WEBVTT 00:00:01.314 --> 00:00:12.008 - This meeting will come to order. This is the July Regular hearing of the city of Bloomington Transportation 00:00:12.008 --> 00:00:22.207 - Commission Can we have the secretary call the roll? Did you say roll sorry, yes the role, please Davis 00:00:22.207 --> 00:00:29.534 - here Coppock here Stossburg here Poland here Flaherty here Stramitis here 00:00:31.010 --> 00:00:39.837 - Anyone attending online? All right, we have a quorum we'll conduct our agenda as follows under reports 00:00:39.837 --> 00:00:48.749 - and communications will hear from commissioners and from staff specifically a staff memo on the process 00:00:48.749 --> 00:00:56.719 - for selecting a parking kiosk vendor Under cases will hear TCR 26 16 a title to amendment of 00:00:56.719 --> 00:01:00.318 - on Transportation Commission appointments 00:01:02.434 --> 00:01:09.585 - Under discussion of topics not on the docket. We will hear from commissioners resolution by me to submit 00:01:09.585 --> 00:01:16.667 - findings regarding the 2026 Walker parking study and to form an annual report task force and from staff 00:01:16.667 --> 00:01:23.886 - an update on local motion grant 2025 and introduction to local motion grants or 2026 and also a an annual 00:01:23.886 --> 00:01:30.696 - report on safe streets and roads for all or SS for a And then we'll have general public comment and 00:01:30.696 --> 00:01:32.126 - then we will adjourn 00:01:32.738 --> 00:01:40.406 - Let's start now with reports from commissioners. Are there any reports from commissioners to my right? 00:01:40.406 --> 00:01:48.149 - To my left Did you ever report No, okay We now go to reports from staff. Let's hear about the selection 00:01:48.149 --> 00:01:55.669 - process for our parking kiosk vendor I see Michelle wall parking services director Hello. Hello. How 00:01:55.669 --> 00:01:59.838 - are you guys? Good. How are you? I'm good. Thanks. Good 00:02:00.322 --> 00:02:06.722 - Michelle wall parking service director the city of Bloomington In summary parking services has provided 00:02:06.722 --> 00:02:12.876 - the transportation commissioners with two demonstrations of integrated parking management platforms 00:02:12.876 --> 00:02:19.030 - as attached in the following staff memo arrived pulse accompanied with a written statement provided 00:02:19.030 --> 00:02:25.615 - by Josh cedar is affiliated with Sloberg kiosk system elevate populist brief is accompanied with a written 00:02:25.615 --> 00:02:27.646 - statement by Braxton Ratliff and 00:02:27.810 --> 00:02:35.094 - and is affiliated with the IPS kiosk system. The design of both platforms aligns with the recommendations 00:02:35.094 --> 00:02:42.035 - detailed in our 2026 Walker Parking Rate Study and Comprehensive Review. The use of each platform is 00:02:42.035 --> 00:02:49.457 - conditional on the adoption of specified kiosk technology and cannot be substituted. Also, we have launched 00:02:49.457 --> 00:02:56.466 - on July 8th two of these kiosks in our lobby for public use to try them out, to see them, and to take 00:02:56.466 --> 00:02:57.566 - a short survey. 00:02:58.050 --> 00:03:10.676 - Thank you Also, by the way both representatives from IPS IPS and arrive are in the audience. Thank you 00:03:10.676 --> 00:03:22.933 - Okay, are there any questions for staff on this item to my left Don't be shy have a question Yes, I 00:03:22.933 --> 00:03:25.630 - think that's the idea 00:03:34.402 --> 00:04:01.758 - Okay, get really close to the mic. And maybe turn the mic on. 00:04:02.946 --> 00:04:11.950 - Sorry, sorry I Have some questions for arrive I work in the transportation software field and particularly 00:04:11.950 --> 00:04:20.450 - but one of my roles was to vet our vendors so Arrive you're based in May have your name Matt Brooker 00:04:20.450 --> 00:04:29.370 - regional director. Yes. So arrive is does have headquarters in Sweden as well as Atlanta, Georgia several 00:04:29.370 --> 00:04:31.390 - US offices and for this 00:04:31.586 --> 00:04:37.852 - for Bloomington, Indiana as a customer, would the data be stored in the United States or would it be 00:04:37.852 --> 00:04:44.180 - stored overseas? Here in the United States. Okay. Do you have any security certifications such as ISO 00:04:44.180 --> 00:04:51.004 - 2701 or SOC 2, type 2 that would govern data privacy or data security? We do, yes. We're fully PCI compliant. 00:04:51.004 --> 00:04:57.270 - We do have SOC compliance as well, happy to follow up with whatever certifications the body may like 00:04:57.270 --> 00:05:01.054 - to see. Okay, thank you. I didn't see those on your website. 00:05:01.282 --> 00:05:11.964 - questions for IPS Hello sir, can you hear me? May I have your name? Brexton Ratliff. Thank you. And 00:05:11.964 --> 00:05:22.646 - you are based in the US? Yeah, IPS is based in San Diego, California. And I saw on your website you 00:05:22.646 --> 00:05:28.094 - already have the PCI DSS certifications? Yes, sir. 00:05:28.610 --> 00:05:37.985 - Do you have other data or privacy certifications like ISO 2701? Correct. Yes, sir. Oh great. Thank you 00:05:37.985 --> 00:05:46.541 - I think those were my primary concerns. I was checking on the websites to see sure if you had 00:05:46.541 --> 00:05:55.734 - the certifications Thank you. Thank you, sir. Appreciate it Questions to my right from commissioners 00:05:55.734 --> 00:05:57.918 - Okay Commissioner Davis 00:06:01.698 --> 00:06:12.935 - I'd like to hear from both of you about what accessibility features these systems have. I've tried them 00:06:12.935 --> 00:06:23.955 - both, and Michelle and her staff told me what they knew, but I don't believe we had the full suite of 00:06:23.955 --> 00:06:30.654 - accessibility features on either machine that's here in town. 00:06:31.330 --> 00:06:42.558 - So I'd like to know what you have for blind or visually impaired users. Good evening, Josh Deeder with 00:06:42.558 --> 00:06:53.786 - the Rye Regional Sales Manager. Yes, we do have full ADA compliance in terms of height of our machines 00:06:53.786 --> 00:06:58.910 - as well as separate configurations in terms of 00:06:59.010 --> 00:07:05.230 - color in terms of hearing impairment, we have the ability to add audio jack for auxiliary accessibility 00:07:05.230 --> 00:07:11.210 - as well as a speaker system to assist with guiding you through our payment process. In addition, we 00:07:11.210 --> 00:07:17.430 - do have a 24-7-365 support line as well via IVR that can support making payments over the phone as well 00:07:17.430 --> 00:07:23.710 - as paired with our park mobile application that would have the ADA-compliant settings already programmed 00:07:23.710 --> 00:07:27.358 - into the individuals. But all of our machines do come fully. 00:07:27.842 --> 00:07:33.746 - with our ADA compliance as well as the PCI compliance budget earlier. So the fact that the machines 00:07:33.746 --> 00:07:39.886 - here didn't have those features, or did they and I just didn't see them? You are correct that the audio 00:07:39.886 --> 00:07:45.967 - jack would be custom and build. We do build our machines to service the towns and clients that we meet 00:07:45.967 --> 00:07:51.989 - with. So once we have all the configuration requirements and requests, we would custom build and make 00:07:51.989 --> 00:07:57.598 - sure that it does allow. Our stock machine here does not have the audio jack, you are correct. 00:07:57.986 --> 00:08:07.262 - Okay, thank you. Further questions. Oh, let's hear from the other vendor. It's going to be more or less 00:08:07.262 --> 00:08:16.717 - the same. I mean, we we meet all ADA compliance that you guys would run into. I mean, federal regulations 00:08:16.717 --> 00:08:25.726 - mandate that we have in terms of standing it up in terms of the demo environment, not something that 00:08:25.858 --> 00:08:33.396 - Commonly requests, but we would be more than accommodating to you know adhere to any 80 80 compliance 00:08:33.396 --> 00:08:40.861 - that you would have on on the street higher requirements like the The folks from arrival were saying 00:08:40.861 --> 00:08:48.251 - anything on the back end Collins blind hearing impaired Colorblindness anything that you would have 00:08:48.251 --> 00:08:55.198 - related to that. So yes, ma'am Okay. Thank you. Absolutely. Thank you All right I'm sorry the 00:08:55.554 --> 00:09:03.910 - It's not a let's see I did want to give each vendor an opportunity to just generally speak on behalf 00:09:03.910 --> 00:09:12.431 - of their product since we didn't really get a sense of I mean in addition to what you submitted if you 00:09:12.431 --> 00:09:20.787 - would just like to say a few words in general explaining your product and why you think it would fit 00:09:20.787 --> 00:09:24.510 - the city. I'd be happy to start with arrive. 00:09:27.394 --> 00:09:33.462 - Just general overview of your product and why you think it would work for us. Absolutely. Thank you. 00:09:33.462 --> 00:09:39.531 - Yes So very similar to the parking department's initiative of park simple our goal and initiative as 00:09:39.531 --> 00:09:45.900 - a company is to assist your city and becoming more livable through an accessible Parking payment provider 00:09:45.900 --> 00:09:51.968 - that allows you to have full control availability insight to your on-street city inventory occupancy 00:09:51.968 --> 00:09:56.414 - and be able to show the proper balance so with the tools that we provided 00:09:56.546 --> 00:10:02.988 - With our flow bird hardware machine as well as arrive pulse and insights as it back office services 00:10:02.988 --> 00:10:09.752 - for additional parking studies research and collaboration In congruence with our park mobile application 00:10:09.752 --> 00:10:16.645 - is already on street It will allow a simplified platform to update rates have event rates have progressive 00:10:16.645 --> 00:10:23.151 - rates and be able to accompany all of your constituents needs as they go on an ongoing basis I Would 00:10:23.151 --> 00:10:25.406 - just add to that that you know, we 00:10:25.922 --> 00:10:31.281 - Is our parent company but essentially the park mobile application is one of our core services that's 00:10:31.281 --> 00:10:36.957 - been operating here in Bloomington for many years and currently over half of the parking revenue collected 00:10:36.957 --> 00:10:42.369 - through The on-street system is coming in through the mobile app and that's the direction that we see 00:10:42.369 --> 00:10:47.038 - Most cities heading toward as more and more people adopt the app. So by layering on our 00:10:47.490 --> 00:10:53.747 - Infrastructure as well, which is also the most widely used throughout the US and another major major 00:10:53.747 --> 00:11:00.313 - and mid-size and small cities Really provides the parking department with one place where they can manage 00:11:00.313 --> 00:11:04.030 - operations, but also groups like like this body to evaluate 00:11:04.194 --> 00:11:10.480 - real ground truth data, not just better visualization of transaction and other data that is in the system 00:11:10.480 --> 00:11:16.589 - already, but through our insight solution, which is capturing actual occupancy at the block. Those are 00:11:16.589 --> 00:11:22.697 - blind spots. That's data that doesn't often get collected if someone parks and they don't pay and they 00:11:22.697 --> 00:11:28.094 - haven't gotten a ticket. You don't have that in the data, but the solution we're proposing 00:11:28.290 --> 00:11:36.201 - Folds that in and includes that so that decisions can be made on what's actually happening at the curb 00:11:36.201 --> 00:11:44.189 - and then you can evaluate and see what the impact of those was on reducing congestion creating turnover 00:11:44.189 --> 00:11:52.407 - supporting businesses So just better visibility better tools for the team Very good. Thank you. Appreciate 00:11:52.407 --> 00:11:55.326 - it. Mr. Ratliff from elevate Yeah, so 00:11:55.778 --> 00:12:02.338 - I mean, we, in parking, you know, we all know each other. We all know these guys. I mean, I can sit 00:12:02.338 --> 00:12:09.030 - here and regurgitate all the things in terms of what we can offer in terms of data and analytics, and 00:12:09.030 --> 00:12:16.049 - we can provide all that. IPS has been in this city for, you know, over a decade. We've been a good partner 00:12:16.049 --> 00:12:22.609 - with the city. The city's been a good partner to us. My message would be why IPS is that, you know, 00:12:22.609 --> 00:12:25.758 - we are at a state now where I really think that 00:12:25.986 --> 00:12:31.925 - We're truly becoming partners with cities and municipalities and this would be one that would would 00:12:31.925 --> 00:12:38.042 - mean a ton to us And so not to bore you you're gonna see Analytics and data and how a paybox works and 00:12:38.042 --> 00:12:43.980 - how machine works But truly at the end of the day what we're offering is a true partnership and how 00:12:43.980 --> 00:12:49.919 - we can better serve the city of Bloomington and the people that live here you know, I'm a you know, 00:12:49.919 --> 00:12:51.582 - I live in my own city and I 00:12:51.970 --> 00:12:58.008 - with parking and you know, I know nobody wants to pay for parking parking is not the coolest the coolest 00:12:58.008 --> 00:13:03.873 - thing so We truly believe that you know what we can provide is a true partnership And we can get into 00:13:03.873 --> 00:13:09.910 - the analytics and the way we can save you save you money and save you, you know do all these cool things 00:13:09.910 --> 00:13:15.660 - But we want to be partners with the city of Bloomington and help the people here at a very baseline 00:13:15.660 --> 00:13:16.350 - level. So I 00:13:16.546 --> 00:13:21.269 - I'm not sure any of us get into parking to be cool per se but yeah, I always compare when I talk to 00:13:21.269 --> 00:13:26.323 - Michelle I always say it's like a referee at a basketball game, you know You kind of just want the referee 00:13:26.323 --> 00:13:31.187 - to be in the background and let the I mean to their credit parking services here makes it cool But you 00:13:31.187 --> 00:13:36.005 - know is cool with it. Well, just one of the one of the best teams in the country I hear I go all over 00:13:36.005 --> 00:13:40.350 - the United States So you got one of the best groups around just for the record. Oh go on. I 00:13:40.578 --> 00:13:48.350 - Just kidding. Just kidding. Thank you. I appreciate I appreciate that Thank you. I appreciate a couple 00:13:48.350 --> 00:13:56.121 - of questions for Michelle wall This wall what is the the timetable for the decision You you began this 00:13:56.121 --> 00:14:04.120 - in June I guess after the report came. Yeah, so we were about six months behind and There's no timetable. 00:14:04.120 --> 00:14:09.854 - Okay, it's the conversation between Transportation Commission the community 00:14:10.082 --> 00:14:16.775 - and the council. Well at least you have you're saying that the public testing will be available through 00:14:16.775 --> 00:14:23.469 - mid-August. Does that mean perhaps that will convene again in September to discuss details or possibly. 