off of. So that won't negatively impact us with any change orders or such?
- due to not having the information when the bid went out on that particular section. And then I'll bring up last section, that four foot of wall at the section of First Street and Rogers on the southwest corner, where it switches from a fieldstone concrete to four feet of concrete that matched the old limestone wall. You'll have to look at it.
- Okay, I will say, go along there today because they just finished removing the old wall completely. I know, and they left that four foot section. They're going to remove some more of that. Okay. Yeah, they're not done yet. It'll be nice when it's all done. Oh, it was nice anyway. It just happened to be concrete four feet at the limestone. Just little things. Okay, this works for the city. We don't have to come back. We get the second street and our Rogers stuff done. It'll look as good as it does. Okay, perfect. Thank you. Okay.
- Any other questions, comments, or commissioners? I'm just going to make one quick note that the second whereas from the bottom, just to spell meets and bounds, meets is misspelled. Should be M-E-T-E-S. Just for the record. OK. Any public comment either online or in person? Not seeing any, I will entertain a motion for resolution 25-103.
- I'll make a motion to approve 25-103 as written. Second. We've got a person with the amendment for changing. Oh, thank you with the spelling correction. Thank you. We will do a roll call vote, please. Cease camp of Larry, yes. Randy Cassidy, yes. John West, yes. Lori McRobbie, yes. Wilbur Myers, yes. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you.
- Next item on our agenda is resolution twenty five dash one oh four approval to allow the director of housing and neighborhood development to grant rights of entry to redevelopment commission properties. Or the director I'll speak to this okay there's a lot of times that. Individuals like artists or whatever need access to some RDC property for a short period of time and sometimes
- They can't even come to the RDC because by the time we get here, that time period would be over. So this would just allow Anna to be able to approve rights of entry onto RDC property. And it would also, you know, so if that needs it to do their work, she'd be able to do that. I did put in there that she, during her report, would include every
- uh, every meeting any rights of entry that she had so that if you see anything that's concerning, um, or something that, uh, uh, or want to know more about, then, uh, you would have the information, uh, that it was, uh, approved. Um, and so I would think that anything that was super important long term would need to come here, but this is,
- kind of handle the smaller short term rights of entry for if it was to do some drilling or it was just procedural type stuff. So I thought about it and I thought this might be a good way to, because sometimes things happen, we don't even have a resolution because it's over again, it's over with before. But I'd rather have a good
- a paper trail from your director as opposed to not having a paper trail at all. So that's why I put on here that, again, that she would have the power to approve them and would have to regularly report those to you so that you knew what was going on. And if it doesn't work out, you can always
- If it works out great, then it'll be one less thing you'll have to worry about doing when it comes through. And we would still require the indemnities.
- to be signed for anyone that goes onto RDC property. I think that there's times where maybe BPD wants to do a training exercise in the garage or something like that, and they've missed the training windows because we didn't have a meeting or something like that. So obviously, we will discern. This is not just a blanket everybody gets access, and I'm just going to check the box. We're still going to filter that out.
- And it's built in here that you report back to us every time. What is the duration times? Is this like a day, a week, a month? I don't think we're talking about months. I think we're talking about days. OK, that's why I was just looking at this, because it becomes a long term situation. And this resolution could pass date the next administration or two. Yeah, I would anticipate that we're only talking about days. Anything that's more long term would require a resolution, I would think.
- or we would be pursuing resolution. Anything long term is likely spending money, too. Right. Exactly. And this is no money. So OK. I'm just trying to identify. Put that around. And then the only other thing about the resolution, I have a question. And this may be just because of municipal code 2.1A. The RDC controls the housing and neighborhood development?
- You are the governing body of the housing and neighborhood development. We approve all the budgets and all those expenses. The term controls always concerns me. The reason why is it's because we're a participating jurisdiction and entitlement community as part of HUD. We receive the annual allocations of CDBG and home, but we're required to have
- something called a public participation plan. And our public participation plan puts the RDC as the governing body. Of the entire hand department. That is correct. Not just the TIF, but also all of the CBDG and the home funds. That's right. So that's why you have our claim and payroll registers. That's why we bring you contracts that are being funded by HUD, but not TIF.
- for approval. When I see the word controls, it always triggers me a little bit to say, OK, keep working together. One of the things, the optics for any HUD stuff that often gets missed, and especially CDBG, is the economic development piece. And there is a huge, huge piece of economic development in CDBG projects.
