- Welcome to the redevelopment commission meeting for the City of Bloomington for June 15th, 2026. We'll
- start the meeting with a roll call please. Laura McRobbie, present. Steve Scambaleri, here. Brandi Cassidy,
- present. John West, here. Debra Meyerson, here. Staff present, please. Anna Killian Hanson, housing
- development. Christina Finley, hand department. Henry Caswell, hand department. Jeff McKim, city controller.
- First item on our agenda is the approval of minutes from June 1st, 2026. Any questions or comments from
- commissioners? If not, I will take a motion. Yes, I do have at least a question on page three. Under
- resolution 2637 is the
- The language that we added to the draft of is, I think, the draft of resolution 2635, which is covered
- on the previous page. So it just may be that whatever is written there should not be in that part of
- the minutes. That is correct. It has nothing to do with resolution 2637. Good catch. Thank you.
- Any other questions or comments from commissioners about the minutes from June 1st? Move for approval.
- Second. As amended. We've got a first and a second for the minutes as amended. All in favor say aye.
- Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously. Thank you. Next item on the agenda is the Claims Register from
- June 18th, 2026. Any questions or comments from commissioners on this item?
- On Fund 2209-9216, I know what it was. Can you tell me what page it is? Oh, I apologize. There's a lot
- of claims there. Yeah, there are. Yeah, okay. It'd be on page 9 of 111, and it's 2209 Fund,
- and it's the 9216. I know it's for the maintenance of the lots, which is our responsibility. I just
- want to be able to
- bring up that at some point with page nine. Well, on mine it's page nine. It's page two of six. Page
- two of six, thank you. I apologize. Oh, it's the middle of the page 9216. Page two of six. Williams
- Creek Management. Yes. I know it's for the maintenance of the Evergreen lots. I just want to keep it
- on radar at some point to be able to try to get that homeowners association going. We have attempted.
- I know. I know we have. They have not
- cooperative and actually just so that you're aware I do believe that that was home funding that we use
- it is so it because we use home funding in the project originally yes I just want to bring it up because
- at some point the homeowners Association have to take responsibility they were supposed to yes okay
- thank you and then the only and the other question would be
- under I think it's 25-19 on the Duke bills where we're getting college square and we don't have any
- tenants there, is that correct? We do have Wettle in the building. Wettle, okay. And the reason I ask
- that when I combined up the college square bills for the Duke it was like $2,045 now and I think that
- incorporates two months. And yeah, there are individually metered units there that
- harder to pay. We're paying the minimum. Okay, so basically that's the weddle and associated minimums
- for a couple months. Yes, but I will tell you that we are supposed to be billing back weddles, so we
- do owe them a bill back for some utilities and that is coming there expecting it. We've talked about
- it as recently as last week. Okay, perfect. Thank you. And while we're on subject to college square
- and utilities, I just want to flag for you that we did receive and it will be coming out in the
- following claim register, I don't think in this one, a more than $1,000 water bill for College Square.
- Apparently there was a leak in the common area restroom. It has been repaired, but just FYI, that was
- a little shocking, but has been taken care of. Is there any, in terms of what else, use of the property,
- anything where there could be some weekly, let's say, just kind of scan to look for things before they
- kind of get adequate
- I'm just trying to get a sense of what capacity. It was them that discovered it. They're in the one
- end of the building and they've got their own restrooms. And the end that you're talking about probably
- was where the offices were. And that's what I'll even use that end. I'm not sure they discovered the
- leak, but yes. So we, it may be another conversation to say, should we shut off all common area? That's
- where I was headed. Yeah. Okay.
- We can work on that. No, no. Got to ask. It's okay to question work, but we don't use it. Anything else
- on the plan? Yeah, I've got not a question about the bill, but just a status kind of
- Climate control at the Trades Garage. I see that we've got quite a few invoices from HFI. And I know
- that we've got a situation there where we've been having a hard time stabilizing it. The Trades Garage
- has mostly been stabilized. I will have to talk to the facilities and get back to you
- what they were working on there. Because we did have Blue Fox working on the trades commercial space.
- This may be specific to something else. I'll have to report back on that. This may be their billing
- previous to Blue Fox going in and handling
- So it may just be a billing catch up. Yeah, and actually you can tell, and you can see it says 7-11-25,
- 7-18-25. So this is prior to me getting involved to find the root cause. Yeah. These are some older
- bills. So we're paying them, but they never actually solved the problem. Correct. They tried a number
- of different things.
- on the 6 of 6 on the BOKF, which is our solar panels. What is the interest basis of that? I'm going
- to have to let Jeff and Dana answer that. This is our portion that we pay, and we pay that how often?
- Twice a year.
- separated out the interest or is that principal plus interest? I don't have the. I only have the principle
- and interest for the total solar bonds payment, not just the RDC's portion of it, but right now. Let's
- see if we're looking at. 2026 we.
- the total payment on the bond is $427,600 and of that $132,600 is interest. So you can just kind of
- do the proportionally, the interest is going to be about 30% of the total cost.