00:14:23.469 --> 00:14:30.033 - Or we might extend the survey. There's only I believe right now 12 people that's taken the survey. So 00:14:30.033 --> 00:14:36.534 - we encourage everybody to spread the word and we want their feedback. We need their feedback to make 00:14:36.534 --> 00:14:38.014 - a collective decision. 00:14:38.242 --> 00:14:47.974 - Regardless of the vendor it is your hope I guess that all the prior data we've had will be integrated 00:14:47.974 --> 00:14:57.705 - into a new system. OK. That's great. Yes. And am I hearing correctly from both vendors that I mean we 00:14:57.705 --> 00:15:04.670 - made a choice back in 2013 not to integrate the meters with park mobile. 00:15:05.186 --> 00:15:13.469 - Are both of their presentations are both of their offers automatically integrating with ParkMobile. 00:15:13.469 --> 00:15:21.752 - Absolutely. Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any further questions. Mr. Midas. 00:15:21.752 --> 00:15:30.283 - Yes. Why are we we're only looking at the like single block machines and we're not looking at the like 00:15:30.283 --> 00:15:31.774 - parking meters by 00:15:32.162 --> 00:15:39.976 - So currently the Walker report the study Suggested kiosks. Okay, so so I mean that's not off the table 00:15:39.976 --> 00:15:47.791 - I mean if the community wants meters then we'll discuss meters, but right now the Walker report Stated 00:15:47.791 --> 00:15:55.529 - that they would recommend kiosks to lower the infrastructure on the street. Okay. Thank you. And then 00:15:55.529 --> 00:15:59.550 - for the folks from flow bird or whatever it is I was 00:15:59.650 --> 00:16:05.181 - I just had a question about your relationship between, there's like Flowbird for transit systems payments, 00:16:05.181 --> 00:16:10.351 - and you guys, and then there's also Arrive, and was curious about, like I know in Indianapolis kind 00:16:10.351 --> 00:16:15.675 - of the TVMs all shut down very abruptly, and I know that's related to Flowbird, and was just wondering 00:16:15.675 --> 00:16:19.294 - if you could talk to the relationship between the different entities. 00:16:26.434 --> 00:16:32.513 - there so flow bird is a manufacturer of Parking kiosks ticket vending machines those kind of things 00:16:32.513 --> 00:16:38.045 - and park mobile mobile payment platform merge last year to form arrive That's so there's a 00:16:38.045 --> 00:16:44.306 - little clarification on the brands Yes, that would those I would be the machines used in Indianapolis. 00:16:44.306 --> 00:16:50.385 - I don't have context specifically on the situation you're referring to on transit, but we do have a 00:16:50.385 --> 00:16:51.966 - transit business unit who 00:16:53.122 --> 00:16:59.964 - Supports transit operations happy to follow up with more information about what you're referring to 00:16:59.964 --> 00:17:06.943 - Did I hear that correctly that flow bird merged with park mobile correct. Oh, okay. That's news to me 00:17:06.943 --> 00:17:13.991 - All right any further questions from commissioners on the status of the parking kiosk vendor selection 00:17:13.991 --> 00:17:20.833 - process See none we thank both vendors for their presence here today and we look forward to working 00:17:20.833 --> 00:17:22.270 - with you both in the 00:17:22.562 --> 00:17:31.985 - this further discussion. Thank you for having us. Thank you. Let's move now to cases. We have now TCR 00:17:31.985 --> 00:17:41.315 - 26 16. Who is here to present. Well if it isn't a council member Hopi Stasberg. Hello council member 00:17:41.315 --> 00:17:43.070 - Stasberg. Welcome. 00:17:45.026 --> 00:17:50.370 - Thank you. Good evening Hopi Stasberg district 3 City Council and I'm here to talk about proposed 00:17:50.370 --> 00:17:55.987 - Transportation Commission membership changes that I'm making kind of in conjunction with the committee 00:17:55.987 --> 00:18:01.441 - on council processes So you know, it's like next slide. Let's see. There we go So I wanted to start 00:18:01.441 --> 00:18:07.330 - with the purpose of the Commission, which of course I'm not changing but I wanted to specifically highlight 00:18:07.330 --> 00:18:09.566 - that the purpose of the Commission is to 00:18:09.698 --> 00:18:15.586 - Guiding the city's transportation endeavors through a comprehensive framework which seeks to provide 00:18:15.586 --> 00:18:21.649 - adequate and safe access to all right-of-way Users as kind of the primary mission you could say of your 00:18:21.649 --> 00:18:27.537 - body And when we created the Transportation Commission last year, there was a lot of discussion that 00:18:27.537 --> 00:18:33.541 - I had both both in public at City Council meetings then also privately with colleagues and staff about 00:18:33.541 --> 00:18:38.846 - the importance of the inclusion of representatives from Monroe County Community Schools on 00:18:39.074 --> 00:18:46.243 - the body of the Transportation Commission that MCC SC manages transportation for about ten to twelve 00:18:46.243 --> 00:18:53.413 - thousand students a day during the school year in Bloomington Monroe County. Of course a lot of that 00:18:53.413 --> 00:19:00.795 - happens within city limits. And so somebody you know deeply invested in Monroe County Community Schools 00:19:00.795 --> 00:19:05.054 - transportation would be a really apt addition to this body. 00:19:05.442 --> 00:19:13.191 - And so this led to in the original membership of the commission including language of preference preference 00:19:13.191 --> 00:19:20.439 - for an MCC SC related representative and I had spoken with the MCC SC superintendent at the time and 00:19:20.439 --> 00:19:27.614 - she was excited and Recommended one of her Cabinet I think apply for the position and they were not 00:19:27.746 --> 00:19:33.371 - Ultimately qualified because of a residency issue. They did not live within city limits and all of the 00:19:33.371 --> 00:19:38.833 - appointments That were related to that. We're only for within city limits And so at that point once 00:19:38.833 --> 00:19:44.294 - that problem came out we started going like oh do we still care about that? And you know, should we 00:19:44.294 --> 00:19:49.865 - do something differently? And so the committee on council processes Started discussing this issue. So 00:19:49.865 --> 00:19:54.398 - what follows in terms of proposal is kind of what came out of those discussions so 00:19:54.530 --> 00:19:59.870 - Just wanted to go through everything That I might be changing in this and the first thing of course 00:19:59.870 --> 00:20:05.478 - is not substantive It is capitals and we had this whole discussion last week at the committee on council 00:20:05.478 --> 00:20:11.032 - processes meeting about whether These different bodies should be capitalized or not and that discussion 00:20:11.032 --> 00:20:16.639 - I will say is ongoing. That's why this is a draft So don't ask me questions about this right now because 00:20:16.639 --> 00:20:22.086 - that is a discussion that neither you nor I Honestly need to make and I don't think it matters either 00:20:22.086 --> 00:20:23.742 - way as long as it's consistent 00:20:24.066 --> 00:20:31.079 - So the first real change comes with number six and it might look like we're eliminating number six But 00:20:31.079 --> 00:20:38.160 - really we're just changing the order of things. So in order to get that MCC SC person We have a special 00:20:38.160 --> 00:20:39.998 - seat for them dedicated to 00:20:40.226 --> 00:20:46.048 - The mayor is on board with appointing this person. So I will go ahead and read it for those who may 00:20:46.048 --> 00:20:51.870 - not be able to see the slides. One member appointed by the mayor shall be an employee of the Monroe 00:20:51.870 --> 00:20:56.062 - County Community School Corporation involved in student transportation. 00:20:56.418 --> 00:21:03.562 - Monroe County Community School Corporation superintendent shall recommend up to three applicants to 00:21:03.562 --> 00:21:11.278 - the mayor for consideration There are no residency requirements for this appointment They will be qualified 00:21:11.278 --> 00:21:18.565 - for the appointment by merit of their employment with the Monroe County Community School Corporation. 00:21:18.565 --> 00:21:22.494 - Oh Okay, and So then of course if we go back here this 00:21:22.722 --> 00:21:29.123 - Previous number six to members appointed by council with experience using forms of travel other than 00:21:29.123 --> 00:21:35.650 - personal motor vehicles that moves to number seven Okay, and you can see the original number seven did 00:21:35.650 --> 00:21:41.988 - have that preference for application for somebody related to MCC SC and also had a second potential 00:21:41.988 --> 00:21:48.515 - preference as a member of a community organization dedicated to serving a marginalized group so number 00:21:48.515 --> 00:21:52.254 - six became number seven and Then we created a number eight 00:21:52.610 --> 00:21:59.248 - To have that additional seat that was in number seven Continue it will be appointed by common council 00:21:59.248 --> 00:22:05.821 - And once again the mayor supported that she take the seat the MCC SC appointed seat and leave common 00:22:05.821 --> 00:22:12.394 - council with the residency appointed seat There where the preference will be a member of a community 00:22:12.394 --> 00:22:19.358 - organization Dedicated to serving marginalized groups, especially safety marginalized transportation users 00:22:22.210 --> 00:22:23.038 - And... 00:22:23.106 --> 00:22:28.902 - Then the other thing and so this is a relatively new change. So if you read the packet too early It 00:22:28.902 --> 00:22:34.930 - might not have been in there because I worked on this this weekend because at the CCP meeting last week 00:22:34.930 --> 00:22:40.958 - It was also discussed that currently the terms on Transportation Commission are not staggered. So right 00:22:40.958 --> 00:22:46.754 - now there are several terms that are set to expire January 31st of next year And so in an effort to 00:22:46.754 --> 00:22:53.072 - stagger those terms the Novak report recommends staggering generally speaking. It's good for consistency. So 00:22:53.072 --> 00:22:59.943 - This is you can say a very first draft at Proposal of how to stagger once again We have some capitals 00:22:59.943 --> 00:23:06.478 - that we're fixing and then I changed instead of members appointed from the Council for Community 00:23:06.478 --> 00:23:13.282 - Accessibility I said members appointed by the mayor which is more inclusive Because it includes both 00:23:13.282 --> 00:23:18.334 - the Council for Community Accessibility seat and also this MCC SC seat and 00:23:18.594 --> 00:23:25.759 - That generally those will be two-year terms, but starting next year. So with the fresh terms two of 00:23:25.759 --> 00:23:32.996 - the council appointments will just have a single-year term and the third will be a two-year term and 00:23:32.996 --> 00:23:40.233 - then one of the mayor's appointments will be a single-year term and the other one will be a two-year 00:23:40.233 --> 00:23:45.822 - term and so that will after next year allow for staggering and I think that's 00:23:46.050 --> 00:23:53.803 - Oh, I think the only other thing that I want to mention that I forget about is that none of this would 00:23:53.803 --> 00:24:01.556 - Go into effect until the current residency appointed seats expire, which is January 31st of Next year. 00:24:01.556 --> 00:24:09.234 - Okay, and then everything else in the code powers and duties procedure scheduling and staff There are 00:24:09.234 --> 00:24:14.654 - no changes proposed in that so any questions or comments at this point? 00:24:15.522 --> 00:24:24.268 - Thank you for the presentation councilmember Stasberg are there questions on this resolution to my right 00:24:24.268 --> 00:24:32.598 - Commissioner Flaherty Thank you the new paragraph eight which References group serving marginalized 00:24:32.598 --> 00:24:41.344 - residents, but especially a safety marginalized transportation users that used to be in a in a paragraph 00:24:41.344 --> 00:24:44.926 - that had it was it was one in a handful of 00:24:45.250 --> 00:24:52.449 - considerations and just wondering like what your perspective is on so for For a dedicated seat for you 00:24:52.449 --> 00:24:59.927 - know with this priority for appointment like what type of organizations are you thinking of in Bloomington 00:24:59.927 --> 00:25:07.195 - that would meet the definition of Serving safety marginalized transportation users You have any in mind 00:25:07.195 --> 00:25:12.926 - that well, that's a great question I don't necessarily have any in mind because I 00:25:13.090 --> 00:25:20.549 - for the sake of full transparency, I just took this one and replicated language. I did hear from the 00:25:20.549 --> 00:25:27.935 - office of the mayor. So I originally had all three of those folks in number seven and included both 00:25:27.935 --> 00:25:35.321 - of those preferences for appointments all together in the same paragraph. And at the request of the 00:25:35.321 --> 00:25:38.718 - administration, they really wanted to set out 00:25:38.882 --> 00:25:45.687 - serving marginalized groups as a second I'll say standard and it is valuable to note that I did make 00:25:45.687 --> 00:25:52.424 - sure to put preference for appointment in those as opposed to a requirement for appointment just in 00:25:52.424 --> 00:25:59.297 - case there's somebody that you can't find in terms of Marginalized groups. I think that we have a lot 00:25:59.297 --> 00:26:06.910 - of marginalized groups that exist in the world, right? We can think about black and brown we can think about Age 00:26:07.330 --> 00:26:14.467 - We can think about ability so we can think about like stone belt for example. Those folks might be safety 00:26:14.467 --> 00:26:21.671 - marginalized. We can think about beacon and the unhoused because those folks are also safety marginalized. 00:26:21.671 --> 00:26:25.374 - They're more vulnerable. We can think about El Centro. 00:26:25.602 --> 00:26:31.458 - for example, because they work with immigrants. And right now, immigrants sure are a little bit more 00:26:31.458 --> 00:26:37.314 - vulnerable in this world. So I think that there are several organizations that could potentially be, 00:26:37.314 --> 00:26:43.402 - but I wasn't necessarily thinking of one in particular. And in addition, it says a member of a community 00:26:43.402 --> 00:26:49.373 - organization. And we could play with that language, but in my mind, member of a community organization 00:26:49.373 --> 00:26:53.374 - could be somebody who works there. It could be somebody who's served 00:26:53.506 --> 00:27:01.955 - That organization it could be a volunteer or a board member It could be a lot of different types of 00:27:01.955 --> 00:27:10.741 - people. It wouldn't necessarily have to be a professional in that space Thank you. Sure other questions 00:27:10.741 --> 00:27:19.443 - questions to my left from commissioners anybody All right. I've got two I think one is Can you go back 00:27:19.443 --> 00:27:22.654 - to the slide about empty CSC? It says 00:27:22.882 --> 00:27:30.157 - the superintendent shall recommend. And a problem that just occurred to me is that, uh, they being a 00:27:30.157 --> 00:27:37.504 - separately, a separate jurisdiction, our code can't bind a superintendent. Uh, so this shall here may 00:27:37.504 --> 00:27:45.067 - be, um, uh, inappropriate. I don't know. Like it doesn't really have meaning here. You're, you're saying 00:27:45.067 --> 00:27:51.550 - you want them to make the recommendation, but we can't make them. Do you see what I mean? 00:27:52.866 --> 00:28:01.780 - Maybe it's a may here or rather shall be limited to recommending up to three applicants but it's I Mean, 00:28:01.780 --> 00:28:09.846 - how do we bind the superintendent to make this recommendation to the mayor in the first place? 