- Welcome to the City of Bloomington Redevelopment Commission meeting for September 15, 2025. We'll start
- the meeting with a roll call, please. Laura McRobbie, present. C. Scambillari, here. Randy Cassidy,
- present. John West here doing electrical work. Deborah Meyerson here. We have staff present, please.
- Christina Binley, hand department. Anna Killian Hanson, hand department.
- Thank you all. So first item on our agenda is minutes from September 2nd, 2025.
- Any questions or comments from commissioners? If not all, invite a motion, please. Move for approval.
- Second. We've got a first and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously.
- We do not. We are all here in person, at least for today. Next item in the agenda is examination of
- claim register. We have September 12, 2025 for $77,669.42.
- Any comments or questions from commissioners on the examination of point registers? If not, I will entertain
- a motion, please. Move approval of the claim registers for September 12th. Second. I've got a question.
- Go ahead and second, then I've got a question. Second. On page three, the Trinacom payment, should that
- be out of that account or the TIF account?
- Who is it? It's Tronicom, T-R-O-N-I-com, page three. I don't know who that is. I don't know who submitted
- that claim. Well, I was looking at what the description was. And it just looked to me like it would
- have been a TIF expense.
- Because it's a capital expense, isn't it? It's not a routine maintenance or. Jane, it's for the Forge.
- It's coming out of the 2519 account. It's doing an install, though.
- I think it's an enhancement. That's our tech electronics charge. And it is installation and their invoice.
- All right. Services. So I think you're right. So Jessica, that would mean? We'll do an expense adjustment. Good eye.
- Any other questions or comments? Thanks for the catch. One question on two of five, and it's just got
- to do with the Corps, Bloomington Housing Authority. That's the payment of four. Is that the fourth
- payment? Is that all of them? Or is there additional payments that could be occurring? The Corps? I
- would have to look it up. I'd have to look it up. Hold on. Anna, do you know?
- I'm trying to understand, where are you seeing this? Well, it's under the hand department on page two
- of five. It's one of the payments. I'm just verifying how many more we have to go, I think.
- What was it, a million? Two? I'm sure there's probably more payments. We have a lot more payments. They
- have not drawn down hardly all of it. I want to say they're...
- I'm sorry. I don't quote me on this because this is off the top of my head. I know that they've only
- turned in maybe about $600,000 worth of claims so far. So we're not there yet. OK. I just saw application
- number four. So I was just wanting to verify the numbers. OK. Thank you. So with the redirected expense
- to the TIF as
- described by Mr. West. We have a first and a second. Would that amendment all in favor say aye? Aye.
- Any opposed? Passes unanimously as amended. Thank you. Next item on the agenda is the payroll register
- for September 5, 2025. Any comments or questions from commissioners? Move for approval.
- Second. We've got a first and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously.
- Now we're onto our reports from offices and committees. Do we have a report from the director? I know
- that there's something in the packet. Well, there is one in the packet. I do want to just go over a
- couple of things with you guys. So as noted in the packet, we did receive our grant agreement from HUD
- last week. It's been fully executed.
- As of today, what that means is that they have accepted our consolidated plan, our annual action plan,
- and we are now able to move forward with our allocation of a little over $1.3 million. So big pats on
- our backs because that was a lot to get through, but we are there. We do need to commission members
- to serve on the 2025 Citizen Advisory Commission.
- one for physical improvements, and one for social services. Right now, it's only two days that would
- require your attention, November 7th at 5.30 PM and November 14th at 5.30 PM. I'm not sure if we have
- any volunteers to do that. And I apologize. I know you guys are already so committed with this commission,
- but we would appreciate any help we could get. Anna, do you mean the 6th and the 13th? Yeah, because
- those are Fridays.
- at 530, which seems a little odd. That is the calendar that I was provided. It sounds like maybe they
- didn't update it from the year previously. So the 6th and the 13th, right, it should be Thursdays. If
- the 6th and the 13th are the corrected dates, I know that I will be away on the 6th, so not available,
- unfortunately. Otherwise, I would be happy to volunteer. I'm actually traveling both weeks or else I
- would do it.
- I'll be here on the 6th, but not the 13th. I'll do physical, if someone wants to. It doesn't matter.
- I'm here. I can't do the 6th. I could do the 14th. 13th. Or 13th. Is it possible? So we could record
- the 6th, because I believe the voting is actually taking place on the 13th. So the 6th would be the
- presentation. So if we were able to provide you guys with
- a video and audio of the presentation, could I get a member that would come for just the one day on
- the 13th? I would do social services if that could be arranged for the recording of the sixth. I really
- appreciate it, and I'm sorry to ask. I'll follow back up with you individually following the meeting.
- So also on the director's report, College Square, we're continuing to have some roof leaks.
- We've been forced to deal with it while we still have tenants in the space, especially since Indiana
- Legal Services is upstairs where a lot of the leaking has started to occur. Again, not trying to break
- the bank, just trying to make sure that we're patched enough to make it through whatever we're doing.
- Hopewell, I'm sure you guys have heard that during the remediation, we did uncover three fuel tanks.
- on the first bucket we hit one on the second bucket we hit one and on the fifth bucket we hit one but
- the good news is they are out of there at this point we do have some additional testing that we have
- to do now and you do have an item on your agenda as a result of this same with 714 south roger street
- when that got in there and i know i mentioned this last week or we'll try to our last meeting that there
- is some additional
- mold growth than what they had originally anticipated, so they're going to need to demo a little bit
- more. We are having some issues at Hopewell Common. We're having transients take off some boards from
- the swings. We're not really sure why, but it's continuing to happen. We're also having some other vandalism occur.
