This meeting will come to order. This is the July Regular hearing of the city of Bloomington Transportation
Commission Can we have the secretary call the roll? Did you say roll sorry, yes the role, please Davis
here Coppock here Stossburg here Poland here Flaherty here Stramitis here
Anyone attending online? All right, we have a quorum we'll conduct our agenda as follows under reports
and communications will hear from commissioners and from staff specifically a staff memo on the process
for selecting a parking kiosk vendor Under cases will hear TCR 26 16 a title to amendment of
on Transportation Commission appointments
Under discussion of topics not on the docket. We will hear from commissioners resolution by me to submit
findings regarding the 2026 Walker parking study and to form an annual report task force and from staff
an update on local motion grant 2025 and introduction to local motion grants or 2026 and also a an annual
report on safe streets and roads for all or SS for a And then we'll have general public comment and
then we will adjourn
Let's start now with reports from commissioners. Are there any reports from commissioners to my right?
To my left Did you ever report No, okay We now go to reports from staff. Let's hear about the selection
process for our parking kiosk vendor I see Michelle wall parking services director Hello. Hello. How
are you guys? Good. How are you? I'm good. Thanks. Good
Michelle wall parking service director the city of Bloomington In summary parking services has provided
the transportation commissioners with two demonstrations of integrated parking management platforms
as attached in the following staff memo arrived pulse accompanied with a written statement provided
by Josh cedar is affiliated with Sloberg kiosk system elevate populist brief is accompanied with a written
statement by Braxton Ratliff and
and is affiliated with the IPS kiosk system. The design of both platforms aligns with the recommendations
detailed in our 2026 Walker Parking Rate Study and Comprehensive Review. The use of each platform is
conditional on the adoption of specified kiosk technology and cannot be substituted. Also, we have launched
on July 8th two of these kiosks in our lobby for public use to try them out, to see them, and to take
a short survey.
Thank you Also, by the way both representatives from IPS IPS and arrive are in the audience. Thank you
Okay, are there any questions for staff on this item to my left Don't be shy have a question Yes, I
think that's the idea
Okay, get really close to the mic. And maybe turn the mic on.
Sorry, sorry I Have some questions for arrive I work in the transportation software field and particularly
but one of my roles was to vet our vendors so Arrive you're based in May have your name Matt Brooker
regional director. Yes. So arrive is does have headquarters in Sweden as well as Atlanta, Georgia several
US offices and for this
for Bloomington, Indiana as a customer, would the data be stored in the United States or would it be
stored overseas? Here in the United States. Okay. Do you have any security certifications such as ISO
2701 or SOC 2, type 2 that would govern data privacy or data security? We do, yes. We're fully PCI compliant.
We do have SOC compliance as well, happy to follow up with whatever certifications the body may like
to see. Okay, thank you. I didn't see those on your website.
questions for IPS Hello sir, can you hear me? May I have your name? Brexton Ratliff. Thank you. And
you are based in the US? Yeah, IPS is based in San Diego, California. And I saw on your website you
already have the PCI DSS certifications? Yes, sir.
Do you have other data or privacy certifications like ISO 2701? Correct. Yes, sir. Oh great. Thank you
I think those were my primary concerns. I was checking on the websites to see sure if you had
the certifications Thank you. Thank you, sir. Appreciate it Questions to my right from commissioners
Okay Commissioner Davis
I'd like to hear from both of you about what accessibility features these systems have. I've tried them
both, and Michelle and her staff told me what they knew, but I don't believe we had the full suite of
accessibility features on either machine that's here in town.
So I'd like to know what you have for blind or visually impaired users. Good evening, Josh Deeder with
the Rye Regional Sales Manager. Yes, we do have full ADA compliance in terms of height of our machines
as well as separate configurations in terms of
color in terms of hearing impairment, we have the ability to add audio jack for auxiliary accessibility
as well as a speaker system to assist with guiding you through our payment process. In addition, we
do have a 24-7-365 support line as well via IVR that can support making payments over the phone as well
as paired with our park mobile application that would have the ADA-compliant settings already programmed
into the individuals. But all of our machines do come fully.
with our ADA compliance as well as the PCI compliance budget earlier. So the fact that the machines
here didn't have those features, or did they and I just didn't see them? You are correct that the audio
jack would be custom and build. We do build our machines to service the towns and clients that we meet
with. So once we have all the configuration requirements and requests, we would custom build and make
sure that it does allow. Our stock machine here does not have the audio jack, you are correct.
Okay, thank you. Further questions. Oh, let's hear from the other vendor. It's going to be more or less
the same. I mean, we we meet all ADA compliance that you guys would run into. I mean, federal regulations
mandate that we have in terms of standing it up in terms of the demo environment, not something that
Commonly requests, but we would be more than accommodating to you know adhere to any 80 80 compliance
that you would have on on the street higher requirements like the The folks from arrival were saying
anything on the back end Collins blind hearing impaired Colorblindness anything that you would have
related to that. So yes, ma'am Okay. Thank you. Absolutely. Thank you All right I'm sorry the
It's not a let's see I did want to give each vendor an opportunity to just generally speak on behalf
of their product since we didn't really get a sense of I mean in addition to what you submitted if you
would just like to say a few words in general explaining your product and why you think it would fit
the city. I'd be happy to start with arrive.
Just general overview of your product and why you think it would work for us. Absolutely. Thank you.
Yes So very similar to the parking department's initiative of park simple our goal and initiative as
a company is to assist your city and becoming more livable through an accessible Parking payment provider
that allows you to have full control availability insight to your on-street city inventory occupancy
and be able to show the proper balance so with the tools that we provided
With our flow bird hardware machine as well as arrive pulse and insights as it back office services
for additional parking studies research and collaboration In congruence with our park mobile application
is already on street It will allow a simplified platform to update rates have event rates have progressive
rates and be able to accompany all of your constituents needs as they go on an ongoing basis I Would
just add to that that you know, we
Is our parent company but essentially the park mobile application is one of our core services that's
been operating here in Bloomington for many years and currently over half of the parking revenue collected
through The on-street system is coming in through the mobile app and that's the direction that we see
Most cities heading toward as more and more people adopt the app. So by layering on our
Infrastructure as well, which is also the most widely used throughout the US and another major major
and mid-size and small cities Really provides the parking department with one place where they can manage
operations, but also groups like like this body to evaluate
real ground truth data, not just better visualization of transaction and other data that is in the system
already, but through our insight solution, which is capturing actual occupancy at the block. Those are
blind spots. That's data that doesn't often get collected if someone parks and they don't pay and they
haven't gotten a ticket. You don't have that in the data, but the solution we're proposing
Folds that in and includes that so that decisions can be made on what's actually happening at the curb
and then you can evaluate and see what the impact of those was on reducing congestion creating turnover
supporting businesses So just better visibility better tools for the team Very good. Thank you. Appreciate
it. Mr. Ratliff from elevate Yeah, so
I mean, we, in parking, you know, we all know each other. We all know these guys. I mean, I can sit
here and regurgitate all the things in terms of what we can offer in terms of data and analytics, and
we can provide all that. IPS has been in this city for, you know, over a decade. We've been a good partner
with the city. The city's been a good partner to us. My message would be why IPS is that, you know,
we are at a state now where I really think that
We're truly becoming partners with cities and municipalities and this would be one that would would
mean a ton to us And so not to bore you you're gonna see Analytics and data and how a paybox works and
how machine works But truly at the end of the day what we're offering is a true partnership and how
we can better serve the city of Bloomington and the people that live here you know, I'm a you know,
I live in my own city and I
with parking and you know, I know nobody wants to pay for parking parking is not the coolest the coolest
thing so We truly believe that you know what we can provide is a true partnership And we can get into
the analytics and the way we can save you save you money and save you, you know do all these cool things
But we want to be partners with the city of Bloomington and help the people here at a very baseline
level. So I
I'm not sure any of us get into parking to be cool per se but yeah, I always compare when I talk to
Michelle I always say it's like a referee at a basketball game, you know You kind of just want the referee
to be in the background and let the I mean to their credit parking services here makes it cool But you
know is cool with it. Well, just one of the one of the best teams in the country I hear I go all over
the United States So you got one of the best groups around just for the record. Oh go on. I
Just kidding. Just kidding. Thank you. I appreciate I appreciate that Thank you. I appreciate a couple
of questions for Michelle wall This wall what is the the timetable for the decision You you began this
in June I guess after the report came. Yeah, so we were about six months behind and There's no timetable.
