WEBVTT 00:00:00.514 --> 00:00:07.366 - We're going to get started for the Read Amount Commission meeting of December 15th, 2025. We'll start 00:00:07.366 --> 00:00:14.352 - with our meeting with a roll call, please. Lori McRobbie, present. Cece Campbell-Lurie, present. Marina 00:00:14.352 --> 00:00:21.070 - Cassidy, present. John Wedge, present. Deborah Meyerson, present. And staff available, please. Anna 00:00:21.070 --> 00:00:27.855 - Gillian Beathen, present. Christina Finley, and Amy Casperl, present. Jane Cougarsmith, economic and 00:00:27.855 --> 00:00:29.534 - sustainable development. 00:00:31.906 --> 00:00:42.442 - Dana Kerr, legal department. Where did you see staff? Mass Winning Hand Department. Thank you. OK. So 00:00:42.442 --> 00:00:53.700 - the first item on our agenda is the minutes from December 1, 2025. Any comments or questions, commissioners, 00:00:53.700 --> 00:00:58.142 - on the minutes? Move for approval. Second. 00:00:58.562 --> 00:01:07.313 - We've got a first and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Next 00:01:07.313 --> 00:01:16.063 - item on the agenda is examination of claims registers for December 5th, 2025. Any questions or comments 00:01:16.063 --> 00:01:24.814 - from commissioners on this item? Yes, I have a question. On page 44, number 223, can you remind me what 00:01:24.814 --> 00:01:27.422 - we own at 105 West 4th Street? 00:01:31.362 --> 00:01:40.807 - Is that a 4th Street garage? I'm not sure. That could be. I just couldn't remember the address. I'm 00:01:40.807 --> 00:01:51.103 - thinking it's the 4th Street garage commercial spaces. Yes, it is. All right. Thank you. Any other questions 00:01:51.103 --> 00:02:00.926 - or comments from commissioners on the claims registered from December 3? One question on the first one. 00:02:01.218 --> 00:02:09.648 - let alone one in general, on the neighborhood grants, just on Bluestone and Andrew Mars. That was a 00:02:09.648 --> 00:02:18.163 - combined grant to the Bentley homeowners for the 9,067. So it was broken up into actual physical and 00:02:18.163 --> 00:02:26.594 - then consulting. Well, one of them appears to be consulting, and one of them is actually the actual 00:02:26.594 --> 00:02:27.774 - installation. 00:02:28.130 --> 00:02:34.845 - Yeah, the Mars is consulting. So we're about even in regards to consulting the actual fiscal approval. 00:02:34.845 --> 00:02:41.430 - Yeah, and that's through our neighborhood improvement groups, which are not to funding. Right. Yeah, 00:02:41.430 --> 00:02:48.015 - I just wanted to clarify the difference between the two. Thank you. Thank you. If there are no other 00:02:48.015 --> 00:02:54.665 - questions or comments, I will enter the motion for the claims register of December 5th. Move approval 00:02:54.665 --> 00:02:57.534 - for claims register for December 5th, 2025. 00:02:57.730 --> 00:03:03.808 - Second. We've got a first and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously. 00:03:03.808 --> 00:03:10.311 - Next item in the agenda, examination of payroll registers for November 26, 2025. Any questions or comments 00:03:10.311 --> 00:03:16.389 - from commissioners on this item? Make a motion as presented. Second. Second. First and two seconds. 00:03:16.389 --> 00:03:22.588 - All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Next item on our agenda 00:03:22.588 --> 00:03:27.390 - is the report of officers and committees. We have a director's report tonight. 00:03:27.586 --> 00:03:35.199 - If you don't, I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Lincoln Report? Nothing specific. I'm here 00:03:35.199 --> 00:03:42.590 - for any questions. OK. Thank you. A Treasurer's Report. I don't know if we even have the controller 00:03:42.590 --> 00:03:50.203 - here. OK. Well, anybody get in touch with the controller if you have questions. A Business Development 00:03:50.203 --> 00:03:56.190 - Update. Not this evening, but also happy to answer questions. Thank you so much. 00:03:56.578 --> 00:04:03.751 - Um, so next item on our agenda is under new business. Um, but, uh, okay, old business until the end. 00:04:03.751 --> 00:04:10.996 - Okay. There we go. So, uh, first item on our agenda under new business is resolution 25-141, approval 00:04:10.996 --> 00:04:17.743 - of agreement with adaptive commons for comprehensive and coordinated design of Hopewell Block, 00:04:17.743 --> 00:04:25.342 - West Block 4. Who'd like to speak to that? We actually have them online ready to, um, give a presentation. 00:04:30.530 --> 00:04:43.682 - Welcome. Turn the captions on, that would be helpful. Thank you. Sorry, we're having computer. Just 00:04:43.682 --> 00:04:57.886 - under more, there should be captions option. Can we just turn up the volume? Well, both is fine. Thank you. 00:05:02.114 --> 00:05:09.443 - OK, you guys are welcome to share your screen if you would like. There was a proposal that was included 00:05:09.443 --> 00:05:16.489 - in your package. Great. Are you able to see that? Yes. All right. So, well, hello, everyone. We are 00:05:16.489 --> 00:05:23.747 - Adoptive Commons. My name is Riley Gibson. And I'm your assistant. And we're really excited to present 00:05:23.747 --> 00:05:30.794 - our proposal, our scope of work, to begin the pre-development work for the redevelopment of Block 4 00:05:30.794 --> 00:05:31.710 - at Hopewell. 00:05:34.082 --> 00:05:40.452 - So to start off, my name is Renee Gibson. I come from a background in architectural design and community 00:05:40.452 --> 00:05:46.579 - engagement. I have, since my career, focused on involving community members and neighborhoods in the 00:05:46.579 --> 00:05:52.888 - shaping of their built environment. And I am super excited to work as the portfolio manager of Adaptive 00:05:52.888 --> 00:05:59.137 - Commons, where I oversee our pipeline of investment projects and workforce affordable housing projects 00:05:59.137 --> 00:06:00.350 - across the country. 00:06:01.122 --> 00:06:06.762 - And just by way of background, I'm a native New Yorker. I went to high school in a much more affluent 00:06:06.762 --> 00:06:12.678 - neighborhood, a public high school, and a college campus. So I know firsthand what it's like to experience 00:06:12.678 --> 00:06:18.593 - living in two worlds, if you will. And I like to share that context because it essentially has illustrated 00:06:18.593 --> 00:06:24.122 - the work I've done ever since. It has dictated the work I've done ever since. And so after graduate 00:06:24.122 --> 00:06:26.334 - school, I landed in Memphis, Tennessee. 00:06:26.530 --> 00:06:31.307 - And Community Development Corporation founded a single site charter school, which went on to do really 00:06:31.307 --> 00:06:36.084 - well out the gate. And I realized pretty quickly I was doing the same thing to our kids. That was done 00:06:36.084 --> 00:06:40.954 - to me in that they were getting a great education, but they still had to go home. And no one was focused 00:06:40.954 --> 00:06:45.870 - on the built environment. And so that's when I rolled up my sleeves and got into real estate development, 00:06:45.870 --> 00:06:50.694 - all with a socially oriented lens. And from that point, I ended up acquiring 43 acres of land, 24 which 00:06:50.694 --> 00:06:53.662 - is a planet apartment complex, 394 units collected for $37,000. 00:06:53.890 --> 00:06:58.893 - and worked to reshape that space to what is now a middle school performing arts center, single family 00:06:58.893 --> 00:07:03.848 - homes, and partnership with Habitat for Humanity. And then we hired a shopping class directly across 00:07:03.848 --> 00:07:08.949 - the street from that, which is now a medical clinic, a dental clinic, elementary school, a high school. 00:07:08.949 --> 00:07:13.952 - So the full K-12 continuing on with the wraparound infrastructure. And I've continued to do that work 00:07:13.952 --> 00:07:18.906 - for almost 20 years now. I was also involved as a senior with the one and a half million square foot 00:07:18.906 --> 00:07:21.310 - redevelopment of the old Sears building, Mendis. 00:07:21.410 --> 00:07:27.264 - which is a now urban village, which includes not only a school, but housing, YMCA, art facility, 00:07:27.264 --> 00:07:33.661 - art space. So just wanting to demonstrate the work that's happened over the last two decades and continue 00:07:33.661 --> 00:07:39.756 - to do that work. Adaptive College really came about about three years ago as I took a look back with 00:07:39.756 --> 00:07:44.222 - a couple of colleagues to think about what might this look like at scale. 00:07:44.674 --> 00:07:50.406 - particularly as we think about the lack of workforce and affordable housing that's happening across 00:07:50.406 --> 00:07:56.139 - the country. And at the same time, what does it mean to look at underutilized assets? And so that's 00:07:56.139 --> 00:08:01.928 - essentially how Yachter Commons was born. And we're excited to share a little bit more about the RY, 00:08:01.928 --> 00:08:07.718 - as well as the work I hope we'll ask Block 4. So really, as you all are aware, I'm sure teachers and 00:08:07.718 --> 00:08:13.966 - other essential workers can't afford to live near where they work. And municipalities, like school districts 00:08:13.966 --> 00:08:14.654 - and cities, 00:08:14.690 --> 00:08:21.603 - own many assets that are either vacant or legalized. And so there's an opportunity to use that to lean 00:08:21.603 --> 00:08:28.381 - into that older supply and to catalyze really easy creative financing, the opportunity for adaptable 00:08:28.381 --> 00:08:35.092 - use or reuse for workforce housing. So a little bit more about what we do. We kind of have two main 00:08:35.092 --> 00:08:42.206 - focuses. So first and foremost, we build strategic partnerships with municipalities in order to transform 00:08:42.306 --> 00:08:48.254 - vacant civic spaces into workforce affordable housing and the other up around infrastructure that's 00:08:48.254 --> 00:08:54.560 - needed to really create a complete community that is comfortable and livable along with being sustainable 00:08:54.560 --> 00:09:00.687 - and resilient for the future. And then secondly, we also invest in workforce affordable housing across 00:09:00.687 --> 00:09:07.230 - the nation by providing low cost debt through a philanthropically enhanced fund that's at the national level. 00:09:09.026 --> 00:09:15.900 - So diving a little bit more into what our strategic public partnerships look like, we work with public 00:09:15.900 --> 00:09:22.641 - entities, with philanthropic partners, with private developers and other private community groups as 00:09:22.641 --> 00:09:28.782 - well to jointly finance and implement high impact projects that focus on workforce housing. 00:09:28.782 --> 00:09:35.589 - By doing that, we help to identify civic sites that are ideal for adaptive reuse or redevelopment. We 00:09:35.589 --> 00:09:38.526 - then design site-specific or portfolio-wide 00:09:38.690 --> 00:09:45.284 - strategies to incorporate stakeholder input to unlock financing and address the local housing need, 00:09:45.284 --> 00:09:51.879 - both at a community level, at a neighborhood level, or even at a larger, more regional approach. In 00:09:51.879 --> 00:09:58.737 - doing that, we assemble local development, design, and construction partners in order to make sure that 00:09:58.737 --> 00:10:04.606 - we are tapping into local knowledge, providing local jobs, and also building place-based 00:10:04.738 --> 00:10:11.760 - real estate development that makes sense for the communities we work in. And then finally, we invest 00:10:11.760 --> 00:10:18.991 - in these projects. So we provide efficient low cost capital, which often is the missing piece that gets 00:10:18.991 --> 00:10:26.013 - these projects over the hurdle to becoming a reality and becoming a place where people live and work 00:10:26.013 --> 00:10:28.446 - and thrive. So in terms of how the 00:10:28.610 --> 00:10:35.278 - creative financing works for us as we think about projects at a much larger scale. We think about this 00:10:35.278 --> 00:10:42.205 - national fund that Bradley mentioned as a part of, paired with our strategic partnerships. So at a typical 00:10:42.205 --> 00:10:48.743 - development level where the developer goes out to develop, even if they were to borrow from a CBI or 00:10:48.743 --> 00:10:55.476 - a high-impact institution, they're likely borrowing these days 8% or higher in some cases in the double 00:10:55.476 --> 00:10:56.382 - digits, which 00:10:56.706 --> 00:11:02.154 - causing these projects to look great on paper, but to ultimately not pencil. And so this is where our 00:11:02.154 --> 00:11:07.603 - capital comes into play, if needed, to bring the cost of capital down. As we all know, time is money. 00:11:07.603 --> 00:11:13.051 - If you can actually get these projects off the ground sooner rather than later, you then overcome the 00:11:13.051 --> 00:11:18.499 - challenges that might come when construction costs increase, or you're sitting on a project while you 00:11:18.499 --> 00:11:23.894 - wait for another sort of public subsidy to come through, like low income housing tax credits. And so 00:11:23.894 --> 00:11:26.672 - we see this as an opportunity to get ahead of that. 00:11:26.672 --> 00:11:37.313 - and a way to be paired with our strategic partnerships that create the value add for us and our partners. 00:11:37.313 --> 00:11:41.630 - And so ultimately our goal, if not stated, 00:11:41.794 --> 00:11:49.061 - Earlier, it is to really implement 10,000 high-quality, attainable homes in the next 10 years by working 00:11:49.061 --> 00:11:56.051 - in partnership with municipalities like yours and others across the country. We see this as thinking 00:11:56.051 --> 00:12:03.110 - about adaptive reuse and the reuse of civic-owned land to see it both as an environmental opportunity 00:12:03.110 --> 00:12:10.238 - as well as a social and financial impact, the opportunity to have a 33% reduction in carbon emissions. 00:12:10.370 --> 00:12:15.848 - and through adaptive reviews, when you're actually activating these blocks, these spaces and places 00:12:15.848 --> 00:12:21.491 - that are right now vacant or are blighted, there's an opportunity, a high opportunity to reduce crime. 00:12:21.491 --> 00:12:26.969 - That first project that I mentioned that I did almost 20 years ago now, that was a site that no one 00:12:26.969 --> 00:12:32.886 - wanted to go on by day. I remember walking that site with architects, and once it was ultimately developed, 00:12:32.886 --> 00:12:38.364 - that was a space that, and still is a space that everyone's comfortable walking on around at night. 00:12:38.364 --> 00:12:40.336 - And so we see this as a high impact 00:12:40.336 --> 00:12:46.835 - opportunity, not just the financial level, but most importantly, the social level. So to dive into exactly 00:12:46.835 --> 00:12:53.213 - the opportunity that we see at Hopewell and specifically on Block 4, I know you all have likely reviewed 00:12:53.213 --> 00:12:59.409 - the scope of work that we've put forward, but these next few slides just kind of dive into how we see 00:12:59.409 --> 00:13:05.544 - that scope of work going, and we would be happy to answer any questions you all have about what this 00:13:05.544 --> 00:13:09.310 - means for Bloomington, what this means for Hopewell at large, 00:13:09.506 --> 00:13:15.569 - and all of the above. So within the scope of work, we do see some research and due diligence that is 00:13:15.569 --> 00:13:21.931 - necessary, mostly to make sure that we look at past efforts that have been put forth towards the progress 00:13:21.931 --> 00:13:28.054 - at Hopewell and making sure that we're in alignment with the community needs, with the local context, 00:13:28.054 --> 00:13:34.236 - with anything that's kind of emerged since community engagement was done. And in that research and due 00:13:34.236 --> 00:13:38.558 - diligence period, we also see ourselves beginning to identify potential 00:13:38.946 --> 00:13:45.003 - Partnerships on the local level that was built in the workforce housing and ownership, which I know 00:13:45.003 --> 00:13:51.059 - is something that's in a priority specifically for this portion of the site. In the pre development 00:13:51.059 --> 00:13:56.510 - and planning phase, we hope to engage local and regional design and development partners. 00:13:56.738 --> 00:14:03.638 - and really dive into the pre-development of Block 4. So that looks like a master plan of Block 4. That 00:14:03.638 --> 00:14:10.738 - looks like beginning to think about what it looks like from a 3D perspective, from a massing perspective, 00:14:10.738 --> 00:14:17.906 - and really making sure that we update the housing unit types and affordability levels that you all foresee 00:14:17.906 --> 00:14:21.054 - for Bloomingtonians at this site specifically. 00:14:21.346 --> 00:14:27.654 - And then the final portion of this initial scope of work would be a financial feasibility analysis with 00:14:27.654 --> 00:14:34.145 - the ultimate goal of having a proposed capital stack. This would involve looking at home ownership models, 00:14:34.145 --> 00:14:40.453 - this would involve looking at leasing structures, and it would ultimately result in a pretty clear plan 00:14:40.453 --> 00:14:46.762 - of how to finance this whole portion of the site going forward, which in essence is also how we foresee 00:14:46.762 --> 00:14:50.462 - kind of getting to the ground and getting the ground running 00:14:50.594 --> 00:14:58.748 - development happening by the middle of next year. So this is just kind of that timeline that I was working 00:14:58.748 --> 00:15:06.596 - through on the last slide, but as you can see, all of this leads to the idea that by July 26, we would 00:15:06.596 --> 00:15:14.750 - be headed towards development and having a very clear plan for what the 12th last block for it looks like. 00:15:19.298 --> 00:15:27.113 - And so piggybacking off of Riley, really we see in terms of deliverables, we know oftentimes these projects, 00:15:27.113 --> 00:15:34.425 - the way they work, someone comes with a great plan and there's no plan to execute. And so this really 00:15:34.425 --> 00:15:41.953 - lands on us executing on the plan that gets delivered. So versus that block four plan that we described, 00:15:41.953 --> 00:15:44.606 - producing semantic mass and options, 00:15:44.706 --> 00:15:50.398 - for updating the unit count, the unit mix, so that it actually aligns and it's complementary to the 00:15:50.398 --> 00:15:56.148 - work that is happening. And then also block four based on just what the current marketing conditions 00:15:56.148 --> 00:16:02.238 - are and the available capital sources that we also help to source and bring to the table. And then lastly, 00:16:02.238 --> 00:16:07.646 - that capital stack so that the project that is delivered is something that can be executed on. 00:16:10.498 --> 00:16:16.864 - So with that we're happy to answer any questions. We're also looking forward to working with all of 00:16:16.864 --> 00:16:23.676 - you and we're really excited about the energy that's already gone into the whole redevelopment of football 00:16:23.676 --> 00:16:30.233 - and we're looking forward to being a part of what that could look like next. Thank you. Thank you. Any 00:16:30.233 --> 00:16:35.390 - questions or comments from commissioners or anything further from staff as well? 00:16:36.258 --> 00:16:43.857 - I don't have anything other than we encountered Darwin. We met him at Harvard in our fellowship as well. 00:16:43.857 --> 00:16:51.240 - He was also a faculty member during that fellowship and we're really impressed with him and his work. 00:16:51.240 --> 00:16:58.622 - And actually, Darwin and Riley both came to Bloomington and toured Hopewell and really got a feel for 00:16:59.010 --> 00:17:07.352 - what we were targeting, have had long conversations with the mayor. Derwin even met with MCCSE as well 00:17:07.352 --> 00:17:15.612 - to understand what their needs were and the gap in employment versus where you are capable of living. 00:17:15.612 --> 00:17:23.873 - So we feel comfortable with their work. I know that this is new to you guys, but we would like to see 00:17:23.873 --> 00:17:28.894 - it happen. Thank you very much. Excuse me. This resolution is 00:17:29.986 --> 00:17:40.880 - adopt the agreement between the RDC and Adaptive Commons, the amount of the fee would be an amount not 00:17:40.880 --> 00:17:51.457 - to exceed $125,200. And that could be paid from the fund line that's listed there. And so again, it 00:17:51.457 --> 00:17:58.014 - is approving the agreement that's attached to the resolution. 00:18:01.570 --> 00:18:08.392 - Thank you. I think we'll have two different parts to our discussion. One may be questions specifically 00:18:08.392 --> 00:18:15.016 - for the adaptive commons team. And then we may then conclude their presentation and have additional 00:18:15.016 --> 00:18:21.839 - discussion among ourselves. So questions or comments from commissioners, please? I have a question for 00:18:21.839 --> 00:18:28.926 - adaptive commons about, can you say more about exactly how your relationship with Flintlock Lab will work? 00:18:32.162 --> 00:18:38.426 - Yeah, I can start off speaking to that. So we are aware of the work that Flintmont Law is doing in Hopewell 00:18:38.426 --> 00:18:44.341 - South, and we have reviewed their proposal. And we honestly see ourselves as supporting that work, as 00:18:44.341 --> 00:18:50.199 - potentially helping to finance some of that work, and to also make sure that we're coordinating with 00:18:50.199 --> 00:18:56.114 - them from a construction standpoint, from an urban planning standpoint, all of the above. I know that 00:18:56.114 --> 00:18:59.710 - with the portion of Law Corps that we are now focusing on and 00:18:59.842 --> 00:19:06.193 - the southern portion that they're focused on, there actually isn't a direct connection to the two sites. 00:19:06.193 --> 00:19:12.483 - But we do want to support the overall redevelopment of Hope Row and see this portion of Block 4 as just 00:19:12.483 --> 00:19:18.713 - one component of a larger mission and a larger idea of this kind of complete neighborhood. And we hope 00:19:18.713 --> 00:19:25.184 - to support the entire project as best we can, both from phasing perspective, from a financing perspective, 00:19:25.184 --> 00:19:27.422 - and from a coordination perspective. 