- The HVAC at the Trades District garage, we're still working on. We think we're getting there, and we
- do have techs going out again this week. So that's it for my report. Moving on to other officers. CLARE
- DUDALE. I've got a question. Anna, is there, we don't need to get into detail. Does the administration
- still intend on potentially utilizing 714 South Rogers?
- Yes. OK. Do we have any idea when something might occur on that, Anna? Not to put you on the spot, I'm
- just trying to identify, because we continue to spend money on a building that we had a cost to tear
- down. It is underway. I mean, part of the exercise right now has been to really look at our financial
- numbers just to see what can we afford, what can't we afford.
- how much is left on the life of the TIF and then how, what have we committed to thus far? Just so that
- we're looking at the whole picture. We don't want to get in over our heads here. And so that's been
- an exercise that Jessica has been working on. And so I think we're getting closer to a point where we
- feel comfortable moving forward. I do think that it's going to be utilized one way or another
- I mean, the bad thing about the 714 building and something that we've talked about previously is that
- during demo, they cut the main to the building. So it had no electricity. And trying to get it electrified
- again was a real challenge. Add in the fact that each room is individually heated and cooled. So it's
- not just go get the furnace on to dry off the air. It's individually heated and cooled rooms, which
- makes it complicated. So the only thing that can be really
- have controlled air in an air handler for the common spaces. Well, when you have a moisture intrusion
- issue, no electricity, mold growth. I mean, it's just been a recipe for disaster here. That being said,
- I do feel comfortable with this process. The business that's in front of me this evening, it's demo
- work that would need to be
- undertaken no matter what. It's just at this point that we'd be best to go ahead and get some materials
- out of there so that we don't have any conducive conditions for further mold growth. But yeah, it was
- a comedy of errors with that particular building. And my main concern on it, as you said, is from a
- fiscal standpoint and what we're looking with SB1, what we can financially afford. And we're looking
- at a building that we've been dealing with in and out for several years. And at some point, do we just
- pull the plug and build a new police station. But personal opinion on that? So it's just I hate to keep
- spending dollars on that particular building when we're talking biologics and mold growth and we're
- looking to rehab it into something else as a public use. So. Duly noted, but again, I do think that
- we would be spending this much, if not more, on demolition anyway at some point.
- Looking back over previous things, it was $250,000 to tear it down when we tore the hospital, but that's
- been a couple years ago. So we seem to have spent more than that just trying to save it. At some point,
- and I'm trying to think of what's a reasonable, let's say, even end of calendar year to have a checkpoint.
- I mean, quarterly, it would make sense to do this, and that would just be the end of this month in terms
- of looking at how much money has been spent
- you know, maintenance and repair so far, review what the maybe current cost of demolition might be.
- It might even just be updating the previous quote based on inflation or something just something rough,
- not to spend money to get the estimate, but just to get and to compare that and then to get the timeline
- for at least just, you know, what the possible
- use of the building might be in terms of renovation, et cetera, just to kind of try and have some decision
- points to look at. So I'm just asking, one might be a reasonable time to have all of that information
- in front of us to review to just have as a reference point.
- I believe that we could probably have something to you rather quickly for that review. That being said,
- September is going to be a very busy month for that building. We're going to have a lot more information
- to share with you, likely October, November. OK. Is that something that we could maybe
- have monthly or bi-monthly just to kind of have it on the radar because otherwise just stuff keeps coming
- in and it's just it's that trickle effect right of like a little bit here a little bit there but just
- to be like okay here's the revised calendar here's the total this you know to date and then again at
- least the an updated cost of demolition just for comparison purposes at least it just helps with
- maybe understanding the context of individual requests like mold remediation. Yep, absolutely. Because
- we're to the same point on your report dealing with the College Square building. We have one tenant.
- Is that a correct statement? And then we've got Weddle brothers. Two? Well, Weddle as well, yeah. Well,
- yeah. I would like to hope that for free rent, Weddle's would fix the roof, but that won't happen.
- But as it is, I mean, the great people, I have no issues. We cut our deal with them. But my main thing
- is we're looking at two buildings at this present moment that we're looking to reutilize or to remove
- in order to put our convention center hotel. And I just don't want to continue to put little bits of
- money, as Deborah indicated. I'd like to know what that whole thing is and an idea of what we're going to do.
- So we can be as fiscally conservative as we can, which I know you are, Anna. No questions. And then
- the SB1 has gutted a lot of things. So with that, we want to kind of look at that. So to Debra's point.
- Absolutely. And you know, Indian Legal Services lease is coming to an end. So when that terminates,
- we really won't have such a need there until we can decide the future use.
- Is that the end of the calendar year for their lease? Or what's the, I don't, just remind me the end
- date? Yes. Okay. And they have indicated that they might be able to get out earlier. Okay. That'd be
- nice just to have one less thing to shepherd along here. Okay. Can I ask one other question?
- Please do. Hey, Anna, you kind of, you glossed over the vandalism at Hopewell Commons, but do we have
- a plan of some sort to try to mitigate that problem?
- Yeah, we're working right now with our MSI team and then with Parks as well. So MSI is employed by Parks
- to patrol the B line and switch yard. And then we also have a Hopewell patrol. So we're trying to make
- sure that we have full coverage over there. That being said, it seems like the issues are happening
- after 2 AM.
- So we're working on a plan to address that. OK, thank you. OK, thank you for that report. Next on our
- agenda? Other reports. Yeah, next report on our agenda. Sorry, that's what I was trying to say. I'm
- here for questions, but I have nothing specific. OK, thank you. Do we have a treasurer's report? No
- treasurer's report at this time. Thank you. We still have enough money.
- We'll ask that every time. Do we have a business development update? I don't think I have anything for
- today. Thank you. OK. Thank you all for being available and present. So we're on to our new business,
- which the first item on our agenda is resolution 25-116, the approval of an addendum number two to the
- Vet Environmental Engineering LLC agreement regarding 714 South Roger Street, such as we were just discussing.