- all been broke out between utilities, RDC, and parks. Those are the three entities that have the payment
- overall for 427. Exactly. Okay, thank you. Okay, are you done, Randy? Yes. One more on page two of six
- leading into page three of six, the ICD ARFA expenditures. Question for our controller, can you do just a
- 30-second or 60-second update on ARPA funding and where we are with that. I think this is our last year
- for some of those expenditures, if I remember correctly. I mean, yes, but I would need to get the detail
- on these specific expenditures. But yes, we are still paying out various contracts associated with ARPA.
- Sorry, I'll have to send you the detail. All projects for ARPA have to be complete by the end of this county.
- That's what I was remembering. So yes. So it's going to be whether everyone spends what they've been
- allocated or not, but they have until the end of this calendar year and that is it. And if we don't
- do the dollars revert then or what? They do revert. OK. Thank you. Does that put us at any risk as far
- as a lot of people?
- There are no further questions on the claims register from June 18, 2026. I'll take a motion. Move approval
- of the claims register. Second. The person is second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes
- unanimously. Thank you. Next item on the agenda is the payroll register for May 29, 2026. Any questions
- or comments from commissioners?
- second we've got a first and a second all in favor say aye aye any opposed thank you okay next there's
- directors report there is no formal directors report I will let you know that I got a message from John
- Hernandez last week that they have had a water intrusion issue at the porch and so I
- It's about $2,500 is what they're anticipating for the repair. We would likely try to run that through
- the 2602 funding line, which is for maintenance of all RDC properties. But just to give you a heads
- up that that is coming and I told him to move forward with the repair because water intrusion issues
- are the largest issue with degradation of properties.
- doing a legal report. I do have a report with questions. Thank you. Treasurer's report. Just a brief
- one. Actually, Tammy is going to share a spreadsheet on the screen. This is a report that we'll actually
- send out to you for the minutes, but I just wanted to let everybody know that we did receive our spring
- property tax settlement for 2026.
- This chart up here actually shows the amount of settlement we received over $13 million in property
- tax a couple of days ago. This chart that I'll send out actually shows the property tax revenue by allocation
- area. Like I said, I don't think there's any point to go through this in detail at this meeting, but
- I'll send this out to the group and it'll be part of the minutes.
- But I just kind of wanted to let everybody know that we had received that settlement. It was about $3
- million more than the equivalent spring settlement of last year. And we've still not received anything
- for the meridian tip. So that number still remains zero. Happy to take any questions. Is there an anticipated?
- online for one number native might be part of that? No, you know, I was thinking of calling the assessor
- and talking about that. I just worked on this chart today and I... Yeah, it'd be kind of curious just
- to know like how that timeline is managed because obviously it's not necessarily on the property tax
- timeline because it's being... I'm just... Well, no, it should still be on the property tax timeline,
- yeah. Okay. So when you say we've received three million dollars more,
- based upon what the assessed value was at the time that the properties have came into being paid. So
- does that allow $3 million more to be spent on any projects that are necessary? Well, yes. But remember,
- we're still anticipating this revenue for future bonds that we've discussed. So it shouldn't be considered
- gravy. It just means that it's not found money. But it's additional dollars that we weren't calculating
- on at the present time. Right. It does mean that
- our allocation areas are mostly continuing to create the increment that we anticipated. And then dealing
- with the Prowl Road Tif, that goes away at the end of this year. That goes away at the end of this year.
- So we'll receive one more settlement, the fall settlement, at the end of the year and that will be it
- for the Prowl Road Tif. When do we have to spend down that allocation buy for that
- So I'm going to defer to Anna on this. We've had some discussions about the... But the kids are proud
- to. Yeah. We do not have, my understanding, Dana, correct me, that we don't have a hard and fast deadline
- of when we need to spend it by. It's just when we stop collecting these at the end of this year. Is
- that correct? Yeah. Correct. But we really should be trying to find the right project for that area.
- There's been a few that's popped up that ended up getting taken care of already, but we do need to start
- looking at what some of the needs are in that area. There's been so much work in other places, not being
- able to focus on that, but I believe getting with engineering
- structure stressors that are in that area is an important next step for that. And as of today, that
- TIF fund has $831,000 in it, and there'll probably be another, in the fall there'll probably be another
- around 40,000, 45,000. So yeah, it'll be like 875 maybe, something like that by the end. Recognizing
- that that could get chewed up
- infrastructure improvements, and so forth. One nice, visible, neighborhood visible kind of thing to
- do would be to take some proposals for some neighborhood beautification that could happen as a result
- of that. Could happen with that funding. I mean, much like we did the neighborhood improvement grants,
- these were big sums of money, and they got the neighborhood together to do various projects. It might
- be a nice additional way to cap off
- that's funding, you know, 20 grand allocated, something like that. Anyway, just a suggestion. Can you
- just remind me what the vision was for the TIF when it was, let's say, created 25 years ago, whatever
- that was? I don't remember. Yeah. You remember? I don't. That corridor was envisioned to be a business
- corridor going up north of the north side of the county. OK.
- And I remember the conversation, and they visualized, just think of what, in Marion County, what Meridian
- looks like. This could be our little, our little Meridian. And so it would, you know, there was a building,
- a big office building built, and it was more projected.