00:28:09.846 --> 00:28:16.638 - At this point, I've spoken with Superintendent Mark a dr. Winston and I I think 00:28:17.186 --> 00:28:23.753 - She was going to try to tune in on Zoom today. And so maybe she can speak to the current intention. 00:28:23.753 --> 00:28:30.385 - She is very on board. I think you're potentially right, though. And so this is a question, honestly, 00:28:30.385 --> 00:28:37.018 - to bring up with attorneys and legalists, whether we should change that from shall to may or will. I 00:28:37.018 --> 00:28:43.650 - just want to bring that to your attention now because it's problematic, not with this situation. I'm 00:28:43.650 --> 00:28:46.014 - sure that Superintendent Winston is 00:28:46.402 --> 00:28:55.727 - Is on board and willing to cooperate. It's just that Again, we can't bind a city code can't bind a non 00:28:55.727 --> 00:29:04.871 - city employee. So Fix that. Yeah, I'll talk to it with the attorney is about the best way to Okay Be 00:29:04.871 --> 00:29:14.106 - accurate there. The other question is And I think I've mentioned this to you at the council processes 00:29:14.106 --> 00:29:15.102 - meeting. I 00:29:16.482 --> 00:29:23.734 - Despite appearances, I think that we're doing pretty well in getting at least six members present. And 00:29:23.734 --> 00:29:30.915 - I wonder if you thought about expanding the commission by two members rather than repurposing a seat. 00:29:30.915 --> 00:29:37.674 - I say this because when parking commission was created in 2017, we had very specific limits on, 00:29:37.674 --> 00:29:45.278 - for example, two seats had to be merchants within the meter zone. And those proved to be very hard to fill. 00:29:45.762 --> 00:29:53.778 - Uh, and so I wonder if, uh, maybe, uh, expanding so that you can get a very specific appointment in, 00:29:53.778 --> 00:30:02.270 - uh, cause this day has can hold 11 and as long as we have six, we could have quorum to, to make decisions. 00:30:02.270 --> 00:30:10.286 - I'm a little concerned about, um, uh, so many specific appointments that, uh, the commission becomes 00:30:10.286 --> 00:30:14.334 - that much more inflexible, uh, in staffing itself. 00:30:14.818 --> 00:30:21.678 - Do you have any thoughts about that? I think the only thoughts I have are pretty much the same ones 00:30:21.678 --> 00:30:28.811 - that I shared at the CCP at this point That's not what the CCP thought would be a good way to go. There 00:30:28.811 --> 00:30:35.945 - was concern about not having the applicants and so I think the conclusion that we came to at that point 00:30:35.945 --> 00:30:42.942 - was to leave it at 9 for now and wait and see and if there seemed to be a plethora of applicants that 00:30:43.586 --> 00:30:52.308 - would provide, I'll say, a diverse representation. Because if we have like five or six applicants and 00:30:52.308 --> 00:30:57.438 - they're, I mean, if we look at, oh, it's not moving for me. 00:30:57.826 --> 00:31:03.234 - Anyway, if we if we look at the current number seven, which is the struck out up there You know if we 00:31:03.234 --> 00:31:08.907 - have five or six applicants for two seats But they all use bicycling as their primary method of transport. 00:31:08.907 --> 00:31:14.421 - It's their alternate primary method of transportation they're not necessarily gonna have like a diverse 00:31:14.421 --> 00:31:16.542 - set of kind of views that might be most 00:31:16.674 --> 00:31:22.912 - Useful for y'all or if they all live in the same area of town or if they're all the same age or whatever 00:31:22.912 --> 00:31:28.853 - it is but if there's you know a lot of different applicants and there's a transit rider and there's 00:31:28.853 --> 00:31:34.794 - a cyclist and there's a walker and there's a Young person and an older, you know what? I mean, then 00:31:34.794 --> 00:31:40.794 - I think that there was that openness to the idea of expanding it. So for now CCP was like not at the 00:31:40.794 --> 00:31:43.646 - moment, but we're leaving that possibility open 00:31:43.970 --> 00:31:50.448 - Okay heard. Thank you. Thank you any further questions from commissioners before we go to the public 00:31:50.448 --> 00:31:56.926 - on this resolution commissioner Flaherty Thank you. I wanted to follow up on the mayoral appointment 00:31:56.926 --> 00:32:03.532 - as well First of all, I just wonder if like reversing who has the responsibility there. So like if the 00:32:03.532 --> 00:32:09.946 - mayor shall request a list of nominees, you know of a maximum of three applicants you know from the 00:32:09.946 --> 00:32:11.614 - MCC SC superintendent and 00:32:12.002 --> 00:32:18.419 - The other thing, I'm also mindful of past experience and how these things change over time. It's great 00:32:18.419 --> 00:32:24.897 - that the school corporation is excited and on board, but we don't know what the future holds. And there 00:32:24.897 --> 00:32:31.314 - was a time when the Commission on Sustainability had a ex officio seat voting for IU, a sustainability 00:32:31.314 --> 00:32:37.544 - director. That seat, over time, became one that wasn't really filled. We even kind of accepted, not 00:32:37.544 --> 00:32:41.406 - the director, but their designee, and then it turned out that 00:32:41.826 --> 00:32:48.431 - It was really hard to sustain and, you know, just through different directorships over time, they just 00:32:48.431 --> 00:32:55.037 - kind of didn't see the value in it anymore and didn't prioritize it. And that caused quorum issues and 00:32:55.037 --> 00:33:01.706 - other, you know, challenges for the commission. And so, again, I do wonder if even adding an additional 00:33:01.706 --> 00:33:08.376 - sentence that's like, in the event no qualified applicant meeting this criteria can be found, you know, 00:33:08.376 --> 00:33:11.390 - the mayor shall, you know, make an appointment 00:33:13.122 --> 00:33:20.860 - meeting some other criteria, keeping in mind the criterion paragraph seven and eight or something like 00:33:20.860 --> 00:33:28.522 - that. Just so that we don't run into this block in code where for whatever unforeseen reason, we just 00:33:28.522 --> 00:33:36.035 - can't fill a seat for months and months on end. Absolutely, thank you so much. I wrote down both of 00:33:36.035 --> 00:33:42.270 - those language suggestions and I'll wordsmith that a little bit and go back to CCP 00:33:42.562 --> 00:33:49.459 - All the things thanks anything else any further questions commissioners before we go to public comment 00:33:49.459 --> 00:33:56.155 - Seeing none. Thank you Council member Stasburg. Is there any member of the public who would like to 00:33:56.155 --> 00:34:02.918 - speak to TCR 2616 if so, please come to the podium state your name and sign in for the record You'll 00:34:02.918 --> 00:34:09.815 - have three minutes. If you are online, please use the raise hand function and we'll call on you in due 00:34:09.815 --> 00:34:11.422 - order. Is there anyone? 00:34:11.778 --> 00:34:22.604 - Who would like to speak to TCR 26 16. I don't see anybody in the room coming to the podium anybody online 00:34:22.604 --> 00:34:33.634 - raising their hand. Last call for public comment on TCR 26 16 going twice and we're back to the commission. 00:34:33.634 --> 00:34:39.966 - Are there any debate on TCR 26 16 to my right to my left. OK. 00:34:40.290 --> 00:34:47.927 - I'm just going to say that we did. The commission did have more applicants and it had seats and I remember 00:34:47.927 --> 00:34:55.207 - being in a group of three and being interviewed en masse and there were three people right before us. 00:34:55.207 --> 00:35:02.416 - Not everybody was interviewed was appointed to the commission. I don't think that this commission is 00:35:02.416 --> 00:35:09.054 - suffering from a lack of applicants which is why I'd like to ask Councilmember Stossburg and 00:35:09.346 --> 00:35:16.482 - the council in general to consider maybe amending the language to say nine to eleven members that if 00:35:16.482 --> 00:35:23.971 - we were to expand first we wouldn't have to expand past nine but we could if there were enough applicants 00:35:23.971 --> 00:35:31.106 - present whether it was ten or eleven members it would still require a six member quorum but adding a 00:35:31.106 --> 00:35:38.878 - member or two would preserve the people who some of whom have served for a very short time on this commission 00:35:39.298 --> 00:35:45.935 - while expanding the diversity of the commission. It's an opportunity for there to be more points of 00:35:45.935 --> 00:35:52.705 - view without having to choose between points of view. And 11 isn't too big a number again this day as 00:35:52.705 --> 00:35:59.409 - was built for it and we regularly meet in this room. I think the question is significant enough that 00:35:59.409 --> 00:36:06.311 - it could withstand an expansion by as many as two members but phrasing it as nine to 11 doesn't require 00:36:06.311 --> 00:36:07.838 - it only requires nine. 00:36:08.290 --> 00:36:17.660 - So at least would give council and the administration the opportunity to expand. So that's my only thought. 00:36:17.660 --> 00:36:26.423 - Other than that I recommend this these changes are there any last call to debate on TCR 26 16 seeing 00:36:26.423 --> 00:36:35.966 - none. Will the secretary please call the roll on TCR 26 16. Oh we need a motion. We need a motion to approve. 00:36:38.594 --> 00:36:50.391 - I'll make a motion we approve TCR 26 16 Need a second we have a motion in a second will the secretary 00:36:50.391 --> 00:37:02.303 - please call the roll Sturmitis. Yes Boland. Yes Flaherty. Yes Davis. Yes Stasberg Epstein Coppock. Yes 00:37:02.303 --> 00:37:05.310 - That passes five zero one 00:37:07.106 --> 00:37:15.715 - Thank you very much. Let's now move to discussion of topics on the docket. This is where I pass the 00:37:15.715 --> 00:37:24.324 - gavel and bring up the resolution I put forward which has not been placed as a case and we probably 00:37:24.324 --> 00:37:33.106 - should discuss that. But Mr. Chair I would like to well I guess I have to ask questions of staff now. 00:37:33.106 --> 00:37:36.894 - Staff can we vote on this resolution today. 00:37:42.786 --> 00:37:48.404 - I'm so sorry. I was trying to figure out the vote from the last. Can you repeat your question? Okay. 00:37:48.404 --> 00:37:53.966 - Well, I put forward a resolution to discuss the parking report Can we vote on this resolution today 00:37:53.966 --> 00:37:59.751 - if it's under? Discussion of topics not on the docket. Yeah, of course if you make a motion if the body 00:37:59.751 --> 00:38:05.480 - makes in seconds emotion You can vote on it tonight. All right, so we can just like with this previous 00:38:05.480 --> 00:38:11.153 - resolution We can hear it as a resolution correct. All right, I like to move it doesn't have a number 00:38:11.153 --> 00:38:12.766 - So can you give me a number? 00:38:13.218 --> 00:38:22.706 - Yes, but I have it as TCR 26 xx. You don't need to move anything unless you're making the motion right 00:38:22.706 --> 00:38:32.286 - now I am making the motion. Okay, sorry You passed the gavel. I'm catching up. I'm so sorry. Do we have 00:38:32.286 --> 00:38:38.366 - a number? It's okay The resolution number would be 26-17, okay, I 00:38:38.818 --> 00:38:52.202 - I'd like to move approval of resolution TCR 2617, formerly known as TCR 26XX. Second. Thank you. Okay. 00:38:52.202 --> 00:39:05.715 - I hope all of you had a chance to read your packet. This basically says that it is our duty to oversee, 00:39:05.715 --> 00:39:08.574 - where does it say it? 00:39:09.442 --> 00:39:15.610 - to make recommendations on public parking policy including but not limited to pricing hours of operation 00:39:15.610 --> 00:39:21.601 - additional removal of parking supplier parking spaces changes to city code changes to applicable city 00:39:21.601 --> 00:39:27.769 - plans enforcement procedure or any other asset of parking management policy and also that the commission 00:39:27.769 --> 00:39:33.819 - should coordinate supervise and when necessary approve transportation related studies plans consultant 00:39:33.819 --> 00:39:36.286 - reports activities programs and projects. 00:39:36.706 --> 00:39:46.975 - So this report is right up our alley but it was commissioned before this commission existed at any rate 00:39:46.975 --> 00:39:57.245 - in addition to the fact that we have an obligation to produce an annual report of our own which is part 00:39:57.245 --> 00:40:05.342 - of this resolution. The the report is something that we should be weighing in on. 00:40:05.954 --> 00:40:18.413 - And so I've prepared a simple slideshow putting up the recommendations made in the report for us to 00:40:18.413 --> 00:40:30.498 - discuss here. And I'm going to connect now. Let me see here. Share. I have to find my slideshow. 00:40:30.498 --> 00:40:32.990 - One second, please. 00:40:50.946 --> 00:41:01.119 - Okay, can everybody see the screen? Okay. So just to begin, there's nothing in this slide show that 00:41:01.119 --> 00:41:11.292 - isn't something, a document that's already available to commissioners except for the recommendation 00:41:11.292 --> 00:41:18.718 - we'll talk about here now. Anyway, this is the, oh wait, it's not going. 