- Who'd like to speak to that? I'm happy to speak to it again. So this is an addendum to an already passed
- resolution for mold mitigation at the 714 building. When they got in there, they found that there was
- mold growing even on steel and just on the main level, at least,
- So it's going to require an additional amount that would increase it by $50,000 for the remediation
- for a total not to exceed of $75,000. Thank you. Any questions or comments from commissioners on resolution
- 25116? If not.
- I will welcome a motion. No one wants to move from old. All right, I'll move approval of resolution
- 25-116. Second. We've got a first and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? No. So we've
- got four in favor and one opposed.
- Next item on the agenda is resolution 25-117. This is addendum number one to an agreement also with
- VET Environmental Engineering for environmental remediation services at Hopewell. Who would like to
- speak to that? Hi. Me again. So as you're aware, we approved VET to go in and do the remediation.
- contamination remediation at Hopewell West. So primarily at the corner of 2nd and Rogers Street. Again,
- when they got in there, they ended up hitting three fuel tanks. And so as a result, the costs have increased
- to dispose of these oil tanks. So the original resolution was for $152,486.26.
- The addendum adds $63,404.33. So, something that's required, it's something that we really needed to
- take care of, and this is still aligning with our IDEM contamination plan as well. It just doesn't align
- with our budget. I know, but I have to say that
- I am pleasantly surprised by the amount for the contamination cleanup. I was actually originally anticipating
- significantly more than both the original contract and the addendum. Was there any indication that there
- were tanks? They just didn't know where they were as opposed to these were not a complete surprise,
- right? I mean, there's some indication of what this land use was. So is the additional just because?
- we'll know when we see it and the kind of thing, or just help me with understanding in terms of what
- the due diligence was before the digging started and then what they found and how that all adds up.
- I'm going to let Dana, who was a former environmental consultant, answer a lot of this. But let me just
- phrase this by saying that this site is one of the most studied sites that I've ever seen. We've had
- three phase ones and at least that many phase twos.
- with including sonar radar to try and detect where any tanks might be. Dana, you want to kind of explain
- from your point of view? Yeah. Basically, they did use technology to try to find underground tanks.
- And it came up inconclusive that there wasn't. And the tanks were full. And so therefore, as far as
- water, I'm sorry.
- They were full of water, so therefore there was no hollow areas for them to have encountered. I actually
- haven't read that particular study, but that was done. And there was a number of sampling done, but
- it just so happens where you put down the holes and where you actually find the tank.
- And to be honest, these three tanks were up against the road. To me, there could be additional tanks.
- Because they're, looking at the sand board maps, when I looked at them, it looked like there were two
- generations of gas stations there. The first one is shown in 1947, I believe, and it had three tanks
- behind the building at Setcaddy Corner.
- These are along the roadway and these were 10,000 gallon tanks. In 1947, you did not use 10,000 gallon
- tanks. Two, three thousand gallon tanks were more the norm. So it is possible as they continue doing
- their work and go farther west that they could encounter. Now those tanks may have been removed. They
- may not have. There's just no way.
- of knowing. I know that on one site that I had back when I did environmental work, there was two generations
- of gas stations. And when they built a new building, they poured the foundation over top of the old
- tanks. So the only thing I can tell you is on sites like this, you just don't know what you're going
- to find until you get into them. You really don't. I know that other site.
- locally where all the work was done and they ended up finding that there was a small gas station where
- none was ever reported to have been and tanks remained that had to be dealt with. So I'm not surprised
- personally that they found tanks here. I am actually
- happy the fact that $60,000 to deal with the tanks is actually not that bad, to be quite honest. And
- so because they were already there, they already had equipment. I do not feel that it was a bad price.
- But on a site like Hopewell that has been part of the downtown and used for so many
- century plus, there's going to be things there that you just don't know until you encounter them. But
- they did try with the technology to try to locate these things. It was just inconclusive and they didn't
- locate them that way. There was no way to know from the aerial photographs that were in the reports
- that I looked at or the Sandborne maps for the 1963 didn't show where those things were located.
- the second generation. So there was nothing to typically indicate that those were right there in that
- location. So that's my two cents. Okay, that's good, just to get some perspective on that. A follow-up
- question, Dana. I suppose there's been no soil testing to determine whether we've got some soil mitigation
- that's going to have to be followed up with in these
- in the area at these times? There had already been soil gas sampling in the general vicinity. And I
- have not heard what they were doing for other waste management. So I can't tell you for sure. So as
- part of our soil management plan, testing was required.
- And so yes, we've had a ton of soil samples taken before, during, and after contamination. But was it
- done at the specific spots where these tanks are, or is this going to be a new surprise for quality
- of soil? I don't think that it's going to be a surprise. So one of the benefits of doing this project
- while we have the Jackson Street under construction
- was the soil management plan requires that when you're digging, that you take samples of the dirt that
- you're digging. So as they're digging up for the Jackson Street project, they were taking samples of
- it, confirming that it was clean before they put it back down into the contamination spot. They dug
- down until they reached clean soil. It is my understanding that we now have a clean site. It's just
- we're waiting to dump the
- particular contamination barrels and fluid, which are in a holding tank right now until we can get the
- sample results back. We've approved an expedited sampling. So the lab should be getting back to us instead
- of in three weeks, hopefully in 10 days from the time of sampling. So more information to come.