Okay, it's the conversation between Transportation Commission the community
and the council. Well at least you have you're saying that the public testing will be available through
mid-August. Does that mean perhaps that will convene again in September to discuss details or possibly.
Or we might extend the survey. There's only I believe right now 12 people that's taken the survey. So
we encourage everybody to spread the word and we want their feedback. We need their feedback to make
a collective decision.
Regardless of the vendor it is your hope I guess that all the prior data we've had will be integrated
into a new system. OK. That's great. Yes. And am I hearing correctly from both vendors that I mean we
made a choice back in 2013 not to integrate the meters with park mobile.
Are both of their presentations are both of their offers automatically integrating with ParkMobile.
Absolutely. Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any further questions. Mr. Midas.
Yes. Why are we we're only looking at the like single block machines and we're not looking at the like
parking meters by
So currently the Walker report the study Suggested kiosks. Okay, so so I mean that's not off the table
I mean if the community wants meters then we'll discuss meters, but right now the Walker report Stated
that they would recommend kiosks to lower the infrastructure on the street. Okay. Thank you. And then
for the folks from flow bird or whatever it is I was
I just had a question about your relationship between, there's like Flowbird for transit systems payments,
and you guys, and then there's also Arrive, and was curious about, like I know in Indianapolis kind
of the TVMs all shut down very abruptly, and I know that's related to Flowbird, and was just wondering
if you could talk to the relationship between the different entities.
there so flow bird is a manufacturer of Parking kiosks ticket vending machines those kind of things
and park mobile mobile payment platform merge last year to form arrive That's so there's a
little clarification on the brands Yes, that would those I would be the machines used in Indianapolis.
I don't have context specifically on the situation you're referring to on transit, but we do have a
transit business unit who
Supports transit operations happy to follow up with more information about what you're referring to
Did I hear that correctly that flow bird merged with park mobile correct. Oh, okay. That's news to me
All right any further questions from commissioners on the status of the parking kiosk vendor selection
process See none we thank both vendors for their presence here today and we look forward to working
with you both in the
this further discussion. Thank you for having us. Thank you. Let's move now to cases. We have now TCR
26 16. Who is here to present. Well if it isn't a council member Hopi Stasberg. Hello council member
Stasberg. Welcome.
Thank you. Good evening Hopi Stasberg district 3 City Council and I'm here to talk about proposed
Transportation Commission membership changes that I'm making kind of in conjunction with the committee
on council processes So you know, it's like next slide. Let's see. There we go So I wanted to start
with the purpose of the Commission, which of course I'm not changing but I wanted to specifically highlight
that the purpose of the Commission is to
Guiding the city's transportation endeavors through a comprehensive framework which seeks to provide
adequate and safe access to all right-of-way Users as kind of the primary mission you could say of your
body And when we created the Transportation Commission last year, there was a lot of discussion that
I had both both in public at City Council meetings then also privately with colleagues and staff about
the importance of the inclusion of representatives from Monroe County Community Schools on
the body of the Transportation Commission that MCC SC manages transportation for about ten to twelve
thousand students a day during the school year in Bloomington Monroe County. Of course a lot of that
happens within city limits. And so somebody you know deeply invested in Monroe County Community Schools
transportation would be a really apt addition to this body.
And so this led to in the original membership of the commission including language of preference preference
for an MCC SC related representative and I had spoken with the MCC SC superintendent at the time and
she was excited and Recommended one of her Cabinet I think apply for the position and they were not
Ultimately qualified because of a residency issue. They did not live within city limits and all of the
appointments That were related to that. We're only for within city limits And so at that point once
that problem came out we started going like oh do we still care about that? And you know, should we
do something differently? And so the committee on council processes Started discussing this issue. So
what follows in terms of proposal is kind of what came out of those discussions so
Just wanted to go through everything That I might be changing in this and the first thing of course
is not substantive It is capitals and we had this whole discussion last week at the committee on council
processes meeting about whether These different bodies should be capitalized or not and that discussion
I will say is ongoing. That's why this is a draft So don't ask me questions about this right now because
that is a discussion that neither you nor I Honestly need to make and I don't think it matters either
way as long as it's consistent
So the first real change comes with number six and it might look like we're eliminating number six But
really we're just changing the order of things. So in order to get that MCC SC person We have a special
seat for them dedicated to
The mayor is on board with appointing this person. So I will go ahead and read it for those who may
not be able to see the slides. One member appointed by the mayor shall be an employee of the Monroe
County Community School Corporation involved in student transportation.
Monroe County Community School Corporation superintendent shall recommend up to three applicants to
the mayor for consideration There are no residency requirements for this appointment They will be qualified
for the appointment by merit of their employment with the Monroe County Community School Corporation.
Oh Okay, and So then of course if we go back here this
Previous number six to members appointed by council with experience using forms of travel other than
personal motor vehicles that moves to number seven Okay, and you can see the original number seven did
have that preference for application for somebody related to MCC SC and also had a second potential
preference as a member of a community organization dedicated to serving a marginalized group so number
six became number seven and Then we created a number eight
To have that additional seat that was in number seven Continue it will be appointed by common council
And once again the mayor supported that she take the seat the MCC SC appointed seat and leave common
council with the residency appointed seat There where the preference will be a member of a community
organization Dedicated to serving marginalized groups, especially safety marginalized transportation users
And...
Then the other thing and so this is a relatively new change. So if you read the packet too early It
might not have been in there because I worked on this this weekend because at the CCP meeting last week
It was also discussed that currently the terms on Transportation Commission are not staggered. So right
now there are several terms that are set to expire January 31st of next year And so in an effort to
stagger those terms the Novak report recommends staggering generally speaking. It's good for consistency. So
This is you can say a very first draft at Proposal of how to stagger once again We have some capitals
that we're fixing and then I changed instead of members appointed from the Council for Community
Accessibility I said members appointed by the mayor which is more inclusive Because it includes both
the Council for Community Accessibility seat and also this MCC SC seat and
That generally those will be two-year terms, but starting next year. So with the fresh terms two of
the council appointments will just have a single-year term and the third will be a two-year term and
then one of the mayor's appointments will be a single-year term and the other one will be a two-year
term and so that will after next year allow for staggering and I think that's
Oh, I think the only other thing that I want to mention that I forget about is that none of this would
Go into effect until the current residency appointed seats expire, which is January 31st of Next year.
Okay, and then everything else in the code powers and duties procedure scheduling and staff There are
no changes proposed in that so any questions or comments at this point?
Thank you for the presentation councilmember Stasberg are there questions on this resolution to my right
Commissioner Flaherty Thank you the new paragraph eight which References group serving marginalized
residents, but especially a safety marginalized transportation users that used to be in a in a paragraph
that had it was it was one in a handful of
considerations and just wondering like what your perspective is on so for For a dedicated seat for you
know with this priority for appointment like what type of organizations are you thinking of in Bloomington
that would meet the definition of Serving safety marginalized transportation users You have any in mind
that well, that's a great question I don't necessarily have any in mind because I
for the sake of full transparency, I just took this one and replicated language. I did hear from the
office of the mayor. So I originally had all three of those folks in number seven and included both
of those preferences for appointments all together in the same paragraph. And at the request of the
administration, they really wanted to set out
serving marginalized groups as a second I'll say standard and it is valuable to note that I did make
sure to put preference for appointment in those as opposed to a requirement for appointment just in
case there's somebody that you can't find in terms of Marginalized groups. I think that we have a lot
of marginalized groups that exist in the world, right? We can think about black and brown we can think about Age
We can think about ability so we can think about like stone belt for example. Those folks might be safety
marginalized. We can think about beacon and the unhoused because those folks are also safety marginalized.
They're more vulnerable. We can think about El Centro.
for example, because they work with immigrants. And right now, immigrants sure are a little bit more
vulnerable in this world. So I think that there are several organizations that could potentially be,
but I wasn't necessarily thinking of one in particular. And in addition, it says a member of a community
organization. And we could play with that language, but in my mind, member of a community organization
could be somebody who works there. It could be somebody who's served
That organization it could be a volunteer or a board member It could be a lot of different types of
people. It wouldn't necessarily have to be a professional in that space Thank you. Sure other questions
questions to my left from commissioners anybody All right. I've got two I think one is Can you go back
to the slide about empty CSC? It says
the superintendent shall recommend. And a problem that just occurred to me is that, uh, they being a
separately, a separate jurisdiction, our code can't bind a superintendent. Uh, so this shall here may
be, um, uh, inappropriate. I don't know. Like it doesn't really have meaning here. You're, you're saying
you want them to make the recommendation, but we can't make them. Do you see what I mean?