- correct me if I'm wrong, Randy, because your memory's better than mine, but there was actually a business
- park that was envisioned. It was envisioned there based upon the all good building that originally was
- taken over, and then the addition for it was added on, Meadows came in, and it was supposed to be a
- business park in that particular area, and as 69 came through, it was going to be an off ramp that then
- would bring us into the park. But the park was going to be there first, before 69, and then, of course,
- the park never materialized,
- No need for an offering. Yeah. Yeah. All good. All good dealership. All good. Had a big leasing company,
- a leasing company that built the original building. I'm thinking the part of Prowl that goes south from
- 10th Street. Isn't there a block or two? Oh, you're in downtown Prowl. Downtown Prowl. Yeah. No, this
- is one of the high school north Kinzer Road Prowl. Just north of the high school. I thought
- about neighborhood stuff. Sorry.
- So we call it the pro road. The Hedricks? I'm sorry? Hedricks? If you look across from North High School,
- you can still see a silo there. Okay, because Phil Hedrick had a little farmer and he's the one that
- provided the donkey to Bob Knight.
- My treasurer's report is coming up with a proposal for the use of those funds because I understand from
- legal that there's not maybe a deadline but that also is an appropriate and responsible use of the funds
- and I'm just trying to understand you know
- when it comes back to us, who might be helping to get it to that point? We are working as a team on
- that. Okay. So we have an internal RDC team that includes legal, the controller, me, and the director
- of economic and sustainability. So Jane. Okay. Okay. Thanks. Just wanted to get a sense of how that
- might be. And with this, we see this very often in our other hand funds where
- projects make application and while we're looking at them, they may fall through just for feasibility
- reasons or whatnot. So we've looked at a few different things that have not reached fruition to this
- point. Okay, thank you for that. Okay, next we have a business development update. Director Cooper Smith
- is out this week, so I do not believe that she has one. Anna, did you have the? Okay, that's fine. Just
- wanted to make sure.
- I do see Mr. Kanoki here. Do you have an engineering for Hopewell update? Even though we kind of released
- you formerly of that. I don't have an update this week. I'm here for an agenda item. But I will say
- we are planning on having the number of zero step entry units for you by the end of this week. So your
- next meeting should be able to update. Exciting. OK. Thank you so much. And I have an intent to schedule
- with the CC.
- Yes. Okay. Yeah, I have to check that. That would be great. Okay. We are on to new business. We're looking
- at resolution 26-37, which is the approval of an agreement with Calumet Civil Contractors, Incorporated
- for temporary storage at Hope Police Development. Is that what you're here for, Mr. Kenoki? Yes. Kenoki
- Engineering Department. So this was brought before you at your last meeting. We received some great
- feedback on the language of the agreement. But just to recap, this is
- an agreement to allow the contractor for the West Second Street modernization project to use the northwest
- corner of Hopewell East as a staging area. So this is the southeast corner of Rogers and Second. The
- agreement was presented to you last meeting. There was some feedback given, and I think Dana has done
- a great job incorporating all the feedback. But I'll just recap briefly what the changes are.
- One request was no access to the alley or any of the new Hopewell East infrastructure will be permitted,
- so we removed that from the exhibit and from the agreement itself. Improved the language regarding
- restoration of the site once they're complete. We added a bond requirement for them. The request was
- 30 days to kick them off of the site, and Dana actually put 15 in there, so we went above and beyond.
- And then we added some language about the erosion control responsibilities. So I skimmed through. I
- don't know, Dana, do you have anything to add? Any changes that you made? No, we talked about the amount
- of the bond. And so we, Kendall and I, we went back and forth about the different kinds of things that
- might need to be replaced if things went really bad. And so there's monitoring wells there.
- and so replacing abandoning current monitoring wells if ever damaged and installing new ones and things
- like that. And so I believe both of us felt comfortable that the $100,000 bond would be sufficient as
- a restoration bond to make sure the property gets back to its condition. OK. Thank you. Any questions
- or comments from commissioners on resolution
- What's our rule as we're turning this property over to Calumet to utilize as a staging area where are
- we at with our previous contractor and then having release of liability based upon whether it be trees
- restoration and the rest of that so that we don't end up into you cause this we didn't have that. Yeah
- so we have done our
- We have done everything except for release the retainage to that contractor. So they are waiting for
- our final pay app release of retainage. And we're just waiting on sign off from some city departments
- like planning on a lot of the plantings. There were plantings that have died that are being replaced.
- So my thought is if all of that is completed before Calumet is out of there, then this little section will
- kind of become Calumet's responsibility. This is really just a little grass area so it's not the subject
- of kind of all the ongoing. Right, I just want to verify that where we're setting it we're not getting
- into something well that was fine that we verify ahead of time with photos and written documentation
- that it was in this condition we expected to be put back in that condition. Yeah and Dana actually added
- a line that photos have to be taken and they have to restore it to the existing condition. Who on the city's
- be responsible for documenting and keeping track of that. Is that you? Is that Anna? So that we have
- pre-usage photography so we verify. Yeah, that's a good question. Probably since this is RDC, it's going
- to be Anna Dragovich. I will say we are, with our little construction camera, we are taking a picture
- every 10 minutes now. So we've got a couple of weeks for the green to, I think we can,
- I just want to verify that we're not getting into finger pointing. And then you feel based upon your
- experience that $100,000 will put it back into the condition. Yeah. And that's kind of assuming a worst
- case scenario. Yeah. OK. And this is a performance and payment performance bond. Yes. OK. Thank you.