- That being said, we had no indication on blocks four through seven that there was additional contamination
- beyond some arsenic in the soil up towards the corner building on 1st Street. So if there are more tanks,
- we're not aware of them. It hasn't been part of any of the studies that have flagged that. But we have
- had a ton of studies. I mean, a ton. I will say, too, that in looking at the US
- disclosure spreadsheet that was attached to the amendment that they do have soil disposal. They do have
- triaxles. They do have holding or the tanks for the liquids. So it appears that those and it does have
- a significant amount of analytical testing. So it appears that those have been accounted for. Oh, I
- see that now. Anna, I appreciate what you've said about this being one of the most studied sites you've
- ever worked with. And this is where I get well beyond my area of expertise. But we seem to get a lot
- of inconclusive
- when it would really be helpful to have data, is there testing we are not doing? Is there technology
- we're not using that would be somehow more reliable? Again, this is where I'm out of my area of expertise.
- But if it's the most studied site and we're still being surprised, that concerns me a little. Well,
- let me just say that it was not very clear that we had an issue until we
- started our environmental review, our part 58 environmental review with VET. So there's been a multitude
- of consultants on the site, many different ones. And so I can't say that the technology has, that we're
- missing something on the technology. I can't tell you why things occurred the way they did, but we also
- relied on studies that were done
- on behalf of other organizations, not on behalf of the RDC until recently. Go ahead. No, I'm done. And
- that we're doing, they came and found this. They weren't one of the previous individuals that did look
- at this. They were not. So we had a couple other inconclusive individual
- companies that did that, that flat missed it. And then we, as in me, when I voted to buy the hospital
- side, I expected a clean side on the hospital. So while we may not have a legal right to ask them for
- anything, I would hope that as a community member, they would have some moral obligation. I know that's
- thinking way too big. But. I was not here nor part of this.
- when this all was decided. But the offer to purchase the ground was an as-is offer. You're not going
- to win that. Oh, I'm not looking to win. I'm just simply looking at it from a fiscal standpoint and
- the standpoint. They tore the hospital down and expense. And this is something that was there for years.
- Obviously, it was either missed or ignored.
- And it's an environmental issue that, as a community, we have to deal with from a fiscal standpoint.
- We are the people to clean it up. But it just strikes me that while we need affordable housing, and
- we need workforce housing, and it's a good location, and we're moving forward in the right direction,
- I continue to be concerned about the little things that are coming up at 50,000, 100,000 at a time,
- because it's real money.
- Just my two cents. I can't say that as part of the initial, I mean, I was not involved, and so I don't
- know what the conversations were in the process of purchasing the former hospital site. But it very
- well could be that the administration and those that were involved were aware that it was a possibility
- and didn't care. Just to throw that out there, as the devil's advocate, we don't know what
- that that process was. What I do know is that it was an as-is offer, and it's there, and we
- have a responsibility to our community to get it cleaned up. I don't disagree. I just did. I think the
- price that we settled on in part offset that. We took it as-is, and we also took a price reduction.
- As I recall, you took a price reduction against count. Do you remember how big the price reduction was?
- I kind of do, but I don't think I want to just blurt it out and be wrong. So somebody might repeat me.
- It does strike me. I mean, I sort of hesitate to say this, too, but we're talking about, what, 200,000?
- No, just over 200,000 on a site that is worth a lot. I mean, obviously, well in excess of that to the
- city. But this is only one example.
- run into some others. I bet you we're into this for a million. That's I think that's really the question
- about what are we actually spending to deal with all of this. But it has to be done. It seems like a
- little bitter pill to swallow. It is a bitter pill to swallow. Because our anticipation as we have looked
- forward and hope well in previous administration,
- No responsibility on this administration in any capacity. I understand. You received it. You've done
- a great job, Anna, with it. But trying to continue to get it done, and we find these environmental issues,
- and as we look to redevelop it into housing, into commercial aspects, these throw other concerns, because
- then we have to have our testing and the
- development end of it, as people are looking to reuse this site, these type of environmental issues
- create pause in that developmental. Well, if they've been taken care of, we probably that will. Well,
- that's why we're trying to make sure that we can get some closure letters up front so that it's not
- part of that. I mean, I think it's one thing if you have contamination that's known and you have a wreck
- that's going to require an environmental covenant that's going to be highly restrictive.
- But that's not what we have at this point. We're still talking to IIDEM, and hopefully we can get a
- clean closure letter and move forward with the housing that we really need. Dana, do you have anything
- to add to that? No. I agree in the fact that there was an offset kind of explains a few things to me
- from what I've seen from previous reports that were done before the transaction.
- So, and again, whether, no matter what your report had, that this is not too common, you know, to find
- these kind of things. And it is great, though, to be able to get them addressed and get the closure
- letters because that is going to go a long way with assuring people that these are sites
- You're developing. Because the people may want to buy and redevelop it, but the banks will have to back
- it. And they're going to be the ones that will be concerned with any environmental aspects. And those
- who I used to work with years ago, and they like closure letters. Thank you. Thank you for that discussion
- on resolution 25-117. With no more comments or questions from commissioners, I'll open it for public comment.
- Anything online or in person? Seeing none, I will open it for a motion. I'll move to approve 25-102.
- That's 117. 172, excuse me. 117. 117? Second. Second. Got a first and a second. All in favor say aye.
- Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously. I'm going to take a quick aside from 116. I remember I did not
- invite public comment, so I'm just going to ask.
- Any advice in terms of that's been voted on and approved if you just want to make that complete? Obviously,
- if there is no public comment, we can probably leave it as is, but I'm just going to ask legal how you
- want to do it. That is fine. Technically, you don't have to have public comment. OK. I wasn't sure in
- terms of obligation for that. Only school boards are required to have public comment. OK. Well, if there's
- anybody that does want it, let us know.
- before this meeting is over, but I'm not going to otherwise break from the agenda. Thank you for that
- advice. So next item on our agenda is resolution 25-118, the approval of an agreement with VET Environmental
- Engineering LLC for environmental mold inspection at the Trades District Garage. This is just an agenda
- all about VET. So who would like to speak to that?