00:41:26.114 --> 00:41:33.883 - Okay, we'll just start like this. Each of you has received a copy of the comprehensive policy passed 00:41:33.883 --> 00:41:41.574 - by the Bloomington parking commission in 2022. It's printed in front of you. It's also available on 00:41:41.574 --> 00:41:49.266 - the appropriate city website. And it's just a reminder of the policies that the parking commission, 00:41:49.266 --> 00:41:52.958 - which is a predecessor commission to this body, 00:41:53.474 --> 00:42:04.575 - Came up with in 2022 and reaffirmed in 2024 I only say it now because this resolution calls for us to 00:42:04.575 --> 00:42:15.676 - look at the Walker report through the lens of the comprehensive plan the transportation plan and this 00:42:15.676 --> 00:42:23.294 - policy So here are the 12 Recommendations made by Walker I think that 00:42:23.522 --> 00:42:31.974 - Most of them are pretty good. Some of them deserve a rethinking and I wanted to go over each one but 00:42:31.974 --> 00:42:40.427 - I'm going to make a motion at the end of this presentation summarizing my recommendations and asking 00:42:40.427 --> 00:42:49.047 - you to endorse them or amend them or reject them. So let's start with the first one. Can I ask a point 00:42:49.047 --> 00:42:51.390 - of order. Yeah. I read the. 00:42:52.226 --> 00:43:02.226 - resolution as Creating a process by which the Commission would Make recommendations about the Walker 00:43:02.226 --> 00:43:12.227 - report, but are you suggesting that? Adoption of this resolution would endorse the specific findings 00:43:12.227 --> 00:43:21.534 - you're presenting now adoption of a motion would adopt those findings the the resolution says 00:43:21.922 --> 00:43:27.909 - The Commission should give its opinion of the overall quality and merit of the report with a specific 00:43:27.909 --> 00:43:33.780 - focus on it as a template for filling the Commission's duty under BMC to 12070 for and then it says 00:43:33.780 --> 00:43:39.650 - it shall review for its endorsement each other recommendations made by Walker in the report Got it. 00:43:39.650 --> 00:43:45.696 - I was I was reading that as like a future tense. So shall review for its endorsement and that the task 00:43:45.696 --> 00:43:51.742 - force would maybe be responsible for Proposing to the Commission for adoption at like a future meeting 00:43:52.066 --> 00:43:58.649 - recommendations, so I just misunderstood maybe the the intent and I'm a little if I would find that 00:43:58.649 --> 00:44:05.430 - acceptable we didn't have these your your proposed findings in advance of right right now, correct and 00:44:05.430 --> 00:44:12.079 - I have not shown the findings yet and I can stop here and Yeah, I mean I believe that the Commission 00:44:12.079 --> 00:44:18.662 - should weigh in on the recommendations. I'm fine with taking the time to do it I the only concern I 00:44:18.662 --> 00:44:19.518 - have is that 00:44:19.810 --> 00:44:26.545 - report is going to be presented to council the first week of August and I don't know what's appropriate 00:44:26.545 --> 00:44:33.215 - for Again, we didn't oversee the production of this report. I want to make sure the council knows that 00:44:33.215 --> 00:44:39.950 - we didn't So I'm not sure how much long after that council should hear the Commission's recommendations 00:44:39.950 --> 00:44:46.556 - on it I thought it'd be appropriate to do so now while we had a slow docket At this at the very least 00:44:46.556 --> 00:44:49.470 - I'd like to discuss the recommendations as a 00:44:49.602 --> 00:44:57.371 - As a an advance I can just tell you my But I'm also happy to defer to a later meeting But keeping in 00:44:57.371 --> 00:45:05.293 - mind that we don't have an August meeting. Is that correct? We don't schedule a regular session August 00:45:05.293 --> 00:45:13.139 - because of budgets We do not have a regular hearing scheduled for August. There is a planning session 00:45:13.139 --> 00:45:16.062 - scheduled for the 18th 17th, okay. Oh 00:45:16.258 --> 00:45:23.278 - 24. Thank you. I'm thinking of September September 17th is the one so the the the next opportunity we'd 00:45:23.278 --> 00:45:30.231 - have to give our official opinion would be the September meeting and Sorry to continue on this thread, 00:45:30.231 --> 00:45:37.117 - but my I'm not sure what If anything is being asked of the City Council in the August meeting if it's 00:45:37.117 --> 00:45:45.150 - simply a presentation I don't know if this wall if it's yes, just a presentation Okay, so so recommendations from this 00:45:45.858 --> 00:45:52.632 - Commission that followed from that wouldn't necessarily be untimely so to speak like in and to me it'd 00:45:52.632 --> 00:45:59.274 - be much better to I don't mind walking through your recommendations Commissionable and if you'd like 00:45:59.274 --> 00:46:05.916 - as a item for discussion, but like I think just My preference would be to have the ability to review 00:46:05.916 --> 00:46:11.966 - them in advance to come prepared to make any recommended adjustments at a future meeting so 00:46:12.386 --> 00:46:20.571 - I would be happy to I mean that's fine with me I'd be happy to present these only as my opinions and 00:46:20.571 --> 00:46:28.674 - not ask members to vote on it today, but The the resolution is written so that doesn't specifically 00:46:28.674 --> 00:46:37.102 - say that The Commission shall give its opinion with this, right? It doesn't doesn't set a date. It sort 00:46:37.102 --> 00:46:39.614 - of anticipates a future set of 00:46:39.874 --> 00:46:47.623 - future opinion and endorsements Okay, so I will stop the presentation there and pick up on it in a second. 00:46:47.623 --> 00:46:55.083 - I just want to say that section 2 calls for the formation of a task force or Let's call it a committee 00:46:55.083 --> 00:47:02.325 - We've debated these terms a lot over the years a subset of members of this body plus select members 00:47:02.325 --> 00:47:07.902 - of staff who have relevant experience towards the Commission's obligation to 00:47:08.162 --> 00:47:17.898 - to produce an annual report on parking. So that's the gist of it. And with that, I'm happy to answer 00:47:17.898 --> 00:47:28.406 - any questions before I go into my own recommendations, which I can give in the debate portion. Any questions 00:47:28.406 --> 00:47:38.046 - for Mr. Volum? OK, question. Mr. Coppock. I have a question. Should we not deal with the resolution 00:47:38.178 --> 00:47:47.014 - Well based on what Commissioner Flaherty has just said what I'm going to suggest is that we Pass the 00:47:47.014 --> 00:47:56.462 - in the course of passing the resolution I can give my Take on the recommendations for future consideration, 00:47:56.462 --> 00:48:05.822 - but it's not it's just something to To inform you and not something I'm asking you to vote on at this time 00:48:10.210 --> 00:48:17.721 - questions for mr. Volin Yeah, the This commission or the task force. Do you have a concept so much of 00:48:17.721 --> 00:48:25.232 - how often it would meet? It's an annual meeting Is that a single annual meeting with staff or is this 00:48:25.232 --> 00:48:32.817 - something that would take multiple meetings? It's a great question the short of it is that it took the 00:48:32.817 --> 00:48:38.782 - parking commission a lot of time to produce the report more time than it had and 00:48:39.042 --> 00:48:47.331 - And it fell behind to the point where it got stuck in 2019 So it's a not trivial Walker parking has 00:48:47.331 --> 00:48:55.702 - done an extraordinary amount of work and so we have to be practical about what can it can't be done, 00:48:55.702 --> 00:49:04.156 - but the ordinance does call for more detail than was provided by Walker and so it's got to be a joint 00:49:04.156 --> 00:49:08.798 - effort between commissioners and city staff and perhaps 00:49:09.250 --> 00:49:16.744 - Outside contractors if necessary, we've got to figure out how much it would cost to do it And so it's 00:49:16.744 --> 00:49:24.384 - probably going to take several meetings before we determine a course of action Okay, I don't think it's 00:49:24.384 --> 00:49:31.731 - a one annual meeting. Okay, and then With those meetings in your Hypothetically, would they be open 00:49:31.731 --> 00:49:36.286 - to the public or I assume they'd be closed or I mean It's any 00:49:36.450 --> 00:49:44.516 - That's a very good question. That's fraught basically any sub body is a public body and has to To meet 00:49:44.516 --> 00:49:52.973 - according to open door law. So yes, they would be public meetings Mr. Flaherty Thank you first I appreciate 00:49:52.973 --> 00:50:01.117 - the attention you're bringing to the one of the duties of the Commission which is to produce or oversee 00:50:01.117 --> 00:50:04.798 - an annual analysis of parking asset management 00:50:05.058 --> 00:50:12.771 - And it includes but is not limited to a variety of things related to costs utilization Parking data 00:50:12.771 --> 00:50:21.255 - analytics and recommended policy changes You're quite right that the Commission the former parking Commission 00:50:21.255 --> 00:50:29.045 - Did have a hard time Producing such reports in a timely fashion and in my mind like like part of the 00:50:29.045 --> 00:50:32.670 - language here about producing or overseeing is 00:50:32.834 --> 00:50:39.098 - and some of the broader ideas in the Walker consultant report and in past conversations we've had was 00:50:39.098 --> 00:50:45.485 - to get to a point where we have the data tools to relatively simply produce a consistent set of metrics 00:50:45.485 --> 00:50:51.688 - over time every year, year over year, so that we can analyze those trends. And then the primary role 00:50:51.688 --> 00:50:57.952 - of this body would be to, in conversation with our parking services staff, possibly other engineering 00:50:57.952 --> 00:51:00.286 - or planning and transportation staff, 00:51:00.866 --> 00:51:07.863 - Consider the policy dimensions and make recommendations on the policy dimensions and so I guess it gave 00:51:07.863 --> 00:51:15.062 - me a little bit of pause reading the in the resolution just the To begin production of the annual analysis 00:51:15.062 --> 00:51:21.790 - of parking mentioned above it sort of like a little bit implies to me that the The task force would 00:51:21.790 --> 00:51:28.585 - be the ones producing it Maybe that's not wrong but but I'm wary of trying to recreate what was done 00:51:28.585 --> 00:51:30.334 - in the parking commission 00:51:31.266 --> 00:51:38.584 - Versus figuring out how to do this in a sustainable way And so this is this so what are your thoughts 00:51:38.584 --> 00:51:45.975 - I have another point I want to dig into but like what are your are you aligned with my thinking there? 00:51:45.975 --> 00:51:53.150 - Like what are your thoughts? I am I mean I I suffered many a lonely night trying to process several 00:51:53.150 --> 00:51:57.598 - million parking transactions in my poor wheezing database and 00:51:57.826 --> 00:52:05.872 - I know how laborious it can be with the wrong tools, and this is also talking as long as seven years 00:52:05.872 --> 00:52:13.918 - ago or more. Our technology has advanced since then. It should be, as you say, relatively easier now 00:52:13.918 --> 00:52:21.566 - to produce a report that would meet the standards of the ordinance. I do want to point out that 00:52:21.858 --> 00:52:29.165 - The commission did its made its effort to develop reports with no support whatsoever while the commission 00:52:29.165 --> 00:52:36.059 - got raw data from the administration. There was no money contributed for outside consultants. There 00:52:36.059 --> 00:52:43.298 - was no staff helping produce the report. The commission tried to do it by itself and that's not tenable. 00:52:43.298 --> 00:52:48.606 - So we have to find a process that everybody can live with and yet be able to 00:52:48.866 --> 00:52:55.742 - get the data that we need to make rational decisions like how much you'll be charging for parking on 00:52:55.742 --> 00:53:02.754 - the street in the garages. How often should we adjust it. You know we can't do that without hard data. 00:53:02.754 --> 00:53:09.698 - And also where is the money going. Where what. Where does the money flow from. Where does it flow to. 00:53:09.698 --> 00:53:16.574 - What parts of the system are are breakeven or generating excess revenue which ones are not expenses. 00:53:16.770 --> 00:53:22.983 - so these are all things that Should interest every every one particularly this members of this body. 00:53:22.983 --> 00:53:29.195 - Mm-hmm Follow up on that front is that okay or do you want to I can save it for another round? Yeah, 00:53:29.195 --> 00:53:35.470 - I'd like to take a bite out of the apple I share these concerns about the workload Mr. Volin, we have 00:53:35.470 --> 00:53:41.867 - this the vendors still here Would you like to ask them if you just gave a list of things you might like 00:53:41.867 --> 00:53:42.974 - an annual report? 00:53:43.618 --> 00:53:51.313 - Would you like to hear if these products might help us with the I would like to ask both vendors a very 00:53:51.313 --> 00:53:59.155 - specific question since I'm you're passing me the opportunity to ask the question which is can the report 00:53:59.155 --> 00:54:07.294 - provide visualization of Usage of given meters by block Whoever likes to go first, please come up and tell us 00:54:12.098 --> 00:54:18.389 - Yes, so we actually your name and your Braxton Ratliff IPS group Yeah, we've actually already stood 00:54:18.389 --> 00:54:24.868 - up an instance where a lot of the issues a lot of the concerns That you're they're talking about right 00:54:24.868 --> 00:54:31.159 - now. We actually have that data flown into our platform to where we can Look at block faces and see 00:54:31.159 --> 00:54:37.512 - the revenue coming in. We're able to ingest citation data from your enforcement operation We're able 00:54:37.512 --> 00:54:41.790 - to ingest any mobile payment provider out. There's data as well and 00:54:41.954 --> 00:54:48.139 - Yeah, it's your point. We're able to provide you know starting tomorrow with our meter data as the current 00:54:48.139 --> 00:54:53.977 - meter provider All of the support that you would need to stand up this, you know This this report to 00:54:53.977 --> 00:54:59.816 - stand up this commission and help you make decisions I might ask a follow-up question. How long have 00:54:59.816 --> 00:55:05.770 - you been able to do that? So IPS we we tried to do it on our own and we actually went out and acquired 00:55:05.770 --> 00:55:11.550 - a company one of the top data aggregation companies in the industry company by the name of populace 00:55:11.778 --> 00:55:17.981 - And so they've been able to do it for quite some time. So it's been a really good thing for us. 00:55:17.981 --> 00:55:24.636 - But yeah, we were able to go back and get all your historical data. I don't know if that's more in the 00:55:24.636 --> 00:55:31.227 - line of what you're asking. So the Walker study is nice. The parking studies are nice. But what we're 00:55:31.227 --> 00:55:37.753 - able to provide is, in a sense, an ongoing Walker study. We can provide the ability to do predictive 00:55:37.753 --> 00:55:41.630 - rates, or what does the rates look like when IU is playing? 00:55:41.858 --> 00:55:47.986 - Football school now I guess or when I use playing, you know, whoever I mean we were able to put that 00:55:47.986 --> 00:55:54.297 - predictability in there Again to help that report and help you make decisions. So very good. Thank you. 00:55:54.297 --> 00:56:00.486 - Yeah, absolutely Josh Deter with arrive. Yes. Thank you for the follow-up question So similar to what 00:56:00.486 --> 00:56:06.797 - Braxton mentioned we can also supply very similar data in terms of visualization on anal bases for your 00:56:06.797 --> 00:56:07.646 - occupancy and 00:56:07.842 --> 00:56:13.172 - If the Commission allows I do have an example I'd be happy to leave behind so you have a handout in 00:56:13.172 --> 00:56:18.555 - front of you But with that said we do have that current ability actually also loaded in your current 00:56:18.555 --> 00:56:23.939 - park mobile dashboard That does allow for historical data live view as well as future forecasting as 00:56:23.939 --> 00:56:29.429 - well as with our proposed insights tool that does allow for true vehicle capture in terms of satellite 00:56:29.429 --> 00:56:31.454 - imagery lighter scanners and etc that 00:56:31.778 --> 00:56:39.639 - Will allow for what my colleague Matt mentioned earlier of all vehicles whether they are paid unpaid 00:56:39.639 --> 00:56:47.423 - time of day provided true holistic approach to your occupancy inventory and Planning for the future 00:56:47.423 --> 00:56:55.362 - on your street faces and I don't need a verbal answer But I trust that both vendors can integrate IPS 00:56:55.362 --> 00:57:01.278 - meter data with park mobile meter data. Is that correct? Okay, thank you So 00:57:01.410 --> 00:57:08.449 - I think one one process I see here is to defer this conversation until one of these vendors is online 00:57:08.449 --> 00:57:15.489 - and for this cycle work with the Walker report is something we oversee rather than Reproduce and then 00:57:15.489 --> 00:57:22.804 - as we see these new reporting tools Maybe in for the next cycle will have an easier and different process 00:57:22.804 --> 00:57:29.982 - that might be manageable by a commission in a way that it wasn't previously with the parking commission 00:57:31.010 --> 00:57:38.379 - Well, I think that the Walker report goes beyond Questions of equipment. That's one section of the report. 