- Any other questions or comments? Otherwise, I'll open. Oh. Sorry. One last question.
- given the fact that this contract is supposed to be done by December 26 or December 31st of 26, where
- is our restoration time that we're looking at? Because you're not going to plant grass and you're not
- going to have anything done until spring. So just trying to look at that because if they finish in December,
- we're not going to be able to come back and really plant and get ourselves where it needs to be until
- spring. Yeah, I think we would hold the bond until all of that was established. Is there
- Anything specific in the language, Dana, that speaks to that? No, not as far as the time frame. So we
- would just work with them. We would not release the bond until we were satisfied. Right. Like, anyway,
- what I'm trying to establish is so that they understand they need to get it done by this time, and then
- whether it be June 1,
- the condition because we've got a good stand to grasp the present moment and I understand we want buildings
- and people there but we also need to on a on a project like this that we're looking at outward appearances
- are always important as we're trying to look at the project overall for the future right okay so timing
- just when it's got to be done some question if you could work that out amongst the staff I appreciate
- Yeah, it looks like the language is pretty open, so we can hold the bond until we believe the site's
- been restored in a satisfactory fashion. Yeah, which is great. I'm just trying to hold all of us accountable,
- time-wise. There are no other questions or comments from commissioners. I'll open it for public comment,
- either online or in person for Resolution 26-37. Seeing none, I will ask for motion. Move approval of
- Resolution 26-37.
- We've got a person in second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously. Thank you.
- The next item on the agenda is 26-40, which is the approval of the First Amendment to the 2025 CDBG
- Social Services Grant Agreement with Middleway House. Seeking an extension of time.
- new federal requirements that came out during the grant process last year did make it harder for agencies
- to expend their funds and a lot of which was just caused by guidance not necessarily being there for
- how to proceed in making sure we hit those compliance standards. So this would just be an extension
- of time to allow them to do so but most likely if we can get that ironed out they'll spend it well before
- the next actual funding grant gets underway.
- Any questions or comments from commissioners on this amendment? I'm just curious, are there
- other not-for-profits that will have the same problem? Yes. We'll be seeing this again. Most likely.
- Okay. Any other questions or comments? Otherwise, I'll open it up for public comment, either online
- or in person, for Resolution 26-40. Seeing none, I'll ask for a motion, please. I'll make a motion to
- approve 26-40 as presented. Second.
- first and a second, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously. Next item in the agenda
- is resolution 2641, which is the approval of the purchase of project management software. Who would
- like to speak to that? Hannah Dragovich is going to be taking that one. Yeah, I can. Hope well. As you
- all know, it is quite a robust project. I mean, we were just discussing
- Who's going to track what? Who's going to be responsible for what? Who's going to be aware day to day?
- And right now, the team is doing, I think, fairly well working in just a simple Google Sheets spreadsheet.
- But as we go on and as this project gets more and more complicated with contractors digging out there
- and proximity that I'm just anticipating things getting more complicated.
- We're kind of getting to the point where our to-do list sort of has a to-do list. And so I would really
- love for the team to get monday.com is what I'm recommending specifically to purchase so that folks
- can just have more of a, I guess, a more dynamic way to manage the project. I don't know if you're familiar
- with working with any of those, but I can go into a little bit more details if you want, but it's,
- a more robust way to facilitate a project and make sure things are getting tracked. And just visually
- as opposed to a spreadsheet, which is really the purpose is more financial tracking and not project
- management. Having a proper project management tool will just help us keep track of things. And so to
- start, I'm recommending 10 what monday.com calls seats,
- our subscriptions. And to purchase an annual subscription for those 10 seats, the total cost is $2,280.
- And so that will be 10 people across several departments who are directly working, have tasks with Hopewell.
- So hopefully that provides clarity.
- Have you enough? I think it's a good start. You know, I was trying to be a bit more conservative. Not
- necessarily. I don't think people necessarily who will have to say it. There are a lot of folks on the
- on the Hopewell team that do contribute, but they may not directly be responsible for tasks specifically.
- They may have a big hand in
- the decision making process, but they may not necessarily be directly responsible for tasks. So I think
- to start 10 would be enough. It does get, I think it's strange when we're working at this subscription
- level, which is called pro as opposed to like an enterprise level, the subscriptions start out at three,
- five, then they go to 10 to 15 to 20. So, um,
- I thought 10 was good, because otherwise, I don't know, 15 would be too many. That's probably a really
- long way to answer your question, but 10, yes, 10 feels like it's not. And this is an annual cost, so
- next year we'll be presumably voting again to renew those seats, because this is like a, I mean, we're
- going to be in this for a while, more than a year. Yeah, yeah, I would think so. How long has monday.com
- been around? I don't know. It's a good question. Are they?