- All right, I'll take it. So essentially, as you know, I've been reporting to you guys that we've had
- some issues at the trades district garage with the HVAC equipment really started with the fact that
- they are oversized and there is no hot air reheat on them. So it's short cycling instead of drying out
- the air. We've had an incredibly hot and humid summer.
- At moments of time this summer, we had water dripping from the ductwork in addition to condensation
- on the walls. So we are working on a solution right now. We think we are hoping, fingers crossed, everything
- crossed, that we got it figured out. The tenants have not been able to occupy the space right now. They're
- federal subcontractors and are tied to really specific standards.
- When we met with them recently, one of the things that would make them feel better is to make sure that
- there's no additional mold growth going on in the building as a result of the condensation from the
- HVAC units. So this particular resolution is for $1,300, 1309.38, excuse me, for that mold testing just
- to confirm.
- We have no signs of it. We haven't noticed anything, but we really need to do an indoor air quality
- sample to confirm. Any questions or comments from commissioners? Thank you for that report. I've got
- a question, and I'm really not debating $1,300. And I think we discussed this before, but I don't remember
- the response. If the equipment was specced incorrectly, do we have any recourse?
- I haven't found a mechanism for recourse because what was installed was on the architect's drawing.
- I think part of the issue is that the HVAC units that were installed anticipated a restaurant being
- in the space, which has a great big vent hood, which makes sense if you have a hot kitchen. But because
- there's no hot kitchen after the build out, we started to see some issues.
- Director Coopersmith is in the room, and she's also able to answer questions as well regarding the tenants.
- Commissioner, do you have any additional questions? Well, in terms of the question about the specs and
- understanding that maybe the original drawings were based on a different intended use,
- And given that, there sounds like there, I don't know if there's yet a correlation between the original
- specs, what was built, and the current issue. My question is, is there any, is this the tip of the iceberg,
- or is there more stuff that's gonna be coming after this? Or, I mean, I realize we don't necessarily
- know, but I'm just trying to get a sense of, again, that general theme we've got going this evening,
- which is the scope. There's the little thing that's in front of us now on this resolution, but what's
- the bigger picture for, in this case, the Trades Garage, right?
- I mean, I can't promise that there will never be an additional issue with this space. But we have been
- in the space with JD Boroff really carefully looking at windows and thresholds and talking to the tenant
- about what was going on to try to make sure that we're not going to have additional issues. I will say
- that the tenant took occupancy, if that's the right verb phrase, April.
- first, and so they haven't been through a complete cycle. So I think the HVAC issues that we're correcting
- now, I assume that those will support the space this winter, too, because we're working to adjust the
- equipment and right size it for the space. So I think if we didn't make these corrections and then hit
- winter, we would just have a different version of the same problem. Anna, do you have anything else
- to add? I would like to jump in here because, look,
- We got to be working smarter not harder and I think that that is my overall theme when we anytime we
- build a building We absolutely need to be requiring any HVAC tech before they install equipment to be
- running manual J and manual D calculations I reported that to you guys several times the fact that that
- didn't happen appropriately is frustrating but
- If we can make that requirement moving forward, then I don't think that we'll get into that kind of
- a situation. But HVAC equipment has to be properly sized. At this point in time, we are not opting to
- replace them, which was the first thing that I was told was that we needed to replace the units to the
- tune of around $200,000. So right now we're making small changes
- to try and make sure that we can get what we need out of the equipment. I mean, there's two 10 ton units
- up there for a 4,500 square foot space that's way oversized. So we've tried just turning one off and
- letting the fan run. We tried some other little adjustments to try and make sure that we're getting
- the correct air exchanges. But again, there is a building science to this that
- We really just need to be smart about and not get ourselves into projects without doing the evaluations.
- Thank you. So is that being smart basically just using this as a lesson learned and kind of what we've
- got in front of us is kind of the best fit for our current situation?
- Yes, I am all about cost-effective repairs, and I do believe that this is, again, an inherited situation.
- I had nothing to do with the designer scope of it, but now that my eyes are on it, Jane, me, facilities,
- Dana, we're all over it and trying to make sure that we're making cost-effective repairs that
- are appropriate, but then also making sure that moving forward, we don't get ourselves into this kind
- of situation again.
- Correct me if I'm wrong, but was this not a design build? What do you mean? That the city's designed?
- I mean, it was like a spec. Yeah. The city's spec built. Yeah. It was spec built. Right. And the architect
- just got it wrong, or the engineer. I mean, that's our understanding. Anna also observed, or Director
- Killian Hansen also observed that there is inherently a pressure with sales relating to HVAC, where
- you recommend a larger unit, you can
- drive your revenues. I'm not speculating that about this particular vendor, but just that the calculations
- that she's talking about become even more important for that reason, for the property owner to just
- verify that what's being sold and recommended is actually correct. Randy, my recollection is that, well,
- it was spec-billed. Correct me if I'm wrong, Anna, but we spec-billed it without a tenant.
- We did the shell and the mechanical. And then we got a tenant. And then we did the leasehold. And the
- mechanical was already there. That's my recollection. OK. That answers my question completely. So now
- we're adjusting it for our tenant accordingly. So to her point about a restaurant, there was a 50-50
- chance it might have been that use. I bet you it's probably got it.
- a grease trap under it. Yeah. Well, there you go. There you go. That answers that question. Thank you.
- Okay. But there's also way too much fresh air coming into the building. I mean, that's part of the problem
- as well. So I think I am able to utilize a lot of my past knowledge and talk about insulated duct work
- and making sure that we're right sizing equipment. And these are things that everybody should take home
- with them for their own personal homes as well.