Maybe it's a may here or rather shall be limited to recommending up to three applicants but it's I Mean,
how do we bind the superintendent to make this recommendation to the mayor in the first place?
At this point, I've spoken with Superintendent Mark a dr. Winston and I I think
She was going to try to tune in on Zoom today. And so maybe she can speak to the current intention.
She is very on board. I think you're potentially right, though. And so this is a question, honestly,
to bring up with attorneys and legalists, whether we should change that from shall to may or will. I
just want to bring that to your attention now because it's problematic, not with this situation. I'm
sure that Superintendent Winston is
Is on board and willing to cooperate. It's just that Again, we can't bind a city code can't bind a non
city employee. So Fix that. Yeah, I'll talk to it with the attorney is about the best way to Okay Be
accurate there. The other question is And I think I've mentioned this to you at the council processes
meeting. I
Despite appearances, I think that we're doing pretty well in getting at least six members present. And
I wonder if you thought about expanding the commission by two members rather than repurposing a seat.
I say this because when parking commission was created in 2017, we had very specific limits on,
for example, two seats had to be merchants within the meter zone. And those proved to be very hard to fill.
Uh, and so I wonder if, uh, maybe, uh, expanding so that you can get a very specific appointment in,
uh, cause this day has can hold 11 and as long as we have six, we could have quorum to, to make decisions.
I'm a little concerned about, um, uh, so many specific appointments that, uh, the commission becomes
that much more inflexible, uh, in staffing itself.
Do you have any thoughts about that? I think the only thoughts I have are pretty much the same ones
that I shared at the CCP at this point That's not what the CCP thought would be a good way to go. There
was concern about not having the applicants and so I think the conclusion that we came to at that point
was to leave it at 9 for now and wait and see and if there seemed to be a plethora of applicants that
would provide, I'll say, a diverse representation. Because if we have like five or six applicants and
they're, I mean, if we look at, oh, it's not moving for me.
Anyway, if we if we look at the current number seven, which is the struck out up there You know if we
have five or six applicants for two seats But they all use bicycling as their primary method of transport.
It's their alternate primary method of transportation they're not necessarily gonna have like a diverse
set of kind of views that might be most
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
it is but if there's you know a lot of different applicants and there's a transit rider and there's
a cyclist and there's a walker and there's a Young person and an older, you know what? I mean, then
I think that there was that openness to the idea of expanding it. So for now CCP was like not at the
moment, but we're leaving that possibility open
Okay heard. Thank you. Thank you any further questions from commissioners before we go to the public
on this resolution commissioner Flaherty Thank you. I wanted to follow up on the mayoral appointment
as well First of all, I just wonder if like reversing who has the responsibility there. So like if the
mayor shall request a list of nominees, you know of a maximum of three applicants you know from the
MCC SC superintendent and
The other thing, I'm also mindful of past experience and how these things change over time. It's great
that the school corporation is excited and on board, but we don't know what the future holds. And there
was a time when the Commission on Sustainability had a ex officio seat voting for IU, a sustainability
director. That seat, over time, became one that wasn't really filled. We even kind of accepted, not
the director, but their designee, and then it turned out that
It was really hard to sustain and, you know, just through different directorships over time, they just
kind of didn't see the value in it anymore and didn't prioritize it. And that caused quorum issues and
other, you know, challenges for the commission. And so, again, I do wonder if even adding an additional
sentence that's like, in the event no qualified applicant meeting this criteria can be found, you know,
the mayor shall, you know, make an appointment
meeting some other criteria, keeping in mind the criterion paragraph seven and eight or something like
that. Just so that we don't run into this block in code where for whatever unforeseen reason, we just
can't fill a seat for months and months on end. Absolutely, thank you so much. I wrote down both of
those language suggestions and I'll wordsmith that a little bit and go back to CCP
All the things thanks anything else any further questions commissioners before we go to public comment
Seeing none. Thank you Council member Stasburg. Is there any member of the public who would like to
speak to TCR 2616 if so, please come to the podium state your name and sign in for the record You'll
have three minutes. If you are online, please use the raise hand function and we'll call on you in due
order. Is there anyone?
Who would like to speak to TCR 26 16. I don't see anybody in the room coming to the podium anybody online
raising their hand. Last call for public comment on TCR 26 16 going twice and we're back to the commission.
Are there any debate on TCR 26 16 to my right to my left. OK.
I'm just going to say that we did. The commission did have more applicants and it had seats and I remember
being in a group of three and being interviewed en masse and there were three people right before us.
Not everybody was interviewed was appointed to the commission. I don't think that this commission is
suffering from a lack of applicants which is why I'd like to ask Councilmember Stossburg and
the council in general to consider maybe amending the language to say nine to eleven members that if
we were to expand first we wouldn't have to expand past nine but we could if there were enough applicants
present whether it was ten or eleven members it would still require a six member quorum but adding a
member or two would preserve the people who some of whom have served for a very short time on this commission
while expanding the diversity of the commission. It's an opportunity for there to be more points of
view without having to choose between points of view. And 11 isn't too big a number again this day as
was built for it and we regularly meet in this room. I think the question is significant enough that
it could withstand an expansion by as many as two members but phrasing it as nine to 11 doesn't require
it only requires nine.
So at least would give council and the administration the opportunity to expand. So that's my only thought.
Other than that I recommend this these changes are there any last call to debate on TCR 26 16 seeing
none. Will the secretary please call the roll on TCR 26 16. Oh we need a motion. We need a motion to approve.
I'll make a motion we approve TCR 26 16 Need a second we have a motion in a second will the secretary
please call the roll Sturmitis. Yes Boland. Yes Flaherty. Yes Davis. Yes Stasberg Epstein Coppock. Yes
That passes five zero one
Thank you very much. Let's now move to discussion of topics on the docket. This is where I pass the
gavel and bring up the resolution I put forward which has not been placed as a case and we probably
should discuss that. But Mr. Chair I would like to well I guess I have to ask questions of staff now.
Staff can we vote on this resolution today.
I'm so sorry. I was trying to figure out the vote from the last. Can you repeat your question? Okay.
Well, I put forward a resolution to discuss the parking report Can we vote on this resolution today
if it's under? Discussion of topics not on the docket. Yeah, of course if you make a motion if the body
makes in seconds emotion You can vote on it tonight. All right, so we can just like with this previous
resolution We can hear it as a resolution correct. All right, I like to move it doesn't have a number
So can you give me a number?
Yes, but I have it as TCR 26 xx. You don't need to move anything unless you're making the motion right
now I am making the motion. Okay, sorry You passed the gavel. I'm catching up. I'm so sorry. Do we have
a number? It's okay The resolution number would be 26-17, okay, I
I'd like to move approval of resolution TCR 2617, formerly known as TCR 26XX. Second. Thank you. Okay.
I hope all of you had a chance to read your packet. This basically says that it is our duty to oversee,
where does it say it?
to make recommendations on public parking policy including but not limited to pricing hours of operation
additional removal of parking supplier parking spaces changes to city code changes to applicable city
plans enforcement procedure or any other asset of parking management policy and also that the commission
should coordinate supervise and when necessary approve transportation related studies plans consultant
reports activities programs and projects.
So this report is right up our alley but it was commissioned before this commission existed at any rate
in addition to the fact that we have an obligation to produce an annual report of our own which is part
of this resolution. The the report is something that we should be weighing in on.
And so I've prepared a simple slideshow putting up the recommendations made in the report for us to
discuss here. And I'm going to connect now. Let me see here. Share. I have to find my slideshow.
One second, please.
Okay, can everybody see the screen? Okay. So just to begin, there's nothing in this slide show that
isn't something, a document that's already available to commissioners except for the recommendation
we'll talk about here now. Anyway, this is the, oh wait, it's not going.