- Yeah, say that again. I think it's pretty well recognized as a project management. Which leads me to,
- which is where I'm really headed is, are they going to be around for a while? So, I mean. At this point,
- anything is better? Anything is better. We need project management software. We have far too many projects
- going on to be operating the way we are. So, John, you had a question?
- I was just wondering if you had a consultation with IT in terms of either, if any other departments
- use project management software, what they use. And IT might have a recommendation or they might have
- recommended what you looked at. I'm just curious kind of how that. Yeah. So you feel like it seems like
- you want to say something. No. I would just say that that has been sort of on the back burner for IT.
- And we're kind of hoping that.
- demonstrate some leadership here and perhaps set a standard. But if not, I mean, that's, you know, then
- presumably we might switch at some point in the future. So we're probably not just buying this software
- just for the Hopewell project, but you could use it for any project.
- The 10 people that have a subscription, yeah, they'll be able to use it for any other projects, not
- necessarily RDC, but the purposes that I will have you having them use it for is hopeful. Yes, but this
- is for all RDC projects. Okay, well, I guess you're seeing where I was headed. If this is going to be
- a city-wide platform, which everybody could maybe benefit from it, why is the RDC paying
- This is specific for RDC projects. At this point, that is the only reason for Hopewell, all of the other
- RDC projects, period. We're looking for timeframes, individual tasks in order to identify one single
- platform that everybody can look at to identify what is being done, what has been done. You're $228
- per seat. That's on an annual basis, correct? There's no additional subscription plus I'm sure we got
- how many hours of help in order to do this. I have not heard of monday.com. I looked at some of their
- videos in order to verify it. It essentially sets up the time frame. It allows you to import and export
- from Excel. The two primary ones that we deal in these large projects is Procore and Bluebeam. Now,
- being fiscally responsible based on the size of our RDC projects and such and just starting in this,
- this is dirt cheap. And it's still,
- maintains the basics of what you need to manage a project. I'm not questioning the use of it or the
- purpose of it or the value of it. If this rolls into being a city-wide, everybody in the building is
- using it, then maybe we ought to come up with a way to share the costs. I agree. That's what I was having.
- I agree. It's my understanding that the
- City's been looking for two years at looking at the program. It hasn't come up with one yet. And so,
- Hopewell can't wait for that continued, you know, going down, kicking that can down the road. So, the
- purpose was to get something going now for RDC projects, and yes,
- And it could be that the city chooses something else down the road, and this may morph into something
- else later. But yes, it's not intended to be something that everybody uses at the expense of RDC. It's
- something for the RDC to use now because it's needed now. And then again, if it does,
- If the city comes up with one, if it's the same thing, then cost sharing would be very appropriate way
- forward. But the city has yet to decide on a way forward. Good answer. Thank you. Are you going to require
- any of our contractors also to utilize the software? Not in the way that
- seats will. They will be able to view things and I believe comment on them, but they will not be able
- to alter timelines. You'll have administrative rights in regards to it. It will be able to be looked
- at. Contractors that engage with the city will be able to add to with your permission or look at what
- it is so you know where they are from a time frame standpoint.
- I can't remember if they can add to, but I know they will be able to view. But we are not purchasing
- licenses or seats. No, not at all. The reason I ask this is in our ProCores, Bluebeams and other software
- or other project management, there are permissions that are given so that the owner as the manager of
- the project management software is aware of where the circumstances are. So it's not up to you at all
- times to always update where they are.
- And I'm just going to say, I think it's awesome. I really am excited that you're doing this, because
- I totally appreciate the value of good project management software. And I've used a variety of different
- kinds based on just my own professional experience, just even with clients, because everybody's got
- something different, and I've got to figure out how to use it. I have not used Monday.com, although
- I have heard very good things about it. My one just kind of suggestion is,
- and it's not going to be like, oh, all of a sudden everything's dumped in here. I know it takes time
- to build it up, but just to maybe trial it with a project, make sure it's doing what you need it to
- do just because once you're in, if you realize there's things that maybe aren't quite what you hoped
- it would be or not working perfectly, it's harder to pull out because it's just so embedded in there.
- And if there's a lot of projects that are embedded on there, it even becomes more
- of that commitment, so just trying to kind of test it out, make sure it's doing what you need it to
- do, because there are other options if you're like, well, it's not really doing X or Y that we've hoped
- it would, and it's a little easier to extract yourself if you've kind of not maybe overcommitted, at
- least in the first quarter or two quarters or whatever. I appreciate that. I have been working within
- a trial that Monday.com gave, and I've actually asked them to extend it generously.
- I have been, you're right, there is a learning curve to getting it set up in a really logical way that
- works. And that's taken a little bit of time, but I'm hopeful that I've got a good thing going. So far
- so good. So far so good. I haven't been using it with the team because they don't have seats yet,
- but yeah. Thanks for initiating it again. I think it's a great move and I will look forward to having
- RDC projects embedded in that. Thank you for your support.