00:19:28.642 --> 00:19:36.022 - Let me also just call out that block four is the Hopewell garage. And so this type of housing is very 00:19:36.022 --> 00:19:43.257 - different than one flip block has done. I have talked to Allie about this as well. And this is just 00:19:43.257 --> 00:19:50.782 - not her wheelhouse to do a denser, more commercial building. We're envisioning condos that are wrapping 00:19:50.782 --> 00:19:57.438 - the garage. Can I add something else, too? Yeah. What was really illuminating when adaptive 00:19:57.666 --> 00:20:05.084 - Commons visited the site. Two things really stood out to me. One, the deep experience that Derwin has 00:20:05.084 --> 00:20:12.356 - with just different financial vehicles, including New Market's tax credits, which we haven't used a 00:20:12.356 --> 00:20:19.774 - lot of in this community. So I think when they talk about financing, they're really bringing a lot of 00:20:19.774 --> 00:20:26.174 - experience to the table related to those types of tools. And then to Anna's point about 00:20:26.466 --> 00:20:33.121 - thinking about the garage. I think their vision when they came to the site truly understood the garage 00:20:33.121 --> 00:20:39.905 - as an asset to the overall site that can really anchor and drive the development rather than how I think 00:20:39.905 --> 00:20:46.948 - we've become accustomed to thinking about it. Just we as staff or you all as the redevelopment commissioners 00:20:46.948 --> 00:20:53.474 - writing the checks. So they really viewed the position of the garage as a strength, especially as it 00:20:53.474 --> 00:20:56.446 - relates to the grocery store and the beeline. 00:20:56.994 --> 00:21:02.489 - I don't know if you want to say anything more about that, but I just wanted to. No, I mean. I'm sorry. 00:21:02.489 --> 00:21:07.877 - I wanted to speak a little bit more to that as well. I think the garage we do see with an asset, and 00:21:07.877 --> 00:21:13.425 - we also see it as an opportunity, because of its height, to add some density in this area in a way that 00:21:13.425 --> 00:21:18.920 - might not be as comfortable on the southern side, where Allie and the Flint Black Lab team is working, 00:21:18.920 --> 00:21:20.894 - whereas in this portion of the site, 00:21:21.186 --> 00:21:26.801 - It does make sense to add housing that could be four to five stories tall, that could kind of address 00:21:26.801 --> 00:21:32.470 - a different type of need and a different demographic than is maybe being addressed in Hopeville South. 00:21:32.470 --> 00:21:38.140 - And we like the idea that we could not necessarily compete with Valley, but instead kind of have these 00:21:38.140 --> 00:21:43.369 - two components that speak to different portions of the population of Livington and really open 00:21:43.369 --> 00:21:48.158 - up opportunities for housing, lots of different diverse populations in your community. 00:21:49.890 --> 00:21:56.307 - I just have a quick question that's based on Director Cooper Smith's comment, which is, do you see new 00:21:56.307 --> 00:22:02.662 - markets tax credits as being part of the capital stack for Block 4? Yeah, there's a huge opportunity, 00:22:02.662 --> 00:22:09.266 - especially if you think about the new markets typically is for commercial use. Right, that's my question. 00:22:09.266 --> 00:22:15.870 - And what's interesting about workforce housing is there's a way to bring workforce housing to address the 00:22:15.970 --> 00:22:22.604 - The workforce component of the market, but more than anything, any commercial component that goes call 00:22:22.604 --> 00:22:29.302 - that the ground level. So, say, let's just imagine you build a five story building and the four stories 00:22:29.302 --> 00:22:30.590 - about your housing. 00:22:30.690 --> 00:22:36.195 - The bottom floor can be early child care or some other community amenity. You would not only utilize 00:22:36.195 --> 00:22:42.027 - new market tax credits for that, but you could also leverage new market tax credits for the infrastructure 00:22:42.027 --> 00:22:47.586 - that would help to make that project viable. So then you get to think about new markets, not just for 00:22:47.586 --> 00:22:53.200 - that building alone, but the infrastructure in and surrounding that. So there are really creative ways 00:22:53.200 --> 00:22:57.342 - to address using new markets in ways that typically aren't used. Thank you. 00:22:57.922 --> 00:23:06.495 - I got a question. So to further your comment about financing, if you use that kind of financing, does 00:23:06.495 --> 00:23:14.899 - it limit the type of commercial uses that would be available to us? I would argue that it, in fact, 00:23:14.899 --> 00:23:23.304 - encourages and enhances more community-oriented uses. New Market's tax credits essentially wants to 00:23:23.304 --> 00:23:26.750 - ensure that more jobs are being created, 00:23:27.170 --> 00:23:35.055 - you're bringing workforce back into a neighborhood. And so this opens up all kinds of opportunities 00:23:35.055 --> 00:23:43.097 - that otherwise might be overlooked because of the lack of access to capital and markets would then be 00:23:43.097 --> 00:23:51.219 - that workforce scenario that allows it to happen. Does that answer your question or? Well, yes and no. 00:23:51.219 --> 00:23:54.846 - I get your point, and I would agree with you. 00:23:55.106 --> 00:24:04.595 - Just say it was going to be a law office or an accounting firm or a hair salon. I mean, is there a approved 00:24:04.595 --> 00:24:13.557 - list of uses that have to go along with that, with the use of that capital? Or is it pretty much open 00:24:13.557 --> 00:24:23.486 - to whatever our zoning allows? It's not so much an approved list, but the amount of jobs that you were creating. 00:24:23.714 --> 00:24:29.898 - you know, if you were building, if this were an accountant office versus, you know, a 10,000 square 00:24:29.898 --> 00:24:36.391 - foot warehouse that only housed a single employee, you're likely not going to get new market tax credits 00:24:36.391 --> 00:24:42.575 - for the 10,000 square foot warehouse, but for the accounting firm that now is bringing called 25 to 00:24:42.575 --> 00:24:49.192 - 30 new employees to the neighborhood that would otherwise not be there but for the new market tax credits. 00:24:49.192 --> 00:24:53.150 - Okay. I don't envision that kind of commercial space there. So, 00:24:54.178 --> 00:25:01.481 - But I get what you're saying. Thank you. And I just want to chime in here and say, we've had some experience 00:25:01.481 --> 00:25:08.180 - with our public offerings that they're not specific enough to be successful. And we've wasted a lot 00:25:08.180 --> 00:25:15.282 - of time with those. By getting consultants or folks that can help us really hone in and carve out exactly 00:25:15.282 --> 00:25:21.982 - what we're trying to accomplish will help us be successful when it does come time to issue a public 00:25:22.786 --> 00:25:30.875 - That's why this work is very important to us. Can I trouble you to put some slides back up? There's 00:25:30.875 --> 00:25:38.963 - one about a third of the way in that showed a bar graph that divided up incentives versus financing 00:25:38.963 --> 00:25:42.846 - and so forth. Can you put that back up, please? 00:25:48.706 --> 00:25:55.601 - That's it. Yeah. And in particular, can you talk more about public subsidies? What have you seen in 00:25:55.601 --> 00:26:02.634 - the past? What do you envision being appropriate for this particular setting? Yeah. So if you look at 00:26:02.634 --> 00:26:09.597 - the dotted line, if you look at the two dotted lines, the one above the dark square and then the one 00:26:09.597 --> 00:26:16.492 - sort of in the middle of the dark square, at the top level, if you imagine without the right source 00:26:16.492 --> 00:26:18.078 - of creative financing, 00:26:18.338 --> 00:26:24.903 - So let's just step back. That first dotted line, the arrows that show that space between, that's capital 00:26:24.903 --> 00:26:31.155 - or public subsidy that would be needed if the Hopewell land was not available to be participated in 00:26:31.155 --> 00:26:37.845 - the project. So think about the land itself as public subsidy. So now we've already, we being Bloomington, 00:26:37.845 --> 00:26:44.285 - have brought the cost of development down because of the land being participated with. The other arrow 00:26:44.285 --> 00:26:46.974 - going up with that other dotted line shows 00:26:47.138 --> 00:26:53.404 - the space in between the public subsidy that will be needed, if you didn't have a five to six percent 00:26:53.404 --> 00:26:59.854 - cost of debt, but instead your typical eight percent higher, you would need to have more public subsidy. 00:26:59.854 --> 00:27:06.488 - So the public subsidy that light gray square would essentially take up, without the land being participated 00:27:06.488 --> 00:27:12.877 - and without the cost of capital being at a lower cost, you would essentially, that gray area would take 00:27:12.877 --> 00:27:15.518 - up the space in between both dotted lines. 00:27:15.906 --> 00:27:22.148 - What then would typically take the place of that public subsidy or what would be that public subsidy 00:27:22.148 --> 00:27:28.328 - is typically low income housing tax credits. And low income housing tax credits at that level would 00:27:28.328 --> 00:27:34.632 - likely be the 9% tax credits that give the highest level of subsidy and are also the most competitive 00:27:34.632 --> 00:27:41.121 - to come by and also take about two years to just even manifest if you get it and also cost a few million 00:27:41.121 --> 00:27:43.902 - dollars to get to that stage of application. 00:27:44.034 --> 00:27:48.510 - If not, the 9% tax credits is likely even the 4%. 00:27:48.802 --> 00:27:56.365 - bond slash tax credits, which are easier to come by, non-competitive if you will, but still that restrict 00:27:56.365 --> 00:28:03.928 - the kind of affordability we're talking about. As we understand it, this is open to workforce affordable. 00:28:03.928 --> 00:28:11.205 - So not big A, but little A affordable, which still can go below 80% AMI, but also includes that 80 to 00:28:11.205 --> 00:28:18.768 - 120 AMI, that missing middle that is often left out of the conversation. And so in order to address that, 00:28:18.768 --> 00:28:26.309 - then that public subsidy needs to be replaced. And so this is a way to create a way to replace that 00:28:26.309 --> 00:28:34.378 - public subsidy. That's helpful. Thank you. That was a good question. I was wondering how long has Adaptive 00:28:34.378 --> 00:28:36.414 - Commons been in operation? 00:28:37.602 --> 00:28:44.449 - Adaptive Commons as a business has been in operation for two and a half years. As I shared, I was a 00:28:44.449 --> 00:28:51.502 - loan fellow at Harvard three years ago now, and this was my main focus to lift up a firm that actually 00:28:51.502 --> 00:28:56.638 - focused primarily on workforce affordable housing, be that adaptive reuse. 00:28:56.866 --> 00:29:03.456 - Prior to that, the work I had done had been tangential to this. It involved adaptive reuse, it involved 00:29:03.456 --> 00:29:09.984 - housing, it involved school development, and I realized that the next 20, 30 years, I know I look like 00:29:09.984 --> 00:29:16.637 - I'm 12, but the next 30, 40 years, I want to dedicate my life and career to work for support for housing 00:29:16.637 --> 00:29:19.806 - via adaptive reuse. And while adaptive commons is 00:29:19.970 --> 00:29:26.958 - two and a half years old, collectively, between Riley, myself, my partner Margaret, and Mike, we make 00:29:26.958 --> 00:29:33.877 - up decades and decades of experience, both on the real estate and on the finance side. Thank you. So 00:29:33.877 --> 00:29:40.728 - the reason for my question is because I'm interested in, I appreciate your big picture presentation 00:29:40.728 --> 00:29:47.716 - about the mission of Adaptive Commons. I'm interested in seeing examples of your portfolio that would 00:29:47.716 --> 00:29:49.086 - be most parallel to 00:29:49.282 --> 00:29:56.741 - what's intended for Hopewell Block 4 and I just need some more information about that if you could help 00:29:56.741 --> 00:30:04.200 - me with that please. Yes, and I can, you know, we're actually currently in Denver working with a client 00:30:04.200 --> 00:30:11.802 - that I would say is we're working with the school district on adaptive reuse strategy for their workforce 00:30:11.802 --> 00:30:16.894 - housing. So that's currently in our portfolio, but that's a, you know, 00:30:17.090 --> 00:30:23.492 - we'll be able to speak to that as that continues to manifest. I would say the most between the Sears 00:30:23.492 --> 00:30:30.020 - Crosstown work or the other project in Memphis, that might be the closest, which is why we share those 00:30:30.020 --> 00:30:36.485 - projects. Those are likely the closest aligned with Bloomington when you're talking about vacant land 00:30:36.485 --> 00:30:43.013 - that is ground up development using creative financing like the parking stock credits and also working 00:30:43.013 --> 00:30:47.006 - for affordable housing. Those are the closest representations. 00:30:47.170 --> 00:30:53.413 - I know that we shared a collective CV of our firm's joint experience and work that I think it wasn't 00:30:53.413 --> 00:30:59.595 - shared with you all. I'm sure we can make sure that it gets shared with you so that you have access 00:30:59.595 --> 00:31:05.838 - to a larger overview with the details of past projects that team members have worked on. I will just 00:31:05.838 --> 00:31:12.144 - note that I did get to see that. And I was a little concerned because the projects that at least were 00:31:12.144 --> 00:31:15.358 - featured in there were from, I think, 2016 to 2020. 00:31:15.586 --> 00:31:20.295 - kind of, you know, a little older than maybe some of your more recent work. It also wasn't clear to 00:31:20.295 --> 00:31:24.817 - me which members of your team were involved with which projects that were presented in that CV. 00:31:24.817 --> 00:31:29.714 - So I just, I feel like I need some more information about your firm to like really see that it's a good 00:31:29.714 --> 00:31:34.424 - fit for this project. And I don't know, again, you may not have that available now. You may want to 00:31:34.424 --> 00:31:39.228 - pull that together from some of your current projects. But, you know, I think it's really fascinating 00:31:39.228 --> 00:31:44.031 - what you're doing. And I appreciate, again, the big picture. I'm just still trying to look for a good 00:31:44.031 --> 00:31:44.926 - connection between 00:31:45.026 --> 00:31:54.560 - your expertise, and what's needed here. OK. And I can say, just off of my head of knowing what we submitted, 00:31:54.560 --> 00:32:03.657 - I was involved directly in most, but for one of those projects, or two of those projects, it would have 00:32:03.657 --> 00:32:12.753 - been another one on teammates. But I was at least involved in a majority of them. Thank you. Good luck. 00:32:12.753 --> 00:32:14.590 - Question? Everybody? 00:32:15.682 --> 00:32:21.723 - Have you guys, have they been provided with any structural report for the garage? I believe we have 00:32:21.723 --> 00:32:27.825 - shared some of that. I don't remember if they've seen the most recent one, though. We've shared some 00:32:27.825 --> 00:32:33.927 - information. It's been several months. The reason I ask that is, as they're looking at everyone with 00:32:33.927 --> 00:32:40.149 - this capital stack knowledge of how those structural components, because based on what I'm seeing, and 00:32:40.149 --> 00:32:44.318 - we're talking about condominiums in regards to wrapping this garage, 00:32:44.546 --> 00:32:51.485 - that structural component cost figure would have to be included in regards to it. So with that and that 00:32:51.485 --> 00:32:58.158 - question, then as you brought up the new market tax credit and our financing, which is the creative 00:32:58.158 --> 00:33:04.897 - thing that we need to look at, where do we get the residential dollars to build that? The new market 00:33:04.897 --> 00:33:11.569 - tax credit, is that a straight conventional financing or is that something that your debt financing 00:33:11.569 --> 00:33:14.238 - takes into consideration because of the 00:33:14.722 --> 00:33:22.284 - difficulty of financing condominiums in a workforce environment. The debt financing would be that would 00:33:22.284 --> 00:33:29.700 - go towards the residential. The new market tax credit would be more towards the infrastructure that's 00:33:29.700 --> 00:33:37.698 - necessary to build out everything that we're describing. But the debt financing would be for the residential. 00:33:37.698 --> 00:33:43.006 - OK. And then everything from a land standpoint that this sets on in your 00:33:43.170 --> 00:33:50.776 - capital stack situation would be a subsidy that would help to offset the overall cost? Yes, and the 00:33:50.776 --> 00:33:58.687 - expectation is that Bloomington would retain ownership of the land, that this would not need to be sold 00:33:58.687 --> 00:34:06.445 - to a developer in order for this to be successful. And then it would go? So you're saying it would be 00:34:06.445 --> 00:34:11.998 - leased? Ground lease, yes. Ground lease, OK. Ground lease then would be? 00:34:12.674 --> 00:34:19.920 - part of the ownership basis, not a lease basis on the units themselves. I think that there is an opportunity 00:34:19.920 --> 00:34:26.767 - to potentially consider homeownership and leasing opportunities on this portion of the site and across 00:34:26.767 --> 00:34:33.414 - the well. So any sort of ground-based structure, I think, we would collaborate with you all to make 00:34:33.414 --> 00:34:40.394 - sure that both of those components work. But yes, there is an opportunity here to look at a ground-based 00:34:40.394 --> 00:34:42.654 - structure, but then a condominium 00:34:42.818 --> 00:34:50.880 - ownership model where some of the units or all of the units in a portion of the site are of ownership 00:34:50.880 --> 00:34:58.785 - but under some sort of like trust model in which the ground lease is still held by the city. Do you 00:34:58.785 --> 00:35:07.084 - have examples of where that's been able to accomplish that? We can provide them. Yeah, there are several 00:35:07.084 --> 00:35:12.222 - community trust models that work with this structure. Thank you. 00:35:13.122 --> 00:35:24.801 - Any other questions for our presenters today? Appreciate it. Appreciate your time. Thank you very much. 00:35:24.801 --> 00:35:36.030 - Thank you. Thank you. OK. So we do have in front of us, sorry, I'm just pulling the agenda back up. 00:35:38.210 --> 00:35:44.831 - Resolution 25-141, which is the approval and agreement with Adaptive Commons for a comprehensive and 00:35:44.831 --> 00:35:51.583 - coordinated design of Hopewell West Block 4. We had a chance to ask our questions directly of Adaptive 00:35:51.583 --> 00:35:58.203 - Commons. I am just now, as I mentioned earlier, opening this for a separate line of questioning just 00:35:58.203 --> 00:36:05.152 - among commissioners as opposed to with the prospective firm. Any comments or questions about the proposed 00:36:05.152 --> 00:36:07.774 - approval of this agreement? I have one. 00:36:08.514 --> 00:36:16.855 - in regards to, was this RFP put out to any other architectural? We have not issued an RFP. This is to 00:36:16.855 --> 00:36:25.115 - help us get an RFP together. OK. And the RFP would be for the? Any offering to help us get it built. 00:36:25.115 --> 00:36:33.619 - So this is to really laser focus in on how we're going to involve developers, builders, how we're going 00:36:33.619 --> 00:36:36.318 - to get this done. And with that, 00:36:37.922 --> 00:36:43.696 - selectiveness to try to get this in from a capital stack standpoint. And will this still create a situation 00:36:43.696 --> 00:36:49.095 - where we need to go back through into the planning, the UDO? Don't know yet. So this is a first step 00:36:49.095 --> 00:36:54.495 - situation that would still have to be looked at architecturally, engineering, and through a planning 00:36:54.495 --> 00:37:00.054 - process. And that's part of what they're going to do in their feasibility analysis, too. And the reason 00:37:00.054 --> 00:37:05.507 - I ask that is given the complexity as we have to move forward to try to actually get something built, 00:37:05.507 --> 00:37:07.806 - that schedule that they're looking at July 00:37:08.546 --> 00:37:15.442 - Next year. That's extraordinarily aggressive based on. Right. The longer you wait, the longer it's going 00:37:15.442 --> 00:37:22.075 - to take. Exactly. But, you know, given where we are on other projects in the process, how we change, 00:37:22.075 --> 00:37:28.905 - is this another situation where we have to go through a PUD? I don't know yet. I think, um, when Derwin 00:37:28.905 --> 00:37:35.998 - was here, you know, we've talked about the garage. It needs repairs. Is it, do we keep it? Do we let it go? 00:37:36.322 --> 00:37:44.404 - But in talking to him, it became very clear that it really is an asset. And it's an asset that a developer 00:37:44.404 --> 00:37:52.109 - could leverage to help get the product that we want, which is not student-centric housing. It's going 00:37:52.109 --> 00:37:59.738 - to be ownership models or a mix to accomplish more housing at Hopewell. And I don't have capacity to 00:37:59.738 --> 00:38:01.022 - do it on my own. 00:38:01.122 --> 00:38:08.283 - Further, Derwin has background in these creative financing methods that are really challenging to find. 00:38:08.283 --> 00:38:15.169 - And then based on the time frame and what they're looking at, is this part of my analogy, a soup to 00:38:15.169 --> 00:38:22.124 - nuts type situation where it's start to finish or do they need to engage other local partnerships in 00:38:22.124 --> 00:38:24.190 - order to do that and then the 00:38:24.290 --> 00:38:29.656 - continuation coming back and needing additional dollars on top of this. Well, I think that that's part 00:38:29.656 --> 00:38:34.971 - of this, is that they are going to be helping us engage with developers locally to try and figure out 00:38:34.971 --> 00:38:40.181 - what the next steps are. I don't think that this is one and done. I think this is the first bite at 00:38:40.181 --> 00:38:45.443 - the apple to get it done, get it going, get momentum, figure out what our zoning is, figure out what 00:38:45.443 --> 00:38:51.070 - the feasibility is, figure out what the capital stack needs to be, get a general master site plan together. 