OK, well, it is 5 o'clock, and we will start our first meeting of the Bloomington Redevelopment Commission
for 2026. We'll start the meeting with a roll call, please. C. Scanbelluri, here. Randy Cassidy, here.
Laura McRobbie, here. John West, here. Deborah Meyerson, here. And staff present, please. Anna Killian
Hanson, here. Christina Finley, hand department. Tammy Caswell, here.
here. Dana Kerr. Not yet. But hi. Hello. Okay well our agenda today is we've got the minutes from December
15 2025 any comments or questions from commissioners if not I'll take a motion.
I'll make a motion to approve as noted. Second? Second. First and two seconds. We'll do a vote by a
roll call, please. Sioux Scandler, yes. Randy Cassidy, yes. Laura McRobbie, yes. John West, yes. Deborah
Meyerson, yes. Motion passes unanimously for the minutes of December 15th. Next item on the agenda is
the examination of claim registers.
for December 22nd, 2025. Any comments or questions from commissioners on the claim register? Move for
approval. Got a question. Sorry, John. Page seven of the Fund 2234 on the unsafe building, which is
the 4U landscape at 24.2, is that an abatement for
Because the reason I ask is when you look that address up, it brings you to the encampment. That's the
encampment. What page is it on? Well, in my world, it's 7 of 35. It's in pun 2230. 7 of the packet,
sorry. Yeah, 7 of the packet, I apologize.
It's $24,020. This was an exceptionally large, exceptionally large encampment that we had to evade.
OK. That's the encampment situation. OK. Yeah, because the address when you bring it up is actually
the Pizza Express building, or the building in front of it. Yeah, I don't think that the actual address
is correct. It's mostly wooded area. OK.
That was the cleanup area on that. Yeah, it took weeks, weeks and weeks. And then the other question
I was on would be page 10 of 35 on Fund 4657, the 4th Street bond proceeds taxable. It was indicating
the $34,000 mobile communication security cams on our 4th Street garage.
and that was just additional, was that something that came through or just through the parking? No,
as a matter of fact, all of those invoices were actually held by the IT department. There was some sort
of issue that they were never paid from, was it 21 or 22? 22. From 2022, never paid. They were held
in the IT department. They were forwarded to us at the end of the year. We worked with the controller's
office for year.
We don't know what happened. So they were paid. They were received. Not by us. Yeah, I know. They were
received by the city, and then not forwarded to the redevelopment at that particular time. That's correct.
There was some issue with closing out the project, and it hadn't been completed yet. And finally got
the IT to say, please process this. This is now complete.
So that is what that was. OK. So that was still, we still had that in reserve in the bond. It was already.
It was already allocated in our bond reserves. Yes, correct. OK. Thank you. That's all. Thank you. Would
you like to make a motion? John did. OK. John's motion is on the table. Second. First and a second.
We'll do a vote by roll call, please. C. Scandalari, yes. Randy Cassidy, yes. Lauren McRobbie, yes.
Down the West, yes.
Deborah Meyerson, yes. Motion passes unanimously. Next item on the agenda is the payroll register from
December 12th and December 24th, 2025. Any questions or comments from commissioners on these two registers?
We have approval of payroll registers for December 12th and December 24th, 2025. Second. We've got a
first and a second. We'll do a vote by roll call, please. C. Scambler, yes. Randy Cassidy, yes.
Laura McRobbie, yes. John West, yes. Deborah Meyerson, yes. Passes unanimously for the examination of
payroll registers. Thank you. Do we have reports from officers and committees? I would like to update
you on something. We got a call from last week or so that a shed that was on the College Square lot
was set on fire and burned.
So it posed a threat to the public. And so I moved forward and got a crew out there on Friday to clean
it up and pull it down so that it would no longer be posing a threat. The total amount for the cleanup
was $900. So I could do one of two things. We can pay it under, if you do approve the maintenance resolution
that's on your agenda tonight, we could potentially pay that out of there.
Or we could bring it back at the next meeting with a resolution and ratification. So it's up to you.
It seems simpler not to create a whole separate resolution. It does, but I would like you guys to add
that decision. Well, when we get to that approval of maintenance funds on the agenda, can we amend it
to add that? Yes. OK. Yeah. But it was something critical that we felt like we couldn't really. And
what was the shed being used for?