Okay, we'll just start like this. Each of you has received a copy of the comprehensive policy passed
by the Bloomington parking commission in 2022. It's printed in front of you. It's also available on
the appropriate city website. And it's just a reminder of the policies that the parking commission,
which is a predecessor commission to this body,
Came up with in 2022 and reaffirmed in 2024 I only say it now because this resolution calls for us to
look at the Walker report through the lens of the comprehensive plan the transportation plan and this
policy So here are the 12 Recommendations made by Walker I think that
Most of them are pretty good. Some of them deserve a rethinking and I wanted to go over each one but
I'm going to make a motion at the end of this presentation summarizing my recommendations and asking
you to endorse them or amend them or reject them. So let's start with the first one. Can I ask a point
of order. Yeah. I read the.
resolution as Creating a process by which the Commission would Make recommendations about the Walker
report, but are you suggesting that? Adoption of this resolution would endorse the specific findings
you're presenting now adoption of a motion would adopt those findings the the resolution says
The Commission should give its opinion of the overall quality and merit of the report with a specific
focus on it as a template for filling the Commission's duty under BMC to 12070 for and then it says
it shall review for its endorsement each other recommendations made by Walker in the report Got it.
I was I was reading that as like a future tense. So shall review for its endorsement and that the task
force would maybe be responsible for Proposing to the Commission for adoption at like a future meeting
recommendations, so I just misunderstood maybe the the intent and I'm a little if I would find that
acceptable we didn't have these your your proposed findings in advance of right right now, correct and
I have not shown the findings yet and I can stop here and Yeah, I mean I believe that the Commission
should weigh in on the recommendations. I'm fine with taking the time to do it I the only concern I
have is that
report is going to be presented to council the first week of August and I don't know what's appropriate
for Again, we didn't oversee the production of this report. I want to make sure the council knows that
we didn't So I'm not sure how much long after that council should hear the Commission's recommendations
on it I thought it'd be appropriate to do so now while we had a slow docket At this at the very least
I'd like to discuss the recommendations as a
As a an advance I can just tell you my But I'm also happy to defer to a later meeting But keeping in
mind that we don't have an August meeting. Is that correct? We don't schedule a regular session August
because of budgets We do not have a regular hearing scheduled for August. There is a planning session
scheduled for the 18th 17th, okay. Oh
24. Thank you. I'm thinking of September September 17th is the one so the the the next opportunity we'd
have to give our official opinion would be the September meeting and Sorry to continue on this thread,
but my I'm not sure what If anything is being asked of the City Council in the August meeting if it's
simply a presentation I don't know if this wall if it's yes, just a presentation Okay, so so recommendations from this
Commission that followed from that wouldn't necessarily be untimely so to speak like in and to me it'd
be much better to I don't mind walking through your recommendations Commissionable and if you'd like
as a item for discussion, but like I think just My preference would be to have the ability to review
them in advance to come prepared to make any recommended adjustments at a future meeting so
I would be happy to I mean that's fine with me I'd be happy to present these only as my opinions and
not ask members to vote on it today, but The the resolution is written so that doesn't specifically
say that The Commission shall give its opinion with this, right? It doesn't doesn't set a date. It sort
of anticipates a future set of
future opinion and endorsements Okay, so I will stop the presentation there and pick up on it in a second.
I just want to say that section 2 calls for the formation of a task force or Let's call it a committee
We've debated these terms a lot over the years a subset of members of this body plus select members
of staff who have relevant experience towards the Commission's obligation to
to produce an annual report on parking. So that's the gist of it. And with that, I'm happy to answer
any questions before I go into my own recommendations, which I can give in the debate portion. Any questions
for Mr. Volum? OK, question. Mr. Coppock. I have a question. Should we not deal with the resolution
Well based on what Commissioner Flaherty has just said what I'm going to suggest is that we Pass the
in the course of passing the resolution I can give my Take on the recommendations for future consideration,
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
questions for mr. Volin Yeah, the This commission or the task force. Do you have a concept so much of
how often it would meet? It's an annual meeting Is that a single annual meeting with staff or is this
something that would take multiple meetings? It's a great question the short of it is that it took the
parking commission a lot of time to produce the report more time than it had and
And it fell behind to the point where it got stuck in 2019 So it's a not trivial Walker parking has
done an extraordinary amount of work and so we have to be practical about what can it can't be done,
but the ordinance does call for more detail than was provided by Walker and so it's got to be a joint
effort between commissioners and city staff and perhaps
Outside contractors if necessary, we've got to figure out how much it would cost to do it And so it's
probably going to take several meetings before we determine a course of action Okay, I don't think it's
a one annual meeting. Okay, and then With those meetings in your Hypothetically, would they be open
to the public or I assume they'd be closed or I mean It's any
That's a very good question. That's fraught basically any sub body is a public body and has to To meet
according to open door law. So yes, they would be public meetings Mr. Flaherty Thank you first I appreciate
the attention you're bringing to the one of the duties of the Commission which is to produce or oversee
an annual analysis of parking asset management
And it includes but is not limited to a variety of things related to costs utilization Parking data
analytics and recommended policy changes You're quite right that the Commission the former parking Commission
Did have a hard time Producing such reports in a timely fashion and in my mind like like part of the
language here about producing or overseeing is
and some of the broader ideas in the Walker consultant report and in past conversations we've had was
to get to a point where we have the data tools to relatively simply produce a consistent set of metrics
over time every year, year over year, so that we can analyze those trends. And then the primary role
of this body would be to, in conversation with our parking services staff, possibly other engineering
or planning and transportation staff,
Consider the policy dimensions and make recommendations on the policy dimensions and so I guess it gave
me a little bit of pause reading the in the resolution just the To begin production of the annual analysis
of parking mentioned above it sort of like a little bit implies to me that the The task force would
be the ones producing it Maybe that's not wrong but but I'm wary of trying to recreate what was done
in the parking commission
Versus figuring out how to do this in a sustainable way And so this is this so what are your thoughts
I have another point I want to dig into but like what are your are you aligned with my thinking there?
Like what are your thoughts? I am I mean I I suffered many a lonely night trying to process several
million parking transactions in my poor wheezing database and
I know how laborious it can be with the wrong tools, and this is also talking as long as seven years
ago or more. Our technology has advanced since then. It should be, as you say, relatively easier now
to produce a report that would meet the standards of the ordinance. I do want to point out that
The commission did its made its effort to develop reports with no support whatsoever while the commission
got raw data from the administration. There was no money contributed for outside consultants. There
was no staff helping produce the report. The commission tried to do it by itself and that's not tenable.
So we have to find a process that everybody can live with and yet be able to
get the data that we need to make rational decisions like how much you'll be charging for parking on
the street in the garages. How often should we adjust it. You know we can't do that without hard data.
And also where is the money going. Where what. Where does the money flow from. Where does it flow to.
What parts of the system are are breakeven or generating excess revenue which ones are not expenses.
so these are all things that Should interest every every one particularly this members of this body.
Mm-hmm Follow up on that front is that okay or do you want to I can save it for another round? Yeah,
I'd like to take a bite out of the apple I share these concerns about the workload Mr. Volin, we have
this the vendors still here Would you like to ask them if you just gave a list of things you might like
an annual report?
Would you like to hear if these products might help us with the I would like to ask both vendors a very
specific question since I'm you're passing me the opportunity to ask the question which is can the report
provide visualization of Usage of given meters by block Whoever likes to go first, please come up and tell us
Yes, so we actually your name and your Braxton Ratliff IPS group Yeah, we've actually already stood
up an instance where a lot of the issues a lot of the concerns That you're they're talking about right
now. We actually have that data flown into our platform to where we can Look at block faces and see
the revenue coming in. We're able to ingest citation data from your enforcement operation We're able
to ingest any mobile payment provider out. There's data as well and
Yeah, it's your point. We're able to provide you know starting tomorrow with our meter data as the current
meter provider All of the support that you would need to stand up this, you know This this report to
stand up this commission and help you make decisions I might ask a follow-up question. How long have
you been able to do that? So IPS we we tried to do it on our own and we actually went out and acquired
a company one of the top data aggregation companies in the industry company by the name of populace
And so they've been able to do it for quite some time. So it's been a really good thing for us.
But yeah, we were able to go back and get all your historical data. I don't know if that's more in the
line of what you're asking. So the Walker study is nice. The parking studies are nice. But what we're
able to provide is, in a sense, an ongoing Walker study. We can provide the ability to do predictive
rates, or what does the rates look like when IU is playing?
Football school now I guess or when I use playing, you know, whoever I mean we were able to put that
predictability in there Again to help that report and help you make decisions. So very good. Thank you.