00:38:51.330 --> 00:39:00.107 - for that block, which is rather large, if you saw that on the platform. You already mentioned this, 00:39:00.107 --> 00:39:08.884 - but just so I'm clear, the current parking structure, the structural integrity of it, they're aware 00:39:08.884 --> 00:39:14.238 - of the current state of that parking structure and they have 00:39:15.522 --> 00:39:22.772 - They can work with what they know we have now. I think so. I think we talked when they were here about 00:39:22.772 --> 00:39:29.811 - the need to spend approximately $5 million on the structure itself. That was one of the last quotes 00:39:29.811 --> 00:39:37.273 - that I remember in that CE solutions analysis. But it's somewhere around there. But to replace the entire 00:39:37.273 --> 00:39:44.734 - parking garage is significantly more for sure. So it was worth the investment to try and get it fixed up. 00:39:44.898 --> 00:39:51.767 - We have that report that's available. To the point of block four and where the garage sits. And then 00:39:51.767 --> 00:39:58.908 - we have our open area, which has some environmental issues that we've discovered. That are being cleaned 00:39:58.908 --> 00:40:05.913 - up. Oh, no, we're in the process. Yeah, we're working towards that closure letter now. And we're very, 00:40:05.913 --> 00:40:12.850 - very close. So in fact, we had the covenants that were required to be recorded. And you guys saw them 00:40:12.850 --> 00:40:14.142 - earlier this year. 00:40:15.074 --> 00:40:21.635 - Yep, as we look through Block 4 and the pictorial that they brought in regards to condominiums 00:40:21.635 --> 00:40:29.162 - and surrounding the garage with residential housing, Block 4 also includes that area. So their creativeness, 00:40:29.162 --> 00:40:36.068 - they're looking at how they reutilize that lot, how this capital stack would work, and how we would 00:40:36.068 --> 00:40:42.974 - utilize residential or commercial mixed use in regards to the garage. That still leaves the area to 00:40:42.974 --> 00:40:44.286 - the east and north 00:40:44.482 --> 00:40:51.305 - It would still have to be determined what would go there. Correct. And that is not part of their scope. 00:40:51.305 --> 00:40:57.865 - Theirs is just block four. OK. Well, block four includes that area. So yes, they're master planning 00:40:57.865 --> 00:41:04.623 - the entire block. They would be master planning it with then just looking at the area. That's a pretty 00:41:04.623 --> 00:41:11.380 - significant area. Correct. That would be a big lot. A big lot that we'd have to look at what it is and 00:41:11.380 --> 00:41:14.398 - then what the community based on our previous 00:41:14.530 --> 00:41:23.314 - Needs are. Are they going to help decide that, or are we going to help direct them on that? I think 00:41:23.314 --> 00:41:32.185 - it's a little bit above. I also just want to say that the mayor has joined us, and she may have some 00:41:32.185 --> 00:41:41.232 - things she would like to comment on regarding the adaptive commons proposal. I'm happy to comment, but 00:41:41.232 --> 00:41:42.462 - I'm coming in 00:41:43.170 --> 00:41:50.852 - fresh to this particular conversation. I'll just say that we had a really pretty phenomenal site visit 00:41:50.852 --> 00:41:58.310 - with adaptive commons, and they were able to see things that really just hadn't been pointed out in 00:41:58.310 --> 00:42:05.022 - the past, some possibilities that we thought really were worth working towards, and there 00:42:05.602 --> 00:42:13.601 - Their ability to plan and tap different kinds of capital stacks for these kinds of things is really 00:42:13.601 --> 00:42:22.080 - an asset that I think we need in this community, and that especially if we're going to do some innovative 00:42:22.080 --> 00:42:30.639 - things that help while getting them on board is, I think, going to be a big asset to this overall project. 00:42:30.639 --> 00:42:34.718 - Thank you. Other questions from the commissioners? 00:42:35.682 --> 00:42:43.959 - Jane, can you just further explain to me why this is not a project for Flintlock? Yeah, I can. I think 00:42:43.959 --> 00:42:51.994 - because we're starting with block four, which is targeted for more density than what is appropriate 00:42:51.994 --> 00:43:00.030 - at South and what we're committed to for South. So this just isn't, it's not apples to apples. It's 00:43:00.030 --> 00:43:03.646 - a different animal and it requires different 00:43:03.746 --> 00:43:10.695 - financial modeling. So if you compare to what Flintlock's doing on South, for example, they're working 00:43:10.695 --> 00:43:17.577 - on baked-in affordability with maybe or maybe not contemplation of land value. But they're working on 00:43:17.577 --> 00:43:24.392 - just really increasing the affordability, reducing the cost through incremental decisions that we're 00:43:24.392 --> 00:43:31.206 - making, and making those improvements to the UDO, or making recommendations. Sorry, I'm out of line. 00:43:31.206 --> 00:43:32.286 - Sorry, the PUD. 00:43:32.930 --> 00:43:40.265 - baking that into the PV. So with adaptive commons, it's really site planning this block, planning for 00:43:40.265 --> 00:43:47.960 - density, and they're delivering us to a different phase of the development. So they're doing the strategic 00:43:47.960 --> 00:43:55.367 - thinking for the whole block, financial planning, and then we'll tee us up so that we can go after the 00:43:55.367 --> 00:44:02.846 - developers at the end of it. So I think what in that timeline when it said July, ready for development, 00:44:04.066 --> 00:44:11.008 - If we were a private entity, we would be like, yes, let's go break ground. But as they already see where 00:44:11.008 --> 00:44:17.751 - you would be at that moment is, let's go release a new public offering. So you've talked to Flintlock 00:44:17.751 --> 00:44:24.560 - about this. They've been. I have. All right. So they're aware. Absolutely. Flintlock has. And they can 00:44:24.560 --> 00:44:31.502 - be collaborative with. Flintlock is excited to work with. They know each other. Also, Ali was very clear 00:44:31.502 --> 00:44:34.014 - to say that this is not what we like. 00:44:34.690 --> 00:44:43.286 - More density is not there in the house as far as big multi-family structures or what we're talking about 00:44:43.286 --> 00:44:51.636 - here. She said she will not do it. That's not. Yeah, she said she will not do large-form residential. 00:44:51.636 --> 00:45:00.150 - She will support them. And so she's going to help by sharing her code analysis, by helping to prop them 00:45:00.150 --> 00:45:03.998 - up for success from what we've already learned 00:45:09.538 --> 00:45:16.007 - basis we're looking at because in Derlin, their past financial experience in regards to getting the 00:45:16.007 --> 00:45:22.928 - capital stack on unique sites and things is one of our primary goals while we're looking at hiring another 00:45:22.928 --> 00:45:29.461 - out-of-state firm. And then they would collaborate with some local firms in regards to architectural 00:45:29.461 --> 00:45:36.253 - and any other engineering things that are necessary. I believe, yes, it will be a collaboration. Because 00:45:36.253 --> 00:45:39.358 - in the past, we have went through out-of-state, 00:45:39.522 --> 00:45:46.007 - here's the idea, and then it's kind of fell flat. So it's in the past. It's in the past. We've fallen 00:45:46.007 --> 00:45:52.555 - flat with numerous RDCs. And it was prior to this administration, so I'm not putting anything out. I'm 00:45:52.555 --> 00:45:59.167 - just looking at the situation of another thing we're consulting, and we want to get to building. Right. 00:45:59.167 --> 00:46:05.716 - Well, and the RDC currently has an enormous number of projects. As you're well aware, by the fact that 00:46:05.716 --> 00:46:08.958 - we're in, what, 150 plus resolutions for the year. 00:46:09.346 --> 00:46:17.380 - We do not the staff does not have enough capacity to try and take this on as well. So if we want to 00:46:17.380 --> 00:46:25.815 - make measurable Momentum at hopeful we need someone that knows what they're doing They do refer to Under 00:46:25.815 --> 00:46:34.250 - financial feasibility as boots suppose this refers to financial entities, but they're they do talk about 00:46:34.250 --> 00:46:39.070 - identifying key partnerships as well as capital sources and 00:46:39.618 --> 00:46:49.770 - I was just looking to see if they're where they might reference community engagement, local professional 00:46:49.770 --> 00:46:59.536 - expertise. I don't particularly see it, but it's certainly something I imagine we can make clear. To 00:46:59.536 --> 00:47:06.014 - your point, Randy, that having more knowledge from potential other 00:47:07.682 --> 00:47:15.089 - entities that might participate in this. Having that knowledge early on is a benefit. I'm just going 00:47:15.089 --> 00:47:22.423 - to add, for me, I think it's truly exciting to hear from Adaptive Commons, some of their innovation 00:47:22.423 --> 00:47:29.831 - ideas. I'd love to see what that could bring to Hopewell. My main area of kind of hesitation is when 00:47:29.831 --> 00:47:35.038 - I went to their website, I did not see a portfolio of projects at all. 00:47:35.586 --> 00:47:42.005 - That was why I reached out to Anna to ask for a portfolio, and what I got was interesting, but did not 00:47:42.005 --> 00:47:48.549 - really fill in certain blanks for me. Again, interesting, but as I mentioned, I wasn't sure who on their 00:47:48.549 --> 00:47:55.155 - team had done what. I appreciate that Derwin had done some of them, but there's a wide range of projects, 00:47:55.155 --> 00:47:59.518 - not all of which are, at least in my mind, quite a fit with Hopewell. 00:48:00.226 --> 00:48:05.683 - I would appreciate the opportunity to get some examples of written deliverables from comparable planning, 00:48:05.683 --> 00:48:10.883 - pre-development engagements, in addition to the capital stack that they might want to bring to it. I 00:48:10.883 --> 00:48:16.032 - think it's great, the idea to think about bringing new markets tax credits into it, but I feel like 00:48:16.032 --> 00:48:21.283 - there's just some open-endedness. Again, I'm all for trying to move things forward, but I really want 00:48:21.283 --> 00:48:23.806 - to make sure it's being done with due diligence. 00:48:23.938 --> 00:48:31.336 - my comment at this point is about the due diligence of feeling like I want to know what they've done 00:48:31.336 --> 00:48:39.173 - that's really closely aligned with this project that would be an example of the portfolio that I'm looking 00:48:39.173 --> 00:48:46.645 - for to feel comfortable moving forward. I have the same concern as Deborah does and I did not look at 00:48:46.645 --> 00:48:53.310 - their website. This is purely from talking to them. I think they bring a lot to the table. 00:48:56.514 --> 00:49:05.550 - think having a firm like that or them would be beneficial. So I'm not opposed to having somebody on 00:49:05.550 --> 00:49:14.767 - board. But I also don't want to be their next resume builder. I want somebody that can really get the 00:49:14.767 --> 00:49:24.256 - job done. And so I wasn't convinced that they were ready for us, quite frankly. They talked a good game, 00:49:24.256 --> 00:49:26.334 - but I'm just not sure. 00:49:27.394 --> 00:49:34.747 - cheering response to that that might help us feel better? No. But I mean, I think that you guys have 00:49:34.747 --> 00:49:42.683 - a choice, whether you vote to approve, deny, or table it. Table it and allow us to get some more information 00:49:42.683 --> 00:49:50.327 - to use that we do feel comfortable. But the likelihood is that that's not going to come up until January 00:49:50.327 --> 00:49:56.734 - or February of 26. So that's completely your call. We can gather some more information. 00:50:00.290 --> 00:50:08.051 - Quick question. What's the first day of our next meeting? It is January 5th. January 5th. That's our 00:50:08.051 --> 00:50:16.119 - organizational meeting, however. So that'll be the meeting that we approve the calendar and be the 12th. 00:50:16.119 --> 00:50:23.957 - Well, that happens to fall on a holiday the following meeting. So I believe the meeting after that is 00:50:23.957 --> 00:50:29.182 - going to be the first week of February. I think so. Second meeting. 00:50:30.530 --> 00:50:39.303 - And also, your appointments are for one year. However, the code says that you continue to serve until 00:50:39.303 --> 00:50:47.989 - you're replaced by a qualified person. So it is always my hope that when the first of the year rolls 00:50:47.989 --> 00:50:57.192 - around that that could be done, appointments could be done from the mayor's office, from the city council, 00:50:57.192 --> 00:51:00.030 - so that we can make sure that we 00:51:00.258 --> 00:51:08.476 - We've got the team going forward. But it's the statute that holds you serve until you're replaced. There's 00:51:08.476 --> 00:51:16.464 - not a deadline on that, but sooner is better than later. So that actually works out fairly well because 00:51:16.464 --> 00:51:24.222 - that gives the time frame to ask any additional questions, have all the answers to whether it be the 00:51:24.222 --> 00:51:29.982 - group here or whether it be the next group so they have full understanding 00:51:30.210 --> 00:51:37.206 - and all of the questions that have been asked here, we don't have any issues. Now, I hate to put things 00:51:37.206 --> 00:51:43.933 - off anymore, but I will make a recommendation to table until that first available meeting to garner 00:51:43.933 --> 00:51:50.728 - all the information so that us or any new commissioners have everything to make the decision to move 00:51:50.728 --> 00:51:57.657 - this forward into a financing and a bill as soon as possible. So I'll put that as a motion. Riverdive. 00:51:57.657 --> 00:51:59.742 - We have a motion on the table. 00:52:00.898 --> 00:52:06.590 - We have a second. To table. The motion is to table. I'm just rephrasing to make sure it's clear. 00:52:06.590 --> 00:52:12.928 - To table, resolution 25-141, which is the approval of the agreement with Adaptive Commons for comprehensive 00:52:12.928 --> 00:52:18.913 - and coordinated design of both Boblock floor and West Boblock floor. I'll second. We have a first and 00:52:18.913 --> 00:52:24.957 - a second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion passes unanimously. Thank you. With all 00:52:24.957 --> 00:52:28.830 - that information, it'd be fantastic. And then we'll just move it. 00:52:29.666 --> 00:52:37.525 - We have a comprehensive list of what information. We don't and I'm going to send you guys an email right 00:52:37.525 --> 00:52:45.160 - now. Please respond to that email individually to me with your questions. Thank you. OK, next item on 00:52:45.160 --> 00:52:53.169 - our agenda is resolution 25-151, which is the approval of the adoption of the Citizen Advisory Committee's 00:52:53.169 --> 00:52:58.334 - recommendations for the allocation of the 2026 Community Development 00:52:58.466 --> 00:53:04.986 - block grant funds, who would like to speak to that? This is also the public hearing portion. We're starting 00:53:04.986 --> 00:53:11.204 - the public hearing. We're starting the public hearing for this portion of the meeting for the approval 00:53:11.204 --> 00:53:17.603 - of the adoption of the Citizens Advisory Committee's recommendations for the allocation of 2026 community 00:53:17.603 --> 00:53:23.882 - development block grant funds. All right. Yeah, you guys should have known if I was here, we were going 00:53:23.882 --> 00:53:27.806 - to talk about CDBG. So I just thought you liked it. Some of you. 00:53:28.194 --> 00:53:37.945 - Anyway, I'd like to thank you guys for the opportunity to present tonight. I'm here to present the 2026 00:53:37.945 --> 00:53:47.322 - CDBG allocations that the CAC recently awarded based on the applications submitted and the guidance 00:53:47.322 --> 00:53:51.166 - that the new consolidated plan provided. 00:53:52.738 --> 00:53:58.952 - A little bit about CDBG. For the past 50 years, community partners have worked hand in hand with HUD 00:53:58.952 --> 00:54:05.412 - to deliver impactful change, especially for low to moderate income communities through CDBG. Since 1974, 00:54:05.412 --> 00:54:11.749 - HUD has invested over $170 billion in urban, suburban, and rural communities through the CDBG program. 00:54:11.749 --> 00:54:17.963 - HUD awards grants to entitlement community grantees, which the city of Bloomington has won, to carry 00:54:17.963 --> 00:54:22.270 - out a wide range of community development activities directed towards 00:54:22.370 --> 00:54:30.882 - revitalizing neighborhoods, economic development, and providing improved community facilities and services. 00:54:30.882 --> 00:54:38.999 - In order to receive funding, activities that are applied for by the applicants must meet a two-pronged 00:54:38.999 --> 00:54:46.880 - test. One, eligibility under federal regulation, and two, ability to meet a national objective. All 00:54:46.880 --> 00:54:52.318 - activities must meet one of the national objectives for the program. 00:54:52.578 --> 00:55:00.043 - which the three are benefit to low to moderate income persons, prevent or eliminate slum and blight, 00:55:00.043 --> 00:55:07.435 - and or meet an urgent need which fulfill community development needs that have a particular urgency 00:55:07.435 --> 00:55:14.901 - based on existing conditions that pose a serious or immediate threat to the health or welfare of the 00:55:14.901 --> 00:55:22.366 - community. A little bit about the process. Some of you actually were involved in the process, Randy. 00:55:22.530 --> 00:55:30.551 - Endeavor, we appreciate your willingness to serve and the work that you put in. So every year, we make 00:55:30.551 --> 00:55:38.339 - an estimate of what the allocation will be, and we base that on the previous year, what we received 00:55:38.339 --> 00:55:46.282 - as our actual allocation. For the 2026 funding year, which starts June 1st of 26 and runs through May 00:55:46.282 --> 00:55:51.422 - 31st of 2027, we estimate the total allocation would be $778,293. 00:55:52.578 --> 00:56:04.942 - Our allocation is always broken down as follows. 65% for physical improvements, which would be $505,890.45, 00:56:04.942 --> 00:56:16.734 - 15% for social services, which would be $116,743.95, and 20% for administration, which is $155,658.60. 00:56:16.734 --> 00:56:21.886 - In October, we start accepting applications. 00:56:22.018 --> 00:56:29.392 - Once they are checked for eligibility, they are presented to the CAC Citizens Advisory Committee. The 00:56:29.392 --> 00:56:36.837 - CAC examines the applications and listens to applicant presentations and then deliberates to determine 00:56:36.837 --> 00:56:44.500 - the allocations with contingency language for more or less funding once we find out our final allocation. 00:56:44.500 --> 00:56:51.006 - After the CAC, the allocations must be presented to the RDC and then to the city council. 00:56:51.650 --> 00:56:59.765 - As I said before, both the RDC and the City Council have representation on the CAC. We do this because 00:56:59.765 --> 00:57:07.723 - that is the way it is laid out in our Citizens Participation Plan, which we develop based on federal 00:57:07.723 --> 00:57:15.916 - regulations. I'm going to read through the projects that were presented, both the physical improvements 00:57:15.916 --> 00:57:17.886 - and the social services. 00:57:18.530 --> 00:57:26.430 - The Boys and Girls Club had a project for gym improvements and security access point upgrades. Life 00:57:26.430 --> 00:57:34.331 - Designs had a project for group home flooring. Middleway House is going to install a new fire panel 00:57:34.331 --> 00:57:42.231 - at 338 South Washington. My Sister's Closet has a major renovation project at the new location that 00:57:42.231 --> 00:57:45.470 - they've acquired. New Hope for Families. 00:57:45.634 --> 00:57:53.485 - is going to be doing HVAC work and a build out of the basement of the family shelter. And Summit Hill 00:57:53.485 --> 00:58:01.490 - Community Development Corporation is going to be redoing the Reverend Butler playground and surrounding 00:58:01.490 --> 00:58:09.264 - courtyard. The social services, I'll read that down through the list, but pretty much all of them is 00:58:09.264 --> 00:58:15.422 - mostly staff salaries and food distribution. We have community kitchen, beacon, 00:58:15.522 --> 00:58:23.293 - Hoosier Hills Food Bank, Boys and Girls Club, New Hope for Families, Middleway House, New Leaf New Life, 00:58:23.293 --> 00:58:31.212 - Courage to Change Sober Living, Pantry 279, Summit Hill Community Development Corporation, and My Sister's 00:58:31.212 --> 00:58:38.613 - Closet. So again, we are bringing you the 2026 CDBG allocations, which were voted on by the CAC, to 00:58:38.613 --> 00:58:43.646 - fulfill our federal obligation of fulfilling our citizens' position 00:58:43.746 --> 00:58:53.771 - participation plan. Easy for me to say. We do this every year. These are great projects. I never envy 00:58:53.771 --> 00:59:04.190 - the work that the CAC has to do to make these allocations. We typically get at least two times the amount 00:59:04.190 --> 00:59:11.070 - of request more than what we are awarded, so they have to do a lot of 00:59:11.298 --> 00:59:19.726 - hard work to determine who's going to get the funding and how much. So we really appreciate their efforts. 00:59:19.726 --> 00:59:27.760 - Available for any questions that you might have. I just note that exhibit A and B have the breakdowns 00:59:27.760 --> 00:59:35.873 - for each of the entities mentioned. And that is part of the resolution. Any questions or comments from 00:59:35.873 --> 00:59:37.054 - commissioners? 