I don't know. It wasn't anything that city was using it for. It was something that was part of the purchase
at that time. It appeared that it had some office chairs and paint and some other chemicals in it. So
I don't know. We don't know. It was not paint. It was used by the prior tenants. OK. There you go. John
has more history than I do. What kind of security is on that law? Before the city got it, they built it.
And the last tenant to use it was the costume of people. That makes sense. Thank you. I was just wondering
what kind of security is on the College Square property. We do not have any security at the College
Square. OK. I'm not trying to invite a new budget line in. I'm just asking. Trying to get a sense of,
you know. Right. There is a lot of visibility there right now. We do have Wettle that's in the building.
Beyond that, it is not like Hopewell. OK, thank you. Since we are on that subject, Mr. McKim did it.
He put that picture out a while back. On the College Square, we do still have a tenant there.
Is that correct? They have vacated, or they should be fully out this month. The legal services? Yes.
OK, so that building will be completely empty.
with the exception of the construction crew for Weddle for the convention center. Correct. Okay. And
they're there until the convention center is complete. Correct. And I will, on that subject, Weddle
has reached out. They would really like to use more parking spaces than what our initial lease was allowing
them since they're having a lot more contractors coming through, a lot more activity. So once Indiana
Legal Services is out, we hope to show where they will be able to use of that parking.
Sorry. Thank you. Anything else for your report? No. OK. Thanks. Other reports? Yes. I have two things
for you tonight. One, I wanted to give you an update on the Summit District and Hopewell residential
TIF timelines. Public notice went to the HD on December 30 and on January 2.
Letters went out, notices went out to neighborhood associations and all other statutory listed entities
like underlying taxing authorities and school corporation and such. In Sunday's paper, it should have
been published notice as well. And so that notice is for a public meeting that's going to be held on
February 5th in the council chambers. And at that time, all of those folks are invited to come. And
neighbors are invited to come. Public is invited. And there'll be a presentation on the test, residential
test, what they are, how they work, what these projects are. And then you make it is not being
publicized as a meeting for you to make a decision on the TIFS is just a step to take in information.
Because there may be information that we absorb that we think we need to make changes for before bringing
it to you. So sometime tomorrow or shortly thereafter, we're putting together a residential housing
development program for each of the projects to kind of lay out the projects.
And those will get posted on our website. February 5th is the neighborhood public meeting. At the February
16th meeting, you'll be asked to consider the TIF declaratory resolution. And that's just a regular
meeting, not a hearing. And then that gets filed with the planning commission. And on March 9th,
The plan commission during a regular meeting will be asked to approve that. And then it will go to council
on March 25th to see if they approve it as well. And if it is approved by both of those, it'll come
back to the RDC on the April 6th meeting. And that will be advertised as a public hearing.
So at that time, we're getting public input at the public meeting. The technical public hearing is at
that time. And then if you decide to move forward to have a declaratory resolution is the first one.
And then the resolution on April would be a confirmatory resolution. And so that's kind of the process
that that goes through. So the key dates are February 5.
for the public meeting at 530, and the hearing would be also very important on April 6. So I wanted
to cover that. Also, since it's the beginning of the year, I wanted to continue to make you aware of
the conflict of interest statute. That's 35-44.1.
And basically, if you have a dependent, which could be a spouse of a public servant, a child, stepchild,
or adoptee who is not emancipated in less than 18 years of age, or an individual whose support you provide
more than one half of the years with would be the definition of a dependent.
And a pecuniary interest means an interest in a contract or purchase if the contract or purchase will
result or is intended to result in, and here's what's important, an ascertainable increase in the income
or net worth of the public servant or a dependent of the public servant. It is not a defense or it is
not an offense under this section if
any public servants makes a disclosure. And that includes eligible people to make disclosures include
appointees by elected public servants, which would be you guys. So if your income or net worth would
change because of a contract, then that needs to have a disclosure.