- Okay, so we've had Commissioner comments any public comment on resolution 26 dash 41 41. Thank you Not
- seeing anything online or in person I will ask for a motion motion to approve Resolution 26 41 second
- got a first and a second all in favor say aye. Aye Any opposed pass unanimously Okay, you're on to resolution 26 42
- which is authorization for a designee to set a litigation through mediation on behalf of the Blue Newton
- RDC. Who would like to speak to that? Yes, sir. I can do that. There is a mediation in the two appellate
- court cases which are stemming from the trial court cases which have been resolved as far as motions
- for summary judgment, but there's not been
- any further action taken in the trial court cases pending these Court of Appeals cases. But on June
- 29th, there is a forewarned technologies in the Board of Relators. There is a mediation scheduled half
- a day for each. And it has been suggested that Deborah Meyerson would be the representative for
- the Redevelopment Commission. And what we're asking for in this resolution is for the RDC to authorize
- Deborah Meyerson as the president of RDC to settle litigation and mediation related to trial court and
- court of appeals cases with the Bloomington Board of Realtors,
- and worn technologies LLC as was identified in the resolution. So this is giving the authority again
- to Debra Meyerson to be that representative that can speak on behalf of the entire RDC when it comes
- to mediation. There was an executive session held earlier
- to discuss litigation and what boundaries might be appropriate. And so there is guidance for Deborah
- Meyerson on that. So this is the, again, allowing Deborah Meyerson to be able to enter into agreements
- should they be reached during mediation.
- I'm gonna invite for questions or comments from commissioners, but since I'm kind of hot seat on this
- proposal, I'm gonna start, which I don't usually do, which is I wanted to propose there are two different
- complainants named in here and wanted to offer to split that because of the time commitment involved
- and the expertise involved.
- so that the RDC might authorize two. And I wanted to propose that Randy Cassidy might split that with
- me, if that would be amenable to all RDC members, where we might each take one of the different complainants
- to participate on behalf of the RDC. And so I'll just put that out there for, or just generally open
- for comment. I want this read. I'm fine with that. I'll open it in its capacity whatsoever.
- What's that? I'm happy to help in any capacity whatsoever to help get resolution in our community and
- for the government. As long as, that sounds good to me, as long as it works from a legal standpoint.
- Do we need the resolution to be specific at this point to say, because we have and or language in the
- resolution. We just need to say. Or we just. And or because.
- Not knowing if there would be an RDC representative available. So then it would allow the Corporation
- Council, who is by statute authorized to handle the legal affairs for the city of Bloomington, including
- the RDC. We could put, what I would suggest would be to put Deborah Meyerson or her designee
- And then she could simply write, you know, designate whomever would be in her place to fill in for her.
- That whatever makes sense for the residents. Okay, I'll follow on here. We will follow on how to do
- that. Okay, any other comments or questions from commissioners?
- Yeah, I need to recuse myself from voting because I am a member of BBOR. Okay, thank you. If you want
- to leave in or in there so that the Cooperation Council could settle if for some reason our PC member
- couldn't be. I think that would be helpful to cover the bases within the resolution as it's written. Okay.
- So I will open resolution 26-43 for public comment, either in person or online. Not seeing any, I will
- ask for a motion. Move approval of resolution 26-42. Second. We've got a first and a second. All in
- favor say aye. Aye. And one abstention. So we've got four in favor and one abstention. Thank you. Next
- item on the agenda is the
- 26-43, which is the approval of the 2026 annual action plan. Who would like to speak to that? I'm happy
- to speak to that. So as you know, we are a participating jurisdiction and an entitlement community that
- basically means that we get an annual allocation of home investment partnership funds and community
- development
- block grant, CDBG funds. Every year as part of that, we have to provide a plan called an annual action
- plan before our funding for the next calendar year is approved. We also have to provide a caper, which
- is basically an end of year report. How did you do? How was the funding used? We have learned in the
- last year that the best
- practices is to bring the annual action plan to you for formal adoption, just to say, yes, we reviewed
- it. We're good with it. Essentially, we have already been to you guys for a good majority of what's
- in the annual action plan, which is the allocations that were decided by the Citizen Advisory Commission
- earlier last year. However, this is the formal plan. Our program years run from June 1st to May 31st
- of each calendar year.
- HUD didn't announce their allocations until late so we have a certain amount of time in which to publicly
- notice the annual action plan for at least 30 days and then submit to HUD. We technically have until
- August 15th to submit but after your formal approval this would be going straight to them hopefully
- this week sometime so that would just allow them to approve the projects that were voted on by the CIC
- and officially approve our allocations and start our program here. So I know this is strange for you
- because you've already seen the projects and you don't normally vote on the annual action plan. But
- moving forward, it would likely be that we will start bringing the allocations and annual action plan
- to you at the same time for approval. Okay, thank you. Any questions or comments from commissioners
- on resolution 2643?
- presented. This just cleans up everything. Yeah we don't technically need to do this but this is just
- best practices to make sure that we're getting as much public participation as possible in our plan.
- It has been out for notice I think May 22nd or April 22nd to May 22nd so it has been out for 30 days.
- We've also had a lot of CAC meetings so it's had a lot of public scrutiny the way that it is
- For transparency. Appreciate that. Any other questions or comments from commissioners? We'll open it
- for public comment, either online or in person. Seeing none, I'll ask for a motion for resolution 2643.