00:57:38.379 --> 00:57:45.265 - There are other recommendations that I think are That the Commission needs to be thinking about now 00:57:45.265 --> 00:57:52.358 - and not wait till next year. Thank you Mr. Flaherty Thank you. Yeah, I think so following up on on the 00:57:52.358 --> 00:57:59.038 - role of the Walker consultants report and my understanding of that from prior conversations with 00:57:59.714 --> 00:58:06.096 - Michelle wall when she was here and just what the report covers is that it's not Something that we anticipate 00:58:06.096 --> 00:58:12.071 - producing every year nor is it the exact same thing as what the mission the commission is charged with 00:58:12.071 --> 00:58:17.873 - It's like a companion but distinct piece. It's it's analyzing some different things making a set of 00:58:17.873 --> 00:58:23.906 - recommendations We might do something like that every I don't know five to ten years, but we still want 00:58:23.906 --> 00:58:29.534 - to track the the data trends annually to understand, you know how to make policy adjustments and 00:58:30.178 --> 00:58:37.090 - I guess a Seeking again just is that how you're understanding Commissioner Boland like the role of that 00:58:37.090 --> 00:58:43.737 - report. I feel like there was something in the text of the resolution that Made me think otherwise, 00:58:43.737 --> 00:58:50.449 - but I could be wrong. Maybe just how we discussed it. I should say that Just for the sake of history 00:58:50.449 --> 00:58:57.694 - week first commissioned a report in 2007 from Walker I had a 2012 follow-up study the parking commission and 00:58:58.050 --> 00:59:04.193 - Commissioned report in 2018 and went with Desmond out of Chicago And now we the city has hired Walker 00:59:04.193 --> 00:59:10.698 - again in 2026. Sorry just to clarify it was this section 1a that says In reference to the Walker consulting 00:59:10.698 --> 00:59:16.841 - report Specific focus on it as a template for fulfilling the commission's duty to producer oversee an 00:59:16.841 --> 00:59:22.984 - annual analysis of parking So that's that's the language that gave me pause this idea that the Walker 00:59:22.984 --> 00:59:27.742 - consulting report is a template for something that would be produced each year 00:59:28.514 --> 00:59:34.825 - Because I understood it conceptually as something quite distinct from what we would be doing on the 00:59:34.825 --> 00:59:41.199 - annual basis Okay, I see your point and I will just say the phrases with a specific focus on it as a 00:59:41.199 --> 00:59:47.572 - Template not the template and that it's a certainly a good starting foundation. It's a foundation we 00:59:47.572 --> 00:59:51.422 - can change it if you'd like but a template simply means that 00:59:51.906 --> 01:00:00.099 - Why would we want to start with something else? We could start with that report and with prior Parking 01:00:00.099 --> 01:00:08.212 - Commission reports in creating something new. So I mean I'm Agnostic about it. I'm happy to change it 01:00:08.212 --> 01:00:16.405 - if you like To to a different word as a foundation Template I don't think there's that much difference 01:00:16.405 --> 01:00:17.598 - Up to you Okay 01:00:18.242 --> 01:00:32.535 - I might make a quick motion to replace the word template with foundation in section 1a of the resolution 01:00:32.535 --> 01:00:46.284 - Second I second second. All right. We'll just do a voice vote all in favor Motion carries Thank you, 01:00:46.284 --> 01:00:48.190 - okay Mr. Kopp 01:00:48.930 --> 01:01:08.911 - Well this this simply calls for the Commission to weigh in on the report produced this year by Walker 01:01:08.911 --> 01:01:17.726 - Yes Questions questions, mr. Bowen All right 01:01:19.330 --> 01:01:29.840 - None what we all right any comments from the public on Mr. Seaborg Point of order we might separately 01:01:29.840 --> 01:01:40.351 - want to invite staff comment or perspective. Thank you from from public. I could start this Okay, mr. 01:01:40.351 --> 01:01:46.430 - Seaborg staff Sure. Thank you Andrew Seaborg City engineer 01:01:47.490 --> 01:01:54.789 - Just appreciating the questions appreciating the discussion Recognizing that in August there is an intention 01:01:54.789 --> 01:02:01.620 - for a mayor's office report to City Council of the Walker study I think the intention is that is just 01:02:01.620 --> 01:02:08.785 - a report similar to what you received previously I'm just to raise awareness to what the report is saying. 01:02:08.785 --> 01:02:15.750 - It's not an endorsement of recommendations It's just here is what Walker's report is including specific 01:02:15.750 --> 01:02:17.022 - to this resolution 01:02:18.050 --> 01:02:26.769 - I think the main thing I wanted to raise and I think tried to in an email before is maybe focusing on 01:02:26.769 --> 01:02:35.660 - section two and just what the commission's duties are to produce or oversee. And I guess fundamentally, 01:02:35.660 --> 01:02:44.550 - those are two very different things that are, as staff, I want to have clarity on what the expectations 01:02:44.550 --> 01:02:46.174 - of each of us are. 01:02:46.402 --> 01:02:52.610 - I will just admit I was not a part of the parking commission, but generally my expectation would be 01:02:52.610 --> 01:02:59.004 - that the administration and staff is in the best position to produce reports and Commissions generally 01:02:59.004 --> 01:03:05.211 - are in a great position to oversee reports and review them but if Commission members want to form a 01:03:05.211 --> 01:03:11.667 - committee and do the work that staff then no longer needs to do that also has some appeal but I do just 01:03:11.667 --> 01:03:15.454 - honestly worry about what those meetings would look like and 01:03:15.618 --> 01:03:21.765 - From a staffing perspective from a minute taking perspective from getting commissioners at those meetings 01:03:21.765 --> 01:03:27.680 - Routinely and and just imagining this commission ten years from now with maybe very different members 01:03:27.680 --> 01:03:33.536 - And is it fair to expect of them to do what I would generally expect of staff? So just that's one of 01:03:33.536 --> 01:03:39.451 - the fundamental questions in my mind that just really hoping for clarity and having some real concern 01:03:39.451 --> 01:03:45.598 - or pause about what section two really means and the implications of it So just wanted to highlight those 01:03:45.826 --> 01:03:53.907 - for the consideration of the group but Happy to answer any questions Thank You mr. Boy, mr. Wallen, 01:03:53.907 --> 01:04:02.393 - I just wanted to ask your opinion of Bloomington code to 12 070 4g which says the Commission is required 01:04:02.393 --> 01:04:11.201 - to quote produce or oversee an annual analysis of parking asset management I was quoting from the ordinance. 01:04:11.201 --> 01:04:15.646 - Yeah, so I agree with you that produce or oversee is a 01:04:16.226 --> 01:04:24.840 - a little ambivalent. But I guess all I'm saying is we've been at this for a year and we haven't even 01:04:24.840 --> 01:04:34.137 - begun the discussion of producing the report. And I feel it's at least incumbent on us to push the question. 01:04:34.137 --> 01:04:42.666 - And so, you know, at the very least what this body can do is name three members to a committee that 01:04:42.666 --> 01:04:44.798 - can then meet with staff 01:04:44.930 --> 01:04:52.495 - Focus on this task. It doesn't have to have the concern of every member at every meeting And that was 01:04:52.495 --> 01:04:59.911 - my goal. So is that does that alleviate any concerns you have as as staff? I think I still have the 01:04:59.911 --> 01:05:07.550 - fundamental question of whose role it is to actually write and do the report I think that is that is a 01:05:07.906 --> 01:05:15.074 - I just don't have clarity on and would very and which is a result of the code that form this commission 01:05:15.074 --> 01:05:22.103 - So if there's an opportunity to clarify it that that would be helpful, but it leaves a very divergent 01:05:22.103 --> 01:05:29.064 - track there Shoot I'm honestly forgetting a part of your question. I mean I if I may I would suggest 01:05:29.064 --> 01:05:36.232 - that It is asking a lot of volunteer commissioners to produce report we get some of us veterans of that 01:05:36.232 --> 01:05:36.990 - commission 01:05:37.090 --> 01:05:44.065 - Can tell you that it was basically impossible We we did as many as we could before we conked out So 01:05:44.065 --> 01:05:51.250 - we need staff's help. There's no question about that So I also though think that commissioners can and 01:05:51.250 --> 01:05:58.365 - should be involved in the writing of at least high-level Overviews of the data that might be provided 01:05:58.365 --> 01:06:05.480 - by staff or outside contractors. So it's going to take a lot of heads in the same room with different 01:06:05.480 --> 01:06:06.526 - expertises and 01:06:06.818 --> 01:06:14.290 - for us to figure it out. But that's what we have to do. That's where we're the ones who have to make 01:06:14.290 --> 01:06:21.985 - you do it. I guess maybe I disagree. And so like as a commission staff will write a report that I think 01:06:21.985 --> 01:06:24.574 - is intended as guided by the code. 01:06:24.994 --> 01:06:30.705 - I think it has this commission has been now for about a month or a year and staffed I think the annual 01:06:30.705 --> 01:06:36.249 - report is something staff in the background have already started to talk about And strategize about 01:06:36.249 --> 01:06:41.960 - how to develop it has this is a new commission. We're getting very much up and running We also haven't 01:06:41.960 --> 01:06:47.504 - talked about an annual safety report, which is also something we need to do but those things are in 01:06:47.504 --> 01:06:49.278 - the works in the background and 01:06:49.442 --> 01:06:55.887 - and a reason the parking study or annual parking report also is behind is because we've had this Walker 01:06:55.887 --> 01:07:02.147 - study that Has as you know has experienced some delays too, and we didn't want to we couldn't do two 01:07:02.147 --> 01:07:08.468 - things at once So those are very much in motion and intended to come to this Commission And no matter 01:07:08.468 --> 01:07:14.914 - who is writing will be discussed for sure You're making a point for me in that We could and should have 01:07:14.914 --> 01:07:18.942 - been calling for this anytime in the existence of the Commission 01:07:19.042 --> 01:07:26.589 - That the Walker study was being done. It was a great convenience, but it didn't change our obligation 01:07:26.589 --> 01:07:34.432 - to produce that report and having been Commissioned in existence for literally 13 14 months now We should 01:07:34.432 --> 01:07:41.831 - have produced one by now. So I'm I'm fine with what you're you're saying Just that I think it's our 01:07:41.831 --> 01:07:48.638 - obligation as a commission to require that the report be produced by whatever means we must 01:07:48.802 --> 01:08:01.786 - collectively Thank you Other feedback from staff We'll move on to public comment if anyone is in the 01:08:01.786 --> 01:08:14.770 - room or online who would like to comment on this Seeing none come back to the Commission for further 01:08:14.770 --> 01:08:17.470 - comment Mr. Flaherty 01:08:18.466 --> 01:08:27.402 - I Generally support the resolution. I do think it's it's worthwhile for the Commission to So looking 01:08:27.402 --> 01:08:36.515 - at section one first To weigh in on the recommendations of the walk Walker consultants report. I think 01:08:36.515 --> 01:08:45.982 - that can be done You know following this meeting it sounds like our chair would like to take would like to 01:08:46.242 --> 01:08:52.595 - Put forth a set of recommendations and if we can do that in a way that's that's timely For review and 01:08:52.595 --> 01:08:58.264 - an input prior to the next meeting we could we could make any adjustments vote on them and 01:08:58.264 --> 01:09:04.493 - forward recommendations then I think that's worthwhile and a good idea Section two actually do like 01:09:04.493 --> 01:09:10.846 - the term task force Commissioner Roland started saying committee, but I think task force is more of a 01:09:12.098 --> 01:09:18.839 - Not a standing thing that will last in perpetuity but rather like we're getting it started for the purpose 01:09:18.839 --> 01:09:25.265 - of figuring out this exact thing of What does it mean for the role of the Commission in its duties to 01:09:25.265 --> 01:09:31.565 - oversee or produce a report? I agree that the data analytics piece in particular is far too much to 01:09:31.565 --> 01:09:34.526 - expect a volunteer Commission to be able to do 01:09:34.786 --> 01:09:40.177 - I'm a little agnostic on, like, the writing of a report. I'm envisioning a relatively brief report. 01:09:40.177 --> 01:09:45.729 - Some of the reports produced by the Parking Commission in the past actually were, you know, at the end 01:09:45.729 --> 01:09:51.335 - of the day, the synthesized bit was relatively short, four or five pages, and I'm imagining we're gonna 01:09:51.335 --> 01:09:56.726 - get to a point where we have a template of a report and a given set of metrics that we produce each 01:09:56.726 --> 01:10:02.494 - year. We could make adjustments to those as needed, of course, but it would kind of give you that template 01:10:03.042 --> 01:10:09.348 - You know that that we use our data tools from vendors like those here before us to produce and then 01:10:09.348 --> 01:10:16.095 - I think again It could be a commission a commission task or maybe it is a committee task To do the writing 01:10:16.095 --> 01:10:22.526 - or that could be staff and and then it's presented, you know, and this body can then You know propose 01:10:22.526 --> 01:10:28.895 - amendments essentially to to a report bought by staff I do think that if this is already underway to 01:10:28.895 --> 01:10:31.102 - some degree for the year 2026 That 01:10:31.906 --> 01:10:37.325 - We should start collaborating sooner than later like it's it'd be better to have some input on the Formation 01:10:37.325 --> 01:10:42.347 - of the report rather than like waiting for a final draft from staff to be the first, you know review 01:10:42.347 --> 01:10:47.617 - in the first instance So I think this task force can serve that purpose as well So those are my thoughts. 