If it's a single event, then we can do a disclosure leading up to that. While the statute doesn't really
call for it, we don't have anything else in place to document it. So if someone is an employee of a
company, it would be good to fill out the conflict of interest
annually so at the beginning of the year fill it out say hey yeah just so people understand I do work
for these people but it does not you know I don't make more because of this particular contract it doesn't
increase me I don't get a percentage of the profits off of it or a commission or anything like that
I simply and an employee and get the same pay I always get and so again technically
That wouldn't require a conflict of interest. And we're talking about maybe putting together some sort
of safe harbor letter so that we still have notice. But I prefer to lean forward to transparency and
might as well do one. So I'm not sure who all those would affect. So if we could get that done sometime,
if we'd like my help filling it out, I'd be happy to help with that.
It's usually something that's discussed at the beginning of the year in boards and commissions. So I
just wanted to bring that to your attention. And I'm here for any questions you may have. If in doubt,
fill it out. When in doubt, fill it out. It doesn't hurt to fill it out. It's, again, it just, if anybody
would say something, even though it's not a violation, you can say, look, I went overboard, above and beyond.
fill that out. Clear transparency. Quick question, Dana. Based on your time frames and the resolutions
and why you went over it, while I'm attempting to write all of those down, would you be so kind as to
forward us those particular dates, times, and what those- Yes. Could they be included in the map? Yeah.
That'd be great if you could send it. And also send a tentative calendar invite that you guys- If you
could. Yeah, that would be helpful. I took some notes, but it'd be nice just to get it.
Yeah, we can do that. And the other thing, too, we'll put on your calendar is that January 12th, which
you guys are probably well aware of, is the planning commission meeting for Hopewell South PDD. So that's
next Monday. Is that at 5? It is. What's wrong? Oh, nothing major. It'll just be by Zoom. Oh, you won't
be there. I won't be there, unfortunately. Well, this is just the first planning commission meeting.
There will be changes.
It's a process to get a PUD or anything. We didn't ask for a waiver or a second hearing. It's part of
the public process. Thank you for that legal report. If there's no other questions for legal, do we
have a treasurer's report? We do not have a current treasurer. I wasn't sure what the gap was or what
the timeline is. No. Our new treasurer will be starting, I believe, next week. OK. Excellent. One quick
question on the treasurers.
4.6 million from the trades district. It's in the 444. No, it's not the 444 account. I'm going to utilize
that. That's where it says. It was supposed to be put back into the 2519. 2519. Which is our 444. Which
is the former 444. Thank you. Yes. OK. Yes. I'll try to keep that right this year. 2519. I know that
it was placed in a different account for a short period of time, but they moved it over. They moved it over.
Speaking of the treasurer, you all know, just so the public knows, that the fiscal officer of the unit
establishing the redevelopment commission is the treasurer of the redevelopment commission, so that
would be the controller for the city of Bloomington, who controller elects here tonight. But currently,
that position is vacant for tonight. Please don't scare him. Just kidding.
Do we have a business development update? I don't see you. Jane is not with us today, so no business
development update. OK. There we go. OK. Well, if there's no other reports of officers and committees,
we'll go to the new business, which includes the election of officers for RDC for 2026. OK. For that,
each redevelopment commissioner does serve for one year, and they serve until the commissioner's successor
is appointed.
and is qualified. So before beginning of a commissioner's duties, they shall take an oath and subscribe
an oath of office in the usual form. So any new members would need to have the oath. Your oath stays
with you while you're continuing this position. And so a meeting for the purposeful organization would
be held at the first meeting day of the year.
And the commission shall choose one of their members as president, another as vice president, and another
as secretary. The president and the vice president shall not have the same appointing authority. I already
mentioned the treasurer. And so we need to continue in your offices until your exchange.
forward and electing new officers. We have not heard of any changes in appointments as of right now.
So you all would continue until you, if somebody else is appointed. So we're in or out. Well, so you
guys can continue to serve for up to 90 days. And we haven't seen any confirmations of anything yet.
Nobody's made any final decisions at this time.
Any election would be until they have been officially appointed, correct? Right. You can redo
the appointments when new members are added. Well, you can redo the appointments any time you all choose
to do so. Sounds fun. OK, so long story short, you need nominations for election of officers. Yes, it
would be. At this time and then in the future.