- Right sized equipment. OK. Well, thank you for that discussion. If there's no further comments from
- commissioners, we'll open it for any public comment, either online or in person. Seeing none, I will
- invite a motion on resolution 25-118 in place.
- I'll move approval of 25118. Second. We've got a first and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye.
- Any opposed? Passes unanimously. OK. The last item on our agenda, which I notice is actually not on
- the agenda, but it's in the packet. So just making sure that there's nothing else. OK. So we've got
- 25119, approval of crash research and analysis incorporated key provisions of lease termination. Who
- would like to speak to that? That would be me. OK.
- And this is another one of our Showers West tenants who has negotiated a termination of their lease.
- It is with Crash Research and Analysis Inc. And they are willing to vacate early as of October 1st.
- They have found a new location at Fountain Square.
- And they would like the RDC to provide the moving services for their personal property. But the tenant
- must pack miscellaneous items, and they must handle all their IT equipment and devices. And there is
- an estimated cost of less than $1,000 for that. The RDC will supply the tenant with two parking passes
- for the 4th Street garage.
- which is covering from October 1st of 25 to September 30th of 26, which you own that garage. And the
- RDC will pay the tenant a sum of $1,000, not to exceed $1,000, for other expenses related to the termination
- of the lease. That being that they needed a new countertop at their new location.
- for $815 and then potentially for box and bubble wrap and tape that they'll turn in a receipt for the
- other. It was determined that this was a very fair and amicable item. We worked hard with the crash
- release and analysis folks.
- And everything remained amicable. And we found that this was a very reasonable request. The city does
- have a group that they have contract services with to do moving. And so though the RDC didn't have a
- contract with them, we would use that same group.
- And we've been working with JD Whorf to get that selected and ready to go. And my understanding is if
- it goes well tonight, the moving crew will be there the morning of October 1st and we'll remove them
- from the premises. So our cash outlay is $1,000.
- $2,000. One for the move and one for the parking spaces. OK, so we are going to pay for the parking
- spaces even though we own the garage. Well, there won't be a separate payment for them, no. But the
- payment of $1,000 is up to $1,000 would be for the moving expenses, the moving company. And then up
- to $1,000 for their countertop they needed and their packaging.
- supplies. So there's a, this should be simple. There's a moving piece and then there's a parking piece.
- There's a moving piece, a parking piece, and then an improvement to their fountain square location to
- accommodate what they would be losing at Showers West. Okay, so where, I only see two issues here, not three.
- All right, so first- And there's a bunch of typos, by the way. Not a bunch, but several. So the first,
- the direct payment for moving expenses would be at a cost of approximately $1,000 more or less.
- And again, that is for the countertop and the, no, that is for the moving company. All right.
- So the first $1,000 is for the moving company period. OK, stop there for a minute. In my opinion, that
- needs to be a not to exceed number. And if it's an estimate and you think it's low, then make it $1,200.
- I don't care. But that needs to be a not to exceed number, not an estimate. Yes, the estimate that we
- received was $800 to $900.
- I don't care what you want to put in there. I just wanted not to succeed. And then the second, that
- there would be no payment for the parking garage because you own the parking garage. You wouldn't pay
- yourself for those passes. So you would just issue those passes. Do we have the ability to issue the
- passes even though we own the garage? Because that parking garage, don't we have an agreement with the
- parking department?
- public works for parking? And they're going to let the redevelopment have a couple free passes for a
- year for a tenant for moving? And they're not going to ask us for reimbursement? Won't that cut into
- the revenue in their budget? No, there's excess passes available. They're not sold out of passes.
- And they're also, with those passes, they're non-exclusive. So there's technically not even a guarantee
- that there will be a space. So it's not a specific location. When I look at that, and I know it's fiddly,
- it's a small amount of money, but it only takes a second to pick up the penny, and that's $36 an hour
- tax free. So when we look at this, what is the passes a year? I don't even know. I know that Margie was.
- instrumental in negotiating this, I don't know what to do. I'm good with it. I'm just looking at that
- revenue loss on the parking that is minor, but it is a situation where we require everybody else, and
- we're paying for it. But it's six to one and a half dozen. It doesn't matter. It's left hand. It's left
- pocket right. But my question is, wouldn't it make sense in terms of,
- this is evaluating the total value or owed that even if it's an in-kind as opposed to a cash outlay.
- One, I feel this paragraph is written in a kind of confusing way. It needs to be different whereas or
- something because or somehow because there's just all this stuff packed in there. And again, I initially
- misread it that the $1,000 was related to the parking. So two things. One, I think it should be written
- more clearly so that each element
- is clearly separate, not just one long run on sentence, and two, that the value of the parking passes
- should be reflected in here, because somebody else is paying cash for those parking passes.
- I agree with you. I thought it was, too. I misread it. So that's when you got into this county and I
- didn't know what you're talking about. Right. And not to exceed language as well. Right. And while you're
- at it, line two, I think you've got
- property earlier, it should be then, not that. In line seven, I think fourth is spelled wrong. Do you
- need this approved tonight, or do you want to come back to us for the correction? Actually, you won't
- need to get it before October 1st. Oh, that's true.
- Can we just map out the amended version so that this can be adopted with amendments? Yes. I mean, it
- does need a little bit more than just fixing a single number. I mean, fine, typo, that's easy enough
- to fix. Again, just writing this in a way so that it's understood the first time through, as opposed
- to having to kind of figure it out while you're reading it what it's referring to. And then I guess,
- of course, the value of the parking passes
- I don't know if there's a way to look that up. I don't know if Ms. Cooper-Smith is still here, but in
- terms of just knowing what the going rate is for a parking pass and be able to put that in there. Again,
- just something to kind of show the full compensation that's being provided even if some of it's in kind
- as opposed to in cash.
