WEBVTT

00:00:00.322 --> 00:00:07.846
- Welcome to the City of Bloomington Re-Development Commission meeting for September 14th, 2026. We'll

00:00:07.846 --> 00:00:15.742
- start the meeting with a roll call, please. C. Schimilari here. Brandi Cassidy here. Are the folks online

00:00:15.742 --> 00:00:23.266
- as well? Lori, you're muted. Lori McRavi, present. Thank you. And Deborah Meyerson, present. We have

00:00:23.266 --> 00:00:29.822
- staff present, please. Anna Killian-Hansen, present. Christina Finley, hand department.

00:00:30.274 --> 00:00:37.379
- Okay, make as well hand apartment. Jeff McCamp, city controller. Kendall Kenoki, engineering.

00:00:37.379 --> 00:00:45.692
- Jane Cougarsmith, economic and sustainable development. Anna Draganich, economic and sustainable development.

00:00:45.692 --> 00:00:53.477
- Mike Decoff, police chief. Jeff Rogers, Bloomington police. Paul Post, Bloomington police. David Hurd,

00:00:53.477 --> 00:00:59.070
- legal department. Sam Planner, Monroe Taxical Corporation. Thank you all.

00:00:59.522 --> 00:01:07.570
- We'll start with reports. Do we have a director's report? Sure. So I want to first bring to your awareness

00:01:07.570 --> 00:01:15.317
- that we do have an amended agenda tonight, which now includes a third resolution, which is 2661, which

00:01:15.317 --> 00:01:22.838
- is an approval of a work scope for HFI in Showers West. So that should be on the amended agenda and

00:01:22.838 --> 00:01:23.966
- linked online.

00:01:24.162 --> 00:01:31.209
- I do also want to bring to your awareness that we are having a survey right now for the community to

00:01:31.209 --> 00:01:38.396
- be involved in naming of the lanes in Hopewell South. We are receiving submissions for potential names

00:01:38.396 --> 00:01:45.513
- until tomorrow, and then that list will be finalized and run against existing roads to make sure that

00:01:45.513 --> 00:01:53.118
- we have no duplications. And there will be another community vote that will conclude this weekend with final

00:01:53.346 --> 00:02:00.537
- potential names for the lanes in Hopewall South. Our civil engineers need that for the platting process

00:02:00.537 --> 00:02:07.590
- so we're trying to expedite that as best as possible. I also want to bring to your awareness that our

00:02:07.590 --> 00:02:14.989
- CDBG funding cycle for 2027 is underway right now. You know our program years actually start the following

00:02:14.989 --> 00:02:16.510
- June so not a January

00:02:16.674 --> 00:02:24.830
- January start date. So we are receiving applications right now. Pre-applications are due, which the

00:02:24.830 --> 00:02:32.986
- application is online on September 17th, so this week. Then October 1st, the completed applications

00:02:32.986 --> 00:02:40.734
- need to be in. And we intend on having our citizen advisory committee meetings on October 1st.

00:02:40.834 --> 00:02:47.611
- October 22nd and October 29th to determine what those projects are. As you are aware, we every year

00:02:47.611 --> 00:02:54.456
- have to ask the RDC for representation at the CIC, both for physical improvements and social service

00:02:54.456 --> 00:03:01.368
- committees. It does, however, say in the code that if you would like someone to attend in your proxy,

00:03:01.368 --> 00:03:04.350
- you do have the ability to appoint someone.

00:03:04.450 --> 00:03:11.495
- Director Coopersmith has volunteered for the Physical Improvements Committee. If you guys are unable

00:03:11.495 --> 00:03:18.471
- to participate, I know we have asked a lot of you recently. So just to put those dates out there, I

00:03:18.471 --> 00:03:25.865
- will email them to you as well. But we do have that potential need coming up. Could you repeat the dates,

00:03:25.865 --> 00:03:31.934
- please? Sure. It is October 1. Well, the CAC organizational meeting will be October 1.

00:03:32.066 --> 00:03:40.764
- The public hearing, which is where you receive information about the projects, is October 22 with a

00:03:40.764 --> 00:03:49.809
- final vote on October 29. So I will also email you. If you're willing to volunteer, please let me know.

00:03:49.809 --> 00:03:58.942
- But we can't go from there. They're all the same time of day? They're all at 5.30 PM, every one of them.

00:04:02.850 --> 00:04:11.476
- And those are the same dates for both committees. And when do you need to have assignments by? In the

00:04:11.476 --> 00:04:19.932
- next week or two would be great. Anything else for the director? No, thank you. We will move to our

00:04:19.932 --> 00:04:24.414
- legal report please. I'd like to report that the two

00:04:24.738 --> 00:04:33.183
- TIF declarations, the declaratory resolution to remove residential parcels from the Bloomington Consolidated

00:04:33.183 --> 00:04:41.087
- TIF will be going to council for approval. It did go through plan commission and was approved. And so

00:04:41.087 --> 00:04:49.067
- that is the next step. After that, assuming approval from the council, those resolutions, that and the

00:04:49.067 --> 00:04:51.934
- one creating the Hopewell South TIF,

00:04:52.066 --> 00:05:02.525
- will come back to the RDC for a public hearing on October 5th. Starting that public hearing would be

00:05:02.525 --> 00:05:13.088
- at 5 PM. So that would be part of the October 5th meeting. So those will be coming back. So those are

00:05:13.088 --> 00:05:20.958
- getting close. And also, we do have several important things on the agenda.

00:05:21.474 --> 00:05:28.140
- Typically, I'll be presenting at the beginning and then asking others to step in. What date did you

00:05:28.140 --> 00:05:35.007
- say that was going to the council on residential properties to be removed? I'm sorry. Did you say what

00:05:35.007 --> 00:05:41.273
- date that was going to council? This Wednesday. It'll be this Wednesday? This Wednesday, yes.

00:05:41.273 --> 00:05:48.473
- Thank you. Thank you. Do we have a treasurer's report? No time to report. Thank you. A business development

00:05:48.473 --> 00:05:50.206
- update? Not this evening.

00:05:50.530 --> 00:05:57.305
- Oh, one item. I just wanted to remind everyone and members of the public that the Trades District Block

00:05:57.305 --> 00:06:04.015
- Party is on Saturday, September 26th. It features a range of free and family community activities, and

00:06:04.015 --> 00:06:10.920
- it's a chance to kind of invite the public into the Trades District and share what's been going on there.

00:06:10.920 --> 00:06:15.806
- So hope you can attend. I believe it starts at five. It may start at four.

00:06:19.426 --> 00:06:26.951
- Okay, thank you. Okay, and I have a Hopewell update on the agenda. Is there a separate Hopewell update

00:06:26.951 --> 00:06:34.475
- besides the lanes? Yes. Oh, I'm sorry. That's the engineering part. Yeah, so good evening. Just wanted

00:06:34.475 --> 00:06:41.781
- to kind of bring the RDC up to date on just a few things with the Hopewell engineering development.

00:06:41.781 --> 00:06:49.086
- So we are working towards filing for all of our permits. We intend on having everything wrapped up.

00:06:49.186 --> 00:06:56.708
- hopefully next week, end of next week, then we'll go ahead and file. So I just have a few items I wanted

00:06:56.708 --> 00:07:03.872
- to kind of run over with you all. So last time I was here, you had asked about parking spaces. So I

00:07:03.872 --> 00:07:11.251
- have kind of added all those up and there are 108 total parking spaces within the development. So this

00:07:11.251 --> 00:07:18.558
- includes all of the off-street parking and then parking that's on Jackson and Fairview, which are the

00:07:18.786 --> 00:07:26.531
- you know, reconstructed streets or a new street. It does not include Wiley. And of those 108, eight

00:07:26.531 --> 00:07:34.818
- of those are accessible spaces. And as you know, there are 98 units. So we're at a little over one parking

00:07:34.818 --> 00:07:42.640
- space per unit being installed in the development. Any questions on parking? How many are accessible

00:07:42.640 --> 00:07:45.118
- again? Eight of those 100, yep.

00:07:47.970 --> 00:07:55.235
- I'm just curious, how many of the, if you know, the actual parcels have off-street parking? Off-street

00:07:55.235 --> 00:08:02.429
- parking? Let's see here. Well, actually, you said that the 108 included all off-street, so that's for

00:08:02.429 --> 00:08:09.553
- the individual homes, right? The 108 includes on-street and off-street, but I do have those numbers.

00:08:09.553 --> 00:08:12.798
- So we have 86 or 88 off-street parking spaces

00:08:13.250 --> 00:08:20.637
- and 20 on-street parking spaces. Again, that doesn't include Wiley, which is adjacent, but because it's

00:08:20.637 --> 00:08:27.739
- just an existing street, it didn't include that. Anything else on parking? Okay, I have a few other

00:08:27.739 --> 00:08:34.912
- items as well. So you had also asked for the number of zero-step entry units, and we've talked about

00:08:34.912 --> 00:08:42.654
- this before, but just wanted to reiterate, so 65 of the 66 buildings will have barrier-free entry into them.

00:08:43.074 --> 00:08:49.955
- So that includes all of the accessible units as well as all of the other buildings, the exception of

00:08:49.955 --> 00:08:57.313
- one, which is just very challenging topographically to do. But that was a big priority for the development.

00:08:57.313 --> 00:09:04.330
- We were able to do that. Our engineers were able to figure it out. So I'm really happy about that. But

00:09:04.330 --> 00:09:11.552
- any questions about zero-step entry? That's great. Say that number one more time. 65 of the 66 buildings,

00:09:11.552 --> 00:09:12.574
- yes. Wow. 99%.

00:09:12.930 --> 00:09:19.056
- That is great. Is there any parallel in terms of, again, I realize this is getting from the exterior

00:09:19.056 --> 00:09:25.181
- grading to the interior, but any update that you might be able to share in terms of zero step to get

00:09:25.181 --> 00:09:31.549
- in of where we might be headed in terms of interior visitability? Again, I realize it's getting a little

00:09:31.549 --> 00:09:37.614
- out of your scope. I'm just asking because it's the topics on the table. Yeah, so I mean, obviously

00:09:37.614 --> 00:09:40.222
- the accessible units, whether they're ADA,

00:09:40.450 --> 00:09:48.251
- Universal Design, FHA, they will meet those particular requirements. Basically, there's a barrier-free

00:09:48.251 --> 00:09:55.294
- entry into the ground floor of the building, not necessarily if it's a multi-story building.

00:09:55.426 --> 00:10:00.834
- or whatever to other stories. With some of the hallways and doorways and stuff like that. That's all

00:10:00.834 --> 00:10:06.241
- I'm trying to say. I can't speak to that. I don't think we have final plans yet. OK. Anyway, just so

00:10:06.241 --> 00:10:11.595
- we can kind of keep our eyes on getting into the building is great. Staying in there and navigating

00:10:11.595 --> 00:10:16.949
- is the next step. I'm just trying to kind of make sure we are closing the loop on that. Yeah. Yeah,

00:10:16.949 --> 00:10:22.464
- that's a great point. We'll develop that. Coming soon. OK. Thank you. Sorry. Go ahead. So the next one

00:10:22.464 --> 00:10:24.766
- is street lighting. So I do have a little.

00:10:24.962 --> 00:10:32.643
- handout if you want to take one and pass it down. So the city uses Duke Energy street lighting program

00:10:32.643 --> 00:10:40.325
- for street lights. This development, like really any other development, we are proposing what's called

00:10:40.325 --> 00:10:47.932
- the traditional light fixture. So if you see, it's kind of in the middle of your sheet. And it's just

00:10:47.932 --> 00:10:54.718
- called the traditional. And the reason I included this sheet is because it has the budget.

00:10:54.914 --> 00:11:00.956
- So it doesn't have the actual price, but it kind of shows you relative to each other how much the lights

00:11:00.956 --> 00:11:06.709
- cost. So those traditional lights are standard for residential subdivisions. That's what you'll see

00:11:06.709 --> 00:11:12.521
- out at like Hopewell West, they've been put up. First Street, it's that exact same type of light. So

00:11:12.521 --> 00:11:18.390
- it's a pretty affordable, but a bit more aesthetic. Now some ways that we could save costs is instead

00:11:18.390 --> 00:11:22.590
- of going with traditional, we could go with just regular roadway lights.

00:11:23.266 --> 00:11:30.016
- You know, they're nothing special, but you'll see them like all around high-use camp. It's just a standard

00:11:30.016 --> 00:11:36.325
- roadway light that can illuminate a larger area for a lower cost. But as you can see, there's a lot

00:11:36.325 --> 00:11:43.201
- of other options. Obviously, the price goes up, but you know, those acorn lights, the mini bells, teardrops.

00:11:43.201 --> 00:11:49.699
- Am I missing something as far as when I'm talking cost? Yeah. And where this is at, because I'm seeing

00:11:49.699 --> 00:11:52.286
- style A, style B. Oh, so that is, sorry.