- I move to approve 26-43. Thank you. And I will just say that all projects are based on applications.
- Applications for the 27 funding year will be opened up
- around August, September. So, we're at the mercy of who applies. So, if you have an awesome project,
- apply. Thank you. Okay. We have one, a motion. We have a second. We have a first and a second. All in
- favor say aye. Aye. The opposed? Passes unanimously. Thank you. We are on to resolution 2644, which
- is the approval of an agreement with Marshall Security LLC for security patrols at Hopewell Properties.
- Would they speak to that?
- Happy to speak to you about that again. So last year you guys approved a year of security patrols at
- the Hopewell site. They have been beneficial to us. I know we went back and forth on what is the frequency?
- How long should they be there? How long are we gonna keep this up? The truth is that we get a number
- of reports that they respond to weekly,
- some daily, I would say definitely weekly. We have a lot of attractive nuisances. So we have the 714
- South Rogers Street building, which is vacant, that has attracted a lot of incidents. But the number
- one site that we've had more reports on is the garage. So it too is an attractive nuisance. It's cool
- in the summer. The fencing keeps getting pulled down. So we're trying to deploy
- someone to go repair that again. But as we start construction and get more heavy equipment out there,
- it seems like potentially a bad idea to pull back from security. Some activity during the day may be
- a good thing. It's what happens after that that I'm concerned with. So what's before you is a contract
- to approve the same
- cadence and frequency that we've been on the same schedule for another year. I'm happy to discuss
- alternatives. I believe it's $28 and 11 cents per hour and we're on 12 hour shifts and those are varied
- shifts. So it's not nine to nine or whatever. It's just so that there's some infrequency for visitors.
- for that presentation. Any questions or comments from commissioners on resolution 2644? My only comment
- in regards to the 714 building, I'd really like to at least get our structural report at some point
- in order to at least identify where we think we're going with that. It has to be secured and maintained
- and from my experience of being out of multiple hours of the night, Marshall security is there significantly
- in regards to even if you pull in
- So they're doing a good job. Just be nice to get ourselves to the point where we're not having to worry
- about security because we've got enough residents and activity in that area. At this point, we're not
- there. I do believe that those reports will be forthcoming soon. We do not have a final draft yet, but
- Anna Dragovich has been working very hard
- questions or comments. I'm wondering what this kind of agreement, it just would be interesting, and
- I don't know if it can be appended later, just a summary of what the activity has been on the site,
- you know, just a one-pager of like, you know, which sites and how many incidences and what
- kind of incidences. It just would kind of help reinforce the value of this service. Well, that's why
- I was saying a summary, right, in terms of like,
- you know, which address and what kind of, and then what number of those kinds. They range widely from
- incidents. Yes, it won't fit on one page. We can get you some sort of summary, but you may not touch
- on it. That's something that will take a lot of staff time. Yeah, something that hopefully you already
- have. It can just be, you know, use AI and then say, give me a summary of what you already have. And
- they may be able to spit out from their system
- They have to record it. Right. They send me an email every time something happens, so they're filling
- my inbox. Okay, okay. Well, I appreciate certainly the verbal report and it just seemed like it would
- be helpful to have that. And my other question is, let's say once construction does get started, what
- typically is the, let's say, role or division between, let's say RDC owns the property, but there may
- be, again, equipment or
- other that the actual developer construction team, is there any kind of splitting of costs for stuff
- like that, or is that really just the property owner? That's a really good question. I'm going to have
- to defer to legal. I think once we have construction crews there, I mean, if they're putting them in
- the infrastructure, there are crews that are out there. So it'd be up to that contract. Yeah, the contractor.
- providing their own security for their own things. It's like all the other contracts we've had, they
- must provide security for their own equipment. But to the extent that we're also the developer, there's
- going to be things there that the
- you know, like the city's installing on behalf of the RDC that still needs to be covered and just overall
- security of the site as individual builders would be working on individual, you know, wads. There's
- still the entire project site and the areas that aren't being developed at a particular time, so they're
- still going to need security.
- So there's still going to be security needs, as well as the 714 building. There's still going to be
- security needs there, even while others are on site. No, we would not have liability for their equipment.
- But to the extent that there are things that are the RDC, then yes, the RDC would want to protect those
- assets. Thank you for that visual information.
- Okay. If there's nothing else from commissioners, I'll open 2644 for public comment, either online or
- in person. Seeing none, I will ask for a motion. Move approval of resolution 2644, agreement to acquire
- security. Second. We've got a first and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously.
- Thank you.
- The last item on the business tonight is the resolution 2645, which is the approval of an amendment
- of maintenance of property owned by the Readabout Commission of the City of Bloomington. Who would like
- to speak to that? I am happy to speak to you about that again. So in January, you guys approved up to
- $300,000 for the maintenance of your REC properties.
- Unfortunately, we're noticing we're at the halfway point for this calendar year. And so we've spent
- about $150,000, $149,962.58 to date as of June 12th when this was run. And if we anticipate receiving
- the utility bills as we have thus far this year, we will completely commit all of our funding.
