Hello and welcome to Cats Week. I'm Annalise Poorman. The Richland Township and Town of Ellitsville
Reorganization Committee met on February 4th and heard subcommittee updates. Subcommittees for Parks,
Recreation and Cemeteries as well as Planning and Zoning both presented their meeting dates. Subcommittee
member Jim Perry highlighted timelines for Parks, Recreation and Cemeteries during his report.
One reason why we're in a little bit of a hurry is because the Reorganization Committee wants our report,
I think, by the 4th of March, is it? The Reorganization Committee plan is expected to be finalized by
April 1st. The committee moved on to discuss the maps for election districts. Committee member Andrew
Henry asked about the details. I found helpful on the Shetland document that pointed out
that only the county commissioners have the authority to establish voter precinct boundaries and that
the creation of these maps could result in split voter districts. Thinking through what that's going
to mean, especially if we find ourselves not consistently on the same page about the whole process as
the county commissioners, do we anticipate that that could present a significant obstacle? That I would
not think so. I've not seen any, pretty much they know that by law they recommend, if I'm not mistaken,
the precinct boundaries
as close as possible, so it would probably be the election board that would end up doing that, and the
county commissioners would sign, they've done it before for Ellitsville when we had some out, and it
was just going through the surveyor and saying, here's where the borders are, here's where the precincts
are, do we need to move them over a street or whatever? I think it was last done in 2017 when I was
on the election board.
During public comment, community member Kathy Wheeler asked for a recap of the committee's actions.
Ellis gave a rundown of the committee and its responsibilities. At the state level, there's been talk,
as far as I can remember, at least since 2006, of eliminating townships, consolidating townships, meaning
you have one smaller township, one larger one, put them together. That sometimes works, but sometimes
you're going to have
townships that have different points of view on things, and it doesn't work. So when we're looking at
this, we're like Ellisville and Richland worked together for 79 years when it came to fire protection.
We have a shared history and a shared vision of growth. So instead of changes at the state level causing
us to have to react, we thought we'd be proactive first.
Ellis emphasized that the reorganization is not an annexation, saying the decision will be voted on
by the public. He said the reorganization will allow the community to grow to support the public without
overwhelming the infrastructure. He clarified that the reorganization will not change anyone's address
or zip code. Committee member Dawn Durnall further clarified that residents will not lose or gain any
services if the reorganization passes. There will be different
tax rates for the town and the rural people. Those of us in the township that are not in town, we still
are not gonna get brush pickup. We're not gonna get whatever is offered to the residents within the
current town that we don't currently have. Those are not gonna be forced on us. They probably are not
even gonna be offered. No, you will not lose any services.
Subcommittee member Kevin Ferris added that the state also has to approve the plan before it can be
implemented. William Ellis stated later in the meeting that the reorganization would cause a slight
increase in taxes. He estimated about a 0.05% increase. If the subcommittees and the public say, you
know what, we want more services than we have, and we're willing to pay for it. But the goal is not
money, because we're trying to make this as close to
revenue neutral for the taxpayer, the people in the township is possible. And because we wanna really
open the industry of new growth, where when new stuff comes in, they can be at the higher rate. And
one of the biggest things I hear from town residents all the time, we do not wanna have to pay for new
growth. Well, the way you do that is have smart growth, growth that is commercial, light industrial.
We're not necessarily attracting any,
but we're not gonna stop that if you have 100 acres and wanna sell it. It's not our job to tell you
what you can do with your land, to an extent, as long as it doesn't affect your neighbor. So to answer
your question, there's a lot of pieces to that, but yes, this is a good way for us to say we have our
own identity, it's a like identity, we go back generations of the two. Ellisville is Richland Township,
you know, we're fully in the township. Actually, I think we have a little bit in Bean Blossom now,
but for most of its history, it has been in Richland Township. The committee restated that
all the information is available on the reorganization website. Committee members apologized that Facebook
was their main method of communication with the public. The next meeting of the Richland Township and
Town of Ellitsville Reorganization Committee will be on February 18th.
The Bloomington City Council met on February 4th and discussed suspending the city's outdoor dining
program, which closes Kirkwood Avenue to car traffic from the month of April to November. Economic and
Sustainable Development Director Jane Coopersmith told the council she believes the best path forward
is to pause the program for one year.
The initial approach to this program for 2026 based on communication between the legal teams was for
ESD to simply update the 2026 guidelines for the Board of Public Works However, it has been determined
that the more appropriate way forward is to activate section 7 of ordinance 2502 which gives the city
engineer the authority to temporarily or permanently Suspend all or parts of the outdoor dining program
So the city engineer will submit a statement to council and the Board of Public Works indicating temporary
suspension of the Kirkwood closure part of the outdoor dining program in 2026 and that may happen as
early as tomorrow. Special projects manager Chas Mottinger listed economic concerns infrastructure shortage
of staff and accessibility among the reasons for this decision. Despite a 57 percent increase in event
activity last year and 16 more program days we still saw an 8 percent decline in average daily visits.