00:11:52.770 --> 00:12:00.340
- Up on the top is the type of light fixture, which is what I'm talking about right now. The bottom is

00:12:00.340 --> 00:12:07.911
- the type of actual pole. So we go with style A, just standard. You can go with style B, C, D, E, but

00:12:07.911 --> 00:12:15.406
- as you can see, the cost goes up. Oh, I'm sorry. The circles are completely irrelevant. The problem

00:12:15.406 --> 00:12:19.454
- is that when you go online, Duke doesn't do the price

00:12:19.682 --> 00:12:27.433
- comparison anymore, so this is an old copy I had sitting on my desk. So yeah, apologies for the confusion.

00:12:27.433 --> 00:12:35.112
- The circles are just, I at one point, and I think at another point, I spilled my lunch on this, so sorry,

00:12:35.112 --> 00:12:42.646
- but the information is good on this. I just could not find this anywhere online. Yeah, so we're looking

00:12:42.646 --> 00:12:49.310
- at style A traditional, and the question for you today is, do you want to go with something

00:12:49.474 --> 00:12:56.680
- nicer but more expensive, do you want to go the most cost-effective route, which is the roadway lighting,

00:12:56.680 --> 00:13:03.614
- or do you want to stick with just what we typically would do, which is the traditional style A? Well,

00:13:03.614 --> 00:13:10.480
- your traditional is going to be 12 feet, correct? Yeah, so those are the shorter 12-foot poles, yep.

00:13:10.480 --> 00:13:16.190
- And if you're going into the roadway lighting, the Cobra heads as we refer to them,

00:13:16.450 --> 00:13:23.949
- You know, you're talking about what approximately 25 25 foot pole would pull. No, we wouldn't go with

00:13:23.949 --> 00:13:31.373
- the woods. So we'd still go with the styling. Okay. And then, I mean, when we're talking either dark

00:13:31.373 --> 00:13:36.446
- skies or something from a neighborhood standpoint, we've already got

00:13:36.674 --> 00:13:44.210
- We've already established the traditional on First Street, is that correct? Yeah, so I would say roadway

00:13:44.210 --> 00:13:51.459
- lighting are really good for dark sky. They shine down. The traditional are okay. They shine farther

00:13:51.459 --> 00:13:59.353
- out, but they don't shine up. Some of these, like the acorn, are not good for dark sky. Okay, so traditional,

00:13:59.353 --> 00:14:02.942
- we've got a cutoff on it, so we don't have glare.

00:14:03.362 --> 00:14:09.967
- that's going to go in. We've got approximately a 12-foot pole accordingly. And how many are we talking?

00:14:09.967 --> 00:14:15.938
- And what's the cost per month? Because the cost is going to be absorbed through Public Works.

00:14:15.938 --> 00:14:22.353
- Is this correct, or is this an expectation? So the RDC will pay the initial construction cost, which

00:14:22.353 --> 00:14:28.895
- is 50% of the total construction cost of the light. And then Public Works pays the ongoing maintenance

00:14:28.895 --> 00:14:33.150
- cost for the lights moving forward. OK. How many are we proposing?

00:14:33.314 --> 00:14:39.592
- I don't have that number for you. I apologize. I think the engineer is still finalizing that.

00:14:39.592 --> 00:14:46.605
- My recommendation would be to go with traditional at this point. We've already established some on First

00:14:46.605 --> 00:14:53.551
- Street. Correct. It's a matter of how we look consistency in regards to our neighborhoods without going

00:14:53.551 --> 00:15:00.364
- back and redoing. So I'm just curious what the spacing is to make sure that we get adequate safety in

00:15:00.364 --> 00:15:01.566
- regards to light.

00:15:02.594 --> 00:15:07.816
- and that we have not so much light that it's not creating above-effects, it's creating a neighborhood

00:15:07.816 --> 00:15:13.037
- that we're gonna have a problem in the neighborhood. Yeah, the spacing will likely be very similar to

00:15:13.037 --> 00:15:18.413
- First Street, so they're pretty, you know, they're spaced pretty close together because they don't shine

00:15:18.413 --> 00:15:23.686
- as far as the taller roadway lights. So then we're into a matter of cost issues. Correct, yeah. Trying

00:15:23.686 --> 00:15:29.010
- to look at from a long-term standpoint. Yeah. And I hate to throw anything else on you because you give

00:15:29.010 --> 00:15:32.542
- us an idea, because I'm assuming there's a photometric that'll show.

00:15:33.026 --> 00:15:39.721
- what that is, and then this is an ongoing operational cost, whether it be our first cost, which is more

00:15:39.721 --> 00:15:46.288
- because of the distance between them versus what the operational costs that we would then throw on to

00:15:46.288 --> 00:15:52.854
- Public Works, which is still everybody's dollars. So. I have a quick clarifying question just because

00:15:52.854 --> 00:15:54.142
- it's great to have.

00:15:54.434 --> 00:15:59.475
- Electrician, you know, expert here. But there's lots that I... So I'm just curious, were you saying

00:15:59.475 --> 00:16:04.617
- that the roadway is a taller pole so that it emits more light in terms of there be maybe fewer? Yeah,

00:16:04.617 --> 00:16:09.708
- there would be fewer lights. So in terms of the overall investment, not only might it be... Well, it

00:16:09.708 --> 00:16:14.799
- looks like at least according to the gradation on this sheet that they might be roughly similar, but

00:16:14.799 --> 00:16:19.840
- because it emits more light in terms of the spacing, there'd be fewer that you'd have to buy. Okay,

00:16:19.840 --> 00:16:22.814
- just wanted to make sure I got that straight. Yes. Thanks.

00:16:25.186 --> 00:16:30.807
- I mean, the traditional, what we've got, I'm good with. I just like to know where we are on a cost aspect

00:16:30.807 --> 00:16:36.268
- in regards to what our DC needs to fund through Hopewell and then operationally that difference. Yeah,

00:16:36.268 --> 00:16:41.624
- in the coming weeks, we can pull together the final cost, especially once I have this direction from

00:16:41.624 --> 00:16:47.138
- you on the lighting. Or even a cost comparison. I don't even know from, again, this is public work side

00:16:47.138 --> 00:16:52.759
- of things, but from an operations perspective, if it's fewer things to repair, if you've got fewer lights

00:16:52.759 --> 00:16:53.342
- out there,

00:16:53.666 --> 00:17:00.321
- with an equal amount of luminescence, shall we say? Yeah, so Duke Energy takes care of all maintenance,

00:17:00.321 --> 00:17:06.592
- but you do have to pay per light, you know, ongoing. So there's a lower operations cost, perhaps,

00:17:06.592 --> 00:17:12.991
- as well, because there's just fewer lift poles. Yes, correct. Anyway, just trying to get a sense of

00:17:12.991 --> 00:17:19.583
- that, even though I like the continuity part, I'm also into, you know, trying to be efficient with our

00:17:19.583 --> 00:17:23.358
- use of funds, so. Right. So you'll get back to us on that.

00:17:24.162 --> 00:17:29.788
- Yeah, I can get you that information. But it sounds like, for now, kind of the traditional style A is

00:17:29.788 --> 00:17:35.523
- probably where we want to go, but I'll get you the pricing and then. It'd be nice to be able to compare

00:17:35.523 --> 00:17:41.039
- if that's not too much trouble, just to be able to say, OK, we can do 10 poles for this much, or we

00:17:41.039 --> 00:17:46.554
- can do 20 poles for that much, or whatever the difference is. OK, so really just roadway versus the

00:17:46.554 --> 00:17:52.180
- traditional. Yeah, that seems reasonable. OK. OK, thank you for your help with those questions. Yeah.

00:17:52.180 --> 00:17:54.110
- Anything else on the street later?

00:17:54.402 --> 00:18:03.428
- Now, just a matter of, depending on where the elevations of the houses are, the traditional tends to

00:18:03.428 --> 00:18:12.722
- keep, especially if we have two stories. Okay, yeah. Again, I really appreciate your expertise in that.

00:18:12.722 --> 00:18:20.318
- Okay, next, I have another exhibit for you. So this is, there's one more, sorry. So,

00:18:20.930 --> 00:18:34.113
- So a while back we had talked about so our hopeful south development You know is building these internal

00:18:34.113 --> 00:18:47.296
- sidewalks and we have one that dead ends on the west end of the project and there is an existing platted

00:18:47.296 --> 00:18:49.054
- alley between

00:18:49.218 --> 00:18:55.886
- the edge of our development in Wiley Street. So if you look at the exhibit on the back here, and initially

00:18:55.886 --> 00:19:02.118
- I came before you and talked about, you know, is this something that we'd like to pursue connecting

00:19:02.118 --> 00:19:08.661
- this alley with the development? And you all had said, yeah, let's look into the cost of that. So that's

00:19:08.661 --> 00:19:15.454
- what we've done here. So on the other side, this is our estimated construction cost to build out this alley.

00:19:15.746 --> 00:19:21.234
- This would be, you know, it's a standard 12 foot platted alley, very similar to most of the alleys you

00:19:21.234 --> 00:19:26.882
- see in a lot of our more traditional older neighborhoods in the city of Bloomington. I think what they're

00:19:26.882 --> 00:19:32.211
- showing here is 10 feet of pavement. You could probably go down to eight feet if you wanted to. And

00:19:32.211 --> 00:19:37.539
- the idea is that rather than having a dead end, you could have pedestrian and bicycle connectivity,

00:19:37.539 --> 00:19:43.134
- as well as vehicles now have another way to kind of get back to some of these units, especially the five

00:19:43.362 --> 00:19:49.868
- units that aren't really adjoining a lane. This would be a way that an ambulance could get back there,

00:19:49.868 --> 00:19:56.310
- a moving truck, something like that. And it would also serve these existing properties if they wanted

00:19:56.310 --> 00:20:02.753
- to come off of it at some point in the future. So this is the proposed design and the estimated cost.

00:20:02.753 --> 00:20:09.322
- And I guess I just wanted to get your feedback on, is this something we want to pursue? I will say that

00:20:09.322 --> 00:20:10.206
- this would be

00:20:10.434 --> 00:20:18.485
- impactful to the adjacent property owners, so we probably want to do some coordination and outreach

00:20:18.485 --> 00:20:26.617
- with them if this is something you want to pursue. But yeah, I'm happy to answer any questions about

00:20:26.617 --> 00:20:35.071
- it. For the benefit of the public, it's $128,170.50 to build out that. I don't know. On that, we already

00:20:35.071 --> 00:20:39.902
- have the right way. Correct, yes. So it's already existing.

00:20:40.866 --> 00:20:47.235
- And if we look to make sure there's no structures already been put in at Miami. There are a few,

00:20:47.235 --> 00:20:54.261
- you know, there's trees there. I think there's a couple of shorter fences that would need to be relocated.

00:20:54.261 --> 00:21:00.893
- There is a power pole that would need to be shifted over as part of our utility relocations. Now all

00:21:00.893 --> 00:21:07.525
- those utilities will be relocated at no cost to the city. But yes, there are a few things like that.

00:21:07.525 --> 00:21:09.758
- If you think of this, this is the

00:21:09.954 --> 00:21:19.451
- grassway thoroughfare that starts on Jackson Street that those center houses line up to and so this

00:21:19.451 --> 00:21:29.328
- would continue that all the way instead again dead-ending would continue it all the way to Wiley Street

00:21:29.328 --> 00:21:39.774
- so it would be a continual thoroughfare and not just drop off so again it would be a connectivity piece there

00:21:40.258 --> 00:21:47.855
- and you are continuing that main avenue, you know, walkway avenue through Hopewell to the next road

00:21:47.855 --> 00:21:55.528
- system. That's connectivity, connectivity situation at the present moment. We have the right of way.

00:21:55.528 --> 00:22:03.429
- The alley has just not been maintained is what it really comes down to as far as... Yeah, it's possible

00:22:03.429 --> 00:22:09.886
- it was never built out. It is possible maybe it was there at some point. Yeah. Yeah.

00:22:10.018 --> 00:22:16.729
- Brings me to the next question. As we build this road out, or build this alleyway out, and I'm all about

00:22:16.729 --> 00:22:23.377
- connectivity in regards to the way this goes out, because long-term, who's going to maintain the alley?

00:22:23.377 --> 00:22:30.024
- So all alleys are maintained by our public works department. Now, they're typically the lowest priority

00:22:30.024 --> 00:22:36.544
- in terms of what gets maintenance, but they are ultimately responsible. OK. And the reason I ask that

00:22:36.544 --> 00:22:38.206
- is we put a new alley in,

00:22:38.466 --> 00:22:45.138
- I want to make sure that we're looking to spend $128,000 to make connectivity, which is critical in

00:22:45.138 --> 00:22:51.810
- regards to transportation, alternative transportation, that we also make sure that it's going to be

00:22:51.810 --> 00:22:58.683
- maintained long-term. Also, based upon what I'm seeing here, you're going to actually add connectivity

00:22:58.683 --> 00:23:05.822
- to the back of some of these other lots, which will give them either access or a potential possibility for

00:23:05.986 --> 00:23:12.925
- an ADU or something of that nature. That's complete planning, but it gives possibilities for granny

00:23:12.925 --> 00:23:20.211
- flats or something. Where does the money come from? You. Just to back up, though, there is no resolution

00:23:20.211 --> 00:23:27.288
- in front of you tonight for an official vote. This is just an update, so we can answer any additional

00:23:27.288 --> 00:23:34.366
- questions and bring it back to you at a future date. So this would have to come back as a resolution.