- additional needs that are coming in, whether that's what happened at the forge or whatnot. So I'm a
- little bit concerned and just want to make sure that we have some cushion to be able to respond as nimbly
- as possible to any building issues. So as an exhibit to your resolution, there's a breakdown as to how
- we've spent that funding. So utilities was about $86,390.
- Showers West maintenance was $36,000. College Square was a little over $5,000 at $53.90. Trades District
- was a little over $10,000. $10,773.76. 627 North Morton was $2,100. 4th Street Garage was $454. And
- mowing thus far has been $85,000.
- That is why the resolution is back before you. When we were trying to process some invoices, we noticed
- this last week or the week before that we were likely going to have an issue with some of our blanket
- POs for our utilities if we move forward in the same capacity. Just curious, do you happen to have a
- number on what
- I'm just talking just utilities, because those tend to be more predictable than, you know, maintenance.
- But just what that might have been, let's say, for 2025, I guess, calendar year, or fiscal year,
- I'm not sure, but previous year. We could run a report that shows everything paid, like, say, Duke Energy
- or a specific place. But we do have a project code that it will show us everything paid to our 2602
- But that won't just be utilities. That would be everything. I mean, it could be done, but we have to
- get that. We have to get that. Yeah. To compare in terms of even a ballpark for next time we authorize
- this for them. Anyway, so sorry. I wanted to open that open to all commissioners like this. Hopefully
- we can dispose of some property where this won't be an issue in 27 levels. Yeah. That was.
- in regards to these ongoing expenses while we need to hold ourselves and maintain to the highest standard
- because, you know, we expect everybody in the private sector to do that. We have to maintain and continue
- these properties, but we also have to look as we've discussed previously of the timeframe in order to
- dispose of them on some of these properties that are non-tax generating and obviously maintenance expenses.
- So we get them back into productive use in our community and employment and housing. Well, we know that
- or we never anticipate fairly substantial utilities increases next year as well. So, I mean,
- in all utilities, we know that the CVU was working on finishing up a rate case in water and then moved
- on to wastewater. You know, eight to 10% in Duke, similar with Centerpoint.
- And my concern is just a matter of those expenses will be ongoing. There's not revenues coming in to
- offset any of those. And these are non-tax generating properties. Correct. And you have Duke bills.
- And I flagged this before for you. But Duke bills in Showers West that are $8,000, $9,000, $7,000. So
- very expensive utilities there. It's an older building with vaulted ceilings.
- insulation and individual HVAC units that are likely at the end of their life cycle. So, you know,
- we have, it's an expensive building for utilities. Okay. We have discussed too, maybe next year having
- two separate resolutions, one for utilities and one for maintenance. So you can see them separately
- and that may help you keep better, you know,
- Yeah. End result comes down, try to cut the expenses that we can and not have something that we're owning
- as a city that we're not utilizing. Okay. Personal opinion. Thank you. Anything else from commissioners?
- Yeah. Are you not bringing this to us a little prematurely? We are, but it has to do with the blanket
- POs for the utilities if they are
- projected, so I'll let you guys explain. Well, right now we have like 124,000 that's just basically
- encumbered from that 300,000. So it's showing right now we only have like 15,000 available that we can
- use. In reality, there's more than that, but that amount will already be used through the end of the
- year. So does that make sense? Because it's earmarking for those utilities for the rest of the year,
- anticipating what's needed.
- And they have to open them up as a blanket purchase order. So we can modify that and reduce it. But
- the problem is going to be the same as we go through the year no matter what. So I'd rather nip it in
- the bud. And so that we can respond when I get somebody calling and saying, hey, we have water intrusion
- issue. Do you want me to wait for the next RDC meeting for approval? I'm just saying, no, go. The reason
- I ask that is not that you don't have the expenses, but you're throwing a dart.
- As to what you need, we are and so I was thinking with three more months. Payout, you'll have a better
- idea. That's all I'm saying. We won't have to come back at this. You want to come back to the trough?
- I know you will, but well, that's why I'm hoping that 50,000 colors will get us a little bit further
- down the road. It may not be enough. Jeff, you're no, I mean, I was just saying you pretty much already
- said it that that the
- utilities was essentially already obligated, even though we haven't actually spent it. It's kind of
- consuming a lot of that ceiling because of that open purchase order. And it doesn't make sense at this
- point to bring you a resolution that says, let's now track utilities separately. Because of the way
- that our system works, you have to give it a project code that you can't really peel back
- So it would be very difficult to run reports. Maybe at the beginning of 27, it would be wise to separate
- them at that point. But right now, I'm not sure that it does. OK. Thank you. If there's nothing else
- from commissioners, I will open it for public comment either online or in person for resolution 26-45.
- Seeing none, I will ask for a motion
- resolution 2645 for maintenance of property. I already see property. I will second it. First and a second
- all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously. That concludes our new business for tonight.
- Any outstanding items before we adjourn? One last comment just to verify you are working on trying to
- dispose of some of this in the next year. Yes.
- And the last RDC report that we provided at the previous meeting, you should have seen that the resolution
- for appraisals, which usually goes untouched, has been being drawn down. Excellent. Thank you for that.
- Okay. I will take a motion to adjourn. So moved. Okay. We are adjourned. Thank you all.