Yeah, absolutely Josh Deter with arrive. Yes. Thank you for the follow-up question So similar to what
Braxton mentioned we can also supply very similar data in terms of visualization on anal bases for your
occupancy and
If the Commission allows I do have an example I'd be happy to leave behind so you have a handout in
front of you But with that said we do have that current ability actually also loaded in your current
park mobile dashboard That does allow for historical data live view as well as future forecasting as
well as with our proposed insights tool that does allow for true vehicle capture in terms of satellite
imagery lighter scanners and etc that
Will allow for what my colleague Matt mentioned earlier of all vehicles whether they are paid unpaid
time of day provided true holistic approach to your occupancy inventory and Planning for the future
on your street faces and I don't need a verbal answer But I trust that both vendors can integrate IPS
meter data with park mobile meter data. Is that correct? Okay, thank you So
I think one one process I see here is to defer this conversation until one of these vendors is online
and for this cycle work with the Walker report is something we oversee rather than Reproduce and then
as we see these new reporting tools Maybe in for the next cycle will have an easier and different process
that might be manageable by a commission in a way that it wasn't previously with the parking commission
Well, I think that the Walker report goes beyond Questions of equipment. That's one section of the report.
There are other recommendations that I think are That the Commission needs to be thinking about now
and not wait till next year. Thank you Mr. Flaherty Thank you. Yeah, I think so following up on on the
role of the Walker consultants report and my understanding of that from prior conversations with
Michelle wall when she was here and just what the report covers is that it's not Something that we anticipate
producing every year nor is it the exact same thing as what the mission the commission is charged with
It's like a companion but distinct piece. It's it's analyzing some different things making a set of
recommendations We might do something like that every I don't know five to ten years, but we still want
to track the the data trends annually to understand, you know how to make policy adjustments and
I guess a Seeking again just is that how you're understanding Commissioner Boland like the role of that
report. I feel like there was something in the text of the resolution that Made me think otherwise,
but I could be wrong. Maybe just how we discussed it. I should say that Just for the sake of history
week first commissioned a report in 2007 from Walker I had a 2012 follow-up study the parking commission and
Commissioned report in 2018 and went with Desmond out of Chicago And now we the city has hired Walker
again in 2026. Sorry just to clarify it was this section 1a that says In reference to the Walker consulting
report Specific focus on it as a template for fulfilling the commission's duty to producer oversee an
annual analysis of parking So that's that's the language that gave me pause this idea that the Walker
consulting report is a template for something that would be produced each year
Because I understood it conceptually as something quite distinct from what we would be doing on the
annual basis Okay, I see your point and I will just say the phrases with a specific focus on it as a
Template not the template and that it's a certainly a good starting foundation. It's a foundation we
can change it if you'd like but a template simply means that
Why would we want to start with something else? We could start with that report and with prior Parking
Commission reports in creating something new. So I mean I'm Agnostic about it. I'm happy to change it
if you like To to a different word as a foundation Template I don't think there's that much difference
Up to you Okay
I might make a quick motion to replace the word template with foundation in section 1a of the resolution
Second I second second. All right. We'll just do a voice vote all in favor Motion carries Thank you,
okay Mr. Kopp
Well this this simply calls for the Commission to weigh in on the report produced this year by Walker
Yes Questions questions, mr. Bowen All right
None what we all right any comments from the public on Mr. Seaborg Point of order we might separately
want to invite staff comment or perspective. Thank you from from public. I could start this Okay, mr.
Seaborg staff Sure. Thank you Andrew Seaborg City engineer
Just appreciating the questions appreciating the discussion Recognizing that in August there is an intention
for a mayor's office report to City Council of the Walker study I think the intention is that is just
a report similar to what you received previously I'm just to raise awareness to what the report is saying.
It's not an endorsement of recommendations It's just here is what Walker's report is including specific
to this resolution
I think the main thing I wanted to raise and I think tried to in an email before is maybe focusing on
section two and just what the commission's duties are to produce or oversee. And I guess fundamentally,
those are two very different things that are, as staff, I want to have clarity on what the expectations
of each of us are.
I will just admit I was not a part of the parking commission, but generally my expectation would be
that the administration and staff is in the best position to produce reports and Commissions generally
are in a great position to oversee reports and review them but if Commission members want to form a
committee and do the work that staff then no longer needs to do that also has some appeal but I do just
honestly worry about what those meetings would look like and
From a staffing perspective from a minute taking perspective from getting commissioners at those meetings
Routinely and and just imagining this commission ten years from now with maybe very different members
And is it fair to expect of them to do what I would generally expect of staff? So just that's one of
the fundamental questions in my mind that just really hoping for clarity and having some real concern
or pause about what section two really means and the implications of it So just wanted to highlight those
for the consideration of the group but Happy to answer any questions Thank You mr. Boy, mr. Wallen,
I just wanted to ask your opinion of Bloomington code to 12 070 4g which says the Commission is required
to quote produce or oversee an annual analysis of parking asset management I was quoting from the ordinance.
Yeah, so I agree with you that produce or oversee is a
a little ambivalent. But I guess all I'm saying is we've been at this for a year and we haven't even
begun the discussion of producing the report. And I feel it's at least incumbent on us to push the question.
And so, you know, at the very least what this body can do is name three members to a committee that
can then meet with staff
Focus on this task. It doesn't have to have the concern of every member at every meeting And that was
my goal. So is that does that alleviate any concerns you have as as staff? I think I still have the
fundamental question of whose role it is to actually write and do the report I think that is that is a
I just don't have clarity on and would very and which is a result of the code that form this commission
So if there's an opportunity to clarify it that that would be helpful, but it leaves a very divergent
track there Shoot I'm honestly forgetting a part of your question. I mean I if I may I would suggest
that It is asking a lot of volunteer commissioners to produce report we get some of us veterans of that
commission
Can tell you that it was basically impossible We we did as many as we could before we conked out So
we need staff's help. There's no question about that So I also though think that commissioners can and
should be involved in the writing of at least high-level Overviews of the data that might be provided
by staff or outside contractors. So it's going to take a lot of heads in the same room with different
expertises and
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
you do it. I guess maybe I disagree. And so like as a commission staff will write a report that I think
is intended as guided by the code.
I think it has this commission has been now for about a month or a year and staffed I think the annual
report is something staff in the background have already started to talk about And strategize about
how to develop it has this is a new commission. We're getting very much up and running We also haven't
talked about an annual safety report, which is also something we need to do but those things are in
the works in the background and
and a reason the parking study or annual parking report also is behind is because we've had this Walker
study that Has as you know has experienced some delays too, and we didn't want to we couldn't do two
things at once So those are very much in motion and intended to come to this Commission And no matter
who is writing will be discussed for sure You're making a point for me in that We could and should have
been calling for this anytime in the existence of the Commission
That the Walker study was being done. It was a great convenience, but it didn't change our obligation
to produce that report and having been Commissioned in existence for literally 13 14 months now We should
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
obligation as a commission to require that the report be produced by whatever means we must
collectively Thank you Other feedback from staff We'll move on to public comment if anyone is in the
room or online who would like to comment on this Seeing none come back to the Commission for further
comment Mr. Flaherty
I Generally support the resolution. I do think it's it's worthwhile for the Commission to So looking
at section one first To weigh in on the recommendations of the walk Walker consultants report. I think
that can be done You know following this meeting it sounds like our chair would like to take would like to
Put forth a set of recommendations and if we can do that in a way that's that's timely For review and
an input prior to the next meeting we could we could make any adjustments vote on them and
forward recommendations then I think that's worthwhile and a good idea Section two actually do like
the term task force Commissioner Roland started saying committee, but I think task force is more of a
Not a standing thing that will last in perpetuity but rather like we're getting it started for the purpose
of figuring out this exact thing of What does it mean for the role of the Commission in its duties to
oversee or produce a report? I agree that the data analytics piece in particular is far too much to
expect a volunteer Commission to be able to do
I'm a little agnostic on, like, the writing of a report. I'm envisioning a relatively brief report.
Some of the reports produced by the Parking Commission in the past actually were, you know, at the end
of the day, the synthesized bit was relatively short, four or five pages, and I'm imagining we're gonna
get to a point where we have a template of a report and a given set of metrics that we produce each
year. We could make adjustments to those as needed, of course, but it would kind of give you that template
You know that that we use our data tools from vendors like those here before us to produce and then
I think again It could be a commission a commission task or maybe it is a committee task To do the writing
or that could be staff and and then it's presented, you know, and this body can then You know propose
amendments essentially to to a report bought by staff I do think that if this is already underway to
some degree for the year 2026 That
We should start collaborating sooner than later like it's it'd be better to have some input on the Formation
of the report rather than like waiting for a final draft from staff to be the first, you know review
in the first instance So I think this task force can serve that purpose as well So those are my thoughts.