- Or could we adopt it with a request for an amended version? Again, I'm asking from a legal point of
- view. Do you just need us to stall and create a distraction while you edit? Yeah. We're still not going
- to know what the parking value is. I can guess what I think it is, but I don't want you to go by. We
- need something to go by. Garage monthly permit costs.
- I'm looking up online. It wouldn't affect the agreement, because it's going to be given to them, and
- RDC will not be paying for it. So it wouldn't affect the agreement. But it's an in-kind value that should
- be reflected as part of the negotiation. January 1, non-reserved, 24 hours, seven days. That's monthly?
- Yeah, monthly. So $116. So $116 times $12.
- times two. 160? I'm not sure what that says. Wow. Now, again, it's double since I last looked.
- This is Google. But it's on the city's website. It's on the city's website. We'll use it. City's website.
- It's interesting just putting perspective, right? What the cash outlay is and what the in-kind value
- is. But somebody else is paying cash for it, so. Yeah, I just want, as you said, transparency, clear
- for the public as a whole. We have to move showers. We appreciate that the negotiation has been done
- and the crash is willing to move out. I just want the reflection of the dollars to be corrected. OK,
- so that $27.84 is the value of the two parking spaces at 116.
- a month times 12 times 2. And we just need to figure where the period needs to get entered in here to
- make this readable in terms of, again, trying to just get this amended in a way that we can agree on
- and adopt. And we're not indicating that we're waiving future rental income. Right. Exactly. Right?
- So that's the other reason for reflecting the value of payment. Yeah, I know.
- We don't collect rent on those last months. So what are we paying out not to collect revenue? That's
- kind of the question you need to be asking yourself. I sort of wondered why we just didn't let this
- release run its course and move on. That would be an interesting cost comparison. What's the rental
- income comparison? It's only a couple of months. Right. Is there any indication of what the rental income
- would have been for the remaining
- Basically, so that's December 13th, so it's even like 10 weeks, right? Mm-hmm. I agree 100%. I also
- look at this as part of a healing process with our tenants, because we have to move them anywhere, anyway,
- as opposed to having any continual
- pushback, it's nice to be able to get resolution. I understand that, Randy. And if it was a long-term
- lease, then I would agree with you. But it expires. It expires in 10 weeks. And there's no additional
- add-on, or additional amendments they can do. So we don't renew. Well, I sort of assume they have to
- take over the new space.
- So they're going to move, be able to take over their new space. Right, but if their lease weren't being
- renewed, they'd have to remove anyway. Right. I have the dollar figure on what they're paying if you
- need that. Dan, is it OK to share that? Yes. $9.31 per month, according to their lease.
- Yeah so it would cost less just you know I understand you know the point about good faith and all that
- but I'm just noting that the actual rental income is less than what the early termination of the lease
- terms are if especially especially if you include the parking value even but even if you just include
- the out-of-pocket value it's pretty close
- You actually do make more with the rental income than what you would pay with the anyways. I believe
- there also were renewal options. That's what I was saying. That would have made a significant difference
- with that. Again, I didn't negotiate this one, but I believe that is a significant factor. So they've
- got renewal options. Are they mutual? I don't know how they're released. Are they mutual?
- mutual renew, or if it's one-sided. It's one-sided. They had a set amount, and as long as they were
- in good standing, then it would have to be. Well, that makes a little difference. These are all facts
- that would be nice to know when we're having these conversations. Maybe just some preliminary thing,
- because you don't necessarily have to have the
- current, the lost rent revenue in the resolution, but it's helpful for our discussion to have those
- numbers up front. So are we back to looking at how to amend this so we can? That's fine. I just wanted
- to make sure we're all on the same page, so to speak.
- tell staff when we're not going to be here in the next meeting. You have some calendars that we won't
- have quorum. Is that what I'm overhearing? Should we take care of that while the editing is being done
- and we can return to this resolution just to make a more efficient use of our time? OK. So we're going
- to table 25-119 for the few minutes in this meeting.
- And we're going to jump ahead to business general discussion, which at least one item of that will be
- just lining up different commissioners' absences in the next couple months so that we just all know
- that. So who was first in the calendar order? Well, the next week, why don't we go meeting by meeting?
- Well, that's what I said in terms of calendar order. October 6. OK. So October 6. Who is not here? I
- am not here. I'm not here. OK.
- And then there's October is 20th after that. Is everyone else here in person on the 6th? Are you here?
- I'll be here in person. OK. I'm not here on October 20th. OK. And I am also not here on the 20th. I'm
- here on the 20th. I'm here on the 20th. OK. And then?
- And November 3rd? Oh, yeah. I'm here on the 20th, so. OK. November 3rd, I am not here. I am here. I'm
- a game day decision. I'm driving back, and if I make it, I'm going to try, but I can't. I'm here. OK,
- so you've got a quorum without me. So who's our third on November 3rd? I'm here. OK. So on November
- 3rd, I have Debra not there, and possibly John West not there, anybody else?
- 17th of November. I am not here. I'm not here. I'm here. I am here. Okay.
- Is that good for now? Do we need to jump ahead to December just to finish off the year? Sure, why not?
- I'm here on the 1st. I'm here on the 1st. I'm here on the 1st. Yeah, I'm here. Yes. And last date in
- December is the 15th. I'm here. Yes. Here. Here. OK. Yay. I'm going to finish the year off right. OK.
- Let's play a party. OK. Anything else for general discussion before we return to?
- Resolution 25 119. We're going to do general discussion now. Yeah, we just want to give as much time
- needed to get this amendment done and take advantage of using that time. Who will be wanting to run
- the meeting when Deborah is gone? That would be me. Are you going to, and you're going to be there on
- October 20th and the 3rd, correct? Correct. Okay. All right. Just one double check.