01:10:47.617 --> 01:10:53.086 - I think it's there are some some questions outstanding. There are some things to figure out I was sympathetic 01:10:53.086 --> 01:10:58.206 - to I think everything director seabor said I don't think there's strong misalignment there in my mind, 01:10:58.206 --> 01:11:01.438 - but I think it's gonna take a few meetings anyway to sort it out 01:11:02.018 --> 01:11:08.900 - Thanks. Thank you. I think those are good comments from Flaherty. I agree. Again I would like to formally 01:11:08.900 --> 01:11:15.523 - adopt kind of some of the recommendations from the Walker study in section one. I like section one of 01:11:15.523 --> 01:11:22.470 - this resolution section two. I'm like very opposed to creating a task force. I kind of see this commission 01:11:22.470 --> 01:11:29.028 - as wonderful because it eliminated the separation of subcommittees and different meetings and groups 01:11:29.028 --> 01:11:30.846 - and things and I would like 01:11:31.042 --> 01:11:36.592 - I don't know if there's a way to do this and the resolution some kind of confirmation that this would 01:11:36.592 --> 01:11:42.034 - indeed be a limited time task force and would not be an ongoing thing. And I would think even given 01:11:42.034 --> 01:11:47.584 - how things can get drawn out and staff time can be kind of over accessed maybe even like a time limit 01:11:47.584 --> 01:11:52.318 - of like the task force will exist until this date some type of deadline. I don't know. 01:12:01.314 --> 01:12:08.182 - And I think we there is a real tension to resolve about produce versus oversee I think we should have 01:12:08.182 --> 01:12:15.319 - a goal of removing one of those verbs It sounds like everyone here had some Concerns about the production 01:12:15.319 --> 01:12:22.254 - part of it. I also have concerns about section 2 To speak to go back to the Parking Commission and the 01:12:22.254 --> 01:12:29.324 - trouble they had producing the report. Those were 11 people who were there 9 to 11 to focus specifically 01:12:29.324 --> 01:12:30.334 - on parking and 01:12:30.914 --> 01:12:36.905 - Now, we have a more diverse group here by intention. People come here with background in public 01:12:36.905 --> 01:12:43.332 - transportation, with accessibility, with cycling. To find three people who have the time and expertise 01:12:43.332 --> 01:12:49.572 - to really focus on producing a detailed parking report is going to be even more of a challenge here 01:12:49.572 --> 01:12:56.124 - than what you described as a nearly impossible task of the parking commission. So I think we'll probably 01:12:56.124 --> 01:12:59.806 - be well served to resolve this language in favor of having 01:12:59.906 --> 01:13:07.528 - Our role to be oversee and then work out the details of how that is produced I agree with mr. Seabor 01:13:07.528 --> 01:13:15.149 - that generally the staff is in a good position to over to to implement reports Thank you Okay, first 01:13:15.149 --> 01:13:22.997 - to address some of the comments I've heard I don't like the word task force. A lot of people don't like 01:13:22.997 --> 01:13:27.902 - the word committee but the simple purpose of the committee is to 01:13:28.034 --> 01:13:35.866 - Create an informal smaller group to help develop recommendations to the full body. I wanted to call 01:13:35.866 --> 01:13:43.777 - it a task force because it didn't need to be as formal as this body and it needed to be able to have 01:13:43.777 --> 01:13:49.886 - open and frank conversations with between commissioners and members of staff. 01:13:50.370 --> 01:13:57.362 - So that was my only goal in calling for a task force. I still think it's the right idea. I do agree 01:13:57.362 --> 01:14:04.563 - with Mr. Flaherty that it can and should be limited in scope, that it's meant to help create the first 01:14:04.563 --> 01:14:12.114 - one and hopefully that future reports will be more easily produced by staff and overseen by the commission. 01:14:12.114 --> 01:14:16.798 - But as to what should be in the report, if it's up to staff alone, 01:14:16.898 --> 01:14:23.502 - to decide what should be in the report then effectively the commission is not overseeing the report. 01:14:23.502 --> 01:14:30.041 - They're simply receiving something that staff decides it should be a conversation between both that 01:14:30.041 --> 01:14:36.711 - both are necessary to produce the report. Now remind everyone that the parking commission as far back 01:14:36.711 --> 01:14:43.903 - as 2017 was all but starved of resources by the administration whose mayor vetoed it. So this is a commission 01:14:43.903 --> 01:14:45.342 - that has been created 01:14:45.666 --> 01:14:52.738 - Between council and mayor there's a lot more agreement on it. It's more substantial. I disagreed with 01:14:52.738 --> 01:14:59.672 - the elimination of the parking commission For this reason that it was that many more people devoted 01:14:59.672 --> 01:15:06.744 - to there's plenty to talk about just with parking But this is the what the city has decided they need 01:15:06.744 --> 01:15:14.094 - to do to create this Commission that is a broader scope and so within this new paradigm we have to figure 01:15:14.094 --> 01:15:15.550 - out how to produce a 01:15:15.778 --> 01:15:22.012 - this report. It's just as important as it used to be. It's just now part of a bigger commission. 01:15:22.012 --> 01:15:28.439 - With that, I was going to take this opportunity to give people a preview of what my recommendations 01:15:28.439 --> 01:15:34.866 - for the report would be. At the very least, you can think about your opinions of it and we can vote 01:15:34.866 --> 01:15:41.293 - on it in September. These are, again, just my opinions and not the opinions of the commission. I'll 01:15:41.293 --> 01:15:45.406 - start with there are 12. You can see on the screen here this is 01:15:45.794 --> 01:15:53.157 - Figure one of the report it gives 12 recommendations three each under organization policy operations 01:15:53.157 --> 01:16:00.448 - technology and communications branding and wayfinding the preview is I endorse eight the twelve one 01:16:00.448 --> 01:16:07.884 - I am Concerned about and I give it a yellow flag and three I oppose So let's talk about them each the 01:16:07.884 --> 01:16:15.102 - first is this recommends transferring all citation appeals duties from the city clerk's office and 01:16:15.298 --> 01:16:22.083 - the parking services division briefly the clerk is already essentially municipal court the The Walker 01:16:22.083 --> 01:16:28.802 - study says that in another city municipal court might be the court of appeal I think we already have 01:16:28.802 --> 01:16:35.454 - that system and I don't think this is necessary the fact that parking services is no longer in City 01:16:35.454 --> 01:16:42.239 - Hall makes it a customer service issue because people who go there to appeal a ticket finally have to 01:16:42.239 --> 01:16:43.902 - go to another office and 01:16:44.098 --> 01:16:49.600 - But that's something that can be addressed by a different recommendation in the study. The 01:16:49.600 --> 01:16:55.827 - second organization recommendation was to develop a mission for parking services for the division that 01:16:55.827 --> 01:17:02.054 - is supported across city departments. I agree with it and would love to go into more detail at a later 01:17:02.054 --> 01:17:08.100 - time. The third is adopt a data driven approach to parking operations and management with recurring 01:17:08.100 --> 01:17:13.662 - transparency of key performance indicators. I also heartily endorse this item under policy. 01:17:13.890 --> 01:17:21.165 - The first item was implement on-street meter parking rate changes utilizing a zone based system considering 01:17:21.165 --> 01:17:28.574 - high and lower demand areas. This has been overdue for a decade. We can't do this fast enough. I emphatically 01:17:28.574 --> 01:17:35.377 - endorse this recommendation. The second one was to implement parking changes off street. The garages 01:17:35.377 --> 01:17:39.486 - cannot are not a vacuum. The garage and lots and the meters. 01:17:39.650 --> 01:17:46.642 - Together create a single system. This was the point of the Parking Commission's report that it's we 01:17:46.642 --> 01:17:53.634 - treat the system unitarily and not as separate silos The third was to reduce on-street paid parking 01:17:53.634 --> 01:18:00.626 - enforcement hours. This seemed to be a customer service style reaction, but Consistently we seen in 01:18:00.626 --> 01:18:07.827 - the city that parking after 5 p.m Is as robust if not more than parking during the day and that people 01:18:07.827 --> 01:18:09.086 - who? ask for this 01:18:09.442 --> 01:18:17.706 - Mean that no one has ever wanted to pay for parking So it's it's just not something that I would recommend 01:18:17.706 --> 01:18:25.584 - Under operations technology transition to multi-space on sheet meter pay stations operating using pay 01:18:25.584 --> 01:18:33.462 - by plate I don't know whether the the era of the single space meter is over in Bloomington perhaps at 01:18:33.462 --> 01:18:37.246 - at Handicap spaces they might need to stay but I 01:18:37.410 --> 01:18:43.852 - I for one endorsed the idea that we certainly need to upgrade the technology we're using it was used 01:18:43.852 --> 01:18:50.293 - when we bought it in 2013 and It's I I can only imagine the horror stories that parking services has 01:18:50.293 --> 01:18:56.735 - about maintaining them The second item on moving to a pay by plate a multi-space meter system update 01:18:56.735 --> 01:19:03.177 - the enforcement system to mobile license plate recognition technology and transition digital permits 01:19:03.177 --> 01:19:06.238 - the problem with LPR technology, this is why if 01:19:06.434 --> 01:19:14.224 - flagged this as a yellow is the same category that we've just seen debated in the city with flock cameras. 01:19:14.224 --> 01:19:21.868 - The privacy issues are significant. I don't have an opinion on this. I just know that political concerns 01:19:21.868 --> 01:19:29.294 - may hold this up and it's something that we need to think about. But I don't think we can think about 01:19:29.294 --> 01:19:35.774 - it outside of a greater discussion about city privacy policies which transcends parking. 01:19:36.738 --> 01:19:42.939 - And finally in operations technology replace the existing Austrian gated parking equipment for the same 01:19:42.939 --> 01:19:49.080 - reasons as the meters before they're in need of a refresh under communications branding and wayfinding 01:19:49.080 --> 01:19:55.161 - create a recognizable parking system logo and brand identity separate from the city's brand identity. 01:19:55.161 --> 01:20:01.481 - The issue I have with this is not the idea itself. It's that anything that I mean if we're having trouble 01:20:01.481 --> 01:20:03.806 - with the communications and wayfinding 01:20:04.098 --> 01:20:11.381 - And this isn't done as part of a large I think that there's a body outside of parking outside of any 01:20:11.381 --> 01:20:18.953 - department. Perhaps it's out of the mayor's office. That should be it shouldn't be reinventing the wheel 01:20:18.953 --> 01:20:26.381 - in a different silo. It should be done as part of an overall city refresh wayfinding refresh. It can't 01:20:26.381 --> 01:20:32.510 - just be done by parking services specifically. Number two C2 was develop and launch. 01:20:32.930 --> 01:20:40.323 - A marketing campaign. Absolutely. We need more of this, not less. And finally, installing informational 01:20:40.323 --> 01:20:47.574 - signage at key locations. The same thing. So, uh, of the, the 12 I recommended eight, uh, I'm opposed 01:20:47.574 --> 01:20:53.758 - to three and have concerns, believe that the commission should be concerned about one. 01:20:54.370 --> 01:21:01.496 - And that's I'm going to ask that my colleagues to do the same thing with this report to come up with 01:21:01.496 --> 01:21:08.552 - your Opinions about each of these recommendations. They're extremely relevant to our mission and we 01:21:08.552 --> 01:21:16.313 - should be I think this is what council expects of us so with that I would ask for approval of this resolution 01:21:16.313 --> 01:21:21.534 - and I can just finally say with regard to section 2 I don't want to limit 01:21:21.890 --> 01:21:28.771 - Such a body to three members. If there are other members of the body who would like to sit in on the 01:21:28.771 --> 01:21:35.924 - task force, you are welcome to. I'm simply trying to save some commissioners work, not trying to exclude 01:21:35.924 --> 01:21:43.077 - them from this important discussion. But it needs to happen now and not wait till the September meeting, 01:21:43.077 --> 01:21:50.366 - which is two months from now. We need to be getting moving on producing this report. Thank you. Thank you. 01:21:51.746 --> 01:21:59.278 - Now We're looking for a motion or more public comment I think was introduced with a motion to adopt. 01:21:59.278 --> 01:22:06.735 - So I think the question is pending if we're ready to take a vote on it Okay I'll ask the Commission 01:22:06.735 --> 01:22:14.565 - any further comment before we vote on this I Will have one sure brief follow-up, which is that I I heard 01:22:14.565 --> 01:22:20.382 - things they agreed with from other commissioners about you know if I guess if 01:22:20.578 --> 01:22:26.986 - We had an August session or if we had more time, I would favor setting a time limit and a narrow scope 01:22:26.986 --> 01:22:33.581 - for the task force for the purpose of basically helping us define the first version of this annual report 01:22:33.581 --> 01:22:40.052 - and what we want it to look like. So that's my intent in supporting the resolution. But I think because 01:22:40.052 --> 01:22:45.278 - we don't have an August session and when it faced two months of delay to, you know, 01:22:45.634 --> 01:22:56.426 - Hold on the resolution and make such such amendments to it or edits to it I would I'm still in favor 01:22:56.426 --> 01:23:07.111 - of moving forward tonight. So just wanted to clarify that Thank you All right, is there a motion to 01:23:07.111 --> 01:23:14.590 - adopt commissioners Olin resolution TCR 26 17 as written I'm so sorry 01:23:15.202 --> 01:23:24.982 - Wait, I would it's not as written. It was amended previously. Okay, and you've already have a motion 01:23:24.982 --> 01:23:34.278 - and a second So I just need to call roll when you're ready All right, then roll call Bolin Yes, 01:23:34.278 --> 01:23:44.542 - Flaherty Yes, Davis. Yes, Stossberg. Yes Coppock. Yes, sure might yes All right motion carries, thank you 01:23:45.602 --> 01:23:51.970 - And with that, we will return the gavel back to Mr. Vola. Thank you, Mr. Sossberg. Let's now move to... 01:23:51.970 --> 01:23:58.216 - Can I actually... Sorry, can I ask another point of order? Yes. Which is whether the chair intends to 01:23:58.216 --> 01:24:04.401 - name members of the task force and if that needs to be done in a meeting versus outside of it. I was 01:24:04.401 --> 01:24:10.524 - going to do it just a second since the resolution has been adopted. Before I name members, I'd like 01:24:10.524 --> 01:24:12.606 - to ask if there's any volunteers. 