Welcome. It is 5 o'clock. We actually have a quorum. So are we on yet? Are we on yet? Were you worried?
And we're recording? OK. Let's soldier in. Let's begin with a roll call vote. Commission members? Brandi
Cassidy, present. John West, present. Sue Scambillari, present. And staff? Anna Gillian Hanson, present.
Christina Bentley, hand department. Tammy Caswell, head department.
economic and sustainable development. Jessica McCollum, city controller. Roy Aitken, city engineer.
Anna Dragamitch, economic and sustainable development. Matt Swinney, hand department. Travis Fentzel.
General support of that. We do have one more staff person in the hand department. Great. Dana Kerr,
legal. Great.
Thank you, everybody. Let's move to the minutes for September 15th and the executive session summary
for October 14th of 2025. Are there any corrections changes? And if not, may I have a motion to approve?
I'll make a motion to approve minutes as presented. Second. It's been moved and seconded. All those
in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. Those minutes are approved.
So let's move to examination of claims registers. And are there any questions or comments on the claims
registers? None? All right. If not, is there a motion to approve? Move for approval. Second. And that,
just to clarify, that's for both? Both.
It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Thank you.
Those are approved. Moving on to examination of payroll registers for September 19th, 2025 and October
3rd, 2025. Are there any questions or comments on payroll registers? And if not, may I have a motion
to approve? Second. Okay. It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye.
Any opposed?
None in opposition? Thank you. Those are approved. Let's move on to reports of officers and committees.
We'll begin with the director's report. No director's report this evening, though I do want to say thank
you to all the community members and the Redevelopment Commission for coming to the Hopewell South kickoff
meeting that was held just previous to this. We had a great turnout, and I think it went well. And just
that'll be available on CATS, will it not?
Yes, and we did record the meeting, and we'll have the slide deck available for distribution as well.
Great. Thank you. Legal report? I'm here for questions if you have them. OK. Thank you. Pressure, please.
Good evening, commissioners. In your packet is my new version of the project summary report.
I've been tinkering around with a way to present the projects to you in a different way that kind of
shows a little bit more information that's more useful for staff and for the members of the RDC.
So I divided, I still have the divisions
named by project like the first one is Hopewell East and then it is going to go through any the resolution
number and the vendor attached to that resolution that is either still open and outstanding from previous
years or ones and including all the ones that you've approved so far this year in 2025. So this can
give you kind of
a better overview of what is actually happening in each project, because I know as the year goes by
and as resolutions get approved, you may see the project name and a number attached to it, but I was
hoping that this would give you kind of more jogger memory as to what has come before the RDC, how much
we have spent,
in that resolution. And then if that vendor has been paid and the project is closed, it'll show the
amount expensed and then it'll show a zero due balance. So the balance will be that nothing is due.
And that means that we've finished out that part of that resolution.
So there's a lot more detail here, and also this means that as we go through every meeting, we can add
resolution numbers to these lists so we can keep better track for the RDC of those resolutions. HAND
also keeps track on different spreadsheets of all the resolutions and all the PO numbers, and there's
even a lot more detail in the way that they track it. But this, I hope, is more information that is
useful to you on these projects.
So something like Hopewell East is a little bit, it doesn't have all of the information, because as
you know, we've spent over 13, 14 million dollars on that project that isn't all shown right here. We
could change this sheet to maybe have a line that shows something about past years, how much has really
been expensed in the project, and then everything that's currently open and being worked through right
now. But other than Hopewell East, all the projects that are on here have
all the resolution numbers and amounts that we have spent so far. Yes. Is Hopewell South covered in
here? Hopewell South, anything that we did in Hopewell South is kind of divided between East and First
and West. When I looked at our
Like our POs, it wasn't always clear to me in the past what was Hopewell South and what was Hopewell
East. Like there's a lot of demolition that was done in Hopewell South, and that's included in the Hopewell
East number. It doesn't have to be, and that's a great, I can take that as a suggestion or a request
that we do, we break out Hopewell South too. I can work on doing that. Well, we certainly talk about
them separately, so it would probably be beneficial.