- Yes, please. Okay, so from a general discussion standpoint, you know, we've got a lot on our
- plate Redevelopment wise and I think the staff is doing a good job with so I just want to say even though
- we ask these questions in regards we appreciate everything the staff is doing and how they're doing
- it and then just in a general discussion standpoint given the unfortunate circumstances occurred last
- week on a national basis and occurred locally yesterday as far as a
- vigil that was put together at the university. I just want to commend the university students and those
- individuals that there was a significant amount of police officers there, but everybody in our community
- acted respectably and with positive decorum last evening. This is the one thing we look at as we all
- see what occurs nationally in there, that Bloomington
- has the ability to work together and not have that divisiveness. And it was rather pleasant to see that
- there were several students, about 300 or 400 that were there. And there was no incident in any capacity.
- So I just want to say from a community standpoint, it looked very good from our community standpoint
- that the students were able to embrace each other. And then actually some of them actually went into
- the downtown last night. Very respectful situation.
- has nothing to do with Rita Baum, but it has to do with our community. Thank you for that. Are you going
- to print it or what? Or can you share a screen up there? We can look at it. We're going to have to sign
- it, so. Well, yeah, but at least if we can approve the resolution by having an agreed version that we
- can all see, we can
- sign the other stuff, and then get a printout. You can share it, Dana. You're able to share it. I'm
- able to share it? Uh-huh. OK. The problem is, it's not going to help. Because I'm not connected.
- I'm not on. You're not on. So I print it quicker. I can see it. You can GChat it to me, and I can share it.
- Well, that was OK. I don't even know what that means. But he also needed it. And I don't think he did
- either. One more thing to look at. While you're still working on data, you also know the language on
- the second page under be it resolved has to be adjusted as well to
- to be not to exceed as opposed to cost of approximately $1,000. Yes, in number two. In number two. Yes,
- it says not to exceed.
- Did you get that, Anna? Just now. Hold on just a second. Uploading now. I'll send it again to you as
- well. Can you guys see it? Yes. Well, you cut it off. Yeah.
- Changes are in this whereas clause. So the city staff is negotiating lease termination with tenant.
- That includes as key provisions that the tenant will vacate the property earlier than December 13, 2025
- by doing so on or before October 1, 2025. And that the RDC will, A, provide moving expenses for their
- personal property except the tenant's
- Tenant must pack miscellaneous items, and tenant must handle moving all IT equipment and devices. This
- is Shower Square, 2000 Square, with an estimated cost of less than $1,000. I'll get to the not to exceed
- minute. Should we say that we're supposed to be not to exceed? Well, it's less than it. It'll say not
- to exceed down in your actual resolution. Oh, not in the order of? B, the RDC will supply tenant with
- two parking passes for the 4th Street garage.
- be that time period that the RDC will pay the tenant a sum not to exceed $1,000 for expenses weighted
- down below. So for number two, you have that the going to redevelopment commission finds it to keep
- provisions detailed above are acceptable, including the direct payment for moving expenses at a cost
- not to exceed $1,000. Two parking passes at the 4th Street garage
- in-kind valued at 116 per month or 12 months for two passes for $2,784. That payment to tenant in amount
- not to exceed $1,000 or for other expenses related to termination of the tenant's lease includes cost
- of new countertop at the new location of $815 and cost for packing materials not to exceed $185. And
- the RDC will forego additional lease payments
- and the rest remain the same. Before going the additional lease payments, how does that get tied to
- a specific term? What months is that? Well, it would be from since we're moving out on October 1, it
- would be October 1 on. All right, so that doesn't need to say for the balance of their term or some
- other language?
- I definitely can put it in there. Well, I'm just asking. Yeah. How specific do you need to be? Honestly,
- I think this is fine. OK. Can you go back up to the larger whereas paragraph of city staff blah, blah,
- blah? The RDC will provide moving services. Do we mean that we will cover the cost of moving services?
- You said expenses when you read that. But as written, it sounds like John and Deb and Randy and Laurie
- and I are going to be hauling boxes. I'm busy that day, but. We will hire the moving company to move
- them and pay directly the moving company for those moving expenses. So to provide moving services is
- accurate. Yeah. OK. I can't believe we're debating this so long.
- I don't have any problem reimbursing it. I don't have a clue why we would be hiring it. Because then
- the move becomes our responsibility. If there is a mistake, if there's breakage, if there's anything
- that goes on, it is now our problem. Why do we want to take on that liability? This is a key term. It's
- not all the terms of the agreement.
- We would definitely be limiting our liability in that. It is something that they specifically requested.
- They didn't want to mess with calling a moving company and have it done. And so this is something they
- specifically requested. And so it was negotiated. OK, we'll arrange it. Again, the city does hire a
- moving company from time to time. And so we got in a relationship with.
- with one and so um but yes there would all the other parts of the the con the agreement with them as
- far as liability and such would would all be addressed notice the word except is in the original and
- it's not in the revised so it's under it's the fourth line except that the
- OK, sorry. I missed it. I just thought they accepted. I was looking at the wrong tenant. It's there.
- Yeah. So RD supervised the Packing for Women Services, except the tenants got their miscellaneous and
- IT. Yeah. And we told them off the bat, we're not touching their IT stuff, period. That's on them. So
- we're just talking office terms.
- And they're to packets. They're blocks. So they were spelled out there for us is good for me. I feel
- like we've addressed the concerns that we raised by my take. Any other comments from commissioners before
- we move on with this? OK. Public comment in person, online, seeing none. We can vote.
- Who would like to make a motion? I'll make a motion to approve 25-119 as amended. Thank you. 119. We
- have a first and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously, and we've
- done our additional business. I will do a last call. Any additional business before we get a motion
- to adjourn? No further general discussion? A motion to adjourn, please.
- So moved. Okay, thank you everybody.