00:59:37.506 --> 00:59:45.962 - Quick question in regards to the allocations for the administration. That is for each individual recipient 00:59:45.962 --> 00:59:53.943 - for their administration of the grant and not 20% for taking care of or you having to administer. So 00:59:53.943 --> 01:00:02.083 - that 20% is for the city of Bloomington's administration of the grant. That's what I wanted to verify, 01:00:02.083 --> 01:00:05.086 - that it was to cover the costs of you 01:00:05.314 --> 01:00:11.555 - being able to administer these grants and verify that these projects aren't going to be done. Which 01:00:11.555 --> 01:00:17.921 - brings me to my second question. Based on what you see, Matt and Cody, and your experience there, you 01:00:17.921 --> 01:00:24.162 - feel as though these, not feel, but you know that these projects will be able to be done within the 01:00:24.162 --> 01:00:30.404 - time frame in order to hit the CBDG requirements. To the best of your knowledge. To the best of our 01:00:30.404 --> 01:00:34.398 - knowledge, the applicants did present timelines that would meet 01:00:34.722 --> 01:00:40.296 - what we need to to expend funds. Thank you. And I appreciate both of you guys' hard work on this. 01:00:40.296 --> 01:00:46.495 - Thank you. Any other questions or comments from commissioners? I'll just say, as somebody who's participated 01:00:46.495 --> 01:00:52.353 - in the Social Services Committee for several years, it is a hard work, but it's amazing the incredible 01:00:52.353 --> 01:00:58.154 - work that the nonprofits in our community do. And I appreciate having the opportunity to at least see 01:00:58.154 --> 01:01:03.102 - what they're doing and be part of supporting them in this way. But yeah, it's amazing. 01:01:03.554 --> 01:01:11.133 - you know, one small part of what they need. So I'm glad that this CDBG funds are available to support 01:01:11.133 --> 01:01:18.785 - them and that the city makes that happen. This is a public hearing. I'm looking for any public comment 01:01:18.785 --> 01:01:26.215 - on resolution 25-151 on the CDBG recommendations for 2026, either in person or online. Seeing none, 01:01:26.215 --> 01:01:30.302 - I will entertain a motion for this resolution, please. 01:01:30.530 --> 01:01:38.025 - I'll move approval of resolution 25-151. Second. I'll move a first and a second. All in favor say aye. 01:01:38.025 --> 01:01:45.447 - Aye. Motion passes unanimously, and the public hearing is now closed. Thank you very much. Thank you. 01:01:45.447 --> 01:01:53.161 - OK. Next item on our agenda is resolution 25-152, which is the approval of the conceptual, comprehensive, 01:01:53.161 --> 01:02:00.510 - and coordinated design of Hopewell South, blocks 8, 9, and 10 for rezoning. And I'll just note that. 01:02:00.674 --> 01:02:06.487 - The redevelopment commission was invited to be part of a city council convening with the mayor earlier 01:02:06.487 --> 01:02:12.130 - just before this meeting. And this is regarding that we did not have a chance to ask any questions, 01:02:12.130 --> 01:02:17.943 - which is fine. It was really the council's meeting. But I appreciate it being invited. But this is our 01:02:17.943 --> 01:02:24.094 - chance to discuss anything that may have come up in looking at the proposal as well as what's in our packet. 01:02:24.290 --> 01:02:30.533 - I will ask who's going to present this. I'm happy to talk about this tonight. So as you know, and you 01:02:30.533 --> 01:02:36.775 - learned earlier today or through this process, the Hopewell South site cannot be developed to achieve 01:02:36.775 --> 01:02:43.201 - the city's housing goals under the existing R4 zoning standards due to dimensional restrictions, minimum 01:02:43.201 --> 01:02:46.078 - lot area and width, and frontage requirements. 01:02:46.178 --> 01:02:52.197 - An analysis of development under the current zoning regulations allowed for only 28 homes to be constructed 01:02:52.197 --> 01:02:57.938 - at price points unattainable to a Bloomington resident earning the area meeting income. Hopewell South 01:02:57.938 --> 01:03:03.790 - plan unit development is designed to not only guide the redevelopment of these blocks, but to also serve 01:03:03.790 --> 01:03:07.134 - as a prototype for attainable urban housing in Bloomington. 01:03:07.458 --> 01:03:13.683 - The PUD seeks to demonstrate how smaller lots, context-based frontage, and simplified subdivision processes 01:03:13.683 --> 01:03:19.907 - can expand homeownership opportunities without compromising neighborhood form or environmental performance. 01:03:19.907 --> 01:03:25.786 - In doing so, it advances the city's broader objectives of fostering compact, connected, and inclusive 01:03:25.786 --> 01:03:31.550 - neighborhoods as outlined in the comprehensive plan and the Hopewell Master redevelopment strategy. 01:03:32.706 --> 01:03:39.897 - So what you guys are actually being asked to approve right now is the conceptual approval of what we've 01:03:39.897 --> 01:03:47.157 - filed for the plan commission, which is on January 12th. So in order to stay on track and to potentially 01:03:47.157 --> 01:03:54.693 - have approval this spring in order to hit the building season over the summer, we would need your conceptual 01:03:54.693 --> 01:04:01.054 - approval of what we have filed, the materials that were filed. They are also in the packet. 01:04:01.698 --> 01:04:09.639 - The project's overall aim is to deliver the homeownership opportunities and the PUD that is in front 01:04:09.639 --> 01:04:17.501 - of you can reduce the average home price by more than 30% and provide 70% more total homes than can 01:04:17.501 --> 01:04:23.870 - be built by right under the existing R4 zoning. This is not a final version yet. 01:04:24.066 --> 01:04:31.152 - Changes can be made. I think our last day to give the Planning Department changes on what we've filed 01:04:31.152 --> 01:04:38.446 - is December 29th. But we do need your approval to move forward to Plan Commission. And even at the first 01:04:38.446 --> 01:04:45.740 - hearing for Plan Commission, there are likely going to be changes and discussions as we gather community 01:04:45.740 --> 01:04:49.630 - input and hear how we need to zone in on what is right. 01:04:50.050 --> 01:05:01.582 - So this is just one of those steps that you're conceptually approving what we have filed. Thank you. 01:05:01.582 --> 01:05:14.142 - Open for questions and comments from commissioners on resolution 25-152, please. Go ahead. OK. Good question. 01:05:14.434 --> 01:05:23.064 - Okay, long story short, the PUD that's just been presented, we've looked through, Ali did a great job 01:05:23.064 --> 01:05:31.525 - at the council presentation. What's the number of homes we're presenting so the public has an idea? 01:05:31.525 --> 01:05:39.902 - I believe it's 98. Okay, so we're looking to go from 28 in the beginning to 98 in a walkable area. 01:05:40.482 --> 01:05:48.728 - close to our community that will generate more tax dollars. Yeah, and of course, these could change. 01:05:48.728 --> 01:05:57.137 - But right now, what we're targeting is ranging in sales price from $83,000 all the way up to $653,000, 01:05:57.137 --> 01:06:05.709 - only a couple of those units. With the very vast majority, I think at least 50% of the units being built 01:06:05.709 --> 01:06:08.158 - are going to be attainable to 01:06:08.482 --> 01:06:14.237 - 100% of our area median income, which is really incredible considering building costs, land costs. That's 01:06:14.237 --> 01:06:19.775 - really not something that we're going to see with new construction. And there's the process that goes 01:06:19.775 --> 01:06:25.258 - through, we'll have planning commission, and then based upon it being a PUD, then it will need to go 01:06:25.258 --> 01:06:30.796 - to common council. It does go to council. Everything moves forward. That is correct. And then there's 01:06:30.796 --> 01:06:36.225 - a platting process as well that will go back through planning commission. So your original estimate 01:06:36.225 --> 01:06:37.854 - of being able to break ground 01:06:38.050 --> 01:06:45.694 - before the season is over next year is a realistic possibility. Assuming that we have approval as this 01:06:45.694 --> 01:06:53.561 - moves forward. So we're guesstimating that we'll have at least two meetings with the Planning Commission. 01:06:53.561 --> 01:06:59.646 - So we'll see. Right now, including platting, I think we're looking at the end of. 01:06:59.746 --> 01:07:06.182 - April beginning of mid part of May before we'll be fully done with the plotting process, assuming that 01:07:06.182 --> 01:07:12.492 - everything gets in person. It's an assumption process. It could go longer. I'm trying to look at the 01:07:12.492 --> 01:07:19.240 - best case scenario based on the cooperative nature that everybody has to get additional affordable housing. 01:07:19.240 --> 01:07:25.800 - We have been listening to your demands for get this done. I want this done next summer. We need housing. 01:07:25.800 --> 01:07:28.862 - And so to stay on target, we need this approval. 01:07:29.474 --> 01:07:37.394 - I believe there's a few units that may be able to get started sooner because they can do some quick 01:07:37.394 --> 01:07:45.551 - lot line adjustments to be able to break around as well. So you may see dirt moving sooner. Before the 01:07:45.551 --> 01:07:53.470 - PV is approved? What do you mean? I'm sorry? What did you mean by sooner? Yes, there's a few of the 01:07:53.470 --> 01:07:56.638 - lots that if they change the lot lines, 01:07:56.962 --> 01:08:04.225 - which you can do through an administrative adjustment, then they could go ahead and start work. It would 01:08:04.225 --> 01:08:11.141 - still end up being part of the overall PUD, but it would meet the criteria at that point in time to 01:08:11.141 --> 01:08:18.196 - go ahead and to be able to get it going. I'm just going to quick mention that even though it's not in 01:08:18.196 --> 01:08:20.894 - the redevelopment commission's packet, 01:08:21.410 --> 01:08:27.350 - members of the public want to see the presentation. It's a great presentation. It's really, really impressed 01:08:27.350 --> 01:08:32.853 - with what Flint Lot Lab has put together. And I think I invite people to see it. It's actually under 01:08:32.853 --> 01:08:38.411 - the city council meeting packets for December 15th. I invite you to take a look, because it's a great 01:08:38.411 --> 01:08:43.970 - presentation and really kind of gives a really strong idea of what's being considered as it starts to 01:08:43.970 --> 01:08:49.473 - move through towards the planning commission. But if there's no other questions or comments from the 01:08:49.473 --> 01:08:51.326 - commissioners. Yeah, sorry, John. 01:08:54.050 --> 01:09:03.286 - I should always make sure I look to my right when I'm doing it. Overall, I have a lot of support for 01:09:03.286 --> 01:09:12.705 - this. But there's some pieces of this design that I'm struggling with. But I don't want to hold up the 01:09:12.705 --> 01:09:22.398 - works because of that. So you said, conceptually, this is what we're approving. So we're in this process. 01:09:22.498 --> 01:09:30.136 - Does the RDC have the opportunity to discuss or explore some specifics of the plan and not dwell on 01:09:30.136 --> 01:09:37.774 - it here to hold up some vote for the overall PUD process, which I would like to support? Well, time 01:09:37.774 --> 01:09:45.488 - is of the essence, of course. So any time between now and, I would say, our February plan commission 01:09:45.488 --> 01:09:52.286 - meeting, we can receive your input. But I would prefer it sooner than later because each 01:09:52.482 --> 01:10:00.023 - If there are changes that need to be made, we need to do it now. Well, changes that... And are you concerned 01:10:00.023 --> 01:10:07.288 - with the home types? Because that's not necessarily what we're approving right now. What we're approving 01:10:07.288 --> 01:10:14.622 - is the layout. Well, that's a good example. I would question the marketability of some of the home types. 01:10:14.622 --> 01:10:22.302 - Now, I don't know if they're there just as examples or by this vote, is this what we're trying to make happen? 01:10:23.554 --> 01:10:30.600 - question, you know, in some cases whether it's reality or not. That's just one example of something 01:10:30.600 --> 01:10:37.717 - that has come to my mind. Sure. Well, you're not approving the house types right now. You are simply 01:10:37.717 --> 01:10:44.974 - approving the PUD, the layout, and where the infrastructure is going. So those conversations will come 01:10:44.974 --> 01:10:48.286 - back up. Okay. Will it come to this body? Yes. 01:10:54.530 --> 01:11:01.587 - But I guess I would also point out that there are other bodies that involved in that as well. There's 01:11:01.587 --> 01:11:08.644 - going to be other conversations with Flintlock, with Planning Commission. I mean, there's going to be 01:11:08.644 --> 01:11:15.701 - obviously other conversations about the housing time. So I don't think that this body necessarily has 01:11:15.701 --> 01:11:18.814 - 100% control over that location. Understood. 01:11:21.922 --> 01:11:29.898 - Anything else from commissioners? Otherwise, I'm going to open it up for public comment, either in person 01:11:29.898 --> 01:11:37.875 - or online. Not seeing anything. I'll entertain a motion on resolution 25-152. Move approval of resolution 01:11:37.875 --> 01:11:45.776 - 25-152. I'll second. We have a first and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes 01:11:45.776 --> 01:11:47.582 - unanimously. Thank you. 01:11:48.386 --> 01:11:54.221 - Next item on the agenda is resolution 25153, which is approval of funding for change order package number 01:11:54.221 --> 01:11:59.781 - one for Hopewell West. Mr. Kenoki is here to talk to us about that. Yes, Kendall Kenoki, engineering 01:11:59.781 --> 01:12:05.451 - department. Thank you very much. So Hopewell West, just as a refresher, this is the first phase of the 01:12:05.451 --> 01:12:11.065 - infrastructure that's under construction now. So this is Jackson Street directly adjacent to the core 01:12:11.065 --> 01:12:16.680 - building, as well as Roger Street. This specifically is approval for the funding of a package of four 01:12:16.680 --> 01:12:17.726 - change orders that 01:12:18.402 --> 01:12:23.967 - occurred on the project. I'll just go through them one by one, and then I'll be happy to answer any 01:12:23.967 --> 01:12:29.588 - questions. So the first one is for the addition of a sanitary manhole structure. This is because the 01:12:29.588 --> 01:12:35.598 - stub we were connecting to was not at the elevation that it was supposed to be at. And that was a different 01:12:35.598 --> 01:12:41.218 - project, the first street project. So getting that through NDOT and going through, the easiest thing 01:12:41.218 --> 01:12:43.166 - to do is just drop a new structure 01:12:43.490 --> 01:12:50.410 - keep this project moving along. So that's where that $5,225 is coming from. Change order number three 01:12:50.410 --> 01:12:57.263 - is the addition of some side for some stabilization. Number four is some additional conduit. So this 01:12:57.263 --> 01:13:04.319 - was essentially to prevent Duke Energy from ripping up our new road. So we decided to drop some conduit 01:13:04.319 --> 01:13:11.239 - in so they could go through there to serve the new core building. And then number five is the biggest 01:13:11.239 --> 01:13:13.342 - one in this group, but this is 01:13:13.794 --> 01:13:22.203 - where our consultant prepares a quantity takeoff of the proposed design, and he did not quite pick up 01:13:22.203 --> 01:13:30.529 - all of these items, so I'll just list them quickly. A gate valve with valve box, sanitary lateral, a 01:13:30.529 --> 01:13:39.102 - storm inlet, and PVC conduit. So these were listed lower on the quantity takeoff that the bidders used. 01:13:39.234 --> 01:13:46.539 - than what was actually on the plan. So we are over on these quantities, and that's added an additional 01:13:46.539 --> 01:13:53.773 - $42,977.50. So I'll say the consultant had a great design and a great takeoff on all the other items, 01:13:53.773 --> 01:14:01.007 - but miscalculated on the amount of conduit and things. But this is cost that would have been included 01:14:01.007 --> 01:14:04.766 - in the original bid had the quantities been correct. 01:14:05.378 --> 01:14:14.068 - And that's why it's non-recoverable, which it says there, which means we can't go after the consultant 01:14:14.068 --> 01:14:22.843 - trying to get the money back. I think that's it. I'm happy to answer any questions. And for the record, 01:14:22.843 --> 01:14:30.942 - change order two was in the amount of $5,225. And change order three was in the amount of $870. 01:14:31.394 --> 01:14:41.927 - Change order four was in the amount of $2,560, and you've already heard the change order four. Yes, 01:14:41.927 --> 01:14:52.881 - questions, please. Maybe I'm just not following the resolution, but it looks to me like we're approving 01:14:52.881 --> 01:15:00.254 - change order package one, and it doesn't even refer to anything else. 01:15:25.090 --> 01:15:33.135 - It's a little confusing because the exhibits are described as exhibit A through B, although then within 01:15:33.135 --> 01:15:40.948 - the text, it's change order two, three, four, and five. And yeah, the text of the resolution doesn't 01:15:40.948 --> 01:15:49.303 - appear to reference. Number two doesn't really reference anything but package one, even though the exhibits 01:15:49.303 --> 01:15:54.718 - are. In the whereas clause, it says that the tax exhibits A through B 01:15:55.010 --> 01:16:03.143 - collectively, a change order package number one. So then in the therefore clause, it's change order 01:16:03.143 --> 01:16:11.358 - package number one, whereas clause has described as those four exhibits. Yeah, but I thought we were 01:16:11.358 --> 01:16:19.491 - doing two through four. It's change order two through four, then it's a package of change orders. I 01:16:19.491 --> 01:16:23.070 - didn't draft it, but I'm just saying that's 01:16:23.394 --> 01:16:36.530 - Legally, it covers it. Because that's what the package number one is, and then it says approved in that 01:16:36.530 --> 01:16:49.413 - package. All right. Thank you. Long story short, we've got 153,444 177 tests. Well, this change order 01:16:49.413 --> 01:16:52.318 - is only for 51,632 50. 01:16:52.770 --> 01:17:01.053 - Okay, I apologize. We already did the other one. It's like a $52,000 miss, but we'd have paid for it 01:17:01.053 --> 01:17:09.581 - anyway, correct? That's correct. The $42,000 is the big thing. It's a quantity miss. Yes. How we missed 01:17:09.581 --> 01:17:18.110 - it is... Yes, approximately $43,000. The other three are, you know, just changes, construction changes. 01:17:22.146 --> 01:17:29.406 - satisfied with it as a professional? And is everything moving along in your time frame and the quality 01:17:29.406 --> 01:17:36.806 - that your expectations are? Yes, the contractor is in liquidated damages, LDs, so they're running behind 01:17:36.806 --> 01:17:43.925 - schedule. So there's a few things that they ran out of time before the winter. So next spring, we're 01:17:43.925 --> 01:17:51.326 - going to get the full payment markings put down. They weren't able to put those down before it got cold. 01:17:51.970 --> 01:17:59.592 - But generally, I think we're probably going to be actually under the total estimated cost for the projects. 01:17:59.592 --> 01:18:06.861 - There'll be a balancing change order at the end. I think we'll be a little under that. That's all over 01:18:06.861 --> 01:18:14.130 - what our original projected cost was. Any other questions or comments from commissioners? I agree it's 01:18:14.130 --> 01:18:19.070 - kind of eventually legible in terms of how the resolution is written. 01:18:19.202 --> 01:18:24.249 - I would strongly agree because there's not even one place where the total is. It's like subtracting, 01:18:24.249 --> 01:18:29.345 - you know, changing the total to the total. There's not anything that adds up exhibits A through D. So 01:18:29.345 --> 01:18:34.591 - I'm just asking from a legal resolution, whoever in the legal department is drafting this stuff. I mean, 01:18:34.591 --> 01:18:39.638 - there's occasionally times where we do come up with or do notice errors in numbers and we want it to 01:18:39.638 --> 01:18:44.685 - be as clear as possible so that we actually can make sure that the numbers are written accurately in 01:18:44.685 --> 01:18:48.382 - the resolution. And I believe they are in this case. I'm just saying that 01:18:48.674 --> 01:18:53.797 - It takes a little while to make sure that that's the case. And to the extent that the resolution can 01:18:53.797 --> 01:18:59.022 - be written clearly to say, you know, Exhibit A is for this much. Exhibit B is for this much. It totals 01:18:59.022 --> 01:19:04.349 - this much. And this is the change order. That would be much more helpful to make sure that we're, again, 01:19:04.349 --> 01:19:09.624 - doing the due diligence of, is this being approved for what it is intended to be approved for? So just, 01:19:09.624 --> 01:19:14.697 - again, that's just mostly from a legal resolution drafting question. Put it really clearly in there 01:19:14.697 --> 01:19:16.574 - so it's really easy to be like, yep, 01:19:17.026 --> 01:19:24.346 - That's what it is. We can check the numbers and make sure that it is delivering what it's intended to. 01:19:24.346 --> 01:19:30.885 - So that's my last word. OK. Thank you. I appreciate that. Any public comment? Commissioner, 01:19:30.885 --> 01:19:38.205 - comment is closed. Anything from the public, either online or in person, seeing none, I will entertain 01:19:38.205 --> 01:19:43.038 - a motion for resolution 21-153. Move approval of resolution 25-153. 01:19:43.522 --> 01:19:50.448 - We've got a first and a second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. 01:19:50.448 --> 01:19:57.721 - Thank you. And our last item of new business for the evening is resolution 25-154, which is the approval 01:19:57.721 --> 01:20:04.786 - of a lease for the Fords with Bermudez Energetics LLC. Who would like to speak to that? Mr. Fernando. 01:20:04.786 --> 01:20:08.318 - OK. All right. Good evening. Thank you, everybody. 