I think it's there are some some questions outstanding. There are some things to figure out I was sympathetic
to I think everything director seabor said I don't think there's strong misalignment there in my mind,
but I think it's gonna take a few meetings anyway to sort it out
Thanks. Thank you. I think those are good comments from Flaherty. I agree. Again I would like to formally
adopt kind of some of the recommendations from the Walker study in section one. I like section one of
this resolution section two. I'm like very opposed to creating a task force. I kind of see this commission
as wonderful because it eliminated the separation of subcommittees and different meetings and groups
and things and I would like
I don't know if there's a way to do this and the resolution some kind of confirmation that this would
indeed be a limited time task force and would not be an ongoing thing. And I would think even given
how things can get drawn out and staff time can be kind of over accessed maybe even like a time limit
of like the task force will exist until this date some type of deadline. I don't know.
And I think we there is a real tension to resolve about produce versus oversee I think we should have
a goal of removing one of those verbs It sounds like everyone here had some Concerns about the production
part of it. I also have concerns about section 2 To speak to go back to the Parking Commission and the
trouble they had producing the report. Those were 11 people who were there 9 to 11 to focus specifically
on parking and
Now, we have a more diverse group here by intention. People come here with background in public
transportation, with accessibility, with cycling. To find three people who have the time and expertise
to really focus on producing a detailed parking report is going to be even more of a challenge here
than what you described as a nearly impossible task of the parking commission. So I think we'll probably
be well served to resolve this language in favor of having
Our role to be oversee and then work out the details of how that is produced I agree with mr. Seabor
that generally the staff is in a good position to over to to implement reports Thank you Okay, first
to address some of the comments I've heard I don't like the word task force. A lot of people don't like
the word committee but the simple purpose of the committee is to
Create an informal smaller group to help develop recommendations to the full body. I wanted to call
it a task force because it didn't need to be as formal as this body and it needed to be able to have
open and frank conversations with between commissioners and members of staff.
So that was my only goal in calling for a task force. I still think it's the right idea. I do agree
with Mr. Flaherty that it can and should be limited in scope, that it's meant to help create the first
one and hopefully that future reports will be more easily produced by staff and overseen by the commission.
But as to what should be in the report, if it's up to staff alone,
to decide what should be in the report then effectively the commission is not overseeing the report.
They're simply receiving something that staff decides it should be a conversation between both that
both are necessary to produce the report. Now remind everyone that the parking commission as far back
as 2017 was all but starved of resources by the administration whose mayor vetoed it. So this is a commission
that has been created
Between council and mayor there's a lot more agreement on it. It's more substantial. I disagreed with
the elimination of the parking commission For this reason that it was that many more people devoted
to there's plenty to talk about just with parking But this is the what the city has decided they need
to do to create this Commission that is a broader scope and so within this new paradigm we have to figure
out how to produce a
this report. It's just as important as it used to be. It's just now part of a bigger commission.
With that, I was going to take this opportunity to give people a preview of what my recommendations
for the report would be. At the very least, you can think about your opinions of it and we can vote
on it in September. These are, again, just my opinions and not the opinions of the commission. I'll
start with there are 12. You can see on the screen here this is
Figure one of the report it gives 12 recommendations three each under organization policy operations
technology and communications branding and wayfinding the preview is I endorse eight the twelve one
I am Concerned about and I give it a yellow flag and three I oppose So let's talk about them each the
first is this recommends transferring all citation appeals duties from the city clerk's office and
the parking services division briefly the clerk is already essentially municipal court the The Walker
study says that in another city municipal court might be the court of appeal I think we already have
that system and I don't think this is necessary the fact that parking services is no longer in City
Hall makes it a customer service issue because people who go there to appeal a ticket finally have to
go to another office and
But that's something that can be addressed by a different recommendation in the study. The
second organization recommendation was to develop a mission for parking services for the division that
is supported across city departments. I agree with it and would love to go into more detail at a later
time. The third is adopt a data driven approach to parking operations and management with recurring
transparency of key performance indicators. I also heartily endorse this item under policy.
The first item was implement on-street meter parking rate changes utilizing a zone based system considering
high and lower demand areas. This has been overdue for a decade. We can't do this fast enough. I emphatically
endorse this recommendation. The second one was to implement parking changes off street. The garages
cannot are not a vacuum. The garage and lots and the meters.
Together create a single system. This was the point of the Parking Commission's report that it's we
treat the system unitarily and not as separate silos The third was to reduce on-street paid parking
enforcement hours. This seemed to be a customer service style reaction, but Consistently we seen in
the city that parking after 5 p.m Is as robust if not more than parking during the day and that people
who? ask for this
Mean that no one has ever wanted to pay for parking So it's it's just not something that I would recommend
Under operations technology transition to multi-space on sheet meter pay stations operating using pay
by plate I don't know whether the the era of the single space meter is over in Bloomington perhaps at
at Handicap spaces they might need to stay but I
I for one endorsed the idea that we certainly need to upgrade the technology we're using it was used
when we bought it in 2013 and It's I I can only imagine the horror stories that parking services has
about maintaining them The second item on moving to a pay by plate a multi-space meter system update
the enforcement system to mobile license plate recognition technology and transition digital permits
the problem with LPR technology, this is why if
flagged this as a yellow is the same category that we've just seen debated in the city with flock cameras.
The privacy issues are significant. I don't have an opinion on this. I just know that political concerns
may hold this up and it's something that we need to think about. But I don't think we can think about
it outside of a greater discussion about city privacy policies which transcends parking.
And finally in operations technology replace the existing Austrian gated parking equipment for the same
reasons as the meters before they're in need of a refresh under communications branding and wayfinding
create a recognizable parking system logo and brand identity separate from the city's brand identity.
The issue I have with this is not the idea itself. It's that anything that I mean if we're having trouble
with the communications and wayfinding
And this isn't done as part of a large I think that there's a body outside of parking outside of any
department. Perhaps it's out of the mayor's office. That should be it shouldn't be reinventing the wheel
in a different silo. It should be done as part of an overall city refresh wayfinding refresh. It can't
just be done by parking services specifically. Number two C2 was develop and launch.
A marketing campaign. Absolutely. We need more of this, not less. And finally, installing informational
signage at key locations. The same thing. So, uh, of the, the 12 I recommended eight, uh, I'm opposed
to three and have concerns, believe that the commission should be concerned about one.
And that's I'm going to ask that my colleagues to do the same thing with this report to come up with
your Opinions about each of these recommendations. They're extremely relevant to our mission and we
should be I think this is what council expects of us so with that I would ask for approval of this resolution
and I can just finally say with regard to section 2 I don't want to limit
Such a body to three members. If there are other members of the body who would like to sit in on the
task force, you are welcome to. I'm simply trying to save some commissioners work, not trying to exclude
them from this important discussion. But it needs to happen now and not wait till the September meeting,
which is two months from now. We need to be getting moving on producing this report. Thank you. Thank you.
Now We're looking for a motion or more public comment I think was introduced with a motion to adopt.
So I think the question is pending if we're ready to take a vote on it Okay I'll ask the Commission
any further comment before we vote on this I Will have one sure brief follow-up, which is that I I heard
things they agreed with from other commissioners about you know if I guess if
We had an August session or if we had more time, I would favor setting a time limit and a narrow scope
for the task force for the purpose of basically helping us define the first version of this annual report
and what we want it to look like. So that's my intent in supporting the resolution. But I think because
we don't have an August session and when it faced two months of delay to, you know,
Hold on the resolution and make such such amendments to it or edits to it I would I'm still in favor
of moving forward tonight. So just wanted to clarify that Thank you All right, is there a motion to
adopt commissioners Olin resolution TCR 26 17 as written I'm so sorry
Wait, I would it's not as written. It was amended previously. Okay, and you've already have a motion
and a second So I just need to call roll when you're ready All right, then roll call Bolin Yes,
Flaherty Yes, Davis. Yes, Stossberg. Yes Coppock. Yes, sure might yes All right motion carries, thank you
And with that, we will return the gavel back to Mr. Vola. Thank you, Mr. Sossberg. Let's now move to...
Can I actually... Sorry, can I ask another point of order? Yes. Which is whether the chair intends to
name members of the task force and if that needs to be done in a meeting versus outside of it. I was
going to do it just a second since the resolution has been adopted. Before I name members, I'd like
to ask if there's any volunteers.