Yeah, at this particular time. And then if there's other members seated by the appointing bodies, which
is the mayor and the council, at that point, you could re-hold additional elections, if so, choose by
the board. Correct. Or I would feel more comfortable if we just get some sort of confirmation of what's
going on right now. It just shows that your term is expired as of this date, and you guys can continue
to serve for those 90 days. So then once we have any word from council and from mayor's office, then
at that point, we'll revisit this.
So continuation of continuity is always good in what we continue to do until such time as necessary.
So I would make a nomination providing that the current officers are willing to nominate the existing
slate. Second. Would there be any further nominations? If not, we'll get the existing slate. First off,
I guess I need to ask.
Is everybody willing to continue in such same offices? I'm willing to continue in that capacity. Want
to make sure because you hate to ask somebody and then say, oh, hold on. Wonderful. That's the case.
Thank you. Appreciate it. OK, so we have nomination on the floor. First and a second, dual roll call
vote. Cease scamblary, yes. Randy Cassidy, yes. Lauren McRabbie, yes. Don West, yes. Deborah Meyerson, yes.
Motion passes unanimously for the election of officers for 2026 or until the next appointees arrive.
Thank you. Sorry, I'm pulling my agenda back up. Next item on the agenda is resolution 26-01, approval
of the 2026 RDC commission schedule. Hopefully, everybody's had a chance to review that. Are there any
questions or comments about the schedule as presented?
resolution 2601. Second. First and a second. We'll go by a roll call, please. Yes. Randy Cassidy. Yes.
Boring McRobbie. Yes. John West. Yes. Debra Mayerson. Yes. Most of them passed unanimously for resolution
2601. Next on the agenda is resolution 2602, the approval of maintenance funds for, I'm sorry, I'm looking at the
the short version. But it's the approval of maintenance of property owned by the Redevelopment Commission
of the city of Bloomington. And I'll just note that as discussed during the hand director's report,
there was the proposal to amend this to include the cost of the shed cleanup on the College Square property
to this resolution as part of that maintenance cost. So do we need to amend this? You don't technically
need to amend it because this hasn't been paid yet.
So you're authorizing it as if you do consider it part of maintenance, then it would be authorized by
the passing of this resolution as it is. OK, that's easy. Good. It's also under the $5,000 cap for what
that's worth. OK.
So any other questions about resolution 2602? Yeah, and I'm going to ask a question. Please don't beat
me on this one, Ms. Christine. I'm so hard. As we look at this from a standpoint, just if we include
it either in the minutes and some list, to the best of our knowledge, because we have multiple properties,
what properties this would affect? I know the term all RDC properties, but in order to kind of get an
idea of what
Properties are included, because we've got a $300,000 cap at this point, which we're fortunate we haven't
been able to hit. But with all of the properties we own, between Parking Garage, Bunker Robertson,
the others, if we would have at least a baseline list that may not include all of what we have, but
what we know. We have a property list that we've provided to you guys before.
that are the main properties that are taking our funding for something like this. That being said, there's
an awful lot of tiny little right of ways that are all over the place that not necessarily.
As Dana put it, and I know you provided us a list, but if we could put that either list either in the
minutes or attached to this so that the public as a whole has a good idea of which properties would be main.
Yes, absolutely. And the other thing, too, is I believe you guys were shared something that I created
last year, which was going through the properties and what is our responsibility versus what is the
tenant's responsibility. So you have an idea. But a lot of these are related to snow, various things,
HVAC tune-ups, whatever it is.
And I'm not looking for the specifics. I just want to be able to, from a transparency standpoint, if
anyone asks, they could go to it and say, it was put out there. It's true. And I think we've discussed
this also. One of the issues with the way that the properties have been listed previously. So if you
go into the GIS, some of RDC properties might be listed under City of Plymouth. Some might be Department
of Redevelopment.
Some might be some other obscure name that isn't necessarily accurate. So it's very difficult to try
and pull out all of the various pieces. The ones that have been recorded under redevelopment commission,
you can see easily in the GIS. You have a good list of them. Again, many of them are tiny little right
of ways that really shouldn't be there. It shouldn't be on RDC.