01:20:08.866 --> 01:20:16.791 - I think that memo I sent out, hopefully you had a chance to read, is pretty straightforward. This is 01:20:16.791 --> 01:20:24.716 - a proposed lease for possibly $2,400 swiffy on the first floor of the Forge. That's a company called 01:20:24.716 --> 01:20:32.954 - Prometheus Energetics. They're a company that's in the defense tech space that's a joint venture between 01:20:32.954 --> 01:20:37.662 - two really major players. So they're technically a startup. 01:20:38.466 --> 01:20:46.285 - But I guess in the startup world, you would consider a hyper growth startup. You may have read that 01:20:46.285 --> 01:20:54.104 - they're planning to build a very large scale manufacturing and engineering facility in Green County 01:20:54.104 --> 01:21:02.705 - as part of a large campus that's being developed in proximity to Crane. But they haven't started construction 01:21:02.705 --> 01:21:07.006 - yet. So they were looking for a space where they could 01:21:07.330 --> 01:21:16.236 - attract some of the professional staff, some of the engineering, some of the CEO and some of the other 01:21:16.236 --> 01:21:25.574 - executives so that they'd be able to have a good place to operate out of why they're doing the larger-scale 01:21:25.574 --> 01:21:34.220 - project. That's why this, unlike our previous lease, it's a three-year lease. Our prior leases were 01:21:34.220 --> 01:21:37.246 - all five. I felt that it was worth 01:21:37.986 --> 01:21:46.792 - compromising and doing a three-year lease with you know they have three options to renew at it for a 01:21:46.792 --> 01:21:55.598 - year because of the nature of the company the brand of the company it's a it's a pretty big addition 01:21:55.598 --> 01:22:04.317 - to our ecosystem I mean in that sector they're very well known and they're very well capitalized to 01:22:04.317 --> 01:22:05.886 - say the least the 01:22:06.850 --> 01:22:14.853 - The discussion I have with the leadership is that since we would be looking at a three-year lease rather 01:22:14.853 --> 01:22:22.857 - than a five-year lease, we'll work together on their tenant improvement plans to make them pretty basic. 01:22:22.857 --> 01:22:30.479 - Nothing hyper-customized so that it'd be much easier to re-tenant at the end of three years if they 01:22:30.479 --> 01:22:34.366 - decide that they don't want to exercise an option. 01:22:35.714 --> 01:22:43.952 - The only other difference in this lease is the rent you'll notice is just slightly higher than our previous 01:22:43.952 --> 01:22:51.656 - leases because we baked into all the leases a annual COLA or inflationary increase of two and a half 01:22:51.656 --> 01:22:59.284 - percent. So that's actually reflected in this lease since they would not begin paying rent until in 01:22:59.284 --> 01:23:05.310 - 2026. So it's 2153 is the base rent plus cams plus their own electric charges. 01:23:05.826 --> 01:23:14.465 - They also have a request in the lease for a first-ride refusal for the remaining 1,800 square feet on 01:23:14.465 --> 01:23:23.103 - the first floor. I don't know if they actually, you know, use that or not, but they were just curious 01:23:23.103 --> 01:23:31.658 - if they could have that just in case they decided they wanted it spanned. I did not include, as John 01:23:31.658 --> 01:23:33.182 - West pointed out, 01:23:33.762 --> 01:23:41.602 - defined term in terms of how long they have to consider that. Retrospect, that would have been a good 01:23:41.602 --> 01:23:49.441 - thing to do. I think given the relationship, we can include that in the notice that we're required to 01:23:49.441 --> 01:23:57.358 - give that give them a set deadline for responding. I wouldn't want to hold up the lease over that just 01:23:57.358 --> 01:24:02.046 - because it's a very corporate bureaucracy, to say the least. 01:24:02.178 --> 01:24:09.530 - that it will take several weeks to go through the legal department and do an amendment for something 01:24:09.530 --> 01:24:17.100 - like that. Just not because it's complicated, not because it's controversial, it's just their corporate 01:24:17.100 --> 01:24:24.379 - governance requires board approval of any of their leases and then it will require chasing down two 01:24:24.379 --> 01:24:31.294 - executive signatures, so it'll take a while. So I hope you just give me a little grace on that 01:24:31.426 --> 01:24:39.383 - trust that we'll be able to manage that process. So I'll stop there. I'm happy to answer any questions. 01:24:39.383 --> 01:24:47.646 - I guess the good news with this is that we started the year with a goal of 50% occupancy. If the commission 01:24:47.646 --> 01:24:55.450 - approves this, we'll be up to 86%. So we're doing pretty well. Thank you very much. Open to questions 01:24:55.450 --> 01:24:59.582 - and comments from commissioners on resolution 25-154. 01:25:01.826 --> 01:25:07.548 - Any questions or comments? I'd love to have the entire facility, but it's good to have what we got. 01:25:07.548 --> 01:25:13.384 - Yeah, no kidding. I mean, we don't, well, that's a whole different topic, Randy, about where we would 01:25:13.384 --> 01:25:19.220 - do that. But yeah, appreciate your effort on that. Thank you. I did want to say that this is based on 01:25:19.220 --> 01:25:24.484 - the model lease that you approved. Thank you. OK. If there's no other questions or comments 01:25:24.484 --> 01:25:29.118 - from commissioners, we'll open it for public comment either online or in person. 01:25:29.346 --> 01:25:38.058 - Seeing none, I will invite a motion for resolution 25-154. I'll move approval of resolution 25-154. 01:25:38.058 --> 01:25:46.857 - Second. First and a second, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank 01:25:46.857 --> 01:25:55.569 - you very much. Congrats, Sean. Thank you. Thank you. One more item of business. It is old business. 01:25:55.569 --> 01:25:58.270 - And that is resolution 25-136. 01:25:58.850 --> 01:26:06.984 - supporting the convention center host hotel on color square property We have this again revisited, but 01:26:06.984 --> 01:26:15.119 - I'll open it to staff for any comments before we move forward because there's been some Changes in the 01:26:15.119 --> 01:26:23.016 - resolution since we last met I'll take it and offer a little intro in context. You all are familiar 01:26:23.016 --> 01:26:28.702 - with it at this point and then I'll pass to corporation council who can 01:26:28.962 --> 01:26:35.185 - do a deeper dive into the legislation and the changes that have been included this week. So the Monroe 01:26:35.185 --> 01:26:41.530 - County Capital Improvement Board, via the internal local agreement signed in February 2024, is empowered 01:26:41.530 --> 01:26:47.753 - to select the site of a hotel, oversee that partnership, and manage development and collaboration with 01:26:47.753 --> 01:26:49.022 - the city and county. 01:26:49.154 --> 01:26:54.902 - The project, the hotel, the convention center and the hotel project have a long history but I'll begin 01:26:54.902 --> 01:27:00.595 - in June 2024 when the CIB issued a request for proposals for a host hotel developer. I misspoke there 01:27:00.595 --> 01:27:06.622 - that's the beginning of the hotel project to be clear the convention center is the one with a long history. 01:27:06.786 --> 01:27:14.865 - The CIB received seven responses to that request for proposals and they heard presentations from three 01:27:14.865 --> 01:27:22.943 - developers in September 2024. They selected a developer in Dora Hospitality and they communicated with 01:27:22.943 --> 01:27:31.806 - Dora Hospitality about available but not necessarily gratis sites to the hotel developer. The developer selected 01:27:32.034 --> 01:27:40.283 - the RDC-owned property at 200 to 216 South College Avenue, which is called College Square or the former 01:27:40.283 --> 01:27:48.453 - Bunger and Robertson property. They selected that as their preferred location. And so they engaged the 01:27:48.453 --> 01:27:56.384 - city in discussions in late 2024 at the staff level. Additional staff and members of the RDC joined 01:27:56.384 --> 01:27:58.526 - those discussions in 2025. 01:27:58.818 --> 01:28:06.119 - From the beginning of those negotiations or discussions, the hotel developers described a significant 01:28:06.119 --> 01:28:13.563 - gap in order to deliver on the scope of the host hotel. When the city, on our side of the negotiations, 01:28:13.563 --> 01:28:21.007 - required full land value as was previously requested, that amount simply appeared as a required subsidy 01:28:21.007 --> 01:28:23.870 - in a different part of their pro forma. 01:28:25.154 --> 01:28:30.913 - So the city considered a range of partnership structures to determine how best to advance the project 01:28:30.913 --> 01:28:36.785 - at the site. And this body approved expenditures totaling $400,000 to advance investigation of the site 01:28:36.785 --> 01:28:42.487 - and design of the building while it continued negotiating with the developer. Initial site work like 01:28:42.487 --> 01:28:48.189 - soil borings has gone forward. No design work has advanced in the absence of a letter of intent with 01:28:48.189 --> 01:28:54.174 - the developer. City staff put forth legislation to the RDC for consideration at its December 1st meeting. 01:28:54.530 --> 01:29:00.958 - The RDC held a public work session on December 10th in order to provide additional public space to discuss 01:29:00.958 --> 01:29:07.447 - the project, and more specifically, to do that with members of the common council. That discussion informed 01:29:07.447 --> 01:29:13.514 - amendments to the legislation, which Margie will discuss momentarily. For members of the public, you 01:29:13.514 --> 01:29:19.702 - can find access to the meeting packet for that work session by Googling Bloomington RDC and navigating 01:29:19.702 --> 01:29:22.526 - to the work session on December 10th. Broadly, 01:29:22.690 --> 01:29:28.752 - Staff recommends consideration of the hotel project, which is a critical piece to a major economic driver 01:29:28.752 --> 01:29:34.642 - for our community. The hotel will fill critical demand gaps, allowing the convention center to operate 01:29:34.642 --> 01:29:40.646 - at its full capacity. It will drive outside revenue into the community, and it will generate tax revenue 01:29:40.646 --> 01:29:46.365 - via the food and beverage and keepers and property taxes. And with that, I'll pass to Margie. So at 01:29:46.365 --> 01:29:51.454 - your last meeting, you guys discussed this resolution, and several council members came. 01:29:51.746 --> 01:29:59.870 - to the meeting and reminded the Redevelopment Commission that they objected to this parcel being offered 01:29:59.870 --> 01:30:07.606 - to a developer for free or for a nominal cost. So based on that meeting, staff went back and edited 01:30:07.606 --> 01:30:15.652 - this resolution. And I know some RDC members provided some feedback. So the amended resolution is based 01:30:15.652 --> 01:30:19.134 - on some changes that you guys had requested. 01:30:19.778 --> 01:30:29.754 - I would point you to, well, let me just say this has 14 kind of whereas clauses to give background and 01:30:29.754 --> 01:30:40.117 - then four resolutions. The third resolution has been edited and essentially it says that the redevelopment 01:30:40.117 --> 01:30:48.350 - commission provides notice of its commitment to a host hotel project by making known 01:30:48.450 --> 01:30:56.789 - that the real estate at College Square, which is bounded by College and 4 and then 3rd Street on the 01:30:56.789 --> 01:31:05.127 - south, may be made available in some form to the Host Hotel Project at a nominal cost to the project 01:31:05.127 --> 01:31:13.796 - if it furthers the best interests of economic development. It also makes very clear what this resolution 01:31:13.796 --> 01:31:16.190 - does not do. This resolution 01:31:16.578 --> 01:31:24.146 - shall not be construed as approving the final development terms, a land conveyance, or a specific financial 01:31:24.146 --> 01:31:31.433 - structure, all of which shall require separate RDC review and approval. You are not negotiating in this 01:31:31.433 --> 01:31:38.580 - resolution a deal with a hotel developer. So let's just get that off the table. What you are doing in 01:31:38.580 --> 01:31:46.078 - this resolution, if you pass it, is signaling to the world, to the city council, to hoteliers, to the CIB, 01:31:46.274 --> 01:31:55.364 - that the roughly 2.4 acre bit of land that you own that is in need of redevelopment, it is an underdeveloped 01:31:55.364 --> 01:32:03.953 - property in downtown Bloomington, you are signaling that you think this is a good location for a hotel 01:32:03.953 --> 01:32:12.542 - and you may make it available at a nominal cost. Nominal meaning, by dictionary definition, very small 01:32:12.542 --> 01:32:15.294 - or below the real value or cost. 01:32:15.586 --> 01:32:23.459 - Not saying you are, just saying you might. And the CIB has chosen this hotel here that we've been trying 01:32:23.459 --> 01:32:31.332 - to negotiate an LOI. We do not have an LOI. However, the world needs to know whether this underdeveloped 01:32:31.332 --> 01:32:39.131 - lot in downtown is intended for a hotel and going to be made available for a hotel or not. And you guys 01:32:39.131 --> 01:32:42.430 - are the owners, and so here we are tonight. 01:32:42.562 --> 01:32:49.348 - please do, you know, three of you are appointed by the mayor, two of you are appointed by the council. 01:32:49.348 --> 01:32:56.134 - Council has made its wishes known. The mayor is here tonight. I would encourage you to take all of the 01:32:56.134 --> 01:33:02.919 - feedback and input that you have been given to date into consideration, and you get paid the big bucks 01:33:02.919 --> 01:33:09.837 - to make these sorts of calls. And so with that, I'll entertain any questions you might have. And I would 01:33:09.837 --> 01:33:11.550 - add, in addition to that, 01:33:12.034 --> 01:33:19.260 - where you mentioned that you would only do the project at the nominal cost and if they less than fair 01:33:19.260 --> 01:33:26.344 - market value, if it furthers the debate in the past interest of economic development in the city of 01:33:26.344 --> 01:33:33.428 - Bloomington, that means you would have to be convinced that that was the right project and whatever 01:33:33.428 --> 01:33:41.150 - concessions you might or might not make would be the right concessions in order to make that project happen. 01:33:41.602 --> 01:33:53.504 - It still gives you the authority to choose whether or not you feel it's an economic interest to have 01:33:53.504 --> 01:34:05.760 - any. So you're retaining that authority. I also want to just say for the record that to date the county 01:34:05.760 --> 01:34:07.646 - has contributed 01:34:07.906 --> 01:34:13.988 - about an acre and a half of land for the Convention Center where it is currently being built. The assessed 01:34:13.988 --> 01:34:19.671 - value of that land is about 1.7 million. We know that's low for an acre and a half, but that's just 01:34:19.671 --> 01:34:25.469 - the AV. There's not a current sales price to bring that up. Property that you guys own is worth about 01:34:25.469 --> 01:34:31.437 - seven to eight million based on appraisal we received and the sales price. The city has also contributed 01:34:31.437 --> 01:34:35.870 - to the Convention Center project in general, about $46 million worth of bond. 01:34:36.002 --> 01:34:43.251 - So there's been a land contribution by the county, there's been a giant bond contribution of food and 01:34:43.251 --> 01:34:50.570 - beverage tax dollars by the city, and you're here tonight to discuss whether you want to make this lot 01:34:50.570 --> 01:34:58.245 - available for a possible post-hotel site. Questions or comments from commissioners? I will note in addition 01:34:58.245 --> 01:35:04.286 - to the comments that people have, I have a proposed amendment to this, but I want to 01:35:05.090 --> 01:35:14.663 - make sure that people have a chance to say what they want to say before I charge ahead with them. If 01:35:14.663 --> 01:35:24.425 - there's nothing, I will introduce it. So I have hard copies if you want to look at it in front of you. 01:35:24.425 --> 01:35:32.766 - Feel free to. I've got seven copies here, so if you want it, you can take a look at it. 01:35:33.218 --> 01:35:40.140 - The two main areas that I'm proposing an amendment to are on page two of the resolution. Um, and they 01:35:40.140 --> 01:35:46.927 - both are kind of centered around that word nominal, um, because even though I fully appreciate, um, 01:35:46.927 --> 01:35:53.917 - the hard work that staff has done, um, that, um, the having the meeting, the work session earlier, uh, 01:35:53.917 --> 01:36:01.790 - last week, um, all good to hear from people to really collaborate, to get towards, um, a fruitful outcome for this. 01:36:02.114 --> 01:36:10.581 - Talking about giving away our nominal cost of land, again, we will have a chance to revisit that later. 01:36:10.581 --> 01:36:18.560 - So just I'll go over the specific amendment first and then just provide my commentary after that. 01:36:18.560 --> 01:36:23.934 - So again, this is page two. The last whereas, my proposal is that 01:36:24.066 --> 01:36:30.522 - this would read, whereas in addition to the incentives already mentioned above, the RDC has determined 01:36:30.522 --> 01:36:36.790 - that the real estate at College Square necessary for the host hotel may be made available in a form 01:36:36.790 --> 01:36:43.184 - and on terms to be determined by the RDC and structured to protect the city's best interest and limit 01:36:43.184 --> 01:36:49.515 - public risk. So it's taking out the at nominal cost and then provided that such participation is, it 01:36:49.515 --> 01:36:53.150 - was just to kind of tighten that up to make it clear that 01:36:53.602 --> 01:36:59.150 - Again, the RDC is prepared to make this available, but we are not stating the terms under which that 01:36:59.150 --> 01:37:03.710 - availability is being made yet. And then the comparable one is under clause three. 01:37:03.970 --> 01:37:09.750 - The Bloomington Redevelopment Commission hereby provides notice of its further commitment to the Host 01:37:09.750 --> 01:37:15.587 - Hotel project by making known that the real estate at College Square, if necessary for the Host Hotel, 01:37:15.587 --> 01:37:21.367 - may be made available in some form and on terms to be determined by the RDC and structured to protect 01:37:21.367 --> 01:37:27.090 - the city of Bloomington's best interest and limit public risk. Again, taking out the at nominal cost 01:37:27.090 --> 01:37:29.470 - to the project because it feels like it's 01:37:30.370 --> 01:37:34.654 - let it's reducing leverage capacity of this so. 01:37:34.850 --> 01:37:40.381 - Just again, this is based on concerns that we heard about fiscal discipline, use of public assets, and 01:37:40.381 --> 01:37:45.805 - maintaining appropriate oversight. I feel like these are legitimate concerns, and they matter to me. 01:37:45.805 --> 01:37:51.337 - So that's the reason for my proposed amended language, taking out the phrases like nominal cost, which 01:37:51.337 --> 01:37:56.975 - can be read as a pricing commitment. Removing that language helps ensure this resolution does not signal 01:37:56.975 --> 01:38:02.775 - a subsidy level before the RDC has fully evaluated a concrete proposal from a hotel developer that reflects 01:38:02.775 --> 01:38:04.816 - the anticipated sources of financing, 01:38:04.816 --> 01:38:10.911 - beyond what the RDC can offer. From my perspective, the purpose of this resolution is to confirm that 01:38:10.911 --> 01:38:16.947 - the RDC is willing to consider making College Square site available in support of a host hotel while 01:38:16.947 --> 01:38:23.102 - preserving our leverage and financial responsibility. The amendment documents that flexibility without 01:38:23.102 --> 01:38:29.257 - pre-committing the RDC to a deal. Importantly, this amendment does not change the resolution's intent, 01:38:29.257 --> 01:38:33.918 - and a binding decision still requires a separate vote by this body in public. 01:38:34.370 --> 01:38:41.410 - With the convention center expansion already underway, I do believe it's appropriate to vote on an amended 01:38:41.410 --> 01:38:47.989 - resolution tonight to create a pathway to move forward on a key component of this project. So thank 01:38:47.989 --> 01:38:54.634 - you for your consideration of this proposed amendment. So. Do you need a second for the amendment? I 01:38:54.634 --> 01:39:01.345 - think I'm introduced to it. I think we need a first and then a second. That's my understanding of the 01:39:01.345 --> 01:39:03.582 - procedure, but I'll defer to our. 01:39:04.002 --> 01:39:17.247 - We have a first and a second. Would we like to discuss further before I vote? Yes. Oh, I'm just saying 01:39:17.247 --> 01:39:31.134 - we have a first and a second, so it's on the table for discussion. Right. OK. So any questions or comments? 01:39:31.650 --> 01:39:38.191 - Either obviously the amendment or the amended version of the resolution, because the resolution as a 01:39:38.191 --> 01:39:45.121 - whole is what's on the table. Why don't we just talk about the amendment? OK. Move back to the resolution. 01:39:45.121 --> 01:39:52.050 - I would be interested in staff's take and in particularly John and Randy's take based on the conversations 01:39:52.050 --> 01:39:59.174 - you had. Is there still a valid point to this resolution with the softened language? Does it still accomplish 01:39:59.174 --> 01:40:01.182 - what we need it to accomplish? 01:40:02.402 --> 01:40:11.230 - given what hoteliers are looking for? And that's a sincere question. Anna? No pressure. In the executive 01:40:11.230 --> 01:40:19.637 - session that we had, you guys asked for the resolution that gave a ceiling to the amount of subsidy 01:40:19.637 --> 01:40:28.297 - that you were willing to provide because the gap was so significant. So by amending and taking out the 01:40:28.297 --> 01:40:29.726 - nominal cost bit 01:40:30.082 --> 01:40:38.152 - You are essentially not giving a ceiling. We are just back to the drilling boards. The land has been 01:40:38.152 --> 01:40:46.621 - made available already. So I appreciate and understand the input that has gone into this. It's ultimately 01:40:46.621 --> 01:40:54.771 - up to you guys to decide how you want to move forward. We know that there is no deal with DORA. There 01:40:54.771 --> 01:40:58.366 - is no deal with DORA with the land donation. 