Anybody who desperately wants to be on this task force? Is there am I seeing any hands? Over here.
All right. Oh, I'm going to name myself comes with a flare or Commissioner Flaherty and because he's
not here Commissioner binder Who was also on the parking commission before so if anybody else wants
to be on it, please let me know Let's move on now to the update of the local motion grant from staff
Who is here to present that
I'm David Brant as the alternative transportation coordinator Please go ahead. Thank you so just to
refresh everyone's memory on the local motion grant program, this is an annual cycle where Community
organizations submit a proposal their project idea that promotes walking biking rolling in the community
applicants
Provide to us a short narrative describing its impact and how they intend to implement that So there
will be a timeline of how they will complete their small project over the next year and then report
back to us a 10% cash match is required. So they have some skin in the game there So 2025 awardees you
may recall we had five splitting a pool of eight thousand dollars
so the Bloomington community bike project with and The Monroe County Public Library and Summit Hill
They all received $2,000 each and then as you can see up there the boys and girls club and the YMCA
Got two more They each got $1,000 so a couple examples of what we're talking about here is
Summit Hill, for example, they had a bike repair station installed Sight with them the boys and girls
club. They recently sent a couple pictures of their club riders program In operation and then like the
YMCA had healthy kids state event that this funding went towards So that's sort of the scope of what
we're looking at here To give you a preview of the 2026 cycle
We hope to send out a press release sometime in August announcing the call for projects And then the
tentative timeline is that we would bring those to the October Transportation Commission for your review
So tentatively those dates that are important to applicants are October 5th would be the application
deadline and then they would submit to us a
Materials for their presentation by October 19th to be included in packet and then October 26 each For
the for the Transportation Commission each organization would have a five-minute presentation To explain
what their Proposal would be and then it would be up to Commission members from there to decide how
to allocate funds and ask any questions of those organizations
So with that most, just to summarize, most everything is staying the same as last year, but please do
take notes, relay any comments to staff. If you have ideas of ways to do it different in 2027, questions
about the process, we're happy to answer that. So that's the end of my update there, and please let
us know if you have any questions for us.
Thank you. Are there any questions on the local motion grant awards to my right? To my left Thank you
for the report much obliged Let's now move to the safe streets and roads for all SS for a annual report
who's presenting this one? I see. Mr. Duncan Hello, my name is Hank Duncan safe streets program manager
as part of the safe streets for all action plan adopted in 2024
City staff is tasked with preparing an annual report highlighting progress made toward vision zero This
report will be presented to the Transportation Commission and City Council Before we develop the city's
first report later in the year We want to talk to this Commission about the performance measures included
in it Within the staff memo. There is a list of performance measures we plan to include in the report
and as transportation commissioners
We request that you review the measures to be included in the report and make suggestions as to any
other Items that should be included in the final report. Oh I'm sorry. I thought you were Yeah, I have
one like that's a question mr. Stossberg, I'm so sorry. I completely yes. I
The metrics are great. Do you anticipate the annual report will include maps? For example, I'd like
to see the Map of the high-injury network shrinking over time as we approach zero miles of high-injury
network so the high-injury network is the network of the highest percentile of the streets with the
highest percentile of fatal and severe injuries in Bloomington so
It will never shrink unless we get to zero The streets will just change and the numbers required to
make it onto the high-end your network will just decrease So it could work if the framing was not a
percentile, but some sort of absolute number of crash. Yes. Yeah Thank you further questions to my left
To my right this comes from a commissioner Flaherty I
Yeah, thank you. Um, will there be like geospatial analysis as part of this? Like do you think some
of these metrics will be presented in that way or it would be purely like aggregate numbers? You know
that is a good question. I'm not sure yet We've been looking at reports from other cities Indianapolis
just published their first SS for a report earlier this year as you and Commissioner Strasburg said
maps and geospatial analyses and visualizations that
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
that entails yet, but we would like to Thank you further questions Let me ask one first. These are the
reason I was Proclaimed there for a minute is because I was looking in the ordinance creating this commission
as to whether there was the same obligation that mr Seabor pointed out for us to oversee the SS for
a report and there does not seem to be
Is this the first such report that has it not been produced yet? Yes, correct. Okay What is your rough
timetable for getting it done? Part of it depends on the performance measures that you all would like
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
Sometime before the end of this year, but I think around October was that happy medium time that we're
expecting it But again things can change but sometime this year, okay How many of these items here on
this list are Hard to get easy to get do you have them? I mean do they require some of them require
more work than others? sure, so a lot of these are easy to get because we have a
Great crash dashboard and in crash data provided by the state There will be other items and some of
these items there is an element to subjectivity For example the very last one dollar amount invested
in infrastructure improvements along the high priority network as a percentage of all transportation
projects I Would argue that just about all of the city's infrastructure projects include some safe streets elements
That could be as little as adding in as a repaving project that adds in a curb extension or a curb ramp
or a signal replacement that changes the geometry just a little bit. The challenge on our end will be
how much of that money that went to the car centric maintenance project, how much of that went to the
safety improvements as well. So that one may be the most difficult one because we will be going through
each of the projects and looking at
the individual items or even making an estimate as to how much was actually Made towards that safety
improvement How might you go about distinguishing And I'm like from for one Item how much of it is safety
related how much is not safety related? I mean like how do you Is there a way is it arbitrary is it?
Yeah, that's
That is one of the questions I have right now. What I would like to do is go through the cost the engineering
incurred throughout those different projects and I'd like to see what the labor materials costs are
for those safe for those individual safety improvement items But I'm not sure that exists for every
project because it is under one one contract and labor is labor Okay further questions mr. Stossberg Yeah
We want numbers that in five years, in 10 years, we can have useful trend lines and that works the best
if we put the right numbers on there now. Absolutely. Bloomington seems to be doing a good job at growing.
So we want to be able to show progress even as we're putting more cars on the road, perhaps more cyclists.
What I'm not seeing here are some relative numbers that might scale over time, like number of injuries
versus miles traveled or
number of injuries versus the population of Bloomington so that If we grow by 2% our crashes grow by
1% we could show that we're making progress and at least in a relative sense That is a great idea and
that's something that in dot does a good job of we and I don't know if we have or are capable capable
of getting a number of total miles traveled in this throughout the city of Bloomington, but we do have
traffic counts for example
Walnut Street has an average daily traffic volume of about 13,000 motor vehicles per day if we know
that there are X number of fatal severe injury crashes today Versus 10 years from now when traffic numbers
have gone up which we can calculate compared to the FS eyes in that year that can be that scalable number
that you're thinking of and Maybe population could be a proxy for how are we keeping our community safe?
Do you think mode share is an interesting? number or set of numbers like our
Are we helping if we shift more people from single-family occupancy to other modes? Oh for sure and
That that is absolutely part of the goal of what we in planning and transportation do it is not just
about improving the existing Streetscape network. It's about improving the network so that mode shift
occurs and we get more people Walking more people rolling more people using the bus rather than driving
their car because most crashes occur by people driving their car
Thank you. Now, in terms of getting those figures, right now, we use census data, which is every decade.
And most, if not all, of the questions revolve around community going to work. What percentage of the
time do you bike going to work? And that's a part of it.
But that's not all transportation. We also use mode shares to do things other than going to work. So
the census is a Number that we can use. I'm not sure if it's the number that we should use. Thank you
Further questions to my left Yeah, thank you You're to my right. Oh, that's right. Yeah, let's go to
second round questions to my right. Mr. Flaherty Thanks
Yeah, similarly, I think, I know this is the first report, but thinking ahead, we'll want to, I think,
include, like, longitudinal trends, so like, how does this, you know, how do these numbers change over
time? I think the absolute number is useful, but in some of these metrics, like having, yeah, relative
to what would definitely be useful, even just as a percentage, the number of crashes involving speeding
or distracted driving,
All crashes what percentage you know, maybe those things are planned already, but just looking at the
list it says number similar number of action items completed from the the the I guess the countermeasures
like policy roadmap, right? Maybe we only get so like also the total right so as we have two three four
years down the line like the number completed that year the total to date
so we can kind of monitor those things. Again, that's probably a little more forward-looking than just
this year. I think the VMT piece, I'm a little, I'm trying to tease out in my head, like we want to
reduce VMT, I think this is what you're saying, and so we want to reduce VMT, even if we have a reduction
also in the absolute number of crashes that result in death or serious injury, it could look like, if
we're comparing it to VMT, it could look like it's actually like worsening
Even while we're making progress on both absolute deaths or serious injuries and mode shift And I'm
just I don't know. My gut would be that population is probably the right comparison Figure do you know
is there Beth like best practice I guess in the field Not that I know of that that is one reason that
I'd like to look at these other safe street reports because this is a relatively New trend of putting
out these annual reports and it's a good trend. But again, I
Because it's the first time we're doing this. We don't necessarily know what are the best metrics to
use and I what I would like to look at a city that has done a report like this for at least five or
ten years to see What are the trends that you're asking about because I don't have the answers to those
questions right now Okay, I wonder about looking to Europe as well just because they've tended to be
quite far ahead of the US in many instances around design safety interventions. So sure. Thank you Mr. Sossberg
I'm going to go ahead and propose something which might be out of scope, but including non-human fatalities.