00:23:36.066 --> 00:23:43.653
- So what do you need from us tonight? Well, I'd really just like to know if this is something you'd like

00:23:43.653 --> 00:23:51.532
- to pursue or if it's something that it's like, no, we want to keep costs down. We don't want to do anything

00:23:51.532 --> 00:23:58.827
- extra or somewhere in between. I mean, the connectivity is a pretty compelling argument. Especially

00:23:58.827 --> 00:24:05.758
- since the right of way is already there. Yeah, so based on what I've seen, I would support it.

00:24:06.018 --> 00:24:14.406
- I would agree. Okay. I'm supportive because I just don't want to have to take land. We don't have to.

00:24:14.406 --> 00:24:23.040
- Having right of way is great. Let's use it. Okay. And this cost estimate, you feel comfortable? Oh yeah.

00:24:23.040 --> 00:24:32.414
- Yeah, our consultants been really good. Anything else on that one? I've got one more. So this is another handout.

00:24:33.154 --> 00:24:44.103
- This is just an update on the traffic. This is an update on the traffic calming. So we were tasked with

00:24:44.103 --> 00:24:54.736
- looking for creative ways to keep speeds low on the lanes. So what we've come up with is essentially

00:24:54.736 --> 00:25:01.790
- a combination of visual roadway narrowing and vertical deflection.

00:25:02.018 --> 00:25:09.533
- So this is just one example of the lanes. On the west and east sides here, we have a raised crosswalk

00:25:09.533 --> 00:25:16.901
- where the vehicles have to go up and over the sidewalks. And then in the middle, where you have the

00:25:16.901 --> 00:25:24.342
- internal sidewalks, you have another raised crosswalk where vehicles are going up and over. And then

00:25:24.342 --> 00:25:31.710
- as you can see here, it's a 20-foot wide roadway. But what we've done is we've made the outer edges

00:25:31.938 --> 00:25:39.125
- The five feet on each side is concrete pavement, but it's just regular white concrete pavement. And

00:25:39.125 --> 00:25:46.456
- then in the middle, we have colored concrete pavement to kind of visually establish a 10-foot driving

00:25:46.456 --> 00:25:53.859
- lane and visually kind of narrow this to a driver, the space that they are driving on, even though the

00:25:53.859 --> 00:26:00.830
- full 20 feet is accessible to trash trucks, emergency vehicles, passing. This is a two-way lane.

00:26:01.250 --> 00:26:07.660
- things like that. So with a combination of these factors, we think that we've been able to, you know,

00:26:07.660 --> 00:26:14.008
- this will keep vehicle speeds very low. I mean, this is, this would be great, you know, just from an

00:26:14.008 --> 00:26:20.481
- engineering perspective, this is really desirable in a residential neighborhood to keep vehicle speeds

00:26:20.481 --> 00:26:27.646
- down. This is more aggressive than what we've done typically in any of our neighborhood traffic calming programs.

00:26:27.842 --> 00:26:34.322
- That's what we were tasked to do as part of the PUD approval, as you know. So I just kind of wanted

00:26:34.322 --> 00:26:41.126
- to give you an update on this. I don't really need anything from you, but I'm happy to hear any thoughts

00:26:41.126 --> 00:26:47.801
- you may have about it. But just wanted to show you kind of the direction we are going for this. It was

00:26:47.801 --> 00:26:54.864
- a reasonable condition to try to keep speeds as low as possible on these lanes. And this has been determined

00:26:54.864 --> 00:26:55.966
- by the engineers

00:26:56.354 --> 00:27:05.728
- that are consulting with and our engineer, traffic engineer, that they believe that this would be effective

00:27:05.728 --> 00:27:14.667
- in achieving the desired results. Well, let me get really simple here. How many humps? How many humps?

00:27:14.667 --> 00:27:23.346
- Humps. Humps? Speed bumps? Speed bumps? Well, I mean, there's really just one mid-block and then as

00:27:23.346 --> 00:27:25.950
- you enter the lanes from each

00:27:26.242 --> 00:27:34.524
- side but they're more i wouldn't call them humps they're race crosswalks so they're a little bit it's

00:27:34.524 --> 00:27:42.886
- not like a speed bump it's like an up and over type comparative to what we just put in on roger street

00:27:42.886 --> 00:27:51.006
- for the trail yeah yeah yeah like the race crosswalk on rogers yeah same same scenario exactly okay

00:27:51.006 --> 00:27:55.390
- okay thank you thank you okay that's all i had thanks

00:28:02.402 --> 00:28:10.213
- OK, well, thank you for those updates. The next item on our agenda is our claims. We have three claims

00:28:10.213 --> 00:28:17.872
- registers from August 14, August 28, and September 11, 2026. I'm going to invite the option to adopt

00:28:17.872 --> 00:28:25.608
- those as a whole. But if you'd like to separate them, please feel free. In the meantime, I'll open it

00:28:25.608 --> 00:28:31.902
- for questions from commissioners. The only question, I have two questions for 814.

00:28:32.034 --> 00:28:41.479
- 9281, it's got the Henry, Jack Henry. It doesn't identify properties, and I understand if we could just

00:28:41.479 --> 00:28:51.014
- put in the future what those properties are. One of them is listed 749. Let me look here. It's the first

00:28:51.014 --> 00:28:59.006
- one. Jack Henry. It's line 9281. Yeah, there's a couple of them on page three and four.

00:28:59.298 --> 00:29:08.191
- For future clarification, we just identify what properties that are. And then the only other one is

00:29:08.191 --> 00:29:17.440
- 9941 on Flintlock. Are we complete with the contract or do we have more to go? They've not drawn? Okay.

00:29:17.440 --> 00:29:27.134
- We still have additional work for them too. Okay. Just verify. Thank you. Any other questions? Other claims?

00:29:27.906 --> 00:29:37.791
- Lori. Yeah, I'm sorry. I wasn't sure if I was interrupting someone if I am. Sorry. I have a question

00:29:37.791 --> 00:29:47.677
- on claims registered for September 11 on page 105. I'm just curious. There's an item for claw clasp,

00:29:47.677 --> 00:29:57.758
- bead storage box, colored pencils, bookmark kit that I'm just curious about. It's not the usual thing.

00:29:58.018 --> 00:30:06.370
- It's what? That we see on the plans registers. But it's also followed by payments that look like they're

00:30:06.370 --> 00:30:14.404
- going to the neighborhoods that were successful in applying for the Neighborhood Improvement Grants.

00:30:14.404 --> 00:30:22.756
- And I was just curious to know if, in one case, it looks like there was a lump sum transfer of the funds

00:30:22.756 --> 00:30:26.494
- that were awarded of $3,000 to Gentry Estates.

00:30:26.914 --> 00:30:35.784
- And others. So, so really two questions. One is, I was just curious about the craft supplies, but, but

00:30:35.784 --> 00:30:45.084
- mainly just to get a quick update on those neighborhood improvement projects. Sure. So the Amazon purchases

00:30:45.084 --> 00:30:53.867
- for the supplies appear to be for, for some tabling events and it is hand materials, office supplies.

00:30:53.867 --> 00:30:55.934
- And then as far as the.

00:30:56.290 --> 00:31:04.867
- Neighborhood improvement grants, I am not aware of the current status, though it does look like the

00:31:04.867 --> 00:31:13.872
- $3,000 was issued to Gentry Estates. And it also looks like $148.81 was issued to Spicewood neighborhood

00:31:13.872 --> 00:31:22.878
- as well. I can report back to you. Yeah, if we get it, I don't know if it's appropriate to get an update

00:31:22.978 --> 00:31:29.493
- on those projects at some point in the future. Obviously, those are ongoing. Those grants were just

00:31:29.493 --> 00:31:36.072
- made this summer. So it could be in the spring that we get an update. But it would be nice to get an

00:31:36.072 --> 00:31:42.587
- update on those. Sure. I'm more than happy to find out and report back at the next meeting. I had a

00:31:42.587 --> 00:31:49.493
- question regarding the August 14th climate together. But please refresh my memory. And this is a question

00:31:49.493 --> 00:31:51.838
- for Jeff. What is the relationship?

00:31:52.226 --> 00:31:59.861
- I know we have CDBG. Council has historically done the Jack Hopkins work. Jack Hopkins grants come through

00:31:59.861 --> 00:32:07.068
- us for approval too? As a matter of fact, no. HAND administers those claims on behalf of the council

00:32:07.068 --> 00:32:14.275
- office because they did not have the capacity to do so. So our social services program manager helps

00:32:14.275 --> 00:32:21.054
- facilitate all of the claims associated with those awards. Those are really a council project.

00:32:21.154 --> 00:32:29.198
- Yeah. It's not part of your code or oversight. So it's simply because HAND has an administrative role?

00:32:29.198 --> 00:32:37.085
- Yes. We are facilitating those for council. Got it. Thank you. Any other questions? Again, we've got

00:32:37.085 --> 00:32:44.973
- three claims registers to consider. Just making sure we're good. Before I ask for a motion to adopt,

00:32:44.973 --> 00:32:49.502
- again, I'm going to ask for all three. One more question.

00:32:49.890 --> 00:33:03.406
- 829 to 911. Fund 2234 on the unsafe building. 21. At least on my computer. 828 claim with a 911. 828,

00:33:03.406 --> 00:33:17.982
- 829 to 911. 911. 911. It's a Silver Creek. Is that something we'll get reimbursed for or is that spent money?

00:33:19.234 --> 00:33:26.304
- on the structural evaluation on the cracking one. It was part of a settlement agreement. It had to come

00:33:26.304 --> 00:33:33.578
- out of unsafe. So unfortunately, you will not get that back. Thank you. OK. Thank you for those questions.

00:33:33.578 --> 00:33:40.444
- Would you like a motion? If we're ready for a motion, I'll ask for it. I move approval of the claims

00:33:40.444 --> 00:33:45.406
- registers for August 14, August 28, and September 11, 2026. I'll second.

00:33:46.114 --> 00:33:53.218
- We've got a first and a second. We'll do a vote by roll call. We have online participation. C. Scambillari,

00:33:53.218 --> 00:33:59.861
- yes. Raina Cassidy, yes. Laurie McRobbie, yes. Deborah Meyerson, yes. Passes unanimously. Thank you.

00:33:59.861 --> 00:34:06.834
- Next on our agenda are two payroll registers from August 21, 2026, and September 4. And we need questions

00:34:06.834 --> 00:34:13.411
- from commissioners on either of these items. And again, I'll also suggest that we can pass those in

00:34:13.411 --> 00:34:15.582
- a single motion after questions.

00:34:19.970 --> 00:34:26.924
- Got a first and a second. We'll do a vote by roll call, please. Cese Kimberley, yes. Rene Cassidy, yes.

00:34:26.924 --> 00:34:33.811
- Lauren McRobbie, yes. Deborah Meyers, yes. Passes unanimously. Thank you. We are now up to the several

00:34:33.811 --> 00:34:40.498
- different meeting minutes. And I'll just name off the dates, but I will also suggest that we can do

00:34:40.498 --> 00:34:47.318
- this in a single motion. But this is for August 17, 2026, regular meeting, and then several executive

00:34:47.318 --> 00:34:48.990
- sessions from August 17.

00:34:49.154 --> 00:34:57.621
- August 31, September 1, September 8, and September 9, 2026. So if there's any questions or corrections

00:34:57.621 --> 00:35:06.170
- on any of these documents from commissioners, otherwise, I will ask for a motion, please. Move approval

00:35:06.170 --> 00:35:14.884
- of the minutes for August 17's regular meeting and the executive sessions on the dates that you outlined.

00:35:14.884 --> 00:35:16.446
- Thank you. Second.

00:35:17.090 --> 00:35:24.460
- We have a first and a second. We'll do a roll call, please. C. Scambaleri, yes. Randy Cassidy, yes.

00:35:24.460 --> 00:35:32.051
- Lori McRobbie, yes. Deborah Meyerson, yes. Passes unanimously. OK. Next on our agenda is new business.

00:35:32.051 --> 00:35:39.421
- We have resolution 2659, declaring support for the redevelopment and use of 714 South Rogers Street

00:35:39.421 --> 00:35:45.022
- property and building as the new Bloomington Police Department headquarters

00:35:45.346 --> 00:35:54.280
- and associated public safety facilities and uses. And it looks like we have. Data curves. Okay. Yes.