- So I would imagine that that was part of the process originally. Although I wasn't here, so I can't say for sure. Just reading through it in detail. That makes sense. All right. Appreciate it. I have two questions. Any estimate, just roughly, about how many times, given this new potential, that's likely that these might come up? Just curious. Just rough estimate.
- I mean, I can think of maybe two times in the last month or so, and they were mostly related to fire police training exercises. There may have been a time when we were going to allow use for, or we were going to bring you a resolution for approval for an artist to go into the 4th Street space, but the timing was not right, so it was not something that we could do.
- I think two to three times in the last month. OK. Well, that's helpful. My other question is, I think this makes a lot of sense. I'm just wondering, is there anything that could be built into this where it could be learned annually, or is it?
- built like that and I just missed it just because it's a protocol that I could see over time, over years, over different administrations, you know, stuff gets forgotten exactly like, oh, it's supposed to be reported to the RDC that this is happening or, you know, whatever it is so that if it were renewed annually, it would still be kind of a one and done, but it would keep it afresh in terms of young people's minds and just kind of, so I'm just asking if that's something that could be accommodated in this resolution.
- As far as I'm concerned, it sure can. It could be one of the first resolutions that gets approved at the beginning of the year, like the meeting schedule, like the appraisals. We do some of the same resolutions over and over. I don't know what Dana thinks. Yeah, maybe we could do that. You've got it in here, unless extended by the RDC. So it'll expire on December 31st, 20.
- It's not an evergreen situation. It's something that would go into the first of the year along with our standard. Yeah, so given, as you know, that it already says it expires, but maybe if the desire and expectation is that it could be continued, if there's, again, I don't know what the standard language might be for that, but something that would just at least uphold that expectation that, yes, it's an expiring resolution, but one that will be revisited in January of each year or so. Sure.
- It would just be a way to keep it in perpetuity, but again, kind of fresh on the agenda so that people see it, remember it, know how it works. I think it's a great idea. Things do get lost over time. Yeah, exactly. Right. And nobody knows how it got that way or how it's supposed to be. And like, oh, what resolution was that? That was from 20 years ago. And oh, gee, look, it says that we're supposed to do whatever. Exactly. So just if it's part of the operating kind of mode of the RDCW. Brilliant.
- I don't see where it says it expires. It's number four on the second page. Once extended by the RDC and the resolution, the authorizations provided under this resolution shall expire on December 31, 2025. Mine doesn't say that. Mine doesn't say it on mine. Can I scroll down to it? Well, you know what? Number five. I'm gonna take electronics. You know what? I'm gonna hit it. It's exactly what.
- I also did the same thing. I was on tech guys. It's number four. Can you add that? Yeah, I can add a five that says that this resolution shall be... Why don't you just modify four? Because it ties in the same thing. We'll get this. I can get that.
- We'll talk slow for the next resolution. Do we want to revisit this just till we have the final language? Okay, let's do that. We will table that and move back to that. Our last resolution on
- Tonight's new business is resolution 25-105 agreement with tech electronics of Indiana LLC for an access control system. Who would like to speak to that? I will speak to this. So resolution 25-105 brings an additional expense from tech electronics. Or sorry, it brings a contract for a previously approved expense. So in resolutions 2572 and 2598, we
- notified the RDC that there would be additional charges to this furniture fixtures and equipment line. Those expenditures were approved, but we didn't have the contracts in hand at that time. And so based on the scope of work provided, Dana drafted an agreement that allows us to secure these services.
- Previous services from Tech Electronics were for networking. As you know, the Forge is a super high tech and secure facility. And so there are just more services needed than what were initially included in the scope of service. So these services, this contract is for badge access readers and the door locking mechanism that allows access in and out of the building that way. I think that's it in a nutshell.
- You approved it. This is just the contract to paper it up. I do just want to chime in that on the last whereas clause, it's referencing a fund number that is not the consolidated TIF fund number. The correct consolidated TIF number should be 44451515900253990.
- Just FYI, we can correct it before signatures. But I would like to make sure that it's in the record that if we're talking consolidated tip, that it's the 444. It's coming out of the 444 account, or what I refer to as 444, which is a completely different number now. 4445 is a consolidated tip. Is that correct? Yeah. 4445, 15, 15.
- 9002-53390. Is it 53390 and not 53990? 53990. OK. Yeah. You got that? Yep. Is it time for questions? It is time for any questions or comments from commissioners now that that phone number has been cracked.
