Hello, and welcome to Cats Week. I'm Annalise Poorman. At their meeting on October 7th, the Bloomington
City Council heard the first reading of the city's proposed 2027 water and wastewater utilities budget.
Council member Isabel Piedmont-Smith asked how nearly $5 million from the utilities depreciation fund
would be used. Where does that money come from? Because things depreciate, they become less valuable.
So where does this $4.9 million come from?
come from. Controller Jeff McKim offered some additional context as to how depreciation funds are generally
used by utilities. I can tell you that in general a depreciation fund for a utility would be essentially
a fund for that would house resources that would be used to repair or maintain depreciation, depreciating
assets. So that's why there's actually a positive number in there.
Piedmont Smith requested that Director Catherine Zager research the issue and return with a more detailed
answer. The utility budget will return for a second reading on October 14th.
Later, the Council heard an amendment proposing to reduce the City's general fund sanitation subsidy
from $1.6 million to $1 million. The proposal anticipates additional revenue from a possible sanitation
rate increase, but leaves open the possibility of resetting the fund to $1.6 million if that increase
does not happen.
Amendment one is the one that reduces the sanitation subsidy from 1.6 million down to 1 million pending
The fiscal committee got a presentation from sanitation Regarding increased rates and so there is an
assumption that that increased rates would would Mean that less subsidy is required this does not
Guarantee in any way for the public that your rates would increase because we've always come back next
year for an additional appropriation for that six hundred thousand dollars if the increase Fails at
the council level, but I think that it's a good preemptive step Because we don't know right now what's
gonna happen with that increase amendment one passed and the council moved on to amendment three which
would remove funding for planning studies for the planning and Transportation Department
Interim Director Lynn Coyne argued that the studies are an early step in a much longer process that
can eventually lead to project designs and outside funding. We do not know until the study is done where
the specifics will lead. And that then leads to applications for funding, it leads to engineering design,
and so forth, our follow-on events to this. So this is the precursor event. Without this, that doesn't happen.
Mayor Carrie Thompson followed, explaining how eliminating the studies could affect the city's ability
to carry out existing transportation plans and compete for future grants. Just to connect the dots here,
I think Council Member Stossberg asked what happens if we don't go forward with these plans. If you
don't go forward with the plans, we can't complete the work that is in things like our transportation
plan. We fall behind on that. If we don't complete
these plans, we also can't apply for funding. So these various Safe Streets for All grants, the corridor
improvement plans, and the grants that we get from federal transportation, they all are contingent upon
having these plans done well in advance and having the community commit to
the planning process and having it signed off on. So it is not the case that we can wait for the grant
to come out and then do the plan. We have to have a plan in place so that we can apply for these grants.
So we lose out on funding if we say no to plans is the long and short of this. The council voted to
reject the amendment, leaving the planning money in the proposed budget.
The council also put a hold on a proposed appropriation from Bloomington's housing development fund
with several members calling for a more clear strategy and greater public oversight of large awards.
Mayor Carrie Thompson said she was open to discussing how the fund could work better, but questioned
whether requiring projects to return through additional council hearings was the best way to accomplish
that. Our administration's been really open to working with council on a
Various things the challenge with having to come back for appropriations for any of this is That if
a need comes up or there's a you know, there's a project what happens if this hasn't been decided is
that that project becomes the the measuring stick for the entire fund and
instead of actually talking about the process. And what we have seen time and again through the planning
process, through funding processes that work in a case-by-case basis like this is that we end up not
getting the housing built, or we end up increasing the cost of the housing. That's not what any of us
want. We all want to do better with the money that we have, but adding layers and layers of red tape
to getting it done
doesn't seem like the most practical solution. So I'm just wondering if there's a counter proposal for
working together in a time-bound way to come up with a strategy, leave the money there so we don't have
to go to three council hearings with all of the staff that already are going to a lot of plant commission,
council, and RDC meetings. So that we can get them
doing work rather than going to meetings. Council Member Stosberg said that her concern was less about
choosing which projects receive funding and more about ensuring that large expenditures are discussed
publicly before the money is appropriated. I'm interested in public transparency and accountability.
And the Mayor's memo actually made this even more important to me because it lists several projects
that requested more than a million dollars in city assistance.