This tells us that street closures alone are not enough to support consistent vibrancy and that thoughtful
activation and infrastructure improvements have a greater impact. Successes of the program have included
that some restaurants and bars saw increased foot traffic and sales during the closures. Many residents
enjoyed the walkable, pedestrian-focused environment. However, we also faced significant and reoccurring
challenges
One is economic concerns. Some retailers and service businesses reported decreases in visits. Parking
and delivery access became problematic. Two, infrastructure limitations. Without permanent features
such as shade, seating, hardscaping, and ADA-friendly services, blocks often fell empty. Three, staff
capacity and resources. We simply do not have the resources to continuously program and manage a fully
closed Kirkwood.
Four are public safety concerns closed but unactivated streets invite crowd surges unsafe behavior and
congestion across bollards and alleyways Five accessibility challenges businesses and residents express
frustrations with drop-off access wheelchair routes and delivery logistics These issues make the 2025
model unsustainable
Instead, the City hopes to shift to incorporating more small-scale activations, such as building more
parklets. Councilmember Kate Rosenberger expressed concerns about the sudden change.
tell me why the administration decided to study this when last year we decided we would keep it open
and I think so many businesses on Kirkwood invested not in the Parkland but in their outdoor dining
space because we basically promised that we would keep it open for a number of years. Moddinger responded
emphasizing the goal of reassessing the city's needs.
Part of my job is to do the implementation of this program, whether that's the Kirkwood closure or it's
the parklets. So I work with a lot of people, as we mentioned before, when we're doing this as a team
effort. It's literally everyone, every department at the city. And these problems have been brought
up in the past, well, a couple years. But really, especially thanks, shout out to our wonderful, she's
been here a year, the Public Works Special Projects Manager, Cassie. We've just been able to understand better
How this program works what the implementation? Successes and challenges are so and thanks to also the
council and when we presented before we've really had a better understanding of what the city can and
can't do What are the actual operational? realities So that goes into it
talking with people constantly, doing our due diligence as public servants, and listening not to just
the largest voices or the loudest voices, but all the voices. People still struggle with accessibility,
they struggle with deliveries, they struggle with all these other things. So we're looking at the full
picture, and these things just get brought to light. And so we are listening to the community, to our
colleagues, to people with these struggles, and also with their successes with this program. And it
just gets brought up. So for the past year since this happened, unfortunately,
You know, we have to deal with it when we hear these things Councilmember Matt Flaherty also brought
up wider concerns about governance and the city's authority to override council ordinances I do find
this concerning If if the purpose of ordinance 2502 was simply if the administration reaches a different
policy conclusion For any reason they can go back on the ordinance then there was no purpose in passing
it in the first place I
At least implicit in that to me in in viewing the city engineer with authority and emergencies and other
Situations to suspend it. There's some presumption that it's not just the administration reached a different
conclusion than the council So that's just how I feel about it I guess and Even if it doesn't violate
the letter of the ordinance it certainly violates the spirit in my mind and I
That's not the first time that's happened under the Mayor Thompson administration. And the type of pattern
that emerges makes it hard to trust when we are developing legislation, we're passing budgets, those
types of things. So to me, this is yet another data point on a larger picture, and it's disappointing.
In a public comment, community member Adam Martinez questioned the city's reasons for pausing the program
and talked about the importance of decentering cars.
The packet states an 8% decrease in visits year over year. I wonder how do we know that the street closure
led to the decrease? The economy overall in 2025 was not great for reasons I won't get into. Is it possible
that the decline could have been more significant had the street been open to cars? The closure of Kirkwood
to vehicle traffic is a major reason that many residents, myself included, visit downtown in the summer.
When I'm sharing drinks with friends, I wanna hear their voices.
Not the roar of internal combustion engines and the squeaking of un-lubricated brakes. I want my lungs
to be filled with the smells of tacos and teriyaki, not gasoline fumes and microscopic bits of rubber
from car tires. I understand the program has presented some logistical challenges, but we should view
this as an opportunity to improve it rather than justification to regress. These problems are solvable.
The city should look towards other successful efforts to pedestrianize. There's Pike Place in Seattle,
34th Avenue in Queens,
They show that restricting private vehicle access is possible, and it leads to communities that are
more connected, more vibrant, and more economically productive. Community member Greg Alexander also
shared the concern that corridor studies are ineffective and may not promote community-centered change.
But regarding the possibility of a Kirkwood corridor study, you guys need to understand the history
of these corridor studies. This body authorized one in 2019.