00:35:54.280 --> 00:36:03.390
- As of course you're aware with several resolutions that you've passed so far that whenever the PUD was

00:36:03.390 --> 00:36:11.262
- created for Hopewell South, this building was thought that it could possibly be used for

00:36:11.362 --> 00:36:22.488
- the Bloomington Police Department's headquarters and other uses affiliated with that. And so by resolution

00:36:22.488 --> 00:36:33.303
- 2543, the RDC decided that they would look into some due diligence to go down that path and see if this

00:36:33.303 --> 00:36:40.062
- would be possible. That due diligence led to further work and we

00:36:40.162 --> 00:36:52.269
- By resolution 25131, the RDC contracted with American Structure Point to complete a feasibility study.

00:36:52.269 --> 00:37:04.140
- That feasibility study was completed. It determined that the thing with the building is that there's

00:37:04.140 --> 00:37:08.254
- no plans from the original design.

00:37:08.674 --> 00:37:19.689
- of the building and so while it is a large concrete structure and it's been used as a nursing home and

00:37:19.689 --> 00:37:30.383
- it's also been used as offices already, there's just not any plans on the structural aspects of it.

00:37:30.383 --> 00:37:36.478
- So the structure point couldn't say 100% positively that

00:37:37.122 --> 00:37:48.090
- it would be perfect to use, but they did say that there are options that can be done that they believe

00:37:48.090 --> 00:37:58.952
- would enable the building and possibly addition onto the building to be used to make a very effective

00:37:58.952 --> 00:38:04.702
- police headquarters with the additional services that

00:38:05.058 --> 00:38:13.976
- are being considered possibly to go along with that. And so they were, we also engage or you engage

00:38:13.976 --> 00:38:23.250
- using the first resolution funds of Mr. Kelly Abel through his company to look at the feasibility study

00:38:23.250 --> 00:38:31.454
- as well. And after further discussions with StructurePoint and discussions with Kelly Abel,

00:38:31.618 --> 00:38:40.375
- Even though structure points feasibility study has some kind of higher level numbers in there, there

00:38:40.375 --> 00:38:49.912
- were a lot of assumptions being made that weren't necessarily needed to be made associated to this particular

00:38:49.912 --> 00:38:59.102
- project. And there was some narrowing of scope. And so it was determined that the project budget could be

00:38:59.810 --> 00:39:10.943
- much less than what was in their original scope. And so it's been determined that a project in the vicinity

00:39:10.943 --> 00:39:21.354
- of $30 million could create a very effective, efficient police headquarters using that building. The

00:39:21.354 --> 00:39:28.158
- location is suitable, especially suitable because it's already in

00:39:28.290 --> 00:39:40.286
- the possession of the Redevelopment Commission is in the Hopewell South PUD, which already has flexibility

00:39:40.286 --> 00:39:51.945
- built into it on how this can be developed. And so it allows for a lot of the things that we would want

00:39:51.945 --> 00:39:56.542
- to see with parking and with landscaping

00:39:56.674 --> 00:40:10.131
- and elevation changes and setbacks and all those things are already accounted for and flexible in that.

00:40:10.131 --> 00:40:23.330
- So that is a tremendous benefit of using this site. So the next step for the RDC, if the RDC would so

00:40:23.330 --> 00:40:25.918
- choose, would be to

00:40:26.146 --> 00:40:37.471
- pass a resolution, as you have before you, stating that you are, at this point in time, making the decision

00:40:37.471 --> 00:40:48.167
- to commit to using the 714 building and property for the purpose of the Bloomington Police Department

00:40:48.167 --> 00:40:54.878
- headquarters and want to start the next steps in the process of

00:40:55.170 --> 00:41:03.440
- going forward with what that would look like and what that would cost and what, you know, bonding options

00:41:03.440 --> 00:41:11.242
- there would be and all the different pieces that go into it and you would be making that commitment

00:41:11.242 --> 00:41:19.435
- to the saying that, you know, at this point you would not be considering any other use for that property

00:41:19.435 --> 00:41:24.350
- from this point forward unless some circumstances would change

00:41:24.482 --> 00:41:34.234
- But you know that you are committed to this project. This allows again a lot of things to to move forward.

00:41:34.234 --> 00:41:43.349
- We're talking about owners representative here after after this resolution. For for the project and

00:41:43.349 --> 00:41:52.190
- so this again is a. A way for you to publicly announced that you are ready to make a commitment.

00:41:52.674 --> 00:42:03.435
- to use 714 South Roger Street for the Bloomington Police headquarters and ancillary facilities and that

00:42:03.435 --> 00:42:14.093
- you're willing to take that step. And so we have the Honorable Mayor Thompson with us and Chief Decoff

00:42:14.093 --> 00:42:20.094
- with us to if they would like to add to anything to this.

00:42:21.026 --> 00:42:35.514
- I think we've done a good amount of research and looking into potential areas to do the new police station.

00:42:35.514 --> 00:42:50.270
- And this site held two clear advantages. First of all, it's a building that we believe can be reused that has

00:42:50.722 --> 00:43:01.787
- the weight-bearing capacity to do various things that we need in the police station. It's also located

00:43:01.787 --> 00:43:12.851
- within a block of what the police had previously identified as their ideal location for a new station.

00:43:12.851 --> 00:43:20.478
- So it puts to good use a big concrete building that otherwise would be

00:43:20.642 --> 00:43:30.911
- detriment to our climate to take down the entire building and would be frankly wasteful. And it's where

00:43:30.911 --> 00:43:41.278
- the police would really ultimately like to be. We have done some outreach in the neighborhood and around

00:43:41.278 --> 00:43:48.190
- the area. And while no support is unanimous, there's fairly welcoming

00:43:48.322 --> 00:43:56.973
- feeling to having that police station located there. So from my perspective, I think this is a win.

00:43:56.973 --> 00:44:05.797
- And I recommend approval of the resolution. And I'll turn things over to Chief DeKoff. Hi. Thank you.

00:44:05.797 --> 00:44:15.486
- So this is a great opportunity for us to move out of a building that has basically outlived its life. It leaks.

00:44:15.618 --> 00:44:22.829
- making offices out of storage units. We just don't have any room for growth in the current facility.

00:44:22.829 --> 00:44:30.541
- So this building offers space that we think will serve our needs for up to 50 years. It's a great location.

00:44:30.541 --> 00:44:37.681
- It's on major roadways. So it gives us access to get around the city pretty easily. The union is in

00:44:37.681 --> 00:44:42.750
- support of it. Everybody's pretty excited about the potentials. It's a

00:44:43.266 --> 00:44:51.691
- As the mayor said, it's a big concrete building, so we think that it will serve our needs really well,

00:44:51.691 --> 00:45:00.442
- and we're excited about the project and ask for your support. We will open it up for questions or comments

00:45:00.442 --> 00:45:02.078
- from commissioners.

00:45:03.618 --> 00:45:09.886
- for resolution 2659. I'd like to ask the controllers. I just wanted to make some regards to... Sorry,

00:45:09.886 --> 00:45:16.092
- I apologize. No, that's okay. I actually just wanted to make one quick comment that even though this

00:45:16.092 --> 00:45:22.544
- resolution does mention bonding, this is not the official resolution that kicks off the bonding process.

00:45:22.544 --> 00:45:26.046
- So that would come at a later date after some more work.

00:45:26.178 --> 00:45:31.862
- This is purely for the RDC to indicate our approval of the use of this property that is under our ownership

00:45:31.862 --> 00:45:37.177
- to be able to move forward with the industry. Exactly. And so at some point, if indeed you do decide

00:45:37.177 --> 00:45:42.493
- to move forward, there will be another resolution that will formally kick off your intention to seek

00:45:42.493 --> 00:45:48.071
- bonds. And then that would also go to city council for approval. Thank you for that clarification. Before

00:45:48.071 --> 00:45:53.334
- you go to questions, Anna Dragovich is the project manager on this. Do you have anything you'd like

00:45:53.334 --> 00:45:54.334
- to add about this?

00:45:54.818 --> 00:46:04.770
- Thank you. No, I think everyone here has covered it really well. I appreciate it. Thank you. And regarding

00:46:04.770 --> 00:46:14.163
- the $30 million, that was placed in there as a budget number so that you could define what you would

00:46:14.163 --> 00:46:23.464
- be looking at as your potential commitment to use potentially a bonding process for that. So it was

00:46:23.464 --> 00:46:24.766
- so you would.

00:46:25.602 --> 00:46:34.013
- be again presenting to the public what your feelings were towards make obligation to moving forward.

00:46:34.013 --> 00:46:42.342
- So as your controller said, yes, no, this is not the beginning of a bonding process at all. This is

00:46:42.342 --> 00:46:50.670
- stating what you believe would be a budget that you would set at this point in time. And of course,

00:46:50.670 --> 00:46:54.334
- you could change that should you choose so.

00:46:55.362 --> 00:47:05.810
- Thank you for that clarification. Anything further before we turn to commissioners? OK. Open it up for

00:47:05.810 --> 00:47:16.461
- questions and comments from commissioners on resolution 26-59. Go ahead. This is identifying $30 million

00:47:16.461 --> 00:47:22.142
- to come out of the consolidated TIF. Well, it would be.

00:47:22.690 --> 00:47:29.891
- a bond that would then be serviced by the consolidated TIF. And in your estimation, based on you've

00:47:29.891 --> 00:47:37.452
- looked at the financials with our financial consultants, the consolidated TIF will have continued enough

00:47:37.452 --> 00:47:44.653
- revenue in order to service this in the time frame that the consolidated TIF exists. So another 13.

00:47:44.653 --> 00:47:51.998
- And given this resolution, Dana, as we're looking at that, if for whatever reason the building didn't

00:47:52.802 --> 00:48:00.650
- pan out, we would still be at a position of where the property would be, the location that it's needed,

00:48:00.650 --> 00:48:08.574
- and the financial ability would not exceed 30 million. That's the dollars we're looking at. Well, that's

00:48:08.574 --> 00:48:16.121
- your decision. OK. Well, I'm just saying, when we look at this consolidated tip and we're trying to

00:48:16.121 --> 00:48:21.630
- identify moving forward on something which I think the police definitely

00:48:22.114 --> 00:48:29.436
- It's time for something in order to secure the security of our community. That is the top end of what

00:48:29.436 --> 00:48:37.188
- we think we can bond because I want to make sure that we're able to financially afford it. Well, understand

00:48:37.188 --> 00:48:44.581
- that it's complicated because there are other commitments that you may want to make in the future with

00:48:44.581 --> 00:48:46.878
- respect to Summit and Hopewell.

00:48:47.266 --> 00:48:53.419
- when we're saying 30 million is feasible, we're also taking into account other projects that we think

00:48:53.419 --> 00:48:59.693
- you may want to consider. And so we believe that 30 million is a responsible amount that can accomplish

00:48:59.693 --> 00:49:05.725
- the project, and Anna can talk about that more if you want to, that can both accomplish the project

00:49:05.725 --> 00:49:11.818
- and fits within your potential bonding capacity given these other projects as well. Well, because of

00:49:11.818 --> 00:49:16.222
- the constraint of SEA 1 and such, I just want to verify that financially

00:49:16.482 --> 00:49:25.912
- have that ability yes yeah okay thank you and then the only other question i have which i think we have

00:49:25.912 --> 00:49:35.886
- a council elected official here the geographic area that it's in if the neighborhood as a whole is supportive

00:49:35.886 --> 00:49:45.950
- of this location if i ask isabel that or not if it's in her district i cannot answer that sorry okay thank you

00:49:46.722 --> 00:49:54.933
- Mixed responses. Thank you. Other than that, this is just the first step. Just to put a finer point

00:49:54.933 --> 00:50:03.226
- on Randy's question, could you describe the process we've gone through to engage the neighborhood in

00:50:03.226 --> 00:50:07.742
- conversations? And I'm not sure who to direct that to.

00:50:08.770 --> 00:50:18.670
- I can address at least part of it. We had a large public meeting. I've also gone to the Neighborhood

00:50:18.670 --> 00:50:28.668
- Association meeting to discuss this. And I have been door knocking on five different occasions in the

00:50:28.668 --> 00:50:38.078
- neighborhood just to get individual feedback and brief people on where we are with the process.

00:50:38.402 --> 00:50:50.631
- The majority of people who answer their door and want to offer an opinion are supportive. And we do

00:50:50.631 --> 00:51:03.350
- have a handful of people that are against having the police in their neighborhood. And I also just want

00:51:03.350 --> 00:51:05.918
- to note that this is

00:51:06.434 --> 00:51:14.632
- You know, while this is a larger space, the size of our police department has nothing to do with the

00:51:14.632 --> 00:51:23.073
- size of the building that they're in. So this is not trying to signal to the community that we're about

00:51:23.073 --> 00:51:31.514
- to dramatically expand the size of our police force. We are understaffed. We do plan to get to adequate

00:51:31.514 --> 00:51:32.894
- staffing, but we

00:51:33.250 --> 00:51:40.947
- This is not a signal to the community that we're about to dramatically increase the number of sworn

00:51:40.947 --> 00:51:48.720
- officers. We are under housed right now in a situation that is frankly dilapidated and is not proper

00:51:48.720 --> 00:51:56.417
- working conditions. So that's why we need a move. And we do need adequate space for the police that

00:51:56.417 --> 00:51:58.110
- we currently have and

00:51:58.210 --> 00:52:05.333
- to get to our full staffing. But this is not a signal that we're about to overstaff our police department.