So going back to what you said just a moment ago, we're going back to some cases 2020, 2022, 2023. But
anything prior to that is not reflected on this. Correct. So these totals, if I add up all of the Hopewell
totals, which I did,
came out to about 7.6, 7.7 million. That really doesn't reflect the total cost of what we spent, setting
aside the purchase of what we spent on this project. No, you are right. And I'm hearing then that that
would still be a valuable number to have to keep current on this sheet. And I can absolutely do that.
Oh, it'd be good to have the total and not incremental total. Yeah. All right. No problem. The breakout's
good. OK. It gives us a better idea. But the previous things for these projects that we have that are
ongoing so we can keep track of the total amount spent, actual total spent. And if you need to do it
as a balance forward because it's so old, I guess that's fine because most of that's
has been expensed. Yes. And there's nothing else outstanding. So just. And if you guys do have questions,
we do have a detail spreadsheet tracking a lot of the expenses or claims that are going through for
each resolution that you guys are passing to see where we are. This is a really good overview. But if
you need to break it down more granularly. Just as you put through these and as John indicated on the
2020 and some of these that are four or five years old or nine, you know, I mean, that aren't closed,
you know, is that a situation that we're just waiting for invoices to come in or? Let's see, so. I mean,
yeah. Well, actually. Well, here's one of them is First Street. It was a 2020 VS Engineering. So that
one is closed. It was approved for seven,
$720,000 and then we spent $699,000 and then the next column is zero. When those are done, that cash
balance just drops out. Basically, we got it done under budget is what it's indication. Yeah. So it's
black and white column because it's closed out. It's closed out. That works.
So like First Street is a great example of like a project that's kind of coming to the end, it's being
closed out, and I put all of the resolutions that I could find related to First Street there so you
can see like kind of the total of what the RDC spent on First Street, even though some of them are,
you know, five years old. And all of these also involve like coordination with engineering, because
sometimes there's POs out there that have been closed down, and we just need to check in with engineering
just to make sure before we
We say, okay, this project is done. This is a good way for all of us to communicate, especially internally,
about where we have questions. There was one that stood out to me big time, and that's Milestone. We
know they're a huge vendor for this project. For yeast. But they're only listed here once.
Um, that could, so we did have a huge contract, like $13 million with milestone. And that's one of the
main ones that I left off this list. Um, and them and many, many others from back in like 2020, I think
when I got in that bid or 2021. So there's a lot of major, um, Hopewell East ones that have been closed
out that I left off of this. Um, I didn't want to overwhelm you with this huge long list of Hopewell East.
resolutions, and so I made the decision, let's just do the open ones for Hopewell East, just the open
ones. But I think I like the idea of doing a balance forward. This is like everything we've spent so
far, and then these are the ones that are still open. That'd be good. OK. And then as they close out,
eventually you can roll them up into the balance. Exactly. Yeah. I think that'll work really nice. And
then just a quick question in regards to the general ledger.
Essentially, we're sitting on 24 million. Yes. For project. Oh, well, yeah. 22 in the TIF. Let's see.
Let's see. Let's see. Yeah. The RDC account is 1.5. The TIF account, the TIF fund is 22, and the Kinzer
Prow is 707. So yes. OK. OK. That's the cash balance that we're rolling right now. And then as we look
at the TIF,
are what you put out for the commitment on Kinser. We don't have anything yet, but we are looking at
some items. Yes. We do not have anything when we're looking. Because we've got a sunsetting clause that's
occurring. Yes, we do. OK. Thank you. Thank you, everybody. Anything else? OK, Jessica, thank you for
preparing this for us. Thank you for being open to additional feedback, too. And that moves us to a
business development update? Yeah.
A brief update or a brief invitation for commissioners and the public to join the City in the Mill in
Celebrating Innovation Week, which is November 4th to 7th. Each day has a different theme. Tuesday is
health tech, Wednesday is gov tech, government tech, Thursday is an AI theme, and then Friday is the
culmination with creative arts and the community block party. The community block party is from 5 to 8 p.m.