01:24:13.058 --> 01:24:19.748 - Anybody who desperately wants to be on this task force? Is there am I seeing any hands? Over here. 01:24:19.748 --> 01:24:26.572 - All right. Oh, I'm going to name myself comes with a flare or Commissioner Flaherty and because he's 01:24:26.572 --> 01:24:33.329 - not here Commissioner binder Who was also on the parking commission before so if anybody else wants 01:24:33.329 --> 01:24:40.154 - to be on it, please let me know Let's move on now to the update of the local motion grant from staff 01:24:40.154 --> 01:24:42.046 - Who is here to present that 01:24:44.866 --> 01:24:53.849 - I'm David Brant as the alternative transportation coordinator Please go ahead. Thank you so just to 01:24:53.849 --> 01:25:02.922 - refresh everyone's memory on the local motion grant program, this is an annual cycle where Community 01:25:02.922 --> 01:25:12.354 - organizations submit a proposal their project idea that promotes walking biking rolling in the community 01:25:12.354 --> 01:25:13.342 - applicants 01:25:13.506 --> 01:25:21.489 - Provide to us a short narrative describing its impact and how they intend to implement that So there 01:25:21.489 --> 01:25:29.393 - will be a timeline of how they will complete their small project over the next year and then report 01:25:29.393 --> 01:25:37.534 - back to us a 10% cash match is required. So they have some skin in the game there So 2025 awardees you 01:25:37.534 --> 01:25:42.750 - may recall we had five splitting a pool of eight thousand dollars 01:25:42.882 --> 01:25:52.360 - so the Bloomington community bike project with and The Monroe County Public Library and Summit Hill 01:25:52.360 --> 01:26:01.837 - They all received $2,000 each and then as you can see up there the boys and girls club and the YMCA 01:26:01.837 --> 01:26:10.462 - Got two more They each got $1,000 so a couple examples of what we're talking about here is 01:26:11.138 --> 01:26:19.208 - Summit Hill, for example, they had a bike repair station installed Sight with them the boys and girls 01:26:19.208 --> 01:26:27.358 - club. They recently sent a couple pictures of their club riders program In operation and then like the 01:26:27.358 --> 01:26:35.349 - YMCA had healthy kids state event that this funding went towards So that's sort of the scope of what 01:26:35.349 --> 01:26:40.254 - we're looking at here To give you a preview of the 2026 cycle 01:26:40.354 --> 01:26:48.474 - We hope to send out a press release sometime in August announcing the call for projects And then the 01:26:48.474 --> 01:26:56.916 - tentative timeline is that we would bring those to the October Transportation Commission for your review 01:26:56.916 --> 01:27:05.036 - So tentatively those dates that are important to applicants are October 5th would be the application 01:27:05.036 --> 01:27:08.574 - deadline and then they would submit to us a 01:27:09.026 --> 01:27:16.994 - Materials for their presentation by October 19th to be included in packet and then October 26 each For 01:27:16.994 --> 01:27:25.117 - the for the Transportation Commission each organization would have a five-minute presentation To explain 01:27:25.117 --> 01:27:32.852 - what their Proposal would be and then it would be up to Commission members from there to decide how 01:27:32.852 --> 01:27:37.726 - to allocate funds and ask any questions of those organizations 01:27:38.306 --> 01:27:46.778 - So with that most, just to summarize, most everything is staying the same as last year, but please do 01:27:46.778 --> 01:27:55.499 - take notes, relay any comments to staff. If you have ideas of ways to do it different in 2027, questions 01:27:55.499 --> 01:28:03.805 - about the process, we're happy to answer that. So that's the end of my update there, and please let 01:28:03.805 --> 01:28:07.294 - us know if you have any questions for us. 01:28:08.450 --> 01:28:16.181 - Thank you. Are there any questions on the local motion grant awards to my right? To my left Thank you 01:28:16.181 --> 01:28:24.064 - for the report much obliged Let's now move to the safe streets and roads for all SS for a annual report 01:28:24.064 --> 01:28:31.947 - who's presenting this one? I see. Mr. Duncan Hello, my name is Hank Duncan safe streets program manager 01:28:31.947 --> 01:28:36.798 - as part of the safe streets for all action plan adopted in 2024 01:28:36.962 --> 01:28:42.741 - City staff is tasked with preparing an annual report highlighting progress made toward vision zero This 01:28:42.741 --> 01:28:48.520 - report will be presented to the Transportation Commission and City Council Before we develop the city's 01:28:48.520 --> 01:28:54.410 - first report later in the year We want to talk to this Commission about the performance measures included 01:28:54.410 --> 01:29:00.078 - in it Within the staff memo. There is a list of performance measures we plan to include in the report 01:29:00.078 --> 01:29:02.078 - and as transportation commissioners 01:29:02.498 --> 01:29:12.464 - We request that you review the measures to be included in the report and make suggestions as to any 01:29:12.464 --> 01:29:22.728 - other Items that should be included in the final report. Oh I'm sorry. I thought you were Yeah, I have 01:29:22.728 --> 01:29:30.302 - one like that's a question mr. Stossberg, I'm so sorry. I completely yes. I 01:29:30.530 --> 01:29:37.770 - The metrics are great. Do you anticipate the annual report will include maps? For example, I'd like 01:29:37.770 --> 01:29:45.227 - to see the Map of the high-injury network shrinking over time as we approach zero miles of high-injury 01:29:45.227 --> 01:29:52.468 - network so the high-injury network is the network of the highest percentile of the streets with the 01:29:52.468 --> 01:29:57.246 - highest percentile of fatal and severe injuries in Bloomington so 01:29:57.890 --> 01:30:05.406 - It will never shrink unless we get to zero The streets will just change and the numbers required to 01:30:05.406 --> 01:30:12.922 - make it onto the high-end your network will just decrease So it could work if the framing was not a 01:30:12.922 --> 01:30:20.739 - percentile, but some sort of absolute number of crash. Yes. Yeah Thank you further questions to my left 01:30:20.739 --> 01:30:24.798 - To my right this comes from a commissioner Flaherty I 01:30:25.282 --> 01:30:31.290 - Yeah, thank you. Um, will there be like geospatial analysis as part of this? Like do you think some 01:30:31.290 --> 01:30:37.418 - of these metrics will be presented in that way or it would be purely like aggregate numbers? You know 01:30:37.418 --> 01:30:43.606 - that is a good question. I'm not sure yet We've been looking at reports from other cities Indianapolis 01:30:43.606 --> 01:30:49.614 - just published their first SS for a report earlier this year as you and Commissioner Strasburg said 01:30:49.614 --> 01:30:52.798 - maps and geospatial analyses and visualizations that 01:30:53.570 --> 01:31:00.226 - We would like that to be a part of the plan. I can't commit to that yet just because I don't know what 01:31:00.226 --> 01:31:06.883 - that entails yet, but we would like to Thank you further questions Let me ask one first. These are the 01:31:06.883 --> 01:31:13.991 - reason I was Proclaimed there for a minute is because I was looking in the ordinance creating this commission 01:31:13.991 --> 01:31:20.454 - as to whether there was the same obligation that mr Seabor pointed out for us to oversee the SS for 01:31:20.454 --> 01:31:22.974 - a report and there does not seem to be 01:31:23.074 --> 01:31:30.701 - Is this the first such report that has it not been produced yet? Yes, correct. Okay What is your rough 01:31:30.701 --> 01:31:38.253 - timetable for getting it done? Part of it depends on the performance measures that you all would like 01:31:38.253 --> 01:31:46.398 - to be included in the report, right right now It's late. July. We would like to do it by mid to late fall and 01:31:46.594 --> 01:31:53.689 - Sometime before the end of this year, but I think around October was that happy medium time that we're 01:31:53.689 --> 01:32:00.715 - expecting it But again things can change but sometime this year, okay How many of these items here on 01:32:00.715 --> 01:32:07.603 - this list are Hard to get easy to get do you have them? I mean do they require some of them require 01:32:07.603 --> 01:32:13.182 - more work than others? sure, so a lot of these are easy to get because we have a 01:32:13.858 --> 01:32:20.502 - Great crash dashboard and in crash data provided by the state There will be other items and some of 01:32:20.502 --> 01:32:27.212 - these items there is an element to subjectivity For example the very last one dollar amount invested 01:32:27.212 --> 01:32:33.923 - in infrastructure improvements along the high priority network as a percentage of all transportation 01:32:33.923 --> 01:32:41.630 - projects I Would argue that just about all of the city's infrastructure projects include some safe streets elements 01:32:42.050 --> 01:32:48.958 - That could be as little as adding in as a repaving project that adds in a curb extension or a curb ramp 01:32:48.958 --> 01:32:55.732 - or a signal replacement that changes the geometry just a little bit. The challenge on our end will be 01:32:55.732 --> 01:33:02.507 - how much of that money that went to the car centric maintenance project, how much of that went to the 01:33:02.507 --> 01:33:09.415 - safety improvements as well. So that one may be the most difficult one because we will be going through 01:33:09.415 --> 01:33:11.806 - each of the projects and looking at 01:33:11.938 --> 01:33:21.200 - the individual items or even making an estimate as to how much was actually Made towards that safety 01:33:21.200 --> 01:33:30.920 - improvement How might you go about distinguishing And I'm like from for one Item how much of it is safety 01:33:30.920 --> 01:33:40.182 - related how much is not safety related? I mean like how do you Is there a way is it arbitrary is it? 01:33:40.182 --> 01:33:41.374 - Yeah, that's 01:33:42.050 --> 01:33:49.876 - That is one of the questions I have right now. What I would like to do is go through the cost the engineering 01:33:49.876 --> 01:33:56.990 - incurred throughout those different projects and I'd like to see what the labor materials costs are 01:33:56.990 --> 01:34:04.105 - for those safe for those individual safety improvement items But I'm not sure that exists for every 01:34:04.105 --> 01:34:11.646 - project because it is under one one contract and labor is labor Okay further questions mr. Stossberg Yeah 01:34:13.282 --> 01:34:20.139 - We want numbers that in five years, in 10 years, we can have useful trend lines and that works the best 01:34:20.139 --> 01:34:27.193 - if we put the right numbers on there now. Absolutely. Bloomington seems to be doing a good job at growing. 01:34:27.193 --> 01:34:34.247 - So we want to be able to show progress even as we're putting more cars on the road, perhaps more cyclists. 01:34:34.247 --> 01:34:41.038 - What I'm not seeing here are some relative numbers that might scale over time, like number of injuries 01:34:41.038 --> 01:34:42.686 - versus miles traveled or 01:34:42.786 --> 01:34:49.613 - number of injuries versus the population of Bloomington so that If we grow by 2% our crashes grow by 01:34:49.613 --> 01:34:56.508 - 1% we could show that we're making progress and at least in a relative sense That is a great idea and 01:34:56.508 --> 01:35:03.403 - that's something that in dot does a good job of we and I don't know if we have or are capable capable 01:35:03.403 --> 01:35:10.365 - of getting a number of total miles traveled in this throughout the city of Bloomington, but we do have 01:35:10.365 --> 01:35:12.190 - traffic counts for example 01:35:13.154 --> 01:35:19.165 - Walnut Street has an average daily traffic volume of about 13,000 motor vehicles per day if we know 01:35:19.165 --> 01:35:25.597 - that there are X number of fatal severe injury crashes today Versus 10 years from now when traffic numbers 01:35:25.597 --> 01:35:31.969 - have gone up which we can calculate compared to the FS eyes in that year that can be that scalable number 01:35:31.969 --> 01:35:38.281 - that you're thinking of and Maybe population could be a proxy for how are we keeping our community safe? 01:35:38.281 --> 01:35:42.910 - Do you think mode share is an interesting? number or set of numbers like our 01:35:43.490 --> 01:35:49.821 - Are we helping if we shift more people from single-family occupancy to other modes? Oh for sure and 01:35:49.821 --> 01:35:56.216 - That that is absolutely part of the goal of what we in planning and transportation do it is not just 01:35:56.216 --> 01:36:02.674 - about improving the existing Streetscape network. It's about improving the network so that mode shift 01:36:02.674 --> 01:36:09.259 - occurs and we get more people Walking more people rolling more people using the bus rather than driving 01:36:09.259 --> 01:36:13.374 - their car because most crashes occur by people driving their car 01:36:14.434 --> 01:36:24.080 - Thank you. Now, in terms of getting those figures, right now, we use census data, which is every decade. 01:36:24.080 --> 01:36:33.450 - And most, if not all, of the questions revolve around community going to work. What percentage of the 01:36:33.450 --> 01:36:38.686 - time do you bike going to work? And that's a part of it. 01:36:39.298 --> 01:36:47.637 - But that's not all transportation. We also use mode shares to do things other than going to work. So 01:36:47.637 --> 01:36:56.059 - the census is a Number that we can use. I'm not sure if it's the number that we should use. Thank you 01:36:56.059 --> 01:37:04.398 - Further questions to my left Yeah, thank you You're to my right. Oh, that's right. Yeah, let's go to 01:37:04.398 --> 01:37:09.022 - second round questions to my right. Mr. Flaherty Thanks 01:37:09.666 --> 01:37:16.106 - Yeah, similarly, I think, I know this is the first report, but thinking ahead, we'll want to, I think, 01:37:16.106 --> 01:37:22.546 - include, like, longitudinal trends, so like, how does this, you know, how do these numbers change over 01:37:22.546 --> 01:37:28.986 - time? I think the absolute number is useful, but in some of these metrics, like having, yeah, relative 01:37:28.986 --> 01:37:35.488 - to what would definitely be useful, even just as a percentage, the number of crashes involving speeding 01:37:35.488 --> 01:37:36.926 - or distracted driving, 01:37:37.186 --> 01:37:43.941 - All crashes what percentage you know, maybe those things are planned already, but just looking at the 01:37:43.941 --> 01:37:50.961 - list it says number similar number of action items completed from the the the I guess the countermeasures 01:37:50.961 --> 01:37:57.849 - like policy roadmap, right? Maybe we only get so like also the total right so as we have two three four 01:37:57.849 --> 01:38:02.750 - years down the line like the number completed that year the total to date 01:38:02.882 --> 01:38:09.073 - so we can kind of monitor those things. Again, that's probably a little more forward-looking than just 01:38:09.073 --> 01:38:15.084 - this year. I think the VMT piece, I'm a little, I'm trying to tease out in my head, like we want to 01:38:15.084 --> 01:38:21.455 - reduce VMT, I think this is what you're saying, and so we want to reduce VMT, even if we have a reduction 01:38:21.455 --> 01:38:27.586 - also in the absolute number of crashes that result in death or serious injury, it could look like, if 01:38:27.586 --> 01:38:32.094 - we're comparing it to VMT, it could look like it's actually like worsening 01:38:32.482 --> 01:38:38.881 - Even while we're making progress on both absolute deaths or serious injuries and mode shift And I'm 01:38:38.881 --> 01:38:45.472 - just I don't know. My gut would be that population is probably the right comparison Figure do you know 01:38:45.472 --> 01:38:51.999 - is there Beth like best practice I guess in the field Not that I know of that that is one reason that 01:38:51.999 --> 01:38:58.527 - I'd like to look at these other safe street reports because this is a relatively New trend of putting 01:38:58.527 --> 01:39:02.430 - out these annual reports and it's a good trend. But again, I 01:39:02.914 --> 01:39:08.142 - Because it's the first time we're doing this. We don't necessarily know what are the best metrics to 01:39:08.142 --> 01:39:13.318 - use and I what I would like to look at a city that has done a report like this for at least five or 01:39:13.318 --> 01:39:18.701 - ten years to see What are the trends that you're asking about because I don't have the answers to those 01:39:18.701 --> 01:39:23.929 - questions right now Okay, I wonder about looking to Europe as well just because they've tended to be 01:39:23.929 --> 01:39:29.726 - quite far ahead of the US in many instances around design safety interventions. So sure. Thank you Mr. Sossberg 01:39:30.402 --> 01:39:38.175 - I'm going to go ahead and propose something which might be out of scope, but including non-human fatalities. 