00:52:05.333 --> 00:52:12.256
- Well, and I think if I recall correctly, both you and Chief DeKoff have made comments in the past about

00:52:12.256 --> 00:52:18.913
- the non-sworn officers that we have added to our police department and how we've very intentionally

00:52:18.913 --> 00:52:22.974
- moved our police department in that direction. So thank you.

00:52:27.554 --> 00:52:34.670
- Any other questions from commissioners about resolution 2659? I'll say it does seem like a very important

00:52:34.670 --> 00:52:41.786
- and useful way to reuse this building again in terms of as an asset in the community and something that's

00:52:41.786 --> 00:52:48.768
- well suited for the proposed use. It seems like a good fit. So I appreciate that this has been explored

00:52:48.768 --> 00:52:55.615
- because it's otherwise been a vacant building for a long time that didn't have an obvious reuse to it

00:52:55.615 --> 00:52:56.958
- and this seems like

00:52:57.634 --> 00:53:05.685
- the appropriate direction to go in. I'm going to open this up for public comment for resolution 2659.

00:53:05.685 --> 00:53:13.973
- I'm here. You have two here. Oh, thank you. I live in the neighborhood. I live a quarter of a mile away.

00:53:13.973 --> 00:53:22.419
- I don't recall any public outreach for this. I do recall there being a feasibility, a cultural feasibility

00:53:22.419 --> 00:53:27.550
- study for the re-designation of the space in the cultural space.

00:53:27.746 --> 00:53:33.742
- I quite frankly, whether or not the mayor thinks that it signals or does not signal an increased police

00:53:33.742 --> 00:53:39.796
- presence in my neighborhood, that building doesn't loom on a hill in the neighborhood that will be built

00:53:39.796 --> 00:53:45.619
- there. There's a lot of unhoused community there. It will signal an elevation of the police presence

00:53:45.619 --> 00:53:51.500
- in the community as a community member who has not asked my opinion of this. I think that building is

00:53:51.500 --> 00:53:57.150
- suitable for many things other than the police station. And I am disappointed in this trajectory.

00:53:58.114 --> 00:54:05.627
- I'm sorry, I didn't get your name. Layla Reichard. Thank you. Any other public comment, either in person

00:54:05.627 --> 00:54:12.853
- or online? See Holly Warren online. Hi, everyone. Can you hear me OK? Yes, thank you. OK, thank you.

00:54:12.853 --> 00:54:20.008
- So I'm the former assistant director for the city of Bloomington. And I just want to remind you all

00:54:20.008 --> 00:54:25.374
- that there was an arts feasibility study in 2022 that actually recommended

00:54:25.506 --> 00:54:33.093
- 714 South Rogers be used as an artist's space. This was a space that would have included both individual

00:54:33.093 --> 00:54:40.318
- studios for artists, as well as shared workshop space that would have had specialized equipment. It

00:54:40.318 --> 00:54:48.193
- would have also included space for performance, music, and dance. These are all resources that are essential

00:54:48.193 --> 00:54:51.806
- to our very beloved and important arts community.

00:54:52.034 --> 00:54:59.939
- This building was actually saved originally for this piece before this administration. Earlier iteration

00:54:59.939 --> 00:55:05.886
- of the Hopewell committee agreed that this building would not be knocked down.

00:55:06.082 --> 00:55:11.851
- So we could explore options for turning this into an art space. We did explore the space with

00:55:11.851 --> 00:55:17.988
- the architectural team that produced the feasibility study. They found that the infrastructure that

00:55:17.988 --> 00:55:24.432
- exists for the building at this point in time made this a great candidate to make this kind of art space

00:55:24.432 --> 00:55:25.598
- for our community.

00:55:25.698 --> 00:55:32.203
- I can also share that as someone who used to review all of the many applications that came into the

00:55:32.203 --> 00:55:38.707
- Bloomington Arts Commission for funding, there is a huge need for affordable artist studio space in

00:55:38.707 --> 00:55:45.342
- our community. The four community art spaces that are promised as part of Indiana University's recent

00:55:45.342 --> 00:55:51.326
- Ready 2.0 grant are not adequate to house the number of deserving artists for this purpose.

00:55:51.874 --> 00:55:59.650
- And I just want to also remind you all that one of the original things that was called out in the Hopewell

00:55:59.650 --> 00:56:06.989
- master plan was spaces for community gathering and creative development in this neighborhood. And in

00:56:06.989 --> 00:56:11.422
- addition to that, being able to provide a resource like this

00:56:11.586 --> 00:56:19.283
- board of this community is going to enable our artists to be able to stay here, contribute to the economy,

00:56:19.283 --> 00:56:26.548
- and really be able to make Bloomington an innovative center that is known throughout the Midwest. So

00:56:26.548 --> 00:56:34.316
- I just wanted to remind you all of that and just ask you all to reconsider that as you are making decisions

00:56:34.316 --> 00:56:40.862
- about how you're allocating space in this new neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. Yes. Hi.

00:56:41.122 --> 00:56:50.502
- Isabel B. Monsmith, District 1 City Council. And this is in my district. I wanted to ask about

00:56:50.502 --> 00:57:00.574
- the feasibility study. So American Structure Point did the study. I found in Bloom Docs the letter to

00:57:00.574 --> 00:57:07.486
- Anna Dragovich of April 10th that basically said it was not feasible.

00:57:07.842 --> 00:57:18.725
- to use the police station or use that 714 South Rogers to reuse it as a police station. And that now

00:57:18.725 --> 00:57:29.716
- I'm hearing that the KGA, Avicon, LLC reviewed the feasibility study. And I guess determined it could

00:57:29.716 --> 00:57:35.966
- be used that way. But I don't know where I can find that.

00:57:36.290 --> 00:57:46.652
- So I'm just asking for more transparency on the studies that have been done to back up proceeding with

00:57:46.652 --> 00:57:56.713
- this project. I can speak to that a little bit. That letter was written at a snapshot in time when,

00:57:56.713 --> 00:58:04.862
- what's the matter? You have to face the microphone. It's fine. I thought it was.

00:58:05.122 --> 00:58:12.408
- Yeah. OK. Sorry. So a reminder to folks, the building doesn't have original construction drawings, which

00:58:12.408 --> 00:58:19.417
- makes it kind of complicated that we're not able to go and see the structure of the building itself.

00:58:19.417 --> 00:58:26.704
- And so when that letter was written, there are kind of some unknowns around what the building is capable

00:58:26.704 --> 00:58:30.590
- of as far as meeting the really strict requirements for

00:58:31.042 --> 00:58:38.276
- these types of essential facilities like police departments, fire stations, hospitals, and things like

00:58:38.276 --> 00:58:45.439
- that. So we think that through further investigation, we'll be able to determine if that building can

00:58:45.439 --> 00:58:52.743
- indeed become sort of an office type building for some parts of Bloomington, for the Bloomington Police

00:58:52.743 --> 00:58:56.606
- Department, or if we need to say construct an addition

00:58:56.802 --> 00:59:04.821
- which is one of the conceptual designs that StructurePoint reviewed, that would house those essential

00:59:04.821 --> 00:59:13.075
- facilities that cannot fit within the existing structure. I hope that, I trust that makes sense. There's

00:59:13.075 --> 00:59:21.094
- portions of a police department that need to be able to still be operational in a worst-case scenario

00:59:21.094 --> 00:59:25.182
- such as a natural disaster, and that has to do with

00:59:25.442 --> 00:59:34.438
- the actual structure of the building. Does that make sense? I'm not a structural engineer, but I'm trying

00:59:34.438 --> 00:59:43.009
- to interpret them really well, so doing my best. So what it entails is that you can add an addition,

00:59:43.009 --> 00:59:51.920
- a limited addition onto the building that meets, they call it category four, design that would withstand

00:59:51.920 --> 00:59:55.230
- like earthquakes, things of, you know,

00:59:55.458 --> 01:00:05.484
- horrific natural disasters so that the operations, critical operations could remain active with the

01:00:05.484 --> 01:00:15.711
- other part, the main structure that is there would unlikely be able to handle that, which at the time

01:00:15.711 --> 01:00:24.734
- it was built and most buildings that are constructed do not meet those kind of standards.

01:00:24.866 --> 01:00:35.644
- because they're specialized. But that does not mean that the building could not be used for the office

01:00:35.644 --> 01:00:46.317
- space, for the training rooms, for interview rooms, for so many other operational aspects of it. It's

01:00:46.317 --> 01:00:54.270
- only those critical emergency operations that need to be in a facility that

01:00:54.530 --> 01:01:04.131
- is strong enough to handle all that. And since there's no plans on how the main structure was designed,

01:01:04.131 --> 01:01:13.456
- it would be unfeasible to make that entire structure able to withstand to become a category four. So

01:01:13.456 --> 01:01:23.242
- what would be feasible, they determined, would be to have an addition where they could have the emergency

01:01:23.242 --> 01:01:24.350
- operations.

01:01:24.610 --> 01:01:35.418
- and still utilize the existing structure, again, concrete solid structure for the other operations of

01:01:35.418 --> 01:01:46.225
- the police department. So it's only a limited portion of the operations of the police department that

01:01:46.225 --> 01:01:53.854
- would need to be in that type of a building. And so that addition would

01:01:54.978 --> 01:02:02.811
- take away the fact that the entire building would need to be redesigned and supported to meet that,

01:02:02.811 --> 01:02:10.802
- which, again, that would not have been feasible. That would just, to find out how it was constructed,

01:02:10.802 --> 01:02:18.792
- do all those studies, and then do all of the stabilizing for sheer force and so on and so forth would

01:02:18.792 --> 01:02:24.510
- just have, even if it was possible, would have been extremely expensive.

01:02:24.962 --> 01:02:32.974
- However, that building has been used again as a nursing home, has been used for offices. There's very

01:02:32.974 --> 01:02:41.222
- little doubt that it can continue to be used for offices and meeting rooms and those kind of operations,

01:02:41.222 --> 01:02:49.313
- which is what most of the structure needs would be for the police department. It's just those critical

01:02:49.313 --> 01:02:52.062
- operations that need a specialized

01:02:52.258 --> 01:03:03.372
- type of structure, and that's what the addition can be. And just to be clear, our current police building

01:03:03.372 --> 01:03:06.622
- does not meet those standards.

01:03:06.690 --> 01:03:14.939
- neither does our current dispatch. So we don't currently, the city does not currently have a facility

01:03:14.939 --> 01:03:23.187
- that does meet that standard. And while it's not a hard requirement, it is a best practice. And so we

01:03:23.187 --> 01:03:31.274
- feel it's really recommended that we do that addition that will just house the Emergency Operations

01:03:31.274 --> 01:03:34.590
- Center and dispatch. And that's what is,

01:03:34.978 --> 01:03:43.977
- that's what's critically needed in a time of disaster. So we want to make sure, without a doubt, that

01:03:43.977 --> 01:03:52.977
- that's structurally sound to virtually anything. Can we see the KGA Advocon review that public? Yeah,

01:03:52.977 --> 01:04:01.800
- I think so. Yeah, the reports from the public, they were in the, were they in the packet or? Not in

01:04:01.800 --> 01:04:04.094
- the packet. Okay, we can.

01:04:04.386 --> 01:04:11.325
- Yeah, we can make sure that they're put on the website. So could it be included as an addendum to this

01:04:11.325 --> 01:04:18.129
- packet in terms of, since this is part of the agenda, that it could be added as part of the publicly

01:04:18.129 --> 01:04:24.933
- available resources on this? That was going to be one of my questions, so I appreciate that that can

01:04:24.933 --> 01:04:31.198
- be added. My other question is getting back to Ms. Warren's comment, which is about the need

01:04:31.490 --> 01:04:39.726
- for artist studio space, which I realize is not part of this resolution. But I'm just asking if there's

01:04:39.726 --> 01:04:47.645
- been any reconsideration since that study was done in 2022. I'm happy to speak to that. Jane Cooper

01:04:47.645 --> 01:04:53.822
- Smith, Director of Economic and Sustainable Development. And yes, Ms. Warren.

01:04:54.402 --> 01:05:01.680
- It completely accurately represents the recommendations of the tray and feasibility study that was done

01:05:01.680 --> 01:05:09.029
- in 2022. There have been a number of changes on the ground since that time. The need remains consistent.

01:05:09.029 --> 01:05:16.237
- The funding environment has changed drastically. And we've also had one pilot project under our belts.

01:05:16.237 --> 01:05:19.806
- And then we have received funding for the location

01:05:20.642 --> 01:05:27.372
- of an arts incubator at the Showers Admin Building, which was of course a former property of the RDC,

01:05:27.372 --> 01:05:34.169
- was purchased by the Erden Opportunity Fund. I can't remember what year exactly. And the plan for that

01:05:34.169 --> 01:05:40.767
- building is actually for 12 artist studios, four of which are reserved for Bloomington locals, four

01:05:40.767 --> 01:05:46.046
- of which are reserved for IU graduates. So those are future Bloomington locals.