And it took four years and then in 2023 the study finally was funded and completed and that was now
two years ago a solid two years ago and We haven't seen any fruit of that In fact, we've doubled down
on the expenditure at the same time as it's become really clear that the mayor is simply going to decide
based on her own opinions and You should be real skeptical about claims of a future Kirkwood corridor study
we've established a pattern of spending money and then ignoring the consultants. If the mayor's gonna
decide regardless of what the consultant says, we can save that money. And if the mayor's gonna decide,
regardless of what you guys say, why are you wasting my time? The next Bloomington City Council meeting
will be on February 18th.
The Monroe County Capital Improvement Board met for a special meeting on February 5th to discuss the
Convention Center Host Hotel. Board member John Wyckart explained the events leading up to the meeting.
Before moving to any discussion and actions on matters on the agenda, it's helpful to summarize events
that bring us to today. In April, 2024, the CIB requested identification from the City of Bloomington
and Monroe County.
of properties for transfer for the Convention Center expansion project. The project was defined to include
a host hotel. This request was required by the Monroe County ordinance that created the CIBN 2023 and
the 2024 interlocal agreement between the city and county. In May 2024, the county identified parcels
to the east and west for transfer for the project.
and the city identified parcels to the south and north for transfer for the project, but distinguished
parcels to the north, what we refer to as the Bunger Robertson site, from the south parcel, stating
that the north parcels require negotiation with the city for purchase. The CIB subsequently chose the
east location for the new construction for the Convention Center expansion. Upon this selection, the
county donated the east parcels to the project.
Weichart continued that Dora Hospitality was selected as the hotelier in October of 2024, and the company
preferred the North property. 14 months later, in December of 2025, the city and Dora reported that
there was no possibility of moving forward on the North site. Weichart said Dora proposed building on
the South site with a land donation, and the city responded that the parcels prices would have to be
negotiated.
We now find ourselves in the following position. The city's position on acquisition of its parcels north
and now south is clear, and the CIB does not have the ability to meet any price or consideration it
requires. The CIB cannot agree to the LOI from DORA because we do not have the land it requires. The
CIB needs to consider its obligations and the need for access to land for parking, a hotel, and for
other purposes for the project.
We now find ourselves at an impasse. For us to proceed, it is imperative that the issue of transfer
and ownership of land for any needs of the project must be resolved. Weichart motioned to end the current
request for proposal process with DORA and reset. Board member Jay Baer supported the motion.
unfortunate that we have to take a step back, but it's the wise and prudent thing to do. Sometimes this
is the way these kind of projects unfold and certainly optimistic that we will get a circumstance that
will be to the ultimate benefit of the citizens of Monroe County and the city of Bloomington at the
end of the day.
Board members Doug Bruce, Adam Thies, and Jim Silverstein also spoke in favor of the motion. The board
voted unanimously to approve the motion, ending the current process with Dora Hospitality. Weickart
said the board has long expected a gap between completion of the convention center and construction
of a host hotel, adding that Visit Bloomington is still booking conventions using existing local hotels.
The next Capital Improvement Board meeting will be on February 18th. The Bloomington Environmental Commission
met on February 4th and voted on a memo from the Environmental Commission Plan Committee. Senior
Environmental Planner Rachel Johnson explained recommendations regarding amendments to the
Unified Development Ordinance. Well great, well we brought you here today to
review and vote on the ECPC memo that was written in response to the UDO amendments that we covered
in our last month's meeting. The ECPC met discussed some of the concerns that we had with the amendment
specifically around the impervious surface changes and so we wrote up this memo. You all have access
to it digitally and on paper but I wanted to see if
If there's any comment or questions about this memo as it stands. Commission member Carrie Albright
raised concerns about the pollinator populations and where they will have their hives. Green spaces
and becoming a bee city, knowing that many, I think it was 70% of native bees nest in the ground and
require impervious surface to create their nests and that reducing the amount of, or allowing for more
impervious surfaces
in new developments could potentially impact how we're able to retain some of that biodiversity with
our pollinator population. The Bloomington Environmental Commission will meet again on February 19th.
The Ellitsville Town Council met on February 2nd for a special meeting. The council proposed increasing
the sewer deposit fee for renters from $100 to $250. Town Manager Mike Farmer said that the rate increase
is in response to renters failing to pay the fee. Just concerned about the amount, because renters are
already stretched thin. And I don't know if there's something we can do for
fees to assess ones that are delinquent, but I just don't like the idea of everybody that's paying work
normally without problems being punished for delinquencies when they're not delinquent. And that's in
a sense what we're doing here. Other proposal was the implementation of the System Control and Data
Acquisition System or SCADA. The budget for the labor, programming, licensing, computer, and the system
software is not to exceed $258,400.