01:39:38.175 --> 01:39:45.520 - One of the kinds of crashes I looked at was deer crashes. We have more crashes with deer than cyclists 01:39:45.520 --> 01:39:52.650 - or pedestrian. They cost about $10,000 on average each, and they'd be great to prevent. And they're 01:39:52.650 --> 01:39:59.710 - also, there's mitigations for them. Those are mostly in the county on the interstates, our biggest 01:40:00.098 --> 01:40:08.463 - We do have some in the city and I don't know exactly You know which ones make sense to mitigate in the 01:40:08.463 --> 01:40:16.746 - city but Sure, thanks be fun to look at Any other let me take a crack at this first of all, I want to 01:40:16.746 --> 01:40:25.111 - endorse that Specifically number of crashes involving deer ought to be measured in this city secondly, 01:40:25.111 --> 01:40:27.710 - I wonder if you have considered 01:40:28.066 --> 01:40:34.244 - Upping the frequency by which you do simple traffic counts of Streets in the city because in overtime 01:40:34.244 --> 01:40:40.302 - when I've looked at traffic counts I've often had to deal with a 15 or 20 year old piece of data as 01:40:40.302 --> 01:40:46.359 - the only indication how much traffic there is there and I feel like Can we do it more often? Can we 01:40:46.359 --> 01:40:51.326 - get a more frequent standard for traffic counts across all streets in the city? I 01:40:51.810 --> 01:40:57.966 - Sure, that is much more of an engineering specific question because our engineering technician who does 01:40:57.966 --> 01:41:04.003 - the traffic counts is an engineering not in planning I will say that he is out every week putting out 01:41:04.003 --> 01:41:10.099 - new traffic counts. So the limitation is definitely on staff time not on anything else and Because the 01:41:10.099 --> 01:41:16.255 - city is working on so many new projects. For example, it could be repaving projects or corridor studies 01:41:16.255 --> 01:41:20.990 - or traffic coming projects or potential speeding complaints from the public and 01:41:21.666 --> 01:41:28.133 - They're about 300 total miles of city streets and it's just hard to get through all of them because 01:41:28.133 --> 01:41:34.665 - there are a lot of them and so I Absolutely hear you. For example, I'm about to start working on the 01:41:34.665 --> 01:41:41.262 - South walnut corridor study later this year We don't have any traffic counts on it in the past decade 01:41:41.262 --> 01:41:45.854 - or so So it's not helpful to us. But that is just another example that 01:41:46.082 --> 01:41:52.691 - We will go out there and do more traffic counts. But you're right. There are there are a lot of streets 01:41:52.691 --> 01:41:59.173 - and a lot of locations on the streets as to where we should have traffic counts. Well to that end and 01:41:59.173 --> 01:42:05.718 - responding again to what Mr. Seabor asked in the previous item would it be helpful if there was a task 01:42:05.718 --> 01:42:12.136 - force or committee to advise you. I mean how soon do you need us to respond to this. We don't have a 01:42:12.136 --> 01:42:13.534 - regular meeting until 01:42:13.986 --> 01:42:19.638 - In a September we can give some ideas now, but maybe commissioners will have more ideas in the next 01:42:19.638 --> 01:42:25.799 - few weeks Can you give us a deadline for getting back to you with recommendations? Sure for recommendations. 01:42:25.799 --> 01:42:31.452 - This was the only meeting that we were planning on speaking to you about this But if and and if you 01:42:31.452 --> 01:42:37.274 - have ideas after this meeting you have you absolutely have my contact information You can email me and 01:42:37.274 --> 01:42:42.078 - we can chat about these ideas. I Would like to get started on this report next month 01:42:42.498 --> 01:42:48.600 - But there as you can see there are a number of action items or performance measures included already 01:42:48.600 --> 01:42:54.883 - And so if we add one a little bit later on it's not going to delay the whole project Okay, I mean maybe 01:42:54.883 --> 01:43:00.924 - I can suggest an arbitrary date of say August 15th that we can get back to you. That's perfect with 01:43:00.924 --> 01:43:07.026 - ideas Alright, so let me just direct commissioners to send any ideas on this to mr. Duncan by August 01:43:07.026 --> 01:43:11.678 - 15th but yeah, it feels like traffic counts are the kind of thing that are I 01:43:12.162 --> 01:43:19.033 - Bread-and-butter data that we is it safe to say we can't afford to do more of them Right now a time 01:43:19.033 --> 01:43:25.973 - is the constraint more than anything Because of because of existing staff levels. Mr. Sossberg Is it 01:43:25.973 --> 01:43:32.913 - true? There's some new technologies coming online like ever everyone has a phone in their pocket and 01:43:32.913 --> 01:43:39.166 - I think Google is Knows like where you are all the time sure and it's selling some of this 01:43:39.330 --> 01:43:47.259 - Data is there a way instead of installing more of these devices we can buy it from a vendor who's already 01:43:47.259 --> 01:43:54.889 - tracking where we are Yeah, so the city contracts with place your AI and that's a software. I haven't 01:43:54.889 --> 01:44:02.594 - worked much with But they do have They do they do have a feature that includes traffic counts. I don't 01:44:02.594 --> 01:44:06.110 - know I haven't done a one-to-one comparison on 01:44:06.210 --> 01:44:13.555 - The two counts that city staff puts out versus their traffic counts based on cell phone data But that 01:44:13.555 --> 01:44:20.900 - does exist and if we are looking for more traffic counts that may be the answer actually Okay, that's 01:44:20.900 --> 01:44:28.389 - interesting, thank you any final comments for mr. Duncan on the SS for annual report and again, I don't 01:44:28.389 --> 01:44:34.942 - see the specific call in the ordinance for there to be a oversight of this report although 01:44:35.266 --> 01:44:40.949 - I think mr. C was right. We should be overseeing it too, but that's a discussion for another time it 01:44:40.949 --> 01:44:46.687 - just for clarification purposes that Recommendation layer requirement lives in the safety action plan 01:44:46.687 --> 01:44:52.426 - itself. It's one of the action So it is an obligation of the Transportation Commission. Yeah you this 01:44:52.426 --> 01:44:58.109 - part of the recommendation was to create a Transportation Commission that would oversee this report. 01:44:58.109 --> 01:45:01.822 - All right. Well, then do I need to form another task force now? I 01:45:03.490 --> 01:45:08.868 - I think currently staff is comfortable without a task force, but if you all want to but we're Happy 01:45:08.868 --> 01:45:14.246 - to check in with you frequently Well, I'll pull the Avengers individual members over the next month 01:45:14.246 --> 01:45:19.892 - or two and see if anybody if there's anybody interested in over helping you With the report sounds good. 01:45:19.892 --> 01:45:25.270 - Thank you. Mr. Duncan. Thank you Let's go now to general public comment on items not on the docket. 01:45:25.270 --> 01:45:30.810 - We have a written submission Is there any member of the public who would like to speak on an item that 01:45:30.810 --> 01:45:32.638 - we have not talked about tonight? 01:45:32.834 --> 01:45:39.867 - If so, please come to the podium, state your name. You'll have three minutes. If you are online, please 01:45:39.867 --> 01:45:46.630 - use the raise hand function and we'll call on you in due order. Please come to the podium, sign in, 01:45:46.630 --> 01:45:53.664 - state your name. Again, if you're online, please use the raise hand function in Zoom. Hi, I'm Jill Bird 01:45:53.664 --> 01:45:58.398 - and I've lived in Bloomington 50 years. I walk and bike all the time. 01:45:58.530 --> 01:46:07.106 - And I feel like a lot of moves made by the city for traffic improvement are really detrimental to pedestrians 01:46:07.106 --> 01:46:14.903 - and bicyclists. I'm not very happy with the bump outs on Rogers. I'm not very happy with some other 01:46:14.903 --> 01:46:21.374 - bump outs. I know they're to calm traffic but they slow traffic and that makes for 01:46:21.506 --> 01:46:30.493 - irate drivers and irate drivers are less patient with pedestrians and bicyclists and I feel like I am 01:46:30.493 --> 01:46:38.775 - in more danger with some of the lane reductions and the slower calmer traffic. Years ago they 01:46:38.775 --> 01:46:47.586 - were considering a change to the Rogers and Third Street intersection and they did kind of a little 01:46:47.586 --> 01:46:50.846 - mock-up. It was temporary and it was 01:46:51.074 --> 01:46:58.723 - adjusted the traffic for a few weeks and The city and the community was able to get a real look at what 01:46:58.723 --> 01:47:06.078 - truly happened with that calming device and It wasn't good So they never did it and I was wondering 01:47:06.078 --> 01:47:13.728 - if the city could move more towards that type of thing instead of jumping in and putting bump outs that 01:47:13.728 --> 01:47:20.862 - I'm seeing problems with and I don't know if other people are seeing problems with them also and 01:47:24.258 --> 01:47:31.867 - Thank you for your comment. Thank you. Is there anybody online who'd like to speak to an item that is 01:47:31.867 --> 01:47:39.476 - not on the docket? Please use the raise hand function and zoom. Is there anyone online? Last call for 01:47:39.476 --> 01:47:47.681 - public comment either in the room or online general public comment Seeing then we come back to the Commission 01:47:47.681 --> 01:47:51.262 - for final notes. Our next meeting is What date? 01:47:55.138 --> 01:48:04.205 - The next planning session is August 24th. The next regular hearing is September 17th 17th is that's 01:48:04.205 --> 01:48:13.454 - early because of budgets September 17th is the next regular hearing session. Sorry, September 28th is 01:48:13.454 --> 01:48:18.078 - the next regular Yeah, sorry. So once again August 01:48:20.386 --> 01:48:27.817 - August 24th August 24th is a planning planning session session that'll be in the Klosky in the classroom 01:48:27.817 --> 01:48:34.894 - and that's just planning will be staffed by Planning transportation and our next regular hearing is 01:48:34.894 --> 01:48:42.254 - September 28th in this room Any last final announcements mr. Flaherty, it's sort of like I guess agenda 01:48:42.254 --> 01:48:50.110 - related future agenda related and I'm curious about We're having an increasingly large queue of items that the 01:48:50.370 --> 01:48:57.295 - That were brought before the Commission that the Commission then acted on in some way that are pending 01:48:57.295 --> 01:49:04.086 - and I'm worried about losing track of them or losing sight of them and also Yeah, just just time lag 01:49:04.086 --> 01:49:11.213 - I think staff capacity surely must dictate some of this at times, but I think just for the sake of future 01:49:11.213 --> 01:49:18.071 - agendas and Not losing track of actions previous taken by the Commission but could we include that as 01:49:18.071 --> 01:49:18.878 - part of our 01:49:19.010 --> 01:49:25.010 - Like a list of pending items that are not on the agenda, you know not action items. I believe this is 01:49:25.010 --> 01:49:31.009 - something we've discussed That John Garcy was planning on attending tonight and it is his prerogative 01:49:31.009 --> 01:49:36.891 - He has just he is already planning to do that if he was not sick tonight He would have been here to 01:49:36.891 --> 01:49:42.773 - provide that update as part of the discussion of topics not on the docket but we can make it like a 01:49:42.773 --> 01:49:46.302 - part of our planning for meetings starting in September and 01:49:46.402 --> 01:49:52.268 - Keeping keeping track of prior items that we're supposed to be keeping track of. Is that the idea? That's 01:49:52.268 --> 01:49:57.801 - what I was trying to communicate like like if Yeah, just maybe it's just a standing part of Agendas 01:49:57.801 --> 01:50:03.501 - or packets that like, you know items that that are pending essentially that are out for action of some 01:50:03.501 --> 01:50:09.366 - kind and have yet to come back to us to not just for our own tracking as commissioners and for the public 01:50:09.366 --> 01:50:15.121 - but also for the You know kind of I guess the the record so to speak So that you can actually see these 01:50:15.121 --> 01:50:16.062 - things over time 01:50:16.866 --> 01:50:23.403 - Do have a spreadsheet where we are tracking all of this information as part of our administrative duties 01:50:23.403 --> 01:50:29.877 - for the Commission I will speak with the other liaisons about Most sustainable way to move forward with 01:50:29.877 --> 01:50:36.538 - that request I'll also add that that was a thing that we were trying to start to do your call two meetings 01:50:36.538 --> 01:50:42.951 - ago I did it at the end of the meeting and it is something we want to get back on track. Mr. Garzi was 01:50:42.951 --> 01:50:46.686 - In that direction, but we could certainly post it somewhere 01:50:47.202 --> 01:50:53.309 - This is something we can talk about in scheduling meetings, right? Just planning for it. Okay. 01:50:53.309 --> 01:51:00.252 - Thank you. Thank you for that. Any other final questions or comments? All right with that, thanks everyone. 01:51:00.252 --> 01:51:06.874 - Our next meeting is August 24th in the McCloskey room. It's a planning session until then this meeting 01:51:06.874 --> 01:51:07.774 - is adjourned.