And if you sign up in advance, you can get tours of the great facilities there, including the Forge,
which was completed and placed in service this year. And the date again? November 7th from 5 to 8. And
the goal, to be clear, is really to invite the public into the Trades District and help the community
have a sense of ownership of this really awesome neighborhood. There was a great invitation sent out.
for both the daily thing, and then also there's a separate one for the event at the end. We could re-forward
those if you didn't get it. Because I think you had to RSVP. I was just asking for the record. OK. Oh,
sorry. But thank you for the thought. So much for being here. I think that's it from me. Great.
Thank you. Are you going to say one thing? I was going to ask a question. We can ask later. Now, I was
just asking based upon the reporting and such where we might be.
on the hotel? Well, I can give approximately the same update I think I gave to CIB last week,
which is the, I mean, right? Which hotel? Oh, the trades district hotel. Oh, sorry. I do have an update
on that. They're really working hard to move that forward. They have filed and will go to zoning, BZA,
I think in November. And then they'll be scheduled for a plane commission the 1st of January. So they're
making progress. Wonderful.
Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Jane. That takes us to new business, beginning with resolution 25127. We're
taking that out of order. This is a resolution to earmark funds for infrastructure design in the southwest
quadrant of the city of Bloomington. Who will be speaking to this for us? There he is. Roy and I will.
You all know we have two potential developments on the southwest side. And this area is basically the
only area that's pretty sparse in the city of Bloomington that could have further development. And so
you have the Summit property, which those are ongoing talks with them.
plus the Public Investment Corp property as well. Plus, in addition to that, you have the current Wimmer
Road that is a significant part of it's located in a floodway, a flip lane, and has a actual one lane
bridge on it. So as development may occur, there is a need to have a much better north and south
corridor between there. So Vanguard Way is an area that, or a road that we believe, engineering believes,
that would be able to create a good north-south pathway. It would, there would be, we're in negotiations
with Public Investment Corp about going through their property.
And then part of that property is shared with Monroe County. So we'll be working with them as well.
And then within the Summit area itself, there is a connection that could be made for Adams Street as
well, going through their property. And then you could connect the two of them, Adams and Vanguard,
with Sudbury.
What we're asking for tonight is no commitment to approve a contract or an amount, but to help with
our discussions with developers and our engineering and such, we would be asking the RDC to set aside,
to earmark, $5 million for infrastructure in that area. And of course, infrastructure is
one of the top listed things that RBC can use with their funds. And so the thought is that if we could
have some money set aside, that would give us a better leverage point with dealing with these developers.
And it would also help speed up getting that north-south corridor.
So what you would pretty much the first phase would be trying to get Vanguard in with roundabout at
Bloomfield Road and roundabout at Tap Road, likely roundabout. That would be a major goal and then the
next would probably be Adams and then third Sudbury. But again, trying to just keep it to infrastructure,
trying to keep it to
roadways infrastructure that would support development in that area. We do believe that if we could
design infrastructure through that vanguard way and that that would spur more development. If we have
that road in, people drive through it, people see this area, see that they can develop it and see that
that infrastructure is already there, sorry, that they're not going to have to pay for that, then that
would give them more incentive to take care of what's on their own property than themselves.
But if you have, feel free to jump in, Roy. I just know that we're very early in the process for working
with them right now, so we're looking at,
design services, things like that, start conversations. There was a traffic impact study that was done
for the development. It outlined some improvements that were going to be required to support the development
that they want to do. So I know that's being heard right now or in the traffic commission meeting. This
would then just outline a support move for
on engineering services so we can get down into the weeds a little bit more beyond just the traffic
study that's out there right now. So again, this is not approving any contract. It's not dedicating
any money to a specific project within there. It's just saying that the RDC believes that infrastructure
is important in that southwest quadrant of the city and that
you're willing to set aside a certain amount of funds to try to get that development of that infrastructure
to happen. So again, it's not the proven contract. Those will all be brought back to you. You could
always say no to them, each and every one of them, if you choose to do so.
basically is just saying, hey, look, the RDC thinks it's important to get the infrastructure down that
southwest corner, not only for the future development, but honestly for fire and police protection to
be able to get through there. So there's a lot of benefits to the city to do it, but it may well spur
some good development down there that the city would be happy to see.
I know I have a couple of questions, but I'll start with commissioners. Go ahead. I've got three that
kind of run together. One is this quadrant currently is not in a TIF district, correct? It is. It is.