01:05:46.210 --> 01:05:52.417
- This is part of our effort to recruit people to remain in our community. And then for regional artists

01:05:52.417 --> 01:05:58.504
- who will be coming into Bloomington. This was a regional partnership was an essential requirement in

01:05:58.504 --> 01:06:04.350
- order to access the funding for this program. The second floor of the building is in reserve for

01:06:05.890 --> 01:06:11.651
- Creative entrepreneur spaces. So there are already people occupying that building We know that that's

01:06:11.651 --> 01:06:17.468
- a critical part of our economy that we want to grow It's not just practicing artists, although we know

01:06:17.468 --> 01:06:23.229
- practicing artists are in dire need of studio space that we know that creative You know professionals

01:06:23.229 --> 01:06:29.046
- also need to be able to stand up their businesses so the second floor supports that and then the third

01:06:29.046 --> 01:06:30.910
- floor does meet that performance

01:06:31.106 --> 01:06:38.305
- requirement, performance-based needs. So I apologize. I don't know the capacity offhand, but it is for

01:06:38.305 --> 01:06:45.433
- performances that would be open to the public. So this Showers Avenue building really does tick a lot

01:06:45.433 --> 01:06:52.772
- of the boxes of that requirement. But the most important piece of it is that after that project receives

01:06:52.772 --> 01:06:58.782
- this cash injection from the REDI Arts and Culture Grant, it will be self-sustaining.

01:06:59.298 --> 01:07:07.633
- It will likely have a small programming request coming from the city's budget. But for example, our

01:07:07.633 --> 01:07:16.302
- commitment for the 2027 budget, if that's approved, it's $20,000, not $100,000. So we've really learned

01:07:16.302 --> 01:07:24.887
- a lot of lessons over the last four years. And I believe that we've taken this recommendation from the

01:07:24.887 --> 01:07:28.638
- Trehand feasibility studies super seriously.

01:07:29.378 --> 01:07:37.833
- Happy to answer any questions about that. One other question I was going to ask based on the resident's

01:07:37.833 --> 01:07:46.043
- comment from the McDonald Gardens neighborhood is just, what's the plan from here on out in terms of

01:07:46.043 --> 01:07:54.254
- public outreach to the neighborhood just because it seems like there's an opportunity for additional

01:07:54.254 --> 01:07:59.294
- outreach? And I'm just wondering what the plans are for that.

01:08:00.258 --> 01:08:07.662
- So we've already reached out to the chair of the McDowell Gardens Neighborhood Association again to

01:08:07.662 --> 01:08:15.733
- get back on the agenda now that we have we've been kind of waiting to see what the feasibility and direction

01:08:15.733 --> 01:08:23.582
- of this is. So we've already reached out to be able to go back and talk to them again. We've been keeping

01:08:23.582 --> 01:08:29.950
- Prospect Hill in the loop as well so we'll probably reach out to them as well just to

01:08:30.242 --> 01:08:36.894
- give them an update and get feedback. Any other outlets besides the neighborhood associations?

01:08:38.626 --> 01:08:45.132
- I think we're planning on a public meeting, right? We're currently working on coming up with a date

01:08:45.132 --> 01:08:51.704
- and outline for a larger public meeting regarding Hopewell in general, too, just to get people aware

01:08:51.704 --> 01:08:58.536
- of what's going on at Hopewell South, but then also potentially with the 714 site. So we have not pinned

01:08:58.536 --> 01:09:05.758
- down an exact location yet or a date, but it is coming soon. We understand that that is a need. Thank you. OK.

01:09:06.754 --> 01:09:13.002
- Any other public comment before we take this to a vote? Yes. My name is Paul Post, president of FOP

01:09:13.002 --> 01:09:19.313
- Lodge 88. I represent the collective bargaining unit, DPD. Jeff's going to talk after this. He's the

01:09:19.313 --> 01:09:25.874
- detective representative. We're here just to express, like Chief Deakoff said, our not having any issues

01:09:25.874 --> 01:09:32.373
- at all with this plan. We've really enjoyed working with Mayor and Chief Deakoff, looking at some ideas

01:09:32.373 --> 01:09:34.622
- for the potential of that property.

01:09:34.722 --> 01:09:41.491
- And I really appreciate seeing some of the things that are possible going forward. So we're here to

01:09:41.491 --> 01:09:48.260
- say we have no objection. Thank you. Good evening. Jeff Rogers, Blount Police Department. Been with

01:09:48.260 --> 01:09:54.894
- the department over 20 years now. Been one of the representatives for about the last dozen years.

01:09:54.894 --> 01:10:01.054
- We have, we need a new police department, so we have to look at what is optional for that.

01:10:01.410 --> 01:10:09.115
- We were heavily involved in the Showers West proposal. One of the primary challenges with that location

01:10:09.115 --> 01:10:16.746
- was accessibility, and also the longevity of the building. This, as has been stated, is gonna be a 40,

01:10:16.746 --> 01:10:24.229
- 50-year building, something that we can work with for a very long time. Accessible, it's also within

01:10:24.229 --> 01:10:30.526
- centrally located, so it really checks off a lot of boxes that we are going to need.

01:10:30.690 --> 01:10:40.167
- And if we don't do this location, I know a lot have been looked at, so we're limited by options as well.

01:10:40.167 --> 01:10:49.373
- So I know Paul, myself, the chief, everybody is in favor of this as far as the police department goes

01:10:49.373 --> 01:10:58.398
- and the location. Thank you. Looking around, any final public comment? If not, I will take this for

01:10:58.498 --> 01:11:07.716
- Any further questions on commissioners or take this for a motion to vote? On resolution 26-59. One quick

01:11:07.716 --> 01:11:16.583
- clarification in regards to our class 4 building and such, an addition on this from what I'm hearing

01:11:16.583 --> 01:11:25.538
- from the police department is the need for the class 4 is not a continual all of the building. It can

01:11:25.538 --> 01:11:27.294
- be additional work.

01:11:27.778 --> 01:11:34.421
- And this $30 million will adequately take care of the class four and the additional office to serve

01:11:34.421 --> 01:11:41.264
- our community for 50 years. I would love to say we have enough money to give them a brand new building

01:11:41.264 --> 01:11:48.505
- as much as they need for 50 years. But we have to be fiscally responsible. And if this is the best solution,

01:11:48.505 --> 01:11:54.750
- I'd like to see that we move forward. Thank you. Thank you. So I'll open this for our motion.

01:11:55.394 --> 01:12:05.109
- Approval of resolution 2659. I'll second. Second. Got a first and a second. We'll vote by roll call,

01:12:05.109 --> 01:12:14.825
- please. Sue Scambaleri, yes. Randy Cassidy, yes. Laurie McRobbie, yes. Deborah Meyerson, yes. Motion

01:12:14.825 --> 01:12:25.310
- passes unanimously for resolution 2659. Thank you all. OK. Moving on to our next item on our agenda, we have

01:12:25.474 --> 01:12:34.887
- Owners representative quotes who would like to speak to that I can keep going First I'd like to explain

01:12:34.887 --> 01:12:44.119
- that the owners representative First is a professional services and for professional services for the

01:12:44.119 --> 01:12:53.169
- Redevelopment Commission This is not the type of services that you would go that you're required by

01:12:53.169 --> 01:12:55.070
- statute to go out to

01:12:55.202 --> 01:13:05.570
- do RFPs for, RFQs for. Professional services are so unique to the, a lot of it has to do with

01:13:05.570 --> 01:13:15.606
- the relationship between the provider of those services and the client. So that connection

01:13:15.606 --> 01:13:22.334
- and the qualifications of the provider are so important that

01:13:22.818 --> 01:13:31.798
- doing an RFP and RFQ is not the kind of process that the statute requires you to go through. You can

01:13:31.798 --> 01:13:40.778
- use aspects of that to the extent that you want to, you desire to, but when it comes down to it, the

01:13:40.778 --> 01:13:48.958
- choice of whom you use is yours. What the owner's representative would be would be for this

01:13:50.050 --> 01:14:01.848
- the Bloomington Police Department project. And so there are some people with local ties that the staff

01:14:01.848 --> 01:14:12.959
- reach out to and ask for them to submit proposals on their willingness and ability to be owners'

01:14:12.959 --> 01:14:18.686
- representatives. We got three responses for that.

01:14:18.818 --> 01:14:28.372
- They are three very different responses in very different ways. And since, you know, just getting them

01:14:28.372 --> 01:14:37.926
- in and getting them to you, my recommendation at this point would be for you to take time to look them

01:14:37.926 --> 01:14:48.222
- over, consider them, think of questions that you might have, and you could let staff know we would be happy to

01:14:48.322 --> 01:14:59.311
- talk over your questions that you have with them, get their answers back to you. If you would like additional

01:14:59.311 --> 01:15:09.601
- to look elsewhere as well, we can do any of that. You can merely reach out to us by email and instruct

01:15:09.601 --> 01:15:16.894
- us how you would prefer that we go. It doesn't have to be something that

01:15:17.474 --> 01:15:25.570
- You vote on if someone says they want us to look further, we can look further. If someone says they

01:15:25.570 --> 01:15:33.828
- ask these questions, we ask those questions. It's not something that requires a vote or anything that

01:15:33.828 --> 01:15:42.248
- all of you say we have to ask certain questions. If you all have questions, you can ask your questions.

01:15:42.248 --> 01:15:45.406
- So again, the relationship is very key

01:15:45.762 --> 01:15:53.991
- to an owner's representative. So we want to make sure that we get this right. I do understand there's

01:15:53.991 --> 01:16:02.138
- a desire to have an owner's representative. And so what this process moving this project along would

01:16:02.138 --> 01:16:10.286
- look like would be that there would be three, I like to use the pun, building blocks. There would be

01:16:10.286 --> 01:16:14.078
- an owner's representative that represents you.

01:16:14.402 --> 01:16:22.033
- that represents the mayor, that represents the police department, that represents the community, that

01:16:22.033 --> 01:16:29.664
- wants to get the very best out of each and every dollar that's spent on the project, making sure that

01:16:29.664 --> 01:16:37.370
- the right decisions are made for Bloomington, for the RDC, for the police department, for the project.

01:16:37.370 --> 01:16:39.390
- And they look out for you.

01:16:40.290 --> 01:16:50.889
- Then the other two pieces, one would be the architect engineer to do the design work. And then the method

01:16:50.889 --> 01:17:00.987
- of services of building would be recommending, in this case, would be what's called a CMC, where the

01:17:00.987 --> 01:17:09.886
- construction manager would be the constructor. In that manner, you can have an agreement

01:17:10.178 --> 01:17:19.516
- on an amount that you would construct the project for. And so now you've got a cap. And then the benefit

01:17:19.516 --> 01:17:28.410
- of getting your construction manager and your architect engineers at the same time is they can work

01:17:28.410 --> 01:17:37.214
- together. Because the CMC, a lot of times, has some really good ways to do some value engineering.

01:17:37.666 --> 01:17:45.632
- the architects and say, well, we like this design. We think this layout would be the best in doing it

01:17:45.632 --> 01:17:53.598
- this way. The CMC may say, well, you know what? If you move this wall this way, you can save X amount

01:17:53.598 --> 01:18:01.564
- of dollars because of that. I'm just making something up, of course. But there's ways that you can do

01:18:01.564 --> 01:18:06.718
- some value engineering that the CMC, because of the way they know

01:18:06.882 --> 01:18:15.607
- how the construction ends up going in the field, working with architects and engineers, that partnership

01:18:15.607 --> 01:18:23.917
- there of having those two entities working together is a great value. Now, the architect engineers,

01:18:23.917 --> 01:18:32.310
- again, professional services, the way you go about doing it, can do it RFP, but you can still select

01:18:32.310 --> 01:18:35.966
- whom you choose, who you think has the best

01:18:36.226 --> 01:18:46.894
- thoughts for this project and qualifications for this project. The CMC, there is a statutory process

01:18:46.894 --> 01:18:57.668
- for that that's required. So you do have to go out for an RFP process. The details in the statute are

01:18:57.668 --> 01:19:00.414
- pretty open, so it is not

01:19:00.834 --> 01:19:11.764
- very cumbersome, but there is a process of how that goes. You develop a committee that reviews the responses

01:19:11.764 --> 01:19:22.494
- that come in and make recommendations to the RDC and so forth. So you have these three different entities.

01:19:22.626 --> 01:19:31.280
- looking out for your interest. You have the architects and engineers who are doing the design work who

01:19:31.280 --> 01:19:39.767
- have, you know, you want to pick one that has specialized knowledge in public safety, one that would

01:19:39.767 --> 01:19:48.169
- have good knowledge in the reuse of buildings such as you have. And then you have CMC that the same

01:19:48.169 --> 01:19:51.614
- way you want some that have knowledge of

01:19:51.874 --> 01:20:02.060
- public safety buildings, knowledge of renovating existing buildings, and doing the constructing part.