One of the kinds of crashes I looked at was deer crashes. We have more crashes with deer than cyclists
or pedestrian. They cost about $10,000 on average each, and they'd be great to prevent. And they're
also, there's mitigations for them. Those are mostly in the county on the interstates, our biggest
We do have some in the city and I don't know exactly You know which ones make sense to mitigate in the
city but Sure, thanks be fun to look at Any other let me take a crack at this first of all, I want to
endorse that Specifically number of crashes involving deer ought to be measured in this city secondly,
I wonder if you have considered
Upping the frequency by which you do simple traffic counts of Streets in the city because in overtime
when I've looked at traffic counts I've often had to deal with a 15 or 20 year old piece of data as
the only indication how much traffic there is there and I feel like Can we do it more often? Can we
get a more frequent standard for traffic counts across all streets in the city? I
Sure, that is much more of an engineering specific question because our engineering technician who does
the traffic counts is an engineering not in planning I will say that he is out every week putting out
new traffic counts. So the limitation is definitely on staff time not on anything else and Because the
city is working on so many new projects. For example, it could be repaving projects or corridor studies
or traffic coming projects or potential speeding complaints from the public and
They're about 300 total miles of city streets and it's just hard to get through all of them because
there are a lot of them and so I Absolutely hear you. For example, I'm about to start working on the
South walnut corridor study later this year We don't have any traffic counts on it in the past decade
or so So it's not helpful to us. But that is just another example that
We will go out there and do more traffic counts. But you're right. There are there are a lot of streets
and a lot of locations on the streets as to where we should have traffic counts. Well to that end and
responding again to what Mr. Seabor asked in the previous item would it be helpful if there was a task
force or committee to advise you. I mean how soon do you need us to respond to this. We don't have a
regular meeting until
In a September we can give some ideas now, but maybe commissioners will have more ideas in the next
few weeks Can you give us a deadline for getting back to you with recommendations? Sure for recommendations.
This was the only meeting that we were planning on speaking to you about this But if and and if you
have ideas after this meeting you have you absolutely have my contact information You can email me and
we can chat about these ideas. I Would like to get started on this report next month
But there as you can see there are a number of action items or performance measures included already
And so if we add one a little bit later on it's not going to delay the whole project Okay, I mean maybe
I can suggest an arbitrary date of say August 15th that we can get back to you. That's perfect with
ideas Alright, so let me just direct commissioners to send any ideas on this to mr. Duncan by August
15th but yeah, it feels like traffic counts are the kind of thing that are I
Bread-and-butter data that we is it safe to say we can't afford to do more of them Right now a time
is the constraint more than anything Because of because of existing staff levels. Mr. Sossberg Is it
true? There's some new technologies coming online like ever everyone has a phone in their pocket and
I think Google is Knows like where you are all the time sure and it's selling some of this
Data is there a way instead of installing more of these devices we can buy it from a vendor who's already
tracking where we are Yeah, so the city contracts with place your AI and that's a software. I haven't
worked much with But they do have They do they do have a feature that includes traffic counts. I don't
know I haven't done a one-to-one comparison on
The two counts that city staff puts out versus their traffic counts based on cell phone data But that
does exist and if we are looking for more traffic counts that may be the answer actually Okay, that's
interesting, thank you any final comments for mr. Duncan on the SS for annual report and again, I don't
see the specific call in the ordinance for there to be a oversight of this report although
I think mr. C was right. We should be overseeing it too, but that's a discussion for another time it
just for clarification purposes that Recommendation layer requirement lives in the safety action plan
itself. It's one of the action So it is an obligation of the Transportation Commission. Yeah you this
part of the recommendation was to create a Transportation Commission that would oversee this report.
All right. Well, then do I need to form another task force now? I
I think currently staff is comfortable without a task force, but if you all want to but we're Happy
to check in with you frequently Well, I'll pull the Avengers individual members over the next month
or two and see if anybody if there's anybody interested in over helping you With the report sounds good.
Thank you. Mr. Duncan. Thank you Let's go now to general public comment on items not on the docket.
We have a written submission Is there any member of the public who would like to speak on an item that
we have not talked about tonight?
If so, please come to the podium, state your name. You'll have three minutes. If you are online, please
use the raise hand function and we'll call on you in due order. Please come to the podium, sign in,
state your name. Again, if you're online, please use the raise hand function in Zoom. Hi, I'm Jill Bird
and I've lived in Bloomington 50 years. I walk and bike all the time.
And I feel like a lot of moves made by the city for traffic improvement are really detrimental to pedestrians
and bicyclists. I'm not very happy with the bump outs on Rogers. I'm not very happy with some other
bump outs. I know they're to calm traffic but they slow traffic and that makes for
irate drivers and irate drivers are less patient with pedestrians and bicyclists and I feel like I am
in more danger with some of the lane reductions and the slower calmer traffic. Years ago they
were considering a change to the Rogers and Third Street intersection and they did kind of a little
mock-up. It was temporary and it was
adjusted the traffic for a few weeks and The city and the community was able to get a real look at what
truly happened with that calming device and It wasn't good So they never did it and I was wondering
if the city could move more towards that type of thing instead of jumping in and putting bump outs that
I'm seeing problems with and I don't know if other people are seeing problems with them also and
Thank you for your comment. Thank you. Is there anybody online who'd like to speak to an item that is
not on the docket? Please use the raise hand function and zoom. Is there anyone online? Last call for
public comment either in the room or online general public comment Seeing then we come back to the Commission
for final notes. Our next meeting is What date?
The next planning session is August 24th. The next regular hearing is September 17th 17th is that's
early because of budgets September 17th is the next regular hearing session. Sorry, September 28th is
the next regular Yeah, sorry. So once again August
August 24th August 24th is a planning planning session session that'll be in the Klosky in the classroom
and that's just planning will be staffed by Planning transportation and our next regular hearing is
September 28th in this room Any last final announcements mr. Flaherty, it's sort of like I guess agenda
related future agenda related and I'm curious about We're having an increasingly large queue of items that the
That were brought before the Commission that the Commission then acted on in some way that are pending
and I'm worried about losing track of them or losing sight of them and also Yeah, just just time lag
I think staff capacity surely must dictate some of this at times, but I think just for the sake of future
agendas and Not losing track of actions previous taken by the Commission but could we include that as
part of our
Like a list of pending items that are not on the agenda, you know not action items. I believe this is
something we've discussed That John Garcy was planning on attending tonight and it is his prerogative
He has just he is already planning to do that if he was not sick tonight He would have been here to
provide that update as part of the discussion of topics not on the docket but we can make it like a
part of our planning for meetings starting in September and
Keeping keeping track of prior items that we're supposed to be keeping track of. Is that the idea? That's
what I was trying to communicate like like if Yeah, just maybe it's just a standing part of Agendas
or packets that like, you know items that that are pending essentially that are out for action of some
kind and have yet to come back to us to not just for our own tracking as commissioners and for the public
but also for the You know kind of I guess the the record so to speak So that you can actually see these
things over time
Do have a spreadsheet where we are tracking all of this information as part of our administrative duties
for the Commission I will speak with the other liaisons about Most sustainable way to move forward with
that request I'll also add that that was a thing that we were trying to start to do your call two meetings
ago I did it at the end of the meeting and it is something we want to get back on track. Mr. Garzi was
In that direction, but we could certainly post it somewhere
This is something we can talk about in scheduling meetings, right? Just planning for it. Okay.
Thank you. Thank you for that. Any other final questions or comments? All right with that, thanks everyone.
Our next meeting is August 24th in the McCloskey room. It's a planning session until then this meeting
is adjourned.