It is, except for the county part, because that's county. Which TIF is a part of the? It's this. The
consolidated TIF? Is it part of the consolidated? Because that's the only group. Yeah, it's part of
the consolidated, but which part of the consolidated
I think it's the TAP expansion. OK. Well, as long as it's part of the consolidated, that actually answers
my other two questions. Well, I'm glad I could do that. That was easy. All right. A couple questions
and one thing. One, that TIF, TAP Road TIF area, I was looking to try to identify the ordinance when
that was expanded into the sub area. Couldn't find it. I was curious when that occurred.
When the tap road? When the tap road TIF and the Sudbury property expanded into that tap road TIF. Because
at the present moment, what's the head? Yeah, from a resolution standpoint, when it was expanded.
And again, I don't remember when that occurred. Well, the consolidated TIF. The consolidated TIF. That
was 2016. Oh, sorry.
I have one of them, I guess, that has a number of them. And they're worried about the timeline? Well,
a timeline, looking at, and then when it was actually done. Wouldn't we carve out a new TIF? Yes. Would
we start the clock based on development, like a scalpel? That's one of the questions I have, because
the overlying TIF that originally was discussed was PIC, and then
In full disclosure, I will have to abstain from a vote on this because I am an adjoining property owner
for both these properties that you're discussing. So in order of transparency, for me to vote on it
would be wrong because I'm in that quadrant. But this question goes back to mine. If we're trying to
identify a TIF district in which this allocation would come from, it's got to be clear to me
where it's coming from. It was clear if it's part of the consolidated, but now because of the question
Randy asked, now I'm back to glory again. If we consolidated the TIF at that point, when was the Sudbury
portion added into that TIF to make sure? Because we're talking about the North South Adams Road to
Connection, which I have
No doubt that is a necessary thing in the future. And then my only other question on that was when,
and then how we would do that because of the dollar amount. And then the $5 million we're looking at,
that's a design criteria or just up to? I think that's just earmarking right now. So there are no contracts
to bring to you, but they're kind of like set aside, hey, this is coming. But yes, design as well. And
it's design.
Right. A resolution, it's for design services. Design services. And it's up to? Yeah. And it's up, it'll
be up to you to bring back, but it could be up to $5 million for the whole thing, which is exactly the
maximum amount that we have the authority to do without going to council. This resolution actually would
need to be tabled for a resolution to pass. Yes, you can have three person and have a quorum, but for
a resolution to pass, it needs
three votes. So it's not just a majority of the quorum, it would be three votes. It would be three votes,
which we would not have. I hate to do that, guys, but I have to. It would be great if we can conclude
at any discussion so we could bring it up the next time we have a group. If we're going to bring it
up again, then these are some questions you can probably drill down on that would help make the decision
just easier.
And again, what would happen as far as the TIF goes is it would be each development and possibly each
part of the development would be carved out as a separate TIF. And the TIF clock starts when you have
the first obligation on that, whether it be a bond or lease. And so that would bring to life
that TIF area, it wouldn't sunset it early or as far as you would get the same benefit out of it as
if it was developed 25 years ago when you started 25 years ago. You're still going to be able to capture
that incremental increase and use it because it's consolidated TIF. Even if you're using consolidated
TIF money from the other areas to do this, once it starts
bringing in revenue, you can use that for the other consolidated areas. That's the whole purpose of
having consolidated that TIF. So it's not only a great benefit to that area, it could bring in revenues
that could be used in the others. And there are different ways of financing and working with developers that
that could have implications with that, but that's too early to really talk about that. But the point
is it would start o'clock again. I have the, sorry, I don't remember the name of it, the Tab Road Tip
established in 1993 and expanded in 03. And I appreciate kind of the detail that we're getting into,
and I think maybe it would help if we come up a level. The purpose of staff making this request today
is really to communicate
to the commissioners that we are looking at ways that the TIF can be applied to really foster redevelopment
in this part of town. And we believe our recommendation is that investments in public infrastructure
and specifically some of the roads that were named tonight are the right way to do that. And we wanna
know if you all are supportive of that strategy as well. And then we want to signal
via this commitment of funds that we would be bringing specific funding requests back with more specific
asks to Roy's point, specific roads with, you know, having gone through the bid process with
those contractors. But this today is just really to foster the conversation and to signal that commitment.