01:20:02.060 --> 01:20:12.346
- So those are the three building blocks that would make a great project. And so again, for tonight, you

01:20:12.346 --> 01:20:20.734
- have three different proposals. Again, they're very different, and I think they are

01:20:21.058 --> 01:20:29.546
- enough different, you know, I would recommend you taking them under consideration at this point in time

01:20:29.546 --> 01:20:37.463
- in reviewing them and letting us know, you know, how, what you would like for us to do next. Um,

01:20:37.463 --> 01:20:45.869
- October 5th, we'd be happy to, um, if, uh, bring a recommendation based on, uh, input that we receive,

01:20:45.869 --> 01:20:48.318
- um, for, for the owner's rep.

01:20:48.674 --> 01:20:59.022
- On October 5th, we could also possibly bring a proposal for you to approve the RFP to go out for architect

01:20:59.022 --> 01:21:09.081
- and engineer. It's my understanding that even though you wouldn't have to, you would like to start with

01:21:09.081 --> 01:21:18.462
- that process for transparency, to make sure that everything's held, the accountability is there.

01:21:18.818 --> 01:21:28.813
- And then we can also consider either that meeting or a later meeting what we put out for the CMC. You

01:21:28.813 --> 01:21:38.905
- may want the architect engineer on board to help with putting out what you put out for the CMC to make

01:21:38.905 --> 01:21:48.606
- sure that you're educated enough unless ownership is in that area where they could help with that.

01:21:48.770 --> 01:21:59.775
- Without the need for the architect engineer to do so so it kind of depends on what the owner qualifications

01:21:59.775 --> 01:22:09.965
- are at that point, but anyway, so you have those three and so that's If you have any questions, I'm

01:22:09.965 --> 01:22:16.894
- happy to answer. Thank you I have a question just I assume that the

01:22:17.026 --> 01:22:27.742
- Various entities within the city will be also reviewing those proposals. Or is the decision completely

01:22:27.742 --> 01:22:38.355
- up to us? The decision would be up to you. The project is an RDC project on RDC property. So it would

01:22:38.355 --> 01:22:46.782
- be up to you. But yes, the other entities in the city have great interest in it.

01:22:46.914 --> 01:22:56.857
- Our mayor, of course, has great interest in this project. Chief Dekoff from the police department have

01:22:56.857 --> 01:23:06.801
- great interest in this project. So any input where their input would be valuable definitely would want

01:23:06.801 --> 01:23:14.910
- their input on that as well. I think short of actually having any of those entities

01:23:15.394 --> 01:23:24.136
- indicate a preference, it would be helpful to me to know what kinds of considerations from the perspectives

01:23:24.136 --> 01:23:32.392
- of those other entities we ought to be considering when we look at them from our perspective. So it's

01:23:32.392 --> 01:23:40.647
- possible for whoever to forward some. It wouldn't need to be anything particularly elaborate or long,

01:23:40.647 --> 01:23:43.966
- but simply a list of criteria that would

01:23:44.450 --> 01:23:53.628
- So, the city staff is looking at these responses, we don't have a recommendation right now which is

01:23:53.628 --> 01:23:57.758
- why there's no resolution attached to these.

01:23:57.858 --> 01:24:03.748
- We are simply asking you to take them under advisement at this point. It's a little bit complicated

01:24:03.748 --> 01:24:09.874
- because it's comparing apples to oranges if you look at the various quotes. So we're trying to pin down

01:24:09.874 --> 01:24:15.881
- some more concrete ways of comparing those responses, but certainly wanted to make sure that you were

01:24:15.881 --> 01:24:19.710
- aware that we did receive these so that we can start moving down

01:24:19.778 --> 01:24:25.775
- making a decision in the future, especially if there's additional questions or if we want to pursue

01:24:25.775 --> 01:24:32.191
- additional quotes. So no vote is required this evening on this particular agenda item. We're just bringing

01:24:32.191 --> 01:24:38.368
- them to your attention. And our intent is to involve an owner's rep specifically so that we can target

01:24:38.368 --> 01:24:42.686
- our budget and make sure that we deliver the project within our budget.

01:24:42.882 --> 01:24:49.678
- I will say that I do have just some thoughts that I can email to Dana to send out that are just exactly,

01:24:49.678 --> 01:24:56.473
- I think, what you're asking for, Lori, that are just some things to consider. Not an opinion about which

01:24:56.473 --> 01:25:03.075
- of the three, but just some questions to be asking. Right. Input as well. And others might have some.

01:25:03.075 --> 01:25:08.382
- One last question is, what's our time frame? When will this come back for a boat?

01:25:08.546 --> 01:25:15.025
- It has not been predetermined at this point. As soon as possible, we would like to keep the project

01:25:15.025 --> 01:25:21.570
- moving, but it has not been determined at this point. So our next meeting is on October 5th, so it's

01:25:21.570 --> 01:25:28.244
- very possible that it could be at that point. We have a little bit of time to get some answers and try

01:25:28.244 --> 01:25:34.982
- to figure out a better way to compare them. So as commissioners, one, in terms of sharing criteria that

01:25:34.982 --> 01:25:36.926
- might be helpful to consider,

01:25:37.090 --> 01:25:44.060
- I understand that the controller may provide some of that. Staff may provide some of that. I know that

01:25:44.060 --> 01:25:50.827
- I would appreciate hearing those criteria. If we have specific questions we'd like to share, should

01:25:50.827 --> 01:25:57.797
- we just send them directly to you? Please, yeah. And some of the things that we would consider is what

01:25:57.797 --> 01:26:02.398
- is the time involvement? What is the commitment? What is the price?

01:26:02.530 --> 01:26:08.760
- What is the experience? All of these things will be under consideration, but yes, please let me know.

01:26:08.760 --> 01:26:14.929
- Okay, thank you. And especially as you said, in terms of comparing like terms of the proposal, which

01:26:14.929 --> 01:26:21.526
- may not be presented on like terms, trying to find a way to help understand that as part of our evaluation,

01:26:21.526 --> 01:26:27.390
- that would be very welcome. You probably noticed that one of them didn't even have a price, so.

01:26:28.546 --> 01:26:36.511
- Yeah, so that's really appreciated that still need to evaluate the criteria. All three of them had prices

01:26:36.511 --> 01:26:44.475
- associated, but two of them were hourly rates. Right. So that's where the time commitment is an important

01:26:44.475 --> 01:26:51.989
- part of the invasion. Great. Well, I do greatly appreciate your sharing these for our consideration

01:26:51.989 --> 01:26:58.526
- as to help inform our vote. And we will be happy to forward questions that we can then

01:26:59.202 --> 01:27:08.048
- have as part of responses that will help us with understanding each of these proposals. Those criteria

01:27:08.048 --> 01:27:16.895
- come through Dana be distributed accordingly. This is all in the public realm. Any other comments from

01:27:16.895 --> 01:27:25.484
- commissioners on this? Otherwise we'll move down the agenda. Okay so the next item on our agenda is

01:27:25.484 --> 01:27:26.686
- resolution 26

01:27:27.266 --> 01:27:36.140
- 60, approval of the second amendment to the agreement with Mother Nature Landscaper Incorporated for

01:27:36.140 --> 01:27:45.013
- stormwater mitigation measures at Hopewell South. I'm going to keep on rolling here. The engineering

01:27:45.013 --> 01:27:54.590
- department caught me in the hallway and let me know that at Hopewell South, the sheet water storm water flow

01:27:54.722 --> 01:28:05.846
- particularly of course on the west side, goes westerly towards Centerstone and it goes northwesterly

01:28:05.846 --> 01:28:17.410
- to an actual point that is at the corner of the RDC property and is leaving the RDC property with enough

01:28:17.410 --> 01:28:22.366
- volume and force that it's creating a galley

01:28:22.498 --> 01:28:33.840
- in the front yard of the Centerstone. And this is being considered a potential safety issue for those,

01:28:33.840 --> 01:28:44.851
- the clients of Centerstone. Many of them walked through and from Centerstone. The believed cause of

01:28:44.851 --> 01:28:51.678
- the issue is twofold. One is that the buildings were removed.

01:28:52.450 --> 01:29:05.247
- And so there needs to be some seed, some grass in areas to help soak up and slow down some of the storm

01:29:05.247 --> 01:29:17.675
- water. In addition to that, there is the First Street Project, which raised the sidewalk along First

01:29:17.675 --> 01:29:21.982
- Street, which also made it so that

01:29:22.434 --> 01:29:35.049
- water that had gone before off more evenly across and off into First Street now is forced to travel

01:29:35.049 --> 01:29:47.664
- more westerly towards that point. So engineering came up with a design for mitigation measures that

01:29:47.664 --> 01:29:51.070
- they believe would—could

01:29:51.266 --> 01:30:05.312
- reduce the impacts to the offsite neighbors. And it is a combination of using some hay bales,

01:30:05.312 --> 01:30:18.910
- straw bales, and just using some grass seeding some of the areas where the buildings were.

01:30:19.074 --> 01:30:30.680
- to get some vegetation growing and using some of the sloping barriers and doing this at different intervals

01:30:30.680 --> 01:30:41.964
- so that it wouldn't be just diverting all the water at one other point, you know, off into First Street,

01:30:41.964 --> 01:30:47.230
- but it would be trying to move the water towards

01:30:47.458 --> 01:30:59.344
- the north towards First Street and so that could be taken up in that stormwater system. So there is

01:30:59.344 --> 01:31:11.468
- a project, a contract that you already have with Mother Nature. They take care of the Trace District.

01:31:11.468 --> 01:31:15.390
- So the quickest way to get these

01:31:16.034 --> 01:31:29.762
- This concern mitigated would be to do a contract amendment with Mother Nature Landscaping. The amount

01:31:29.762 --> 01:31:43.221
- that they have quoted to do this work would be not to exceed $16,890. It is a healthy sum. However,

01:31:43.221 --> 01:31:45.374
- the concern for

01:31:45.794 --> 01:31:57.768
- The neighboring property damage to the neighboring property potential liability issues with Tort claims

01:31:57.768 --> 01:32:09.857
- the things created from the going a lot of center stones again clients Do you know walk through? through

01:32:09.857 --> 01:32:14.462
- that area apparently so This It will be

01:32:15.010 --> 01:32:26.357
- a while, quite a few months before any groundbreaking would be done at the site. And therefore, to wait

01:32:26.357 --> 01:32:37.377
- would just exacerbate the problem and the damages and the risk of liability. Were this simply from a

01:32:37.377 --> 01:32:42.942
- legal basis? Were this simply sheet flow normally?

01:32:43.490 --> 01:32:53.473
- you're not responsible for sheet flow. She flows pretty natural. However, when you have a point source,

01:32:53.473 --> 01:33:03.455
- which is what you have here, that's a different story. And so it is a recommendation of the engineering

01:33:03.455 --> 01:33:13.246
- department and legal department to take these mitigation measures to stabilize the stormwater flow on

01:33:13.538 --> 01:33:20.253
- the Hopewell South. Thank you. Anything further before we open this for questions or comments

01:33:20.253 --> 01:33:27.897
- from commissioners for resolution 2660? I want to clarify. This is where we tore down the Alcott building,

01:33:27.897 --> 01:33:35.184
- the houses, and it's flowing east. And the work that we've done to the road to raise it up. We raised

01:33:35.184 --> 01:33:40.542
- the road up in the Oregon. Somehow, based on this time frame, we've missed

01:33:41.378 --> 01:33:47.750
- the basis of being able to mitigate something on existing buildings to the east. And based

01:33:47.750 --> 01:33:54.262
- on the engineering's review of what Milestone did from a standpoint, it's outside the scope.

01:33:54.262 --> 01:34:01.404
- So right now, we've got a $16,000 turd. And unfortunately, water is the worst thing for any building.

01:34:01.404 --> 01:34:09.246
- And so we're not being good neighbors to. It's cutting into what I refer to as the bluff factory, the building.

01:34:10.882 --> 01:34:17.819
- Part of it does include some fencing to restrict access. Well, this is a temporary mitigation situation.

01:34:17.819 --> 01:34:24.887
- So with this temporary mitigation, my concern in regards to this, because it didn't cut cotton engineering

01:34:24.887 --> 01:34:31.626
- previously with our contractors not responding, we're right back in the same situation. So when we're

01:34:31.626 --> 01:34:38.430
- looking at this from Hopewell South standpoint, what kind of time frame are we doing? Because if these

01:34:38.430 --> 01:34:40.478
- are temporary measures, what's

01:34:40.866 --> 01:34:48.438
- When do we think we're going to be able to do something? Because I don't want to have to go back here

01:34:48.438 --> 01:34:56.159
- again. I know. So this is, as you said, temporary until we can get the actual horizontal infrastructure

01:34:56.159 --> 01:35:03.880
- going, which hopefully you will be awarding a contract for in the very near future. Hopefully this fall

01:35:03.880 --> 01:35:05.662
- we'll see what happens.