We have an entire another ordinance from several years ago that says City Council needs to approve expenses
over a hundred thousand dollars in capital investment and yet we don't want to have Some kind of public
hearing when the city asks when the city has asked for more than a million dollars in assistance That
is absurd and to diminish the value of something like that coming before this body is a diminishment of
of this body's importance as the fiscal officer. We are the fiscal body of this city. And you considered
us with projects that might be over a million dollars in city assistance to just be layers and layers
of red tape. Earlier in this memo, it's a burden to have to come before city council. And it's not that
you're just disrespecting the nine of us up here as individuals, as elected officials,
as a body, but it also feels like blatant disrespect to the residents of this city who have taxpayers,
and it's blatant disrespect when instead of listening to council member comment or to public comment,
instead you walk out of the room. And for those of you not in this room, Mayor Thompson just walked
out of the room instead of listening. I consider that blatant disrespect to the fiscal body
Consider it blatantly disrespectful to the residents of this city who pay taxes, you know to get money
into this fund There has to be an approval of the affordability Incentives for planning projects for
large planning projects for them to take advantage of affordability incentives Plan Commission has to
approve that
Has to approve these payments in lieu that go into this fund. That is a public process. And yet no public
process should be needed for requests more than a million dollars in city assistance that come out of
this. It absolutely should be. The amendment passed six to one. Another unanimously passed amendment
eliminated funding for a currently vacant transportation demand manager position in the department of
economic and sustainable development.
During discussion of whether those resources could be better used elsewhere, Piedmont Smith identified
another area of the city's climate work that she would prioritize. I personally would like to see the
money used to better implement our climate action plan, particularly in the realm of food security and
our local food system. However, this is not a venue where I can dictate that.
that that was my idea and that's what I've talked with Director Cooper Smith about. The largest proposed
reduction would have directed the administration to find another two and a half million dollars in savings
rather than having the council identify individual positions and expenses. Council President Isak Asari
framed the proposal around concerns about using city reserves to cover recurring operating expenses.
I think it's very clear in
worth repeating again and again that our that both SEA one and our local economic conditions do not
support the current trajectory of the city's operating budget. Full stop. I think the proposed general
budget spends approximately five point four million dollars for seven million dollars more than projected
revenue. We know this.
And we also know that we have considerable reserves, which I think that we've spent several years opining
on but Reserves do not make recurring operating deficits sustainable. And so if we use reserves to pay
recurring cost
Those costs return year after year and the revenue does not. And so eventually those reserves are going
to be smaller and the structural problem will remain. So deficit spending as I've said multiple times
I think is justifiable when we're making a deliberate investment with a clear return. That return does
not have to be financial. It may be things like safer streets stronger infrastructure more housing reducing
homelessness better public health lower future costs etc. But
I think and again I'm trying to bias myself away from using the language that I think has grown tired
because I've said it too much and easy then to say that I'm just being theoretical. But I think that
we should be able to say what results we expect from our spending. Controller McKim said that the size
of the proposed reduction and the limited time before the new budget year would make it difficult for
the administration to determine where those savings should come from.
I'm just running calculations. But I did take the $2.5 million.
And as the amendment indicated that it should be allocated roughly according to the proportion that
that department has in the general fund budget, I just calculated it exactly, so exactly proportionally,
just to see how that would come out. And what that would look like is a cut of 765,000 from police,
718,000 from the fire department, 183,000 from ITS,
137,000 from public works 120,000 from planning Did I did that? I mean, I don't need to read them all
33,000 from the council budget 56,000 from facilities maintenance, etc. So those are really large cuts
and definitely not cuts that we would be capable of producing within a week and implementing within a
a couple of months as the mayor just indicated, but at least I think that gives you some idea of the
kind of magnitude of what those cuts would look like. The amendment failed two to five. The council
stopped short of adopting Bloomington's full 2027 city budget after making several changes to the proposal
during the meeting. Controller McKim asked the council to give his office time to incorporate the approved
amendments into the city's financial system before a final vote.
What I would ask is that you continue this meeting to the 14th and this will give us the opportunity
to take all of the amendments that you have passed to enter them into our financial system and then
enter them into Gateway and to produce a final form for which you'd be able to vote on at the next meeting.
Before moving the budget to the next meeting, council members reflected on the larger budget process
and their relationship with the administration.