Absolutely. I will say that those dates are not actually correct. There were some additional expansions
in 2016, but we didn't get those exact dates for you. Just full disclosure, the 03 was when I voluntarily
annexed and added the Willard Mill into the diff in 03. We will come prepared at the next goal. Well,
you guys are usually prepared, huh? An additional question.
confused about this, and then I was, and then I wasn't, and then I was, so I'm a was right now. So,
existing TIF revenues to be used by the city of Bloomington for professional design and service fees.
Some of the conversation I've heard suggests that it would be used for the actual infrastructure
improvements, like putting a roundabout in there. No, so it's just... Do we envision it being spent
for anything beyond design and service fees?
Not that $5 million. Do we envision that there might be the need for RFC dollars for the further
infrastructure? Probably. I would think so, likely. You know, the roads are expensive. But this $5 million
is not going to be built in a roundabout or whatever. Got it. I'm not confused. Questions? One other
comment. This is just research on.
design, and we're talking $5 million. The Fullerton Pike Section 3 that just came in, it was a $1.15
million design contract. Now it's been a few years ago, so inflation has occurred. Making it very expensive.
Yeah. And that was a $19 million project. So percentage-wise, if the $5 million is for design, this
is really expensive stuff for Adam Street and Sudbury.
Any other questions? If not, may I have a motion to table? No, apparently not. You can move to table.
I'll move to table. I'll second the motion to table. It's been moved and seconded. All in favor say
aye. Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. So that'll come back to us at our next meeting. Yeah. OK, great. Sorry.
So yeah, appreciate that very much. Just by way of information for the public, we have a number
of resolutions coming up all pertaining to CDBG funding. Resolution 25-120 is a little bit different,
and then it goes back to a 2022 physical improvement grant. So we're going to take that separately.
But then we will have one vote if commissioners are agreeable on the remaining CDBGs. So does that work
for you all?
I'm good. Great. Okay. Resolution 25120, approval of First Amendment to the 2022 CDBG Physical Improvement
Grant with City of Bloomington Utilities. Who will be speaking to this? Hi. And here you are. Matt Sweeney
with HAN. Yeah, this 2022 project, we had a long road with environmental review issues. So we're now
finally at the end of those. So we're extending
this agreement to the end of 26. Hopefully we can get this all done next year and we are increasing
the funds to help with all the costs that has been incurred with this project. Happy to answer any questions.
Questions? I guess the most obvious question is are the funds there? Yeah.
So they're already there. They're already earmarked. We're good. We've got 200 grand set into the side
to deal with this. And CBU has a plan in place that will get them done in the timeline now that we've
hit all of our environmental checks. And just for the benefit of the audience, this money comes from
HUD to us via CDBG as nothing to do with TIP funding.
And we're just looking at the situation. If they don't get it done this year, which I'm sure they will,
is there a chance of losing this money or it being pulled clawed back at any particular time once we
vote to do this? No. Good. It would be fine even if we had to extend it again. It may affect our overall
timeliness, though, if the project gets drugged on too far. We are timed by the federal government on
how fast we spend the money.
We have to meet certain benchmarks as they time us. So we do not want it to drag out any further. We
need to get it going. That is our goal. That is CBU's goal. Unfortunately, like Matt said, environmental
has got in the way. But this will just paper up and make sure that we're not operating under an agreement
that no longer stands out. And they're shovel ready, ready to go.
Yeah, for the most part. And they're already ready to submit claims for expenses incurred. So I'm not
sure what portion of it they already have ready. But we will start drawing funds. OK. All right.
Sounds good. Thank you. Any further questions? Yes. On the paperwork, just to verify as we went through
where it's grantee and it's got you and it's got sub-recipient and it's got Vic on there as opposed
to Catherine.
and 2022 would have been. Yeah. So we're just extending this. We're not having to redo any of the paperwork.
No. All right. Thank you. Those are the only two items being adjusted. OK. If there are no further questions,
may I have a motion to approve? Make a motion to approve. Second. OK. It's been moved and seconded that
we approve resolution 25120. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed?