- I am confused. OK. Is this a, this was not part of the original quote? The original FF&E, this was not part of it? So, no. And why would that be? I think we under budgeted that category, to be honest. I think that we, I think the demands for this building
- for the tech equipment especially is higher than what was included in that line. So there were actually three total charges from tech electronics. The original scope was under contract with building associates. The second expansion of scope was a contract directly with the redevelopment commission. And then this is the third expansion of those service, third and final. So I think at each time,
- I think it may relate to the way that those services were procured. We were getting exactly what we were asking for in that moment, but we weren't taking a global view of what the building needed to have it all buttoned up. So this is the last invoice for Tech Electronics. But I will say, to the point of under budgeting in that FFE line, there are two additional tech-related charges that I know of that will be coming in. The project remains under budget.
- But there will be a request to fund elevator cameras and I believe exterior cameras for security. And then from what I understand, that's the total of FF&E requests for the full project. I thought we were there when we were at 2598, but this is just the situation at the end of the project as they're wrapping it up.
- So all this technology is going to require constant maintenance. Who's responsible for that? I would have to look in the Mills agreement, but I believe it would fall to them. I don't know if you want me to hurry up and look right now. Well, I think it's easy to keep adding stuff and paying for it. And then it breaks down, and it's going to.
- And then they're going to come back and say, well, we're going to replace it. And it'll be ongoing forever. So at some point, we need to say, enough's enough. We've done our part. And somebody needs to take over the repair, maintenance, and continue on without us funding everything. Yeah. I mean, I see this as a capital expenditure related to the build out of the project, which was square. Like, that was the RDC's.
- responsibility, but I believe that the way the maintenance, repair and maintenance is handled is RDC is really looking at exterior envelope, and Mill is responsible for interior. So I can bring that back in our next meeting. Well, I think it's important, and as you, the two other things that you added to this list, cameras, or exterior cameras,
- But I mean, I just can't see the RDC being responsible for the ongoing maintenance of exterior or interior tech equipment. Yeah. Although, I mean, their intent is to protect the asset of the building. I have the list. I think that I've been sharing with you guys that separates the RDC responsibility versus tenant responsibility.
- Under tenant responsibility, it says repair and maintenance of all electronic and telecommunication equipment and soft goods. Thanks. If I could just add one thing about the cameras are not just protecting the envelope of the building, they're protecting everybody and everything inside it. I would agree with what John is getting at here. The initial build out may be one thing, but ongoing maintenance upgrades,
- Replacements all that kind of stuff has to become part of you know the maintenance of the building and the programs that are in it itself So I don't know how we Make that clear Let me this is based on our agreement with the mill and so the art is that what you read is that part of the lease? This is all from the lease and so I just
- Separated out our responsibilities in the least just to make it very clear who's doing why sometimes you said that I did I'd be happy to share it again I'm happy to put it in the minutes so that the public can have access as well So our DC responsibility on the mill replacement of the mills exterior structure as necessary including doors and windows replacement of the roof and solar panels replacement of mechanical systems electrical plumbing and HVAC
- other than those referenced in one of the exhibits, repair of tuck pointing on the north side of the premises, painting and repair of ceilings remaining unrepaired from original renovation. Everything else is on them. There's a pretty long list. Sorry, Anna, is that the lease with the mill? Because what applies to the forge is the forge management agreement. Oh, wait. So that was the mill. Sorry, you said mill. Let's get into the forge. We have the forge as well. Thanks.
- Well, she's looking at that. I want you to know that in resolution 25-72, this amount was included in that when you extended the budget. So this is just the agreement to get the work done for that value. And since it's an agreement, it has to come to you. So this was part of 25-72 that extended the budget
- to 153. I'm not opposed to doing it. That's not my I'm just concerned we keep adding. And I haven't heard we haven't had a conversation about maintaining it. Other than it's in a document that we probably all need to be refreshed on. So it does spell out for the forge that the repair and maintenance of all electronic and telecommunications equipment is on the tenant. There are very few things on the RDC side for the forge.
- Replacement of the forge's exterior structure as necessary, including doors and windows, replacement of the roof, including the green roof system, replacement of mechanical systems, electrical, plumbing, elevator, and HVAC, and repair and maintenance of the roof and solar power system. That's it. Everything else is on. That's why when there was the vandalism, I reviewed that and I determined that to be maintenance.
- because there was no structural defect that caused the windows to break. So it wasn't on the RDC to pay for those window repairs. It was on the mill. And in there, Lisa, it further goes on to say, replacement or repair maintenance of information, IT equipment, including servers, wireless network, infrastructure, and any other IT or telecommunications equipment. So it says it wants, generally, but then says it again.