01:35:05.986 --> 01:35:12.463
- Hopefully they can correct that from there. Now our civil team is well aware of the problem, so that

01:35:12.463 --> 01:35:19.390
- they're going to be on any corrective measures. Is there anything based upon previously from an engineering

01:35:19.390 --> 01:35:25.803
- standpoint of the individuals that engineered in the beginning to say what the hell happened? I was

01:35:25.803 --> 01:35:32.601
- not involved at that time, so I cannot accurately answer. Basically, we're keeping ourselves from getting

01:35:32.601 --> 01:35:34.846
- litigated against by our neighbor.

01:35:35.746 --> 01:35:44.707
- And taking care of the problem. Yeah, being a good neighbor and taking care of the problems because

01:35:44.707 --> 01:35:53.936
- we created it as a RDC and the project that was done on First Street and the demolition that occurred.

01:35:53.936 --> 01:36:03.614
- Well, I understand something has to be done. I can't say I'm happy about it. We totally agree. I knew that.

01:36:04.258 --> 01:36:13.502
- Sorry. Sorry, I wanted to raise just a question. Not that there may not be time. This may not be feasible.

01:36:13.502 --> 01:36:22.747
- But given the amount of money here, is there any reason that we should be putting this out for competitive

01:36:22.747 --> 01:36:28.190
- bid? Sorry, Lori. Well, I was just going to say, I've actually

01:36:28.994 --> 01:36:36.154
- Coincidentally use mother nature to mitigate a foundation problem that we had and we did get other bits

01:36:36.154 --> 01:36:43.038
- and they came in the cheapest Yeah, it was a residential and a fair bit because this is a temporary

01:36:43.038 --> 01:36:49.922
- fix And it's five figures So just a question about whether we ought to be seeing if there's another

01:36:49.922 --> 01:36:53.502
- suitable contractor out there who could do this and

01:36:53.602 --> 01:37:00.938
- for less? I think the challenge is that the longer that you let this go on, the worse the damage becomes

01:37:00.938 --> 01:37:08.065
- to the adjacent property owners. And so while we would love to be able to spend time finding the most

01:37:08.065 --> 01:37:15.192
- cost-effective bid, really what we need to do is to fix this right away so that we're not causing any

01:37:15.192 --> 01:37:22.878
- more damage to the building, which could theoretically be significantly more than this quote in front of you.

01:37:23.042 --> 01:37:34.923
- My meeting was with the engineering department and with JD Boroff, our facilities director, and when

01:37:34.923 --> 01:37:47.745
- they grabbed me in the hall, they said that this was, they deemed it to be, you know, not a life-threatening

01:37:47.745 --> 01:37:50.686
- emergency, but as far as

01:37:51.074 --> 01:37:59.124
- damages, potential damages to go, a serious issue that needed to be dealt with quickly. So

01:37:59.124 --> 01:38:08.413
- from an engineering and facility standpoint, they were instructing me that it needed to be done quickly.

01:38:08.413 --> 01:38:17.348
- And so this was the quickest path to a resolution that I could get to. This is essentially a race to

01:38:17.348 --> 01:38:19.294
- beat more rain. Yeah.

01:38:20.994 --> 01:38:29.268
- Understood. Thank you. Saturday night, I got four inches. Friday night, four inches. Oh my gosh. OK.

01:38:29.268 --> 01:38:37.541
- So any further questions? OK. I'll ask for a motion for resolution 26-60, please. I'll make a motion

01:38:37.541 --> 01:38:46.470
- to approve 26-60. Second. For the first and the second, we'll do a vote by roll call, please. C. Scambaleri,

01:38:46.470 --> 01:38:50.238
- yes. Randy Cassidy, yes. Corey McRobbie, yes.

01:38:50.594 --> 01:38:59.202
- Debra Meyers, yes. Motion passes unanimously for resolution 2660. Thank you. The last item on our agenda

01:38:59.202 --> 01:39:07.401
- this evening is resolution 2661, which is approval of a scope of work for Harold Fish, Incorporated

01:39:07.401 --> 01:39:15.599
- HFI in Showers West. Who would like to speak to that? I, once again, can do this. This is coming to

01:39:15.599 --> 01:39:20.190
- you because it exceeds $5,000. This is at Showers West.

01:39:20.322 --> 01:39:32.894
- Um, it is another HVAC issue, uh, that is in the suite that the fire department is occupying. Um,

01:39:32.894 --> 01:39:45.209
- the work, uh, quote from HFI is for 6,250. So again, it exceeds the $5,000, uh, limitation. Um,

01:39:45.209 --> 01:39:47.262
- and the, uh, I,

01:39:48.706 --> 01:40:01.107
- again, was contacted by J.D. Boruff on this one, facilities director, and he indicated that this work

01:40:01.107 --> 01:40:13.387
- would, is about half the cost of replacing the unit, but he believed that it would be sufficient and

01:40:13.387 --> 01:40:16.062
- that if this work was

01:40:16.386 --> 01:40:24.758
- done, there would not be a need to replace the unit. So he thought this was the most cost effective

01:40:24.758 --> 01:40:33.466
- approach. He did not recommend replacing the unit. I think part of that too is with not knowing exactly

01:40:33.466 --> 01:40:42.173
- how and the different ways the showers might be used might be a part of that. But again, this is coming

01:40:42.173 --> 01:40:45.438
- to you because it's over $5,000 and so

01:40:45.762 --> 01:40:59.470
- It was asked by our director of facilities who helped evaluate the problem if you would approve the

01:40:59.470 --> 01:41:05.502
- scope of work so this job can be completed.

01:41:06.402 --> 01:41:13.468
- The engineering department housed in this particular suite, so the air conditioner just wouldn't hold

01:41:13.468 --> 01:41:20.465
- a charge any longer, which is why it needed to have this coil replacement. Yeah. It's the former CFC

01:41:20.465 --> 01:41:27.461
- suite, the 200. OK. So I heard fire department. Is that? It's not fire department. It is engineering

01:41:27.461 --> 01:41:34.389
- department. It's suite 200. OK. Thanks. I was wondering about that when I heard that, because I had

01:41:34.389 --> 01:41:36.190
- seen engineering on here.

01:41:38.114 --> 01:41:43.446
- Do we have like a general kind of maintenance schedule for the Showers West building in terms of as

01:41:43.446 --> 01:41:48.937
- opposed to just doing stuff ad hoc when stuff comes up? I mean, because as a property owner, we should

01:41:48.937 --> 01:41:51.390
- probably know what we're getting into, right?

01:41:51.682 --> 01:41:59.690
- Yes, you should. We do not have a comprehensive idea of all of the repairs that are necessary. We know

01:41:59.690 --> 01:42:07.542
- that some HVAC units are aging out and will need some attention. We haven't gotten the comprehensive

01:42:07.542 --> 01:42:15.705
- look though because we don't know exactly what's happening with the building or how long you will retain

01:42:15.705 --> 01:42:17.182
- ownership as well.

01:42:17.346 --> 01:42:24.168
- We know that our utilities are extremely expensive. Yes. And that's another thing that I'm thinking

01:42:24.168 --> 01:42:30.989
- about. So I understand there's uncertainty that makes it hard to make a commitment, let's say, to a

01:42:30.989 --> 01:42:38.425
- longer term plan or something. But between the cost of utilities, which is obviously monthly, this emergency

01:42:38.425 --> 01:42:45.520
- HVAC repair, and just the fact that there is a known list of, let's say, upcoming liabilities, I'm just

01:42:45.520 --> 01:42:46.270
- asking for

01:42:46.370 --> 01:42:52.430
- guidance on how we could set that on track in a more responsible way, then I feel like you know and

01:42:52.430 --> 01:42:58.610
- I understand why we're not there yet but I'm saying this is an opportunity, even though it's not just

01:42:58.610 --> 01:43:04.670
- about the resolution to try and put that into scope. The facilities team has been working alongside

01:43:04.834 --> 01:43:11.420
- to project managers to determine future use but then also look at what the future needs might be. I

01:43:11.420 --> 01:43:18.137
- don't think that they're there yet so they are trying to piece together some of those items but we're

01:43:18.137 --> 01:43:24.788
- just not there quite yet. Okay and I'm just going to ask again because it's on our agenda and rather

01:43:24.788 --> 01:43:31.505
- than wait for the next emergency thing to come up they're not there yet is there something that could

01:43:31.505 --> 01:43:33.086
- be within scope just to

01:43:33.186 --> 01:43:39.282
- rather than deal with deferred maintenance to be, again, more responsive, even though, again, I understand

01:43:39.282 --> 01:43:45.093
- certainly there are outstanding questions that could affect the direction they're going, but at least

01:43:45.093 --> 01:43:50.790
- to get a baseline to work with and then help us with decision-making from there. Yeah. I don't know

01:43:50.790 --> 01:43:56.602
- how to respond to that because we do know that there are some quite expensive repairs that are needed

01:43:56.602 --> 01:43:59.678
- over there that are more than a million dollars. Wow.

01:43:59.810 --> 01:44:06.876
- Um, we're trying to get a comprehensive look at the building to understand what is going to be needed

01:44:06.876 --> 01:44:14.011
- and when, but until we have that, I hesitate to get too far into the weeds. Sure. Okay. Um, so my last

01:44:14.011 --> 01:44:21.008
- part of my series of questions and then I'll share the air here is just, is there a point? I'm just,

01:44:21.008 --> 01:44:23.710
- again, trying to be proactive on this.

01:44:23.842 --> 01:44:29.069
- Again, understanding there are outstanding questions that we don't have all the answers to. I understand

01:44:29.069 --> 01:44:34.098
- that. But I'm just asking if there's a way that we could maybe have a quarterly proactive look like,

01:44:34.098 --> 01:44:39.126
- where are we with this? Just because, again, rather than have to deal with deferred maintenance that

01:44:39.126 --> 01:44:43.806
- comes up with emergency stuff ad hoc that we have no choice but to just put it out there for.

01:44:43.938 --> 01:44:50.308
- I'd love to be in a more responsible and responsive position to say, okay, we know this. And again,

01:44:50.308 --> 01:44:56.933
- I realize there's things we may not want to hear, but nonetheless, I feel like we're at a stage at this

01:44:56.933 --> 01:45:03.366
- point, especially with the final private tenants that are leaving or kind of having been squared off

01:45:03.366 --> 01:45:09.736
- and we are fully in possession of the building that we need to have a more of a plan than an ad hoc

01:45:09.736 --> 01:45:11.838
- situation, so. And that work is,

01:45:12.450 --> 01:45:18.951
- being assembled right now. Just so you are aware, the day in the life of the hand department processing

01:45:18.951 --> 01:45:25.265
- RDC claims, if it was just $1,900 less, it wouldn't even be before you. Right. But nonetheless, it's

01:45:25.265 --> 01:45:32.079
- an important opportunity for the conversation, because it's not something that we have necessarily regularly

01:45:32.079 --> 01:45:38.518
- on our schedule now. And we're moving into a space where at least some of this should be on our radar,

01:45:38.518 --> 01:45:42.206
- even if, again, there's things that are unanswered or that

01:45:42.338 --> 01:45:49.061
- could change our trajectory. Anyway, so yeah, so I'm just, again, using this as a platform because it's

01:45:49.061 --> 01:45:55.718
- come before us to have the conversation that we might not otherwise be having. I think quarterly makes

01:45:55.718 --> 01:46:02.699
- sense until you continue to, while you continue to own the building. Okay, so right now we're in September,

01:46:02.699 --> 01:46:09.422
- so let's say in December, we'd have maybe a way to get an update on where we're at with, again, current

01:46:09.422 --> 01:46:11.038
- facilities review of the

01:46:11.362 --> 01:46:17.486
- Property and again, we may know more things that by then that may help guide our conversation But just

01:46:17.486 --> 01:46:23.432
- so it's an intentional conversation rather than an emergency conversation. So anyway, thanks for my

01:46:23.432 --> 01:46:29.616
- Tolerating my digression. I will others may have others to add to my digression or even just about this

01:46:29.616 --> 01:46:35.622
- actual resolution I'll turn it over. Thank you. Yeah, I appreciate that discussion too. I don't have

01:46:35.622 --> 01:46:38.654
- any questions on this particular resolution though

01:46:43.586 --> 01:46:51.631
- What am I going to do with it? OK. Well, if there's no further questions, I'll open it for public comment

01:46:51.631 --> 01:46:59.373
- for a resolution 2661. I'm not seeing anything online or in person. I will ask for a motion for 2661,

01:46:59.373 --> 01:47:06.963
- please. I'll make a motion to approve 2661 as presented. Thank you. Second. Second. OK, a first and

01:47:06.963 --> 01:47:13.566
- a second. We'll do a vote by roll call. Yes. Sue Scambaleri, yes. Brandi Cassidy, yes.

01:47:14.466 --> 01:47:23.180
- Debra Meyers and yes passes unanimously for a resolution 2661. Thank you all. We are now at the end

01:47:23.180 --> 01:47:28.670
- of our agenda and I'll ask for a motion to adjourn. Thank you.