Thank you. That passes unanimously. Thank you. OK.
Next, we'll move into multiple resolutions, all for CDBG social service grant funding. Resolution 25-121,
approval of 2025 CDBG social services grant with Boys and Girls Club. Resolution 25-122, approval of
2025 CDBG social service grant with Community Kitchen. Resolution 25-123, approval of 2025 CDBG social
services grant with Hoosier Hills Food Bank.
Resolution 25124, approval of 2025 CDBG Social Services Grant with Mother Hubbard's Cupboard. Resolution
25125, approval of 2025 CDBG Social Service Grant with Middleway House. Resolution 25126, approval of
2025 CDBG Social Service Grant with Pathways. Who is our representative for social service? No, but
I mean of the commissioners.
Last year. Last year. Yeah. It was me. Was it you? Okay. Okay. Yeah. Please. Go ahead. Hold on.
Hold on. I'm lying to you. Debra. Debra. That was physical improvements. Yeah. That was physical
improvements. Wrong. Deb. Debra. It was Debra. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Please. Go ahead. Yeah. These are just
the final contracts for the allocations that were already approved earlier this year. So this would
allow us to start
drawing down funding when we're able to to get out to these agencies. Is there anything you can share
about the process or any impressions of? We had a pretty similar process as we always have. I know of
course CAC members had took a lot of time to parse through the applications and provide these recommendations for
funding based on of course our scoring criteria and how it aligns with the city's consolidated plan
which of course at that time was the previous what was it 20 to 24 consolidated plan as opposed to what's
just been approved earlier this year so okay
CDBG contracts limit the amount of funding that can go to physical improvement projects and to social
service projects. So it's 15% of the allocation is the maximum amount that can go to these social service
projects. CAC for the benefit of the audience is the Citizen Advisory Commission. We do two each year,
one for physical improvements, one for social services, their application basis,
And then the CAC members, which are members of the community, we have a member of city council, a member
of RDC present for each one. They will score and decide how that money gets broken down. With social
services and actually with all of the applications that we receive on both physical and social service,
we receive more funding requests than can be funded. So oftentimes, the social services, especially
at only 15% of the allocation,
It's a very difficult decision, but I will assure you that there's been a lot of evaluation that takes
place as these contracts are coming to you. Thank you. Any questions on these resolutions? There were
enough money to do the right thing. If not, may I have a motion to approve on resolution 25-121 through 25-126?
Or not. I'd like to go ahead and list the amounts of each for the record. In resolution 121, Boys and
Girls Club, it would be $20,891. Forgive me, scrolling through to the...
The 25-122 is for community kitchen, was also $20,891. The next would be Hoosier Hills Food Bank for
$17,141. And then for Middleway House, $11,766. For Mother Hubbard's Cupboard, it would be $17,141.
For Pathways, Inc., it would be $11,766. And for Beacon, it would be $17,141. OK. Beacon was not. Beacon
was not. OK. That one was not among these. Was not among these. OK. I was going off a contract. You
had some momentum. Yeah, that's for another time. OK. Questions on those numbers? OK. If not, may I
have a motion to approve?
I'll move for approval of resolution 25-121, 122, 123, 124, 125, and 126. I'll second. We have a motion
and a second. All those in favor, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? And that passes,
and those are approved. Thank you. Thank you.
Moving to resolution 25-128, this is a resolution amending the declaratory resolution and economic
development plan for the Bloomington Consolidated Economic Development Area. And who will be speaking
to this? I actually need to pull that one from the agenda for tonight. OK. Never mind. All right. So
that takes us to resolution 25-129.
Approval of environmental restrictive covenant on property at West Fountain Drive and West 8th Street,
and authorization for installation of a dry detention stormwater facility. And who will be speaking
to this? Well, as well. Apparently, what I was told is that last year, it came to the RBC that there
is a piece of property that's basically rolled away.
there where Fountain Drive and 8th Street come together. It's literally a lot of it is in the actual
road and then the roadway. And technically the RDC owns that property. So last year as part of the stormwater
project, the CBU had come to the RDC, as my understanding, and asked for approval to allow them
to do environmental sampling on the property so that they could get an IBM Indian Department of Environmental
Management site status letter. The site status letter, due to some contaminated materials, the way you
have to handle those, they want an environmental restrictive covenant on that property. Well, since
you are technically the owners, even though it is all right away in street, it requires
your approval to put on the restrictive covenant. So that is the purpose of doing this. This evening
is to put that restrictive covenant on that piece of property. This is one of those properties that
I'm hoping to get transferred out of the RDC because it has no reason to be in the RDC. But they do
have a stormwater detention project that they need to complete. And in order to do that, they need this
restrictive covenant put on so that they can handle soils and things appropriately. Questions? Go ahead.