- Thanks. I'd answer my question. One quick question, since you brought up the cameras that are going to be asked for. That's my understanding. Could we wrap it all into one? One final resolution. One final resolution in regards to cleaning it up rather than doing two additional ones or whenever those come in. I'm just trying to clear this whole thing up. We're so close. I mean, we're at the end of it. And I submitted the EDA.
- grant paper closeout paperwork last week. So that was a big milestone that I wanted to do some final reporting to you guys. So I do think we're at the end of the line here. The way to do that would be to authorize, say, Anna to sign, or the corporation council to sign those agreements, the remaining tech. Do we know what the costs are? No. I'm sorry? Go ahead.
- The remaining tech work that those agreements could be signed by Anna would not have to come to you. If you wanted to do I'm just trying to identify with the additional cost is because at the present moment in twenty five seventy two we approved and increase the budget right which included which included this but didn't include the cameras per se. And I was just giving a notification that I anticipate two additional expenses I don't have those
- invoices yet I don't have contracts in hand or I would have tried to handle them today but I take the point I think we can strive for efficiency and also transparency so we can try to be really. So to your point Randy you mean take those last two and roll them into one? Yeah roll them into one so we're not doing it two more times on that and you know I don't because I'm assuming based on reading the contract the time frame at the end of the year that
- Tech is going to come down and try to do it all at the same time. This is it for Tech Electronics. They're waiting for a signature on this, and then they're going to start ASAP. Yeah, they're going to start this portion. Right. But then there's a different company that is different vendor for elevator cameras. And I haven't seen anything about exterior cameras. I just know that that's something that they're requesting. Anything I'm doing for security and safety. That's why I'm being vague, because I just don't have that information yet.
- But I think just I take the point. It's dragging on, and we can try to button it up in one fell swoop. In the 2572 and 2598, Mr. Fernandez indicated that we were under budget overall, over budget on our FF&E. It's still under budget. My main objective is just to make sure that as these add-ons occur, that we're still under budget. And to John's point, that we're so let's be able to shoot. The next time you have to bring something to us, why don't you bring us
- those two comparisons, so we can verify that we are under budget for the program. Yeah, and I have my draft numbers that I've hesitated to share them publicly yet. I just want to dot I's and cross T's, and then I think we're there. All right. So approve this one. There'll be other vendors, potentially another vendor that will be coming to take care of the cameras on this facility. Yep, pretty much. There's a second place on your resolution on page two, the references.
- The wrong phone number again. Number three. It should be here in two places. So four four four five one five one five nine zero zero two five three nine nine oh. I change it in both places. With that.
- Any other questions or comments from commissioners? Open it for public comment online. Nobody's here in person. Not seeing any. We will entertain a motion, please. I'll move. Approval resolution 25-105. Second. Second. First and a second. We'll do a roll call vote, please. C. Scambaleri, yes. Randi Cassidy, yes. John West, yes. Lorinda Grabby, yes. Deborah Meyerson, yes. Motion.
- Passes unanimously for 25-105. And is the timing enough for us to return to 104 for the revised language? Yes. So for 25-104, I
- push five down because that's usually our last item. So number four says this resolution shall expire on January 31st of each year unless extended by the RDC. That way it'd have to be revisited every January. Sounds good. Can you read that again? This resolution shall expire on January 31st of each year unless extended by the RDC.
- Okay. With that amendment, do we have, I don't think we need a public comment on this yet, did we? We tabled it before we went to public comment, so I'll just open it for that online. Anybody not seeing anything, I'll entertain a motion for 25-104. Move approval of resolution 25-104 as amended. Second. First and a second, we'll do a roll call vote, please. See Scandaleri, yes. Brandi Cassidy, yes. John West, yes.
- Yes. Yes motion passes unanimously thank you. Okay well we are at the end of our new business anything for other business or general discussion that we should touch on tonight. I have one item just as the redevelopment commission the city of Bloomington you know we've lost one of our great redevelopers and citizens as of this weekend and I think just publicly need to recognize is
- the community when we look at the heart and the soul of our downtown and the buildings and historical basis have been placed that you know fail cook was one of the original people to make things happen that we're fortunate enough to be involved in to continue that kind of heritage. Okay well thank you for adding that anything further this evening if not I'll take a motion to adjourn so moved.
- Okay, thank you everybody.