01:40:59.778 --> 01:41:09.175 - That's not going to fix the problem. This resolution isn't going to fix the problem. The amendment isn't 01:41:09.175 --> 01:41:18.571 - going to fix the problem. I will add that I agree. I think unless the RDC is willing to make a statement 01:41:18.571 --> 01:41:27.968 - of how much commitment they might be willing to make if it was the right project and if it had the right 01:41:27.968 --> 01:41:29.310 - terms, then it 01:41:29.442 --> 01:41:37.630 - really isn't impacting on any future negotiations. This is a great opportunity to kind of fix 01:41:37.630 --> 01:41:47.212 - some misperceptions that's out there. The RDC went into this and into these negotiations under the assumption 01:41:47.212 --> 01:41:56.446 - that they were going to be compensated for the land in some manner. Though that assumption stayed strong, 01:41:57.026 --> 01:42:08.283 - until we got deep into the negotiations. Then around June of this year, it became apparent that there 01:42:08.283 --> 01:42:19.431 - was a gap that the developer was looking for a subsidy to fill. So then the RDC took time to look at 01:42:19.431 --> 01:42:26.494 - a variety of structures of deals, a variety of funding sources, 01:42:26.946 --> 01:42:35.399 - most of which, if almost all of which are outside your control, these other funding forces. And finally 01:42:35.399 --> 01:42:43.689 - came to the realization that even if the RBC did the most that it could do, and whether it's offering 01:42:43.689 --> 01:42:51.411 - the land at a nominal amount would be the ceiling because there's nothing else the RBC can do. 01:42:51.411 --> 01:42:54.174 - Senate Bill 1, Senate Rule Act 1, 01:42:54.338 --> 01:43:04.979 - changed the world. Paris has changed the world. Things are different now than they were even a short 01:43:04.979 --> 01:43:16.462 - year ago. And so it was determined in the November executive session that the RDC didn't make any decisions. 01:43:16.462 --> 01:43:22.046 - It just said legal. And it put together a resolution 01:43:22.434 --> 01:43:31.345 - So we have something to consider because we need now that it's obvious that even if the land was part 01:43:31.345 --> 01:43:40.344 - of the deal, as Anna said, the door deal was not going to work. So it's like, OK, well, the deal's off 01:43:40.344 --> 01:43:49.080 - the table. So our confidential negotiations are over with. And now we need to bring into the public 01:43:49.080 --> 01:43:51.614 - realm what the RDC considers 01:43:51.906 --> 01:44:00.000 - the possibility of abusing the land. It was nothing was ever assumed that that was going to happen or, 01:44:00.000 --> 01:44:08.251 - you know, behind, you know, in executive sessions or anything else. It was determined by this body that, 01:44:08.251 --> 01:44:16.423 - hey, we need to get this out into the public sphere and we need to get input. So it was on the December 01:44:16.423 --> 01:44:21.374 - 1st meeting and input was received and enough input that said, 01:44:21.538 --> 01:44:31.394 - We need to look at this some more. So there was a work session on December 10th to make sure that everyone 01:44:31.394 --> 01:44:40.974 - was understanding where things were at. And so that, you know, I hope that clears up this misconception 01:44:40.974 --> 01:44:47.422 - that there was this plan to use this property. It was never the plan. 01:44:48.162 --> 01:44:56.636 - But in all of the negotiations we had in looking at all other projects that have host hotels and seeing 01:44:56.636 --> 01:45:05.274 - that nearly all of them have some sort of public existence, and some of them as much as 100%, we realized 01:45:05.274 --> 01:45:12.771 - that the RDC couldn't make the deal work because the RDC doesn't have the ability to do it. 01:45:12.771 --> 01:45:16.030 - Again, Senate-enrolled Act 1 has caused 01:45:17.442 --> 01:45:26.750 - the RDC funds to be needed for projects that may not that may have been funded in other ways prior to 01:45:26.750 --> 01:45:35.967 - that. So now the RDC has to be very careful with its if its funds and its revenues coming in. So but 01:45:35.967 --> 01:45:45.458 - this is an asset that is on the books. It is an asset that if this deal is going to be done if any deal 01:45:45.458 --> 01:45:46.462 - to be done 01:45:46.754 --> 01:45:56.425 - with the host hotel is going to require the significant contribution from public sources. And the land, 01:45:56.425 --> 01:46:06.281 - if that were a part of it, and again, you can structure the deal in many different ways to try to protect 01:46:06.281 --> 01:46:16.510 - the interests of the city, to try to control that the host host hotel maintains quality and things like that. 01:46:17.186 --> 01:46:25.871 - By doing this resolution, now we're turning it back to the CIB saying, look, we did it. We tried to 01:46:25.871 --> 01:46:34.555 - do it the best we could. We don't have the funds that DORA seeks to do this. Even with reduction in 01:46:34.555 --> 01:46:43.500 - the scope of work, we don't have the funds to do it ourselves. And they're going to require something. 01:46:43.500 --> 01:46:46.366 - But if you pass this resolution, 01:46:46.850 --> 01:46:56.250 - You're saying, as it's without the amendment, you're saying, look, we may go to a nominal amount. We're 01:46:56.250 --> 01:47:05.560 - not saying we will, but we may go to that amount if it's the right project, if it's the right economic 01:47:05.560 --> 01:47:12.158 - development, which the duties of the RDC is for the economic development 01:47:12.418 --> 01:47:22.537 - the health and welfare of the inhabitants of the city. And so that's your focus. And you were appointed 01:47:22.537 --> 01:47:33.143 - to these positions because your appointing person or body felt that you have the expertise and are qualified 01:47:33.143 --> 01:47:38.494 - to consider all these things and decide whether or not 01:47:38.946 --> 01:47:47.974 - you know, what you feel would be appropriate for you to do. Again, I feel that if you pass the amendment, 01:47:47.974 --> 01:47:56.576 - it really doesn't change much about where we're already at. We've already been in negotiations. It's 01:47:56.576 --> 01:48:05.603 - already been publicly acknowledged that the land is there. What this gives is the CIB now the opportunity 01:48:05.603 --> 01:48:08.414 - to say, OK, now I know that this 01:48:08.546 --> 01:48:17.417 - could be available. I'm not saying it is, but it could. Now we can use that in trying to figure out 01:48:17.417 --> 01:48:26.554 - what the best method going forward will be. And as Mr. Wieckar said, that could be going back the door 01:48:26.554 --> 01:48:35.603 - and seeing what they can do. Or if they're no longer interested, maybe going out for another RFP. But 01:48:35.603 --> 01:48:37.022 - it just became. 01:48:37.634 --> 01:48:46.509 - very evident that without a subsidy from the city or county or someone, the hotel will not be built. 01:48:46.509 --> 01:48:55.559 - I'm sorry, but it is that cut and dry. I'm trying not to make it clear. I'm just going to clarify that 01:48:55.559 --> 01:49:04.785 - this proposed amended language is not to take that possibility off the table. It's to keep options open. 01:49:04.785 --> 01:49:06.718 - And it feels that by, 01:49:07.042 --> 01:49:14.528 - continually inserting the nominal cost. That's, again, no matter what, that's still a possibility. But 01:49:14.528 --> 01:49:22.231 - it feels like it's preemptively putting that in here. And that's my feeling in terms of why I've proposed 01:49:22.231 --> 01:49:29.644 - this amended language. I think I can translate and then maybe help get us along a little bit. I think 01:49:29.644 --> 01:49:36.766 - to Anna's point about why staff feels it doesn't advance the project by tempering the language is 01:49:36.930 --> 01:49:43.696 - not really related to the deal with Dora that we've been discussing right now, but it's really, I think 01:49:43.696 --> 01:49:50.202 - what staff was trying to achieve was to move the negotiations along in the future. We really wanted 01:49:50.202 --> 01:49:57.359 - to signal to the CIB what the status is, and then they can, we can also collectively signal to the developers 01:49:57.359 --> 01:50:04.190 - what the limits are. But if the body is not comfortable with that, then that's a different signal that's 01:50:04.322 --> 01:50:11.602 - being sent, and we can understand that, too. But I think understanding that part of the purpose might 01:50:11.602 --> 01:50:19.024 - just be helpful in understanding where the differences lie. I think it has felt to me like we're trying 01:50:19.024 --> 01:50:26.660 - to accomplish two things that don't have to be at odds with each other. And I think, Debra, your amendment 01:50:26.660 --> 01:50:31.870 - helps bring them together. One is, what are we sticking with to develop? 01:50:32.226 --> 01:50:39.688 - And what are we signaling back to the CIB? And I agree with you that having the word nominal in there, 01:50:39.688 --> 01:50:47.223 - I'm not a hotel developer. I don't do anything like that. But I would be looking for any possible point 01:50:47.223 --> 01:50:54.686 - of leverage I could get. And if I see something like that, I think I can get those guys to give me the 01:50:54.686 --> 01:50:59.902 - land. I think the way this is structured now, it's much more ambiguous. 01:51:00.450 --> 01:51:07.986 - And to me, it doesn't give a little bit extra advantage to the developer to come in and demand that 01:51:07.986 --> 01:51:15.145 - we give them land away. We've still got a huge problem. But I think it does accomplish saying, 01:51:15.145 --> 01:51:22.832 - this is it. It's the land. Let's talk about whether there is a way to do this. And we've talked about 01:51:22.832 --> 01:51:27.806 - other options, land leases, land swaps. They may or may not work. 01:51:28.642 --> 01:51:35.705 - But it's not like we have completely exhausted all the possibilities, and that leaves that open. So 01:51:35.705 --> 01:51:42.839 - I support the amendment as it's written. Two things. I'd like to request procedurally that we take a 01:51:42.839 --> 01:51:50.044 - vote on the amendment and vote the amendment up or down before we actually vote on the resolution. So 01:51:50.044 --> 01:51:57.319 - just to be clear about that, because it does substantially change the resolution. Next, Marty, can you 01:51:57.319 --> 01:51:58.590 - redefine nominal? 01:51:58.690 --> 01:52:06.139 - Yeah, so just if it's not defined then you go to the dictionary and the dictionary definition nominal 01:52:06.139 --> 01:52:13.734 - is very small or far below the real value or cost. Far below the real value or cost. I'd love to change 01:52:13.734 --> 01:52:21.256 - the definition of nominal. I mean if you want to say, I mean if you don't want to go as low as nominal 01:52:21.256 --> 01:52:27.902 - and you want to say a reduced value you could use the word reduced. I mean there are other 01:52:28.258 --> 01:52:36.460 - adjectives or other words you could choose if you didn't want nominal in there. Again, you know, you 01:52:36.460 --> 01:52:44.581 - this body of RDC members didn't buy this land, but it was bought by your predecessors. And it is an 01:52:44.581 --> 01:52:52.701 - underdeveloped, very nice, nicely located bit of land. And the question is, and this came up at the 01:52:52.701 --> 01:52:58.142 - council work session with you guys, what do you want to see there? 01:52:58.786 --> 01:53:04.471 - You know, it looks like a prime location for a hotel going next to a convention center. Is that what 01:53:04.471 --> 01:53:10.155 - you want to see there? Do you want to see something else there? So I think that this resolution does 01:53:10.155 --> 01:53:15.840 - send a signal about what you're thinking about this. And that's a really important signal we need to 01:53:15.840 --> 01:53:21.524 - send now, because the convention center hotel's being built. Or the convention center's being built, 01:53:21.524 --> 01:53:27.378 - so. I kind of go one step further. With this amendment, I'm not sure why we need the resolution at all. 01:53:27.378 --> 01:53:28.222 - I would agree. 01:53:28.962 --> 01:53:35.229 - It doesn't change anything. It doesn't change anything. I believe it states, again, our interest in 01:53:35.229 --> 01:53:41.747 - the economic development of the community. Of course, that's the purpose of the RDC. I believe it makes 01:53:41.747 --> 01:53:48.327 - clear what our current engagement has been with this property. I think it just kind of level sets things 01:53:48.327 --> 01:53:55.095 - to move forward. Again, we still have all our options open with this amended language. It is not precluding 01:53:55.095 --> 01:53:56.286 - the option that is 01:53:56.450 --> 01:54:03.765 - currently in the resolution that the amended language seeks to broaden. So it's not changing that, it's 01:54:03.765 --> 01:54:11.150 - just not giving the concession before we have an actual pro forma on the table to say, this is how we're 01:54:11.150 --> 01:54:14.526 - going to plug that gap. We need you to do this. 01:54:14.690 --> 01:54:21.157 - So I want to see that as opposed to giving it away before we have that request. And I certainly understand 01:54:21.157 --> 01:54:27.323 - there have been lots of things, lots of hard work by staff. We've been part of these sessions to talk 01:54:27.323 --> 01:54:33.609 - about different options. But at this stage, this amended language is to make it clear that we are ready 01:54:33.609 --> 01:54:39.895 - to invest, but we need to hear what the investment need is. And also, I mean, obviously, all the public 01:54:39.895 --> 01:54:44.670 - discussion that's happened makes clear where that ceiling is, even if we don't 01:54:45.090 --> 01:54:54.420 - put the nominal language in the resolution. So I would argue that it helps to straddle a very fine line 01:54:54.420 --> 01:55:03.660 - with a lot of different vested interests. Obviously, the Convention Center is a very important product 01:55:03.660 --> 01:55:12.542 - for the community. And so it's trying to balance the various interests while still moving forward. 01:55:14.434 --> 01:55:26.541 - I just want to express where I am with this. I agree that the resolution, if we're trying to signal 01:55:26.541 --> 01:55:38.526 - a ceiling, the resolution as amended would not really do that. It just says we're open to talking. 01:55:39.522 --> 01:55:47.312 - It also doesn't say that we have really anything to offer yet. And I do think in order to negotiate 01:55:47.312 --> 01:55:55.181 - in good faith with whoever might be next, Dora's gap is too big at this point. In order to negotiate 01:55:55.181 --> 01:56:02.971 - in good faith with whoever's next, we have turned over every economic development incentive that we 01:56:02.971 --> 01:56:04.062 - can think of. 01:56:04.194 --> 01:56:12.659 - I don't think of providing the land at a nominal cost to be a gift. I think of it as an incentive that 01:56:12.659 --> 01:56:21.124 - would have to be in the economic best interest of the city. That means that we need to know it's going 01:56:21.124 --> 01:56:29.424 - to do more good for the city than what we're actually investing in it. And the only thing we have to 01:56:29.424 --> 01:56:32.958 - offer right now is the value of that land. 01:56:33.826 --> 01:56:43.333 - abatement, et cetera, none of that ends up making sense. So I'll just say, I think, I'm not sure why 01:56:43.333 --> 01:56:53.405 - the amendment would move forward with the amended language. It doesn't signal much. Matt? Does the reduced 01:56:53.405 --> 01:57:03.006 - language, I'm sitting here noodling about this reduced language, and that's pretty interesting to me. 01:57:03.106 --> 01:57:11.097 - Does that provide enough of a signal if we were to say nominal or reduced cost? The reason I think it 01:57:11.097 --> 01:57:19.323 - does send a signal is because there is inherent flexibility in the statute. Dana and I have talked about 01:57:19.323 --> 01:57:27.157 - this. The RDC has the ability, unlike other government entities, they have the ability to give land 01:57:27.157 --> 01:57:30.526 - to a developer for economic purposes or to 01:57:30.786 --> 01:57:39.606 - to do things at a reduced cost. So I think reduced matches the statute and nods to that flexibility. 01:57:39.606 --> 01:57:48.687 - The point of the redevelopment commission is to take blighted or underdeveloped properties and get them 01:57:48.687 --> 01:57:57.682 - back into a more productive state. And this property is purchased in 2019. We're not getting any taxes 01:57:57.682 --> 01:57:59.166 - on it right now. 01:57:59.714 --> 01:58:06.414 - You know, you got a couple acres in downtown to be used for something. So I think that you ought to 01:58:06.414 --> 01:58:12.979 - be thinking about using your tools and offering land at a reduced value in order to spur economic 01:58:12.979 --> 01:58:19.679 - development. And that's why you exist, to try to encourage economic development. So I think it does 01:58:19.679 --> 01:58:25.374 - send a signal, but I'd love to know what the redevelopment commission members think. 01:58:30.818 --> 01:58:41.852 - Would you consider revising your amendment to say reduced instead of nominal? I appreciate that proposal 01:58:41.852 --> 01:58:52.570 - to me, even reduced nominal. Again, to me, the purpose of this amendment is to take that leverage out 01:58:52.570 --> 01:58:54.462 - of this amendment 01:58:54.754 --> 01:58:59.954 - because I feel like that this amendment or this resolution opens up the opportunity for conversation. 01:58:59.954 --> 01:59:05.306 - Any developer worth their salt is gonna look at how to negotiate a deal, right? And that certainly could 01:59:05.306 --> 01:59:10.506 - include a concession of the land. It's not like they're not gonna ask because we didn't put it in the 01:59:10.506 --> 01:59:15.961 - resolution, right? They're gonna be like, okay, how do we put this deal together? The RDC owns it, they're 01:59:15.961 --> 01:59:21.211 - interested in economic development. Let's see what they'll come to with it for the table. I understand 01:59:21.211 --> 01:59:22.078 - the feeling that 01:59:22.178 --> 01:59:27.650 - Oh, the resolution isn't making movement if we take out the concessionary language. I don't feel like 01:59:27.650 --> 01:59:33.229 - it's the time to make that concession. We've already acknowledged that the the deal that Doris proposed 01:59:33.229 --> 01:59:38.594 - has a huge gap that we don't know how it's going to get filled and certainly conceding this land is 01:59:38.594 --> 01:59:39.774 - not going to fill it. 01:59:39.938 --> 01:59:45.431 - Okay. And so if we do that now, there's still a big gap to fill. So there may be need for we want to 01:59:45.431 --> 01:59:51.032 - keep this moving forward. This convention center needs a hotel and the RDC is always going to be there 01:59:51.032 --> 01:59:53.534 - with this land to say, how can we support it? 01:59:53.666 --> 01:59:59.095 - But we're not, I feel like this resolution is not the place to give that concessionary. Again, developer 01:59:59.095 --> 02:00:04.472 - can ask for it. They fully know that this land is here and the RDC has a role to play in the community. 02:00:04.472 --> 02:00:09.797 - I don't feel like we need to put that concessionary language in the resolution. And I guess, you know, 02:00:09.797 --> 02:00:13.054 - so anyway, so I appreciate the idea of trying to look at that. 02:00:13.346 --> 02:00:21.256 - I understand others may support that. I do not feel like I would be willing to, as someone wants to 02:00:21.256 --> 02:00:29.324 - propose an alternate amendment, I understand that. And I will be happy to participate in that part of 02:00:29.324 --> 02:00:37.312 - the business for my proposed amendment. To me, that concession, I prefer not to keep that in. That's 02:00:37.312 --> 02:00:40.318 - the point of my amended language. So. 02:00:41.154 --> 02:00:50.253 - And I guess I don't see it as concessionary language, given all the other tentative language that we 02:00:50.253 --> 02:00:59.353 - do have. So I think that the elephant in the room, when it comes to developing that property, is the 02:00:59.353 --> 02:01:06.110 - price of that land. It's the availability of land to actually build it on. 02:01:08.002 --> 02:01:15.593 - And I'm back to the notion of, if we don't even mention that, if we don't even acknowledge that, what's 02:01:15.593 --> 02:01:22.965 - the point of having a resolution? Are we signaling anything useful at all? If not, why are we voting 02:01:22.965 --> 02:01:30.264 - on it? But to me, it's not concessionary because there is so much other tentative language in here. 02:01:30.264 --> 02:01:34.206 - So that's the thought I would just offer in response. 02:01:39.618 --> 02:01:46.509 - All right, Margie, to your point, Leonard and Robertson, since the last time we paid taxes when we bought 02:01:46.509 --> 02:01:53.076 - it, we've lost $172,262 in tax revenue based on that. I want to take my feelings out of it because I 02:01:53.076 --> 02:02:00.032 - wear my feelings on my sleeve. I won't get down to the bath. Okay, and the math of it is we need a minimum 02:02:00.032 --> 02:02:03.998 - of a 200-room hotel, and that location is the best location. 02:02:04.738 --> 02:02:11.084 - But we also need to be able to hit a average room rate of $150 or less in order to bring in the 400 02:02:11.084 --> 02:02:17.494 - to 600 person conventions that we want to have on Monday through Thursday in order to help drive our 02:02:17.494 --> 02:02:23.841 - downtown economics, which also is part of bringing people in in order to help continue the food and 02:02:23.841 --> 02:02:30.314 - beverage tax. The county and the city of Bloomington, through your cooperative efforts, have made the 02:02:30.314 --> 02:02:31.710 - interlocal agreement. 02:02:33.634 --> 02:02:41.183 - bit of a miracle that it occurred and with that we got CIB appointed who has been negotiating in the 02:02:41.183 --> 02:02:48.806 - best possible way in order to achieve those goals that we have. The hotel selected person that was or 02:02:48.806 --> 02:02:56.280 - group that was selected came back with a a proposal that is unavailable for us to consider and that 02:02:56.280 --> 02:03:01.886 - was changed significantly as our community as a whole when SE1 was passed. 