Over a period of time, Dan will help clear that up. It is. It's been a mess, and it's something that
we've been working on over the last two years to try and really sort out, like, what exactly do we own
that is taking money? But we know what the key properties are. And that's all I ask is that the key
properties be inclusive so that it's OK. Yep. We are working on getting the existing deeds for the properties
those deliver in ways so that we can
Mainly for the right of ways, we just deed it over to the city. So to transfer property from one governmental
unit to another would take a resolution, similar resolution in both. So the mayor would actually have
a resolution that the mayor would pass saying that the city accepts these properties. So then you would
have a resolution.
I'll probably try to batch those so they're in areas so they're easier to go through. So I was thinking,
if you only had one meeting this month, I might have my first batch ready for you. I'm not asking for
immediacy. I'm just, I know the sins of the past should not be transferred to the new, but in the same respect.
Just as we approve money for this, I'd just like to see the baseline properties. And you've provided
it to the members, no questions. And if people look, they could find it. I just would like to see that.
Yeah, it's mostly Hopewell. There's three lots on Dog Street. It's the 4th Street garage. It's Showers
West. It's College Square. There's a little property over here on Morton that was the innovation lab
by the previous administration. It has a rental unit above.
Just some little pieces like that. Um, but those are the main ones. I appreciate that. Thank you. So
that could be appended as an exhibit to this resolution. Okay. Perfect. Without lots of. Right. I just,
I don't, what's difficult is that it's a little bit of forensic work. Those are the things that we know,
which the key properties are right now. I just don't know what I don't know.
Right, and the record keeping was not great. Yeah, if we just put a little thing in, key properties,
you know, not inclusive of all in that way. Right, yeah. Just don't get angry if there's one that I
don't know about. No, no anger. Just joy. We're trying to get it cleaned up, just the process. And we
do have a list of properties that have improvements because they are insured. So we have the insured.
Oh, there you go. That in itself. If you're just looking for the properties that have
Yeah, my main objective is the fact that we're approving money for maintenance on properties and I think
it's important that the public as a whole has an idea. They may never look, but it's always here we
did this and it's just the key properties that I'm looking at because we know what we spend our money
on. Well, even properties without buildings though and pure expenses like snow removal and mowing. Yeah,
I'm not worried about the snow removal and mowing. Here's buildings or pieces that we have. I appreciate
it. Thank you.
Thank you for your help with those questions. Do we have a motion for resolution 2602? I'll make a motion
to approve. Second. First and a second, we'll vote by roll call. C. Scambler, yes. Randy Cassidy, yes.
Laura McRobbie, yes. Don West, yes. Debra Meyers, yes. Motion for resolution 2602 passes unanimously.
Next item on the agenda is resolution 2603, which is the approval of funding for appraisals for property
within the allocation areas for the purpose of possible acquisition and redevelopment. Who would like
to speak to that? I'm happy to. It's your annual resolution for the appraisals. And I believe it's also
for sale, too. It's not just for acquisition.
So anything that you guys sell, you have to have two appraisals. You can only offer them for sale for
the average of those two appraisals. And so this is your annual resolution to allow that to occur as
needed. Thank you. Any questions or comments from commissioners on resolution 26 or 3? It's like rainy.
Should the resolution indicate that it is also relative
It also covers the sale of property, given that there are some conditions on how we have to do that.
Just ask me a question. It just talks about acquisition. No, it says it on the 1, 2, 3, 4, whereas it
says to either acquire or sell real property. Got it. Acquire or sell, OK.
or dispose of. Okay. Question. Yes, sir. I'm sure that you mean that 50,000's a cumulative number. Does
it really say that clearly? Well, it says various parts. Staff is requesting an amount for the necessary
appraisals
of various parcels of property within the consolidated TIF not to exceed $50,000. Yes, I believe everyone
has always considered that to be a cap. I believe this resolution does the same as it was last year.
So it approves payments. So to me, that would mean all payments not to exceed $50,000.
Okay, just asking. We might want to next time just make that a little more clear. Sure. Use the word
inclusive or something. Not to exceed a total of a year or something. Do we want to make that as amended?
I'm not asking for that, so it's up to you.
I think it's clear in the minutes what the intent is and then next year we can go ahead and adjust it.
Do we have any intent at the present moment as we look forward in 2026 to dispose of properties?