But this will also tell us if we have some kind of alarm at the wastewater plant or our equipment failure.
We do not have to staff it 24 hours a day because we have the skating system. So if you can imagine
having to put, you know, a curve of 12 people out there around the clock, it would be that $250,000
is not covered. That would be for this year. Right. That's true.
The board also addressed the recent snowfall and cold temperatures. Farmer opened by expressing his
gratitude and his appreciation for the snow removal crew. Farmer then made a public service announcement
for the residents. In about a week, we're going to start warming up and people need to be aware if they've
had frozen pipes and they're still frozen, people that have
fire suppression systems, and if they've not been paying attention to how warm their ceilings are, they
need to be aware when we start thawing out, if their frozen pipes are more likely gonna start leaking,
and then it'll be emergency shutoffs. Of course, you can always call the Elstil Water Department. We
have 24-hour service, and we'll come out, but I just want people to be aware it's inevitable that when
we start thawing out, we've been 10 days below freezing,
A lot of them been around zero and we've had wind. So I know there's some stuff out there froze up when
it thaws out, it's going to cause damage. So just be aware. The next Eltsville town council meeting
is scheduled for February 9th. State lawmakers, Matt Pierce and Shelley Yoder gave updates on legislation
being considered in the state house on January 31st. The local chapter of the League of Women Voters
organized the legislative update.
State Representative Pierce addressed House Bill 1001, a bill that's aimed at housing affordability.
Pierce says he's skeptical of the bill and he voted against it. In his view, the policy would not guarantee
lower costs for buyers and could benefit developers. My number one objection is there's nothing in the
bill that requires the cost savings that might accrue to developers actually onto the homeowner, right?
So this could end up just padding
the profits of the of the developers themselves. But at any rate, that's the number one bill for the
session on housing affordability. One bill I did support House Bill 1002 deals with high utility bills.
It's another example of where this is at least a good start, but it's fairly modest. And we had a number
of amendments to House Democrats did to try to increase the protections and
provide more immediate relief on the bills. For example, I had a bill or an amendment that would have
gotten rid of the sales tax on utility bills. It's odd to me that, you know, we say we shouldn't be
taxing necessities like food and clothing with the sales tax, yet we tax energy costs. So this seems
kind of like an odd situation. So I tried to remove that. Oftentimes I get people saying, oh, that's
a big fiscal impact. And so
My answer to that was to eliminate going forward any tax exemptions for data centers. You may not know
it, but data centers are exempt from sales tax on their utility bills, but residential homeowners are
not. State Senator Yoder criticized this session's Senate Bill 1, which would tighten eligibility and
add new restrictions to SNAP and Medicaid. The bill actually would require someone to be
to be eligible for Medicaid first, and then they could be determined medically frail. But in SB1, to
be determined eligible for Medicaid, you have to first show that you've worked 80 hours, because they're
increasing the work requirement in SB1. If someone is medically frail, most likely they are not going
to be able to show that they
have worked those hours. And so it's sort of the process. They're gumming up the process for being able
to being determined Medicaid eligible. And is that by design?
If you read the bill, it seems like it is by design in order to decrease spending in Medicaid, not because
someone isn't eligible, but because of all the requirements now that we're putting in to being determined
eligible, there's going to be more paperwork, more chances of people losing their Medicaid access. If
you make a mistake, you're going to be thrown out of the system for six months. So it just reads.
I'm not saying this is the intent, but the bill reads as if we're going to increase obstacles to access
Medicaid in hopes that we throw so many people off, it will bring down our Medicaid spending. And that
is similar to what's happening in SNAP. Then Pierce explained House Bill 1315, which would reorganize
townships. Pierce denounced the bill saying it would force smaller townships to dissolve or consolidate.
I think the basic premise of this bill and the Senate bill is the idea that you have smaller townships
who don't do much. Maybe the argument is they're spending more money existing than they're actually
providing to people for poor relief or duties. And so the House bill is kind of saying if you're below
certain population parameters and you're not running a fire department, we're basically gonna make you
merge, I think, with the county or towns. And to me,
It's kind of a big mess and I'll be voting against it because they're always attempting to go after
these townships like they're they're worthless or something. And I think that clearly we know that Perry
and Bloomington townships and other townships are doing significant work in our county. But so that
so I think the House bill is not good.
and it's kind of arbitrary, and so I'll be opposing that. Earlier this week, the House passed the Township
Reorganization Bill by a 55 to 44 vote, sending it to the State Senate floor. Pierce voted against it.
To view the full legislative update, you can visit catstv.net following this broadcast. And that is
all for Cats Week. Thank you for joining us. For Cats and WFHB, I'm Annaliese Poorman.