Is this identified on the map anywhere in here? Is there a map with the resolution? Just a map on West
8th and Fountain Drive. I can't even find it.
It's on 247. Oh, that's the drawing. That's just the drawing that shows. From a GIS standpoint. Yeah.
A locator map and stuff like this, a locator map would be probably beneficial. Because it already came,
so we knew what was going on.
Well, I'd say from a property standpoint, you're indicating it's all right-of-way? Yes. As you can see
from the drawing, you have the street, and then you have the right-of-way beside the street. So there's
really no... There's a small piece of property. I'm just trying to, as you said, get things off of RDC.
So this is all right-of-way here. That's it. Yes, that's the center line of the street.
And so you would have the street on both sides and the rest would be the right-of-way, but it's also
part of the right-of-way for a fountain as well. Wow. It's a big right-of-way. Yeah, although this drawing
may not be accurately depicted. Yeah, it doesn't help with the depiction. I bring up the drawing of
The city of Bloomington stormwater cannot move forward.
piece of property right here. Dana, can you project that? I wish I could, but I don't know how to do
that. You can look at it. You'll get it. You'll understand it pretty easily. It's close. It's all right,
but we don't have any. We have to do this for the public, too. Right. I'll do it to the camera. So it's
this piece of property right here.
That makes sense. Because it's right in between. If you can pick that up or not, shoot. Smile. Sometimes
you just get low tech about it. Do you want to do it for the owl for those online too? I'm not sure
how to do it for the owl. Just put it in front of the owl. How do I get in front of him? Climb up. I
don't think anybody wants that.
Can anybody see it? They're both my boys. So anyway, it will be on cats. If you get real interested,
you can pull it up and see it. But it is roadwayed right away. And City of Bloomington Utilities and
the dry detention pond is going to utilize part of this property in order to force stormwater detention
in itself. Yes. OK, and that's not something that
Once we do this letter, we're no longer going to have financial run. No, there is no financial obligation
of the RDC. You're not committing any money to this. You're just saying, OK, we'll put the restrictive
covenant in that way, and it will approve you going ahead and putting in this stormwater detention,
which, of course, will benefit the neighborhood. Unfortunately, we'll still have it.
That's what I was trying to get at. What do we have to do at the same time to transfer this particular
piece of property to public? I have asked if they want us to just transfer it to them and I haven't
got the response back yet. Of course not. Well, I'll be happy to start. This is one of many in that
area. If you search RDC properties in there, that whole time that they reconstructed that area, the
RDC had purchased a bunch of the land that ended up becoming
becoming the street, so there's lots of little slivers of right-of-way. Now there is a portion, if you're
on Kirkwood and you come up to the stop sign, or stop wide at Adams, to the left, the far left corner
there, that'd be the southwest corner, there's a little piece of property there that has some,
I don't know, maybe as much as two acres to it, or an acre, so it's got some property, it is actual
property, so. We've got a few parcels of value.
To that point, happy to take care of environmental things that do it, but really would like to be able
to say how or who could we push and focus on removing or putting back on the tax rolls or transferring
to the proper governmental agency within the city so that we don't own 94 properties that we really
have no tax revenue, nothing happening with, or being able to give back. And it sounds like that's underway.
Yeah, yeah. There have just been so many other things that it just takes time to get to. But yes. Are
there additional questions on 25-129? If not, may I have a motion? I'll make a motion to approve 25-129
as presented. Second. It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye.
Any opposed? And that passes. Thank you. Is there anything for business or general discussion?
Seeing none, we'll be convening next on Monday, November 3rd, I believe. Is there a motion to adjourn?
So moved. So moved, and we are out.