I hope so. Wonderful. Okay. Thank you. Quite a bit of it, hopefully. The nice thing is when you're going
from governmental unit to governmental unit, you don't
So that will not eat into our- So we're getting transferring those little right-of-ways and stuff like
that. It won't eat into our cumulative appraisal money. Yeah. OK. Wonderful. Thank you. Appreciate it.
OK. Any other questions from commissioners? If not, I'll take a motion for resolution 2603. Move approval
of resolution 2603. Second. We have a first and a second. We'll do a vote by roll call, please.
C. Scambaleri, yes. Randy Cassidy, yes. Laurie McRobbie, yes.
John West, yes. Debra Meyers, yes. Resolution 2603 passes unanimously. The last item of new business
on our agenda is resolution 2604, which is the approval of the right of entry for patron engineering
to conduct soil borings as part of the CCC grant. Looks like Mr. Blandford is here to speak to that. Yes.
And quick refresher for the public, the College and Community Collaboration Grant was awarded in partnership
between Indiana University, the city, and the mill. Part of the city's remit is site readiness for three
major public art installations. Right now, we've identified 10 sites that we'd like to bring in Patriot
Geotech to study soil.
readiness and make recommendations for possible foundations for those public art pieces. So this is
a right of entry request. There will be no cost to the RDC. Everything with this work is being funded
by the grant. I'm available for any questions. Any questions from commissioners? Given the, where we're
going to, I mean, soil boiling is extremely important to make sure our foundations aren't falling over.
selected all the pieces of art that's going here in all these locations? No, this is proactive early
work. There are early concepts and some sites amongst the ten that we're hopeful will work out, but
we're kind of looking ahead knowing that we don't have the final artist selected. None of them have
been contracted yet through IU. So it's really just a matter of identifying whether there are any sites
that we need to take completely off the board or if there are any
specific limitations to sites that we need to make the artists aware of in advance while they're working
on their concepts. Okay, so these will be just the site selection that says here's your geotech of what
you could put here. Yes, exactly. We want to avoid rumors of the library sinking. Exactly. Yes. Okay.
Perfect. Any other questions or comments from commissioners? Open it to public comment. Anything online
or in person?
I'm not seeing any. We'll entertain a motion for Resolution 2604, please. I'll make a motion to approve
as noted. Second. We'll go first and a second. We'll do a vote by roll call, please. Sue Skimler, yes.
Randy Cassidy, yes. Laura McRobbie, yes. Conn West, yes. Deborah Meyerson, yes. Resolution 2604 passes
unanimously. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you.
That's all for our new business on the agenda. Is there anything else for business or general discussion
for this evening? How many resolutions did we end up with last year? Like 150. Plays and bets for this
year. I was just reminded when I saw 2601. It was, yeah, 25, 156 was the last one. How much money did we spend?
A lot. Well, you committed more than you probably spent. That's kind of where I'm at. As we start out
our 2026 year saying, OK, what do we have committed? So as we look forward on these resolutions, we're
not over extending ourselves based on our previous resolutions. I know you won't allow that to happen.
I'm sure our new treasurer definitely won't. Right. And I will say that we are in a much better place
this year than we have been in the past
As you know, Jessica did a very in-depth analysis to say, okay. And Christina was absolutely pivotal
in keeping track of all of those resolutions and how much money has been spent and how much has been
committed to. So we have a much better handle on that now. There was not as great of record keeping
previously. So we are in a much better place today to be able to really tell you where we are.
Great. And I do want to commend Christina and Jessica and yourself for everything that's gone on to
keep track of the dollars because as you well know, with our current new legislation, dollars are tight.
They are. OK. Thank you. OK. One last question. More? Yeah. It has nothing to do. When is the hotel
for the trades districts playing commission? Does anyone know? I actually think that they're going on
the 12th as well. OK.
So both of those will be on the agenda. It's gonna be a big day, yep. It's gonna be a big day. Okay.
Thank you. Okay. So if there's no other business or general discussion, I'll take a motion to adjourn.
So moved. So moved. All right. Okay. Thank you all. Good first meeting of the year. Look forward to
working with you this year. And we'll move forward. And we're all on our way to John's.