02:03:02.722 --> 02:03:10.464 - With that, we now, and I'm going to quote our mayor, have to do less with less. I think that was you. 02:03:10.464 --> 02:03:18.433 - I hope so. But what I'm looking at here is signaling. We've had multiple discussions. We've went through 02:03:18.433 --> 02:03:26.251 - executive committees. We've tried to keep everything so we didn't just throw out what we could do. The 02:03:26.251 --> 02:03:30.046 - math comes down. 200-foot room hotel, $150 under. 02:03:31.074 --> 02:03:38.433 - Land is available, and this is the best place for the hotel. Now the question is, how are we going to 02:03:38.433 --> 02:03:45.721 - get there? Now the amendment, nominal, as I said earlier, and try not to be in a joking way, it'd be 02:03:45.721 --> 02:03:53.297 - nice to change that term because it indicates in Webster's at a very low amount. And it's very difficult 02:03:53.297 --> 02:03:59.646 - to say that, say what we would do. Because when I look at what the hotels pay in taxes, 02:03:59.778 --> 02:04:08.798 - over and based on and I'm take I took the downtown hotels I took the seven hotels including the 45 foot 02:04:08.798 --> 02:04:17.732 - graduate on average you know total taxes years 1.69 to 777.8 million at the present moment which comes 02:04:17.732 --> 02:04:21.982 - down to approximately $1637 to per room in taxes 02:04:22.338 --> 02:04:28.448 - which gets us to a payback of our 6.85 day of 21.36 years average. Is that just property tax? That's 02:04:28.448 --> 02:04:34.739 - just property. You're not even counting in-keepers tax? No, I'm not counting in-keepers tax or anything 02:04:34.739 --> 02:04:40.909 - else. And the reason I say that is because our group is only based upon our incremental property tax. 02:04:40.909 --> 02:04:47.019 - I didn't want to get into the weeds because I get in the weeds. I'm sorry about that, but I just do. 02:04:47.019 --> 02:04:48.894 - So with that, how we get to it 02:04:49.090 --> 02:04:55.076 - with the developer to just be straight up. We've got 200 rooms. We've got to hit our room rate. Are 02:04:55.076 --> 02:05:01.062 - you able to do that? Because that property needs to be put back in service at the earliest possible 02:05:01.062 --> 02:05:07.048 - point. And had SE1 not come forth, we would have already been moving forward. We can't change that. 02:05:07.048 --> 02:05:13.034 - But what we can do is send the signals. Like, if anyone's looking from a developer standpoint, this 02:05:13.034 --> 02:05:14.590 - has been discussed a lot. 02:05:14.690 --> 02:05:20.462 - That's the place for the hotel. It's just a matter of how we're going to get there financially. And 02:05:20.462 --> 02:05:26.234 - unfortunately, the city, everybody thinks that a governmental entity has more money than we do. But 02:05:26.234 --> 02:05:32.006 - we have public safety. We have affordability. And we have economic development that needs to be put 02:05:32.006 --> 02:05:37.893 - forth, just like the Prometheus lease. That's bringing people into our town that aren't here to bring 02:05:37.893 --> 02:05:43.838 - our money in. So the convention center and the host hotel will bring that in. The matter is how quick? 02:05:44.098 --> 02:05:50.787 - And can we afford it? Because the other priorities that we have as a community to ensure safety, economic 02:05:50.787 --> 02:05:57.223 - success, and the vibrancy of our downtown, which is our heart, continues. And with that, I don't know 02:05:57.223 --> 02:06:03.849 - how we're going to get there unless we set a priority that says, we're not going to do a police station. 02:06:03.849 --> 02:06:10.222 - We're not going to work on affordable housing. And we're going to put a bunch of money to help close 02:06:10.222 --> 02:06:13.630 - the gap through a current hotelier. I honestly think. 02:06:13.954 --> 02:06:20.756 - between the city's administration, between John Weickart and the CIB, that we can come up with someone 02:06:20.756 --> 02:06:27.426 - to make this work. It's just a matter of how quickly. But sending the signal, we can't just give the 02:06:27.426 --> 02:06:34.492 - land away. But let's talk about what it is, whether it be $6.8 million or whether it be less. But nominal, 02:06:34.492 --> 02:06:41.822 - because of you, I greatly appreciate you putting that definition out. It indicates very low. And I don't know. 02:06:43.682 --> 02:06:54.938 - I'll put one on my sleeve. We're not a very low community. We're a high bar community. So thank you. 02:06:54.938 --> 02:07:06.194 - So are you supporting the amendment as it stands without changing to using the word reduced? To you, 02:07:06.194 --> 02:07:10.206 - it's OK. To me, it's potato potato. 02:07:10.626 --> 02:07:18.074 - Well, that's a fair question. Is reduced different than nominal? I think it is. So maybe that's the 02:07:18.074 --> 02:07:25.597 - second. Maybe that's another amendment. OK. So we have a first and a second for the current proposed 02:07:25.597 --> 02:07:33.194 - amendment. We have a possible other amendment, but that's separate. My question is, is public comment 02:07:33.194 --> 02:07:38.110 - only until we get to the resolution, or is it how does this work? 02:07:38.946 --> 02:07:44.770 - Because we've been asked to have this current motion be just about the amendment, not about the resolution. 02:07:44.770 --> 02:07:50.217 - So I'm asking for clarification in terms of point of order. Yeah, if you want to have public comment 02:07:50.217 --> 02:07:56.149 - on the amendment, you can ask for public comment. OK, that's the stage. But it has to focus on the amendment. 02:07:56.149 --> 02:08:02.081 - On the amendment, OK. And that's fine. So again, just because we've had the motion, we've had the discussion, 02:08:02.081 --> 02:08:07.635 - we're going to public comment before the vote. So we have public comment. And I understand that you've 02:08:07.635 --> 02:08:08.606 - heard me read it. 02:08:08.962 --> 02:08:18.772 - I have hard copies I gave to commissioners and provided by email to staff. But if you would like to 02:08:18.772 --> 02:08:29.268 - look at the hard copies, it's available. Anyway, so opening for public comment either online or in person. 02:08:29.268 --> 02:08:38.686 - And I'll give my seat up for in person. John Fernandez, I just have a comment on the amendment. 02:08:40.482 --> 02:08:48.019 - I've not been privy to all the discussions, but I'm just looking at this from an outsider's perspective 02:08:48.019 --> 02:08:55.338 - and someone who's been involved with lots of economic development deals. It was my understanding the 02:08:55.338 --> 02:09:02.803 - whole point of the original resolution was to send a signal that the city and redevelopment commission 02:09:02.803 --> 02:09:09.470 - was open to some pretty aggressive discussions regarding the land cost as part of the deal. 02:09:10.530 --> 02:09:19.567 - If you pass this amendment, you're going to send a message. I mean, the whole point of the resolution, 02:09:19.567 --> 02:09:28.516 - I think, was almost like a messaging bill to give the CIB a little bit more room to maneuver in their 02:09:28.516 --> 02:09:37.289 - conversations. I think passing this amendment is just the wrong messaging bill because, I mean, the 02:09:37.289 --> 02:09:38.430 - fact is that 02:09:38.882 --> 02:09:46.752 - you know, even if they had the flexibility to provide the land at a fairly aggressive discount, you'd 02:09:46.752 --> 02:09:54.622 - still have to go through, you know, a whole economic development proposal that would come back to the 02:09:54.622 --> 02:10:02.414 - Redevelopment Commission for your review. So you're not taking your ability to say no off the table, 02:10:02.414 --> 02:10:07.198 - but the message that you're sending is, if I'm the developer, 02:10:08.098 --> 02:10:15.656 - I'm saying, okay, so the land, you know, is, you know, an investment of the land by the redevelopment 02:10:15.656 --> 02:10:23.213 - commission is essentially off the table because that's the message because all the conversations that 02:10:23.213 --> 02:10:30.622 - have led up to this proposed resolution is basically looking for a signal from the city that that's 02:10:30.622 --> 02:10:33.438 - an option if it's a good enough deal. 02:10:34.210 --> 02:10:40.579 - And if you take that off the table, you might as well not pass the underlying resolution because you're 02:10:40.579 --> 02:10:47.009 - just basically going to be on a status quo. So I don't know. There's other people I've been in the room, 02:10:47.009 --> 02:10:53.194 - but I'm just looking at it from a messaging perspective. I would perceive this as probably to be the 02:10:53.194 --> 02:10:55.582 - wrong message. That's just my opinion. 02:11:09.282 --> 02:11:16.717 - John Weickart with the Capital Improvement Board. And thank you for the many opportunities you've given 02:11:16.717 --> 02:11:23.938 - me to communicate with you about this. And I'm certainly not here to speak against the chairperson's 02:11:23.938 --> 02:11:31.087 - amendment. But I do want to say, one of the things you did in your meeting of December 10th was you 02:11:31.087 --> 02:11:37.950 - changed the word would to may. The resolution that you looked at originally said that you would 02:11:38.498 --> 02:11:46.612 - offer the site at free or nominal cost, and you change it to May. May seems to me to give you all the 02:11:46.612 --> 02:11:54.886 - flexibility that you need in terms of negotiating with a hotelier. And I'm certainly not here to speak. 02:11:54.886 --> 02:12:03.398 - I'm not here carrying Dora's water in any fashion. Your resolution talks about a host hotel, and certainly 02:12:03.398 --> 02:12:07.614 - I know what that means. But if the goal is to signal 02:12:07.938 --> 02:12:17.756 - the CIB, DORA, or any other potential hotelier if we have to reopen the RFP. And I'm not sure what the 02:12:17.756 --> 02:12:27.955 - resolution does as amended. You signaled what you've already agreed to do, which is the design assistance, 02:12:27.955 --> 02:12:35.294 - the schematic design. I think you've already done the site preparation work. 02:12:35.938 --> 02:12:43.951 - So your resolution becomes historical. It becomes retrospective. It becomes this is what we've done 02:12:43.951 --> 02:12:52.365 - so far, really the perspective, like here's where we would see ourselves going. If the resolution passes 02:12:52.365 --> 02:13:00.378 - as amended, I don't know how the ball is moved down the field. I just don't see how it's happening. 02:13:00.378 --> 02:13:02.622 - We know that there's a gap. 02:13:03.170 --> 02:13:10.250 - We became involved in late October to see how large that gap was. We had not been involved in those 02:13:10.250 --> 02:13:17.542 - negotiations. We saw that gap. We agreed to consider what we could do to help close that gap. We don't 02:13:17.542 --> 02:13:25.047 - have financial incentives. So we agreed that we could make design changes to help close that gap. There's 02:13:25.047 --> 02:13:32.268 - still a gap. The resolution as not amended says you may consider some other things to assist with the 02:13:32.268 --> 02:13:33.118 - development 02:13:33.314 --> 02:13:40.639 - of a host hotel. If it comes back to us, and I'll tell you, we've certainly learned something through 02:13:40.639 --> 02:13:48.108 - this process as well. What we have done in working with that gap in terms of changing and reducing what 02:13:48.108 --> 02:13:55.506 - we would expect in the design of a host hotel, I've said before, is a bell that cannot be unrun. We've 02:13:55.506 --> 02:14:03.262 - already had an initial meeting of our hotel evaluation group to consider, what will our next RFP look like? 02:14:03.842 --> 02:14:10.137 - Because we have to be prepared for that if this doesn't work. Excuse me. And so what we've already agreed 02:14:10.137 --> 02:14:16.076 - to do is already becoming part of what we're looking at in our next RFP. How do we describe it in a 02:14:16.076 --> 02:14:22.134 - future RFP? This is what we need to have. This is what we'd like to have. But this is what we need to 02:14:22.134 --> 02:14:28.192 - have. And we've already made that reduction. And it was a $15 million reduction by Doris numbers. And 02:14:28.192 --> 02:14:30.686 - I said this the last time I spoke to you. 02:14:32.226 --> 02:14:40.405 - If you pass the resolution without amendment, saying you may make this part of your offer, and the deal 02:14:40.405 --> 02:14:48.427 - collapses, because at that point, you've signaled the CIB, you've signaled DORA, the current selected 02:14:48.427 --> 02:14:56.449 - hotel, how far you can go. We know how far we can go. And if DORA can't close the gap, then they need 02:14:56.449 --> 02:15:01.246 - to go home and provide us the opportunity to issue a new RFP 02:15:01.922 --> 02:15:09.638 - And that new RFP signals to a new host hotel developer or multiple host hotel developers, if they're 02:15:09.638 --> 02:15:17.278 - even out there, that this is what we can do in terms of reducing the scope, if you will, of design. 02:15:17.278 --> 02:15:24.918 - This is what the RDC and the city team are willing to do to assist. There's your incentive package. 02:15:24.918 --> 02:15:31.870 - That's it. That's all we have to offer. That's all you can offer. That's all we can offer. 02:15:32.130 --> 02:15:38.433 - But with the amendment, if the amendment passes, frankly, it doesn't signal anything to the CIB. It 02:15:38.433 --> 02:15:45.304 - doesn't give us any tool in our new toolbox to go forward with a new RFP to attract any new hotel developer. 02:15:45.304 --> 02:15:51.671 - They still don't know what's being offered. So I appreciate the conversation and discussion. This is 02:15:51.671 --> 02:15:58.163 - complicated. I congratulate and compliment again the staff. This has been hard work. And thank you for 02:15:58.163 --> 02:16:01.630 - the opportunity to say something to you again tonight. 02:16:13.154 --> 02:16:19.314 - So I have a memo that was written by four. My name is Daniel Bingham, a member of the public. I have 02:16:19.314 --> 02:16:25.412 - a memo that was, I believe, shared publicly that is from four city council members that was sent to 02:16:25.412 --> 02:16:31.572 - the RDC commission earlier today, but that people may not have time to read. And I think it directly 02:16:31.572 --> 02:16:37.853 - impacts on the amendment, so I'd like to read it into the record in case anybody missed it. And it was 02:16:37.853 --> 02:16:42.366 - sent by council members Flaherty, Piedmont-Smith, Rallo, and Rosenbarger. 02:16:43.330 --> 02:16:48.896 - We appreciate your service on the Bloomington Redevelopment Commission and your consideration of our 02:16:48.896 --> 02:16:54.573 - views expressed in this memorandum. We also appreciate you taking the time, along with the city staff, 02:16:54.573 --> 02:17:00.195 - to meet with city council members during a work session last week. Respectfully, we urge you to amend 02:17:00.195 --> 02:17:05.871 - the RDC's resolution 125-36 to remove or substantively alter the final whereas clause, which specifies 02:17:05.871 --> 02:17:11.934 - the College Square property, quote, may be made available at a nominal cost for a convention at a host hotel. 02:17:12.098 --> 02:17:17.946 - and Section 3, which similarly states the property, quote, may be made available in some form to the 02:17:17.946 --> 02:17:23.967 - host hotel project at a nominal cost to the project. One, in making this amendment, the RDC should make 02:17:23.967 --> 02:17:30.162 - clear that its expectation is to receive value for the property similar to its purchase price, $6,895,000, 02:17:30.162 --> 02:17:35.951 - in the form of payment or a land transfer from the Monroe County government. A long-term lease that 02:17:35.951 --> 02:17:40.062 - reflects the full market value of the property could also be explored. 02:17:40.258 --> 02:17:45.964 - Under no circumstance should the RDC sell, transfer, or lease the property for merely, quote, 02:17:45.964 --> 02:17:52.156 - nominal value. Two, we believe as a matter of due diligence that a second RFP should be issued by the 02:17:52.156 --> 02:17:58.227 - CIB to reconsider host hotel options given these cost constraints, since other hoteliers may find a 02:17:58.227 --> 02:18:04.479 - host hotel project to be economically viable without public subsidy. Three, we believe the CIB and the 02:18:04.479 --> 02:18:09.214 - RDC should explore in earnest other options for any additional public subsidy 02:18:09.538 --> 02:18:15.105 - for convention center expansion, including Host Hotel, especially funding sources that are expressly 02:18:15.105 --> 02:18:20.893 - for this purpose, unappropriated food and beverage tax revenues held by Monroe County, and Monroe County 02:18:20.893 --> 02:18:26.515 - Innkeeper's tax revenues and or land previously purchased using these revenues. Rationale for why the 02:18:26.515 --> 02:18:32.303 - RDC should take the steps outlined above. Bullet one, the City Council, which is the city's fiscal body, 02:18:32.303 --> 02:18:37.870 - established a formal policy position on this issue in a letter dated May 6, 2024, with eight of nine 02:18:37.870 --> 02:18:39.358 - members clearly specifying 02:18:39.618 --> 02:18:45.200 - Any land owned by the RDC that may be considered for an expanded Convention Center site must be purchased 02:18:45.200 --> 02:18:50.677 - by the CIB or other entity, for example, a hotelier, for, at minimum, the price the RDC paid to acquire 02:18:50.677 --> 02:18:56.365 - the property. Second bullet, the property's total purchase price would typically require the City Council's 02:18:56.365 --> 02:19:01.790 - formal approval and oversight, which we find meaningful and compelling, regardless of the fact the RDC 02:19:01.790 --> 02:19:07.319 - purchased the property without Council's approval, since the purchase was structured as two transactions 02:19:07.319 --> 02:19:08.478 - less than $5 million. 02:19:08.994 --> 02:19:14.646 - Their bullet directly counteracting the city council's established policy position on this issue will 02:19:14.646 --> 02:19:20.354 - reflect poorly on the RDC and the mayor's administration while undermining public trust in government. 02:19:20.354 --> 02:19:26.228 - The next bullet, to the best of our knowledge, the city has not meaningfully subsidized any other private 02:19:26.228 --> 02:19:32.158 - hotel developments in Bloomington. If this property was not already held by the RDC, it is hard to imagine 02:19:32.158 --> 02:19:36.702 - the mayor or RDC would propose using almost $7 million in tax increment financing 02:19:36.898 --> 02:19:43.115 - or other city tax revenues to subsidize a convention center host hotel. There are other viable alternatives 02:19:43.115 --> 02:19:49.275 - for any additional public subsidy, including Monroe County's unappropriated food and beverage tax proceeds 02:19:49.275 --> 02:19:55.089 - and innkeeper tax revenues or land purchased with those revenues. Unlike TIF revenues, these funding 02:19:55.089 --> 02:20:01.248 - sources are mostly or at least partially borne by visitors, i.e. non-residents, and are related to tourism 02:20:01.248 --> 02:20:05.278 - and a convention center. Mayor Thompson's pledge since the passage of 02:20:05.410 --> 02:20:10.585 - of Indiana State Enrolled Act SEA 1 has been we need to do less with less. A $7 million giveaway to 02:20:10.585 --> 02:20:16.018 - a private hotel, regardless of its usefulness for a convention center, belies this approach. The mayor's 02:20:16.018 --> 02:20:21.245 - prior position was that affordable housing is a more compelling use of these tax dollars, a position 02:20:21.245 --> 02:20:26.730 - we agree with. There are multiple ways to leverage this property to advance affordable housing and enable 02:20:26.730 --> 02:20:32.319 - downtown residency for those who otherwise could not afford it. These options include developing affordable 02:20:32.319 --> 02:20:33.406 - housing on the site, 02:20:33.538 --> 02:20:39.140 - exchanging the property for nearby land owned by the Monroe County government, and developing or even 02:20:39.140 --> 02:20:44.688 - preserving existing affordable housing there, or selling the property at market rate and reinvesting 02:20:44.688 --> 02:20:50.181 - the proceeds in affordable housing. Because the City Council did not have a regular session between 02:20:50.181 --> 02:20:55.673 - the December 10th RDC work session and the December 15th vote on Resolution 125-36, the Council did 02:20:55.673 --> 02:20:59.518 - not have time to formally reassert its policy position on this issue, 02:20:59.650 --> 02:21:04.870 - Five days is not an adequate amount of time for the city council to be meaningfully involved. However, 02:21:04.870 --> 02:21:09.938 - based on the council's formal policy position, May 2024 council member comments during the December 02:21:09.938 --> 02:21:15.006 - 10th work session and conversations with our colleagues, we believe the majority of council members 02:21:15.006 --> 02:21:20.378 - broadly share these views. Just wanted to make sure that got entered into the conversation. The council's 02:21:20.378 --> 02:21:25.699 - position on this is really relevant. And as a member of the public, I share it. I do not think we should 02:21:25.699 --> 02:21:28.030 - be offering additional public subsidy for the 02:21:28.130 --> 02:21:33.330 - for the convention center, for a convention center hotel. There are no guarantees that the convention 02:21:33.330 --> 02:21:38.479 - center is going to succeed. It is a business. Most businesses fail. We've already seen market forces 02:21:38.479 --> 02:21:43.628 - that have drastically offended the effect of the convention business, like COVID, which has actually 02:21:43.628 --> 02:21:48.727 - shut it down for several years. There's no guarantee that this is going to have the effect we want. 02:21:48.727 --> 02:21:52.958 - And $7 million is an enormous subsidy that we need to be spending on other things. 02:22:05.282 --> 02:22:10.927 - My name is Hugh Farrell, and I will say that as a member of the public, my head's been spinning since 02:22:10.927 --> 02:22:16.517 - the beginning of this month. I thought I'd understood the level of public subsidy for the Commission 02:22:16.517 --> 02:22:22.051 - Center and related projects. And I think, as with many people in city and county government and the 02:22:22.051 --> 02:22:27.752 - public, that's been changing really rapidly. I would speak in support of the amendment because I think 02:22:27.752 --> 02:22:33.950 - it allows us to establish a new baseline from whence a new plan for basically regulating the level of city risk 02:22:34.274 --> 02:22:40.072 - and public subsidy can be made. And then in particular, there's an opportunity here to address, I think, 02:22:40.072 --> 02:22:45.814 - multiple of the goals. And I wanted to speak as well in support of the land swap proposal that was made 02:22:45.814 --> 02:22:51.391 - last week. I was glad to be able to attend that meeting. And specifically say that in the context of 02:22:51.391 --> 02:22:57.244 - a very messy process around the convention center, there's also the orphaned property owned by the county 02:22:57.244 --> 02:23:01.054 - at 222 West Second Street, where there are 29 affordable apartments. 02:23:01.218 --> 02:23:08.115 - that had potentially been held, the Convention Center, and now are really, I think, suffering for being 02:23:08.115 --> 02:23:14.813 - held by the county and without a concrete plan. I would say I trust the city and city agencies to be 02:23:14.813 --> 02:23:21.577 - able to better manage those affordable housing units and that the possibility of a land swap in order 02:23:21.577 --> 02:23:26.750 - to secure those for the city would be a good way to do that, but we need time 02:23:26.850 --> 02:23:32.372 - so that our heads stop spinning and we can actually develop a concrete plan within which an RFP can 02:23:32.372 --> 02:23:36.734 - be made and which affordable housing can be preserved and expanded. Thank you. 02:23:52.130 --> 02:23:58.423 - And I just want to start by thanking everyone for all of the time and effort that they put into this 02:23:58.423 --> 02:24:04.716 - resolution. I was able to attend the meeting last week, and it was really extensive conversation. So 02:24:04.716 --> 02:24:11.133 - I just want to thank everyone for that. I'm here to urge the Redevelopment Commission not to give away 02:24:11.133 --> 02:24:18.174 - the College Square property without compensation. It's clear that unexpected costs have come up on this project. 02:24:18.818 --> 02:24:25.111 - And we're at a point where we're going to need to piece together funding to make the hotel and the convention 02:24:25.111 --> 02:24:30.947 - center viable. Those costs should not fall solely on the city nor on the county, but should be shared 02:24:30.947 --> 02:24:37.126 - by both. Several properties were purchased as potential locations for the hotel project. Making an exchange 02:24:37.126 --> 02:24:42.904 - for the property to the south that's currently owned by the county would relieve the county of their 02:24:42.904 --> 02:24:47.710 - current burden of maintaining affordable housing without a structure designed to do 02:24:48.706 --> 02:24:56.419 - More importantly, it would help divide the burden of these unexpected costs of this project between 02:24:56.419 --> 02:25:04.208 - the county and the city. So I think that the current amendment is a step in the right direction, but 02:25:04.208 --> 02:25:12.229 - I encourage you to explicitly include such a land transfer or other real compensation in the resolution 02:25:12.229 --> 02:25:15.006 - that you're considering. Thank you. 02:25:23.394 --> 02:25:28.700 - Hi, my name is T. Randall. I am a resident at the Seminary Square Apartments that have been discussed. 02:25:28.700 --> 02:25:33.852 - I'm here to argue against inclusion of language, which would give away the northern property or the 02:25:33.852 --> 02:25:39.210 - College Square property for a nominal fee. The property owned by the county to the south of the current 02:25:39.210 --> 02:25:44.465 - Convention Center was purchased with funds specifically for supporting the Convention Center project. 02:25:44.465 --> 02:25:49.720 - The county has expressed its apprehension for being a landlord of the Seminary Square Apartments, and 02:25:49.720 --> 02:25:51.678 - the city is interested in maintaining 02:25:51.778 --> 02:25:57.995 - and providing affordable housing. The land swap proposed by the council members is the most direct path 02:25:57.995 --> 02:26:03.972 - towards me and my neighbors having secure housing and truly affordable rents in a central location. 02:26:03.972 --> 02:26:10.009 - The swap would also support the continued existence of several beloved local businesses downtown. As 02:26:10.009 --> 02:26:16.047 - was expressed last week, if this downtown property is sold on the market, what else can we expect to 02:26:16.047 --> 02:26:19.454 - go in its place but another student apartment high-rise? 02:26:19.970 --> 02:26:29.857 - We all talk about the value of affordable housing. Here is a chance to protect affordable housing downtown. 02:26:29.857 --> 02:26:39.103 - My name is Barry Herbers. I think that transferring the College Square property for a nominal fee or 02:26:39.103 --> 02:26:48.990 - even implying that that is an option misses out on the opportunity to protect genuinely affordable housing. 02:26:49.570 --> 02:26:55.532 - The exchange proposed that we've been discussing last week by the City Council is the most direct way 02:26:55.532 --> 02:27:01.552 - to achieve genuinely affordable housing. The county has expressed anxiety in the past that they aren't 02:27:01.552 --> 02:27:07.455 - enthusiastic about being a landlord, and the residential and commercial space in the Seminary Square 02:27:07.455 --> 02:27:13.533 - block is a wonderful opportunity to keep Bloomington affordable for everyone who lives here. Thank you. 02:27:13.533 --> 02:27:16.222 - Any other in-person or online public comment? 02:27:18.882 --> 02:27:27.001 - Hi, yeah. I am online. I wasn't sure how the process was. I can't really see who's from the public is 02:27:27.001 --> 02:27:35.199 - here from the current view. Thank you. Could you just introduce yourself, please? Yeah. My name's Eve. 02:27:35.199 --> 02:27:42.522 - I'm a Wilmington resident. And I just wanted to start off by saying thanks to everybody for 02:27:42.522 --> 02:27:47.934 - this conversation, for the intentionality, again, to this decision. 02:27:48.674 --> 02:27:56.377 - want to echo the memo submitted by city council members to dive deeper into alternative options that 02:27:56.377 --> 02:28:03.470 - won't require this long-term subsidizing of a hotel. It feels like a failing strategy, which 02:28:03.470 --> 02:28:11.097 - it's demonstrated in other cities around the country who have continued to operate their convention 02:28:11.097 --> 02:28:16.894 - centers at a loss because of these sort of subsidies. I also want to speak. 02:28:16.994 --> 02:28:24.044 - in support of the proposal for the city and county to negotiate a land swap that allows the city to 02:28:24.044 --> 02:28:31.164 - assume ownership of the seminary square lot. Similar to the other public comments, I think this is a 02:28:31.164 --> 02:28:38.213 - great opportunity to continue prioritizing the development of and protection of existing affordable 02:28:38.213 --> 02:28:45.475 - housing, especially downtown, which is increasingly unaffordable for Bloomington residents, especially 02:28:45.475 --> 02:28:46.814 - the working class. 02:28:47.554 --> 02:28:55.360 - And let's see. Yeah, I feel like potentially compromising affordable housing while in the same breath 02:28:55.360 --> 02:29:03.167 - promoting the convention center as an economic development strategy feels misguided. And I would like 02:29:03.167 --> 02:29:10.820 - to see creative strategies to continue prioritizing affordable housing. And this feels like a great 02:29:10.820 --> 02:29:16.254 - opportunity to do so. So thank you so much. And sorry that I'm online. 02:29:17.570 --> 02:29:26.336 - Thank you. Any other online comments? It looks like we have one person with their hand raised, 02:29:26.336 --> 02:29:35.840 - Kevin Keough. Can you hear me? Can you hear me OK? Yes, thank you. Yeah, I'm Kevin Keough. And I guess 02:29:35.840 --> 02:29:46.174 - what's troubling, it's not about politics that concerns me most. It's the process and really the accountability 02:29:47.266 --> 02:29:55.530 - And respect for the public, but getting pity to it is, it seems something happened last week at your 02:29:55.530 --> 02:30:04.203 - meeting with the city council where there seems to be a disconnect. And which, as a member of the public, 02:30:04.203 --> 02:30:12.957 - it's got to be recognized and acknowledged. And what really is burning inside me when I'm hearing tonight, 02:30:12.957 --> 02:30:14.430 - there seems to be 02:30:15.554 --> 02:30:23.403 - So use the political capital. And there may be some people tonight spending their political capital 02:30:23.403 --> 02:30:31.253 - based on who gave them the ability to be on this board. And that's concerning, because I would hope 02:30:31.253 --> 02:30:39.337 - we're acting in the best interests of the community. And as such, recognizing in these communications, 02:30:39.337 --> 02:30:43.262 - especially with the public, it needs to be clear. 02:30:43.938 --> 02:30:51.311 - I always, it helps if you try to speak to us. Sometimes if you're speaking to a six-year-old, I think 02:30:51.311 --> 02:30:58.900 - it's good to try to make it simple. What are we really trying to accomplish here? So that's my key point 02:30:58.900 --> 02:31:06.128 - is this transparency, how we're communicating things with the public. And what are we really trying 02:31:06.128 --> 02:31:13.790 - to accomplish? And this is a large amount of money. I don't have a timer, so I probably should switch it. 02:31:14.338 --> 02:31:23.752 - Stop here, but I just wanted to make that point as a member of the public my concern about You know 02:31:23.752 --> 02:31:33.448 - this again spending of political capital tonight. Thank you so much Yeah, we have one more person Eric 02:31:33.448 --> 02:31:42.014 - there isn't a last name Good evening, can you hear me? Yes, thank you Yes, my name is Eric 02:31:42.178 --> 02:31:50.001 - And I wasn't going to make a comment this evening, but I did want to support everything that's been 02:31:50.001 --> 02:31:58.137 - said so far, particularly the comments by Ms. Meyerson and Mr. Keough. And I also wanted to make a note 02:31:58.137 --> 02:32:06.116 - that the doors to St. Paul are locked, which is a violation of the open door law. And if I could have 02:32:06.116 --> 02:32:12.062 - somebody come and open the door for me, I would appreciate that. Thank you. 02:32:14.018 --> 02:32:21.860 - I don't know that this is the time. I mean, really the public comment was really supposed to be related 02:32:21.860 --> 02:32:29.627 - to the amendment only. But it seems that the comments have been about the resolution period. And I did 02:32:29.627 --> 02:32:37.318 - receive an email that is asking me to read it into the record tonight because they could not be here. 02:32:37.318 --> 02:32:39.806 - I'm not sure what the rules are. 02:32:42.882 --> 02:32:58.944 - I think it's fine. Yeah. While we're at public comment. First of all, I didn't support the resolution 02:32:58.944 --> 02:33:11.070 - presented at the December 1 meeting as stated in the minutes of the meeting. 02:33:11.298 --> 02:33:17.589 - I support building the hotel on College Square site but don't support donating the site to a hotelier. 02:33:17.589 --> 02:33:23.696 - Second, to make the hotel more profitable and require less subsidy, change the requirement that the 02:33:23.696 --> 02:33:30.231 - hotel is prohibited from charging superior room rates when major events occur in Bloomington to preventing 02:33:30.231 --> 02:33:36.094 - them from charging superior rates only when events occur at the convention center. As proposed, 02:33:36.290 --> 02:33:41.264 - Resolution 25136 currently states the Bloomington Redevelopment Commission hereby provides notice of 02:33:41.264 --> 02:33:46.435 - its further commitment to the Host Hotel project by making known that the real estate at College Square, 02:33:46.435 --> 02:33:51.606 - if necessary for the Host Hotel, may be made available in some form to the Host Hotel project at nominal 02:33:51.606 --> 02:33:56.531 - cost to the project if it furthers economic development of the city of Bloomington. Enormal cost is 02:33:56.531 --> 02:33:59.486 - vague and subjective term. If you were to pull a commission 02:33:59.650 --> 02:34:05.890 - members, they would likely all have a different definition of nominal cost. In lieu of a nominal cost, 02:34:05.890 --> 02:34:12.130 - it would be defined now or stated as a cap, such as an amount no more than. I still prefer a long-term 02:34:12.130 --> 02:34:18.188 - lease, $1 per year for 40 years. The resolution goes on to say, nothing in this resolution shall be 02:34:18.188 --> 02:34:24.428 - construed as approving the final development terms. It appears the RDC still has to review and approve 02:34:24.428 --> 02:34:29.214 - the transfer of any property. Each commissioner probably has an amount in mind 02:34:29.346 --> 02:34:37.082 - that would be a deal killer. If they establish that number now, the public would know too. By not defining 02:34:37.082 --> 02:34:44.528 - nominal cost now, it appears the commission is just kicking that can down the road. That is from Jerry 02:34:44.528 --> 02:34:51.758 - Hayes. Thank you for sharing that. Was there any other? Just making sure we're good. Nothing online 02:34:51.758 --> 02:34:57.758 - in person. OK. So we've had comments from commissioners. We've had public comment. 02:34:57.858 --> 02:35:04.751 - Final questions or comments from commissioners before we take a roll call vote. On the amendment, we're 02:35:04.751 --> 02:35:11.446 - not doing the resolution yet. As requested, we're voting on the amended language. And then depending 02:35:11.446 --> 02:35:18.273 - on that in terms of how the full vote on the resolution will go. I would like to make one thing clear. 02:35:18.273 --> 02:35:21.918 - I think everybody agrees this is the site for a hotel. 02:35:22.274 --> 02:35:30.061 - That's not a discussion of what we've all collectively seen and very transparent on ours, too. It's 02:35:30.061 --> 02:35:37.926 - not a political decision. It's more of how do we get here from a monetary standpoint. And with that, 02:35:37.926 --> 02:35:45.791 - in previous times, even with the Hotel for the Trades District, we discounted the land, $300,000. We 02:35:45.791 --> 02:35:52.254 - gave them time to pay for it. In past history, which most people weren't involved, 02:35:52.642 --> 02:35:59.359 - The Hilton Garden Inn has paid over $4.4 million since they were opened in 2006, and they didn't have 02:35:59.359 --> 02:36:05.945 - any land cost at that time. So that happened. Just to make it very clear, I am trying to look at it 02:36:05.945 --> 02:36:12.596 - through a mathematical standpoint where it's going to best benefit the community. I think we've sent 02:36:12.596 --> 02:36:19.313 - a good signal of what the financial circumstances are. If we had the money, we'd already be done with 02:36:19.313 --> 02:36:20.894 - Dora. We appreciate it. 02:36:22.434 --> 02:36:29.888 - And I just want to clarify, too, because there's been a lot of discussion about a land swap. There's 02:36:29.888 --> 02:36:37.563 - nothing that would preclude further discussions like that. Plus, there's nothing to say that the county 02:36:37.563 --> 02:36:45.090 - wouldn't do that. But that could be something that could be pursued even with this resolution passed. 02:36:45.090 --> 02:36:51.806 - So I just want to make that known that that doesn't take a land swap off the table at all. 02:36:55.042 --> 02:37:01.693 - Others make my final word for I feel that the amended language helps to straddle various points of view, 02:37:01.693 --> 02:37:08.090 - many of which we've heard this evening, in addition to supporting the direction of moving forward. I 02:37:08.090 --> 02:37:14.678 - understand that some have some doubts about whether the resolution has merit with the amended language, 02:37:14.678 --> 02:37:21.012 - but I would argue that the amendment helps to find a middle ground that helps us move forward. So I 02:37:21.012 --> 02:37:23.102 - will encourage support for that. 02:37:23.458 --> 02:37:33.954 - Could you read the amendment? Yes I'll read it one more time. Okay so the amendment focuses on two elements 02:37:33.954 --> 02:37:43.673 - of the on page two if you have the hard copy of the packet or a virtual copy of the packet focusing 02:37:43.673 --> 02:37:49.310 - on the last whereas the last whereas as amended would say 02:37:49.506 --> 02:37:55.991 - Whereas in addition to the incentives already mentioned above, the RDC has determined the real estate 02:37:55.991 --> 02:38:02.922 - at College Square necessary for the host hotel may be made available in a form and on terms to be determined 02:38:02.922 --> 02:38:09.535 - by the RDC and structured to protect the city's best interests and limit public risk. The other amended 02:38:09.535 --> 02:38:16.274 - area is for clause three at the bottom of this page, and that is the Bloomington Redevelopment Commission 02:38:16.274 --> 02:38:19.390 - hereby provides notice of its further commitment 02:38:19.554 --> 02:38:26.874 - to the Host Hotel project by making known that the real estate at College Square, if necessary for the 02:38:26.874 --> 02:38:34.193 - Host Hotel, may be made available in some form and on terms to be determined by the RDC and structured 02:38:34.193 --> 02:38:41.584 - to protect the city of Bloomington's best interests and limit public risk. So those are the two amended 02:38:41.584 --> 02:38:47.198 - areas. Again, if you have the packet available, you can compare that language. 02:38:49.346 --> 02:39:00.646 - Are we ready for a roll call vote? It would seem so. Okay. Lori McRabbie, I vote in favor of the amendment. 02:39:00.646 --> 02:39:11.109 - See Scambillari? No. Randy Gastey, yes. John West, no. Deborah Meyerson, yes. Passes three, two for 02:39:11.109 --> 02:39:18.014 - the amended language. Now we return to the resolution as a whole. 02:39:18.498 --> 02:39:28.655 - with the amendment that was just approved by three members of the commission. So again, even though 02:39:28.655 --> 02:39:39.422 - we separated this out, are there further things for we're now opening up discussion for resolution 25-136 02:39:39.422 --> 02:39:46.430 - with the amended language as just presented and the amendment is now 02:39:46.914 --> 02:39:54.355 - presented as part of this resolution. Are there further things that commissioners would like to discuss 02:39:54.355 --> 02:40:01.724 - or comment on based on anything else that would be relevant before we take a vote? OK. Question I have 02:40:01.724 --> 02:40:09.093 - is who's going to be moving forward on negotiation with that? Is that going to go back out to the CIB? 02:40:09.093 --> 02:40:13.886 - Jane, you're going to be? So the process going forward, regardless 02:40:14.050 --> 02:40:21.419 - I think in the outcome tonight, there's no deal with the current developer. So staff will report at 02:40:21.419 --> 02:40:29.082 - the CIB meeting this Wednesday that there's no deal. And then the CIB will decide what their next steps 02:40:29.082 --> 02:40:36.524 - are. They can consider other sites with DORA, or they can decide to release a new RFP. Or they could 02:40:36.524 --> 02:40:40.798 - go back to one of the two other developers who responded. 02:40:41.250 --> 02:40:49.812 - We have to pass the ball back to them on Wednesday for those next steps to take place. So my position 02:40:49.812 --> 02:40:58.290 - on this, that side is the best thing for the hotel. We just need to get to the money map of how it's 02:40:58.290 --> 02:41:07.104 - going to work as soon as possible. Anything further from commissioners before we open for public comment 02:41:07.104 --> 02:41:09.790 - on the consideration of 25-136? 02:41:11.778 --> 02:41:21.261 - Okay, open for public, seeing nothing in person or online. Making sure, because you can see the online 02:41:21.261 --> 02:41:30.652 - folks better than I can. Okay. So, do we have a motion to adopt resolution 25-136 as amended? Second. 02:41:30.652 --> 02:41:38.110 - Okay, we have a motion and a second. We'll do another roll call vote for 25-136. 02:41:44.130 --> 02:41:53.214 - Sue Scamblery, yes. Randy Cassidy, yes. Debra Cribson. John West, no. Debra Meyerson, yes. So the resolution 02:41:53.214 --> 02:42:01.882 - passes 4-1. Procedurally, it will go back to the CIB, and then come back. After Wednesday, we'll report 02:42:01.882 --> 02:42:10.217 - to them Wednesday. I do want to compliment the staff and everybody for working diligently to try to 02:42:10.217 --> 02:42:11.550 - make this work. 02:42:11.906 --> 02:42:17.820 - I would appeal to our state legislators that may be listening to please take in consideration what the 02:42:17.820 --> 02:42:23.734 - bill has done to the communities as a whole in our state. And I'll leave that at that. Can we pass the 02:42:23.734 --> 02:42:29.648 - thanks back to you all for all the hours you've put into this and other projects? And the public, this 02:42:29.648 --> 02:42:35.504 - is a long meeting, and the work session was a long meeting. So yeah, thank you. Are you going to have 02:42:35.504 --> 02:42:39.294 - one last set of comments from the commissioners, or are you done? 02:42:39.714 --> 02:42:47.214 - We technically have other business before we adjourn, so just checking. Any other business before we 02:42:47.214 --> 02:42:54.938 - have a motion to adjourn? I have one thing to say. I want to thank the two people in the team that have 02:42:54.938 --> 02:43:02.661 - helped our economic movement throughout our community in the last two years. Hats off to Kurt Signetti, 02:43:02.661 --> 02:43:05.854 - Mendoza, and the FIU football team because 02:43:05.986 --> 02:43:17.621 - We've got a Heisman Trophy winner. We've got plenty. We've got plenty of enthusiasm nationally for Olmington, 02:43:17.621 --> 02:43:21.534 - Indiana. Motion to adjourn. So move.