Council member Matt Flaherty explained why his concerns extend beyond the individual amendments considered
that evening. I also voted no on the civil city budget last year and mean for that to be interpreted
as just broad dissatisfaction with Mayor Thompson's administration and how she's leading the city's
executive branch and my lack of buy-in and some of her priorities and in some cases how she directs
her staff to spend their time and the city's money. There are some specific issues that I think of as
like foundational problems in
the executive branch governance right now that I would like likened to something like a floor or a threshold
of good governance that I need to see met in order to give me the basic confidence to support a budget
request like this. At a certain point when we've raised these foundational issues and they've not been
addressed or the administration refuses to address them,
The budget is one of only a few accountability mechanisms. The meeting concluded with the council considering
2027 salary ordinances for sworn fire and police personnel and city clerk employees. The next city council
meeting will be on October 14th. A special meeting of the Monroe County Election Board was held on October
6th. The meeting was less than 10 minutes in length, but played an important role in the upcoming November
elections.
First on the agenda was the approval of a resolution allowing one election inspector to oversee more
than one precinct on election day. During the discussion portion, Democratic board member Penny Giffins
asked if these locations could have multiple poll watchers. As I read through the state code, it says
that poll watchers
There can be one per precinct. So does that mean that at a place like St. John's, where there are multiple
precincts, that there can be multiple poll watchers? Yes. Okay. Thank you. The resolution passed unanimously.
Next, election supervisor, Kylie Farris said that both political parties submitted their appointments
for election day inspectors and judges, along with alternates.
In your packets, you'll the packets that I provided, you'll see the emails from both the Democratic
and Republican Party. We received those emails this morning from both the chairs. And then you guys
have a list attached of all inspectors and judges that have been appointed and then a list of alternate
inspectors and judges as well. The Election Day inspector and judge workers resolution passed unanimously.
Then the board considered student poll workers participating in the Hoosier Hall Pass program. Ferris
said that recruitment included a strong turnout from Bloomington High School South. In the past we've
approved this, we approved it in the primary as well, and I will say that so far we have recruited a
very large number of Hoosier Hall Pass workers. It is incredible to see the
turn of them we had I believe it was 84 from Bloomington High School South who have volunteered to work
in addition to students from Edgewood and then they are going to Bloomington High School North, Lighthouse
Christian Academy and Seven Oaks as well. Board members approved the Hoosier Hall pass resolution unanimously.
Giffins then asked how many polling place sheriffs would be needed for the general election. Ferris
said that staffing depends on the number of registered voters at each location. One of the things that
indicates is that the Hoosier Hall passed workers and that wasn't the name of the resolution, but hopefully
that's fine. They can work as either a clerk or sheriff. How many sheriffs do you anticipate having
for the general election?
So I don't have a total number right now, but our large locations will have two sheriffs, and the smaller
locations will have one. And then locations like Bergun won't have a sheriff. They'll just have the
inspectors, judges, and clerks. I can get a total number and email that to you guys after this meeting.
I want to say any locations that had, I want to say it was 4,500 registered voters received two.
sheriffs and then anything under a certain amount, I think it was under 1,000, between that 40 to 4,300
to 1,000 received one, and then anything below that has zero. County Attorney Jeff Cockerill noted that
the board might need to vote again on the resolution with additional updates. This resolution, the one
you just approved, assumes that
all the recruiting has been done. It doesn't sound like that's the case, so this one will probably have
to come back to you at a meeting in the future to get updated with all the new information. I would
say the next meeting that we have scheduled, we would be able to go ahead and approve that. Next Tuesday,
correct? Yes. That resolution passed unanimously. Finally, Cockerill asked the board to approve the
use of primary election training materials for the general election.
He said that the earlier resolution did not cover November. There was one other resolution that was
drafted for this meeting that didn't make the agenda. Apparently, when you approve the training materials
for the primary election, it did not follow through through the general election. And so there's a resolution
that just kind of affirms that the training material used at the general election will be used
or at the primary election will be used at the general election. And so we'd like to get that so that
we can meet that state requirement. Clerk Nicole Brown said that the training has not changed since
the primary and called the need for another approval and oversight. Mr. Chair, I believe that that would
have been an oversight. Most resolutions of that nature expire at the end of the year. The training
has not changed from what we did at the primary. And so I am going to make a motion to
adopt the resolution for training for the general election. Republican board member Danny Shields asked
whether any problems during the primary needed to be addressed. Ferris said that the staff corrected
folder labels and changed the training layout, but found no issues with the training materials themselves.
I was under the impression when we did that for May that it was for the entire election season, for
lack of a better term.
Did we have any issues in the primary election that we need to address? No, we didn't have any issues
with the training materials. One thing that we did notice was in a binder was some of the colors of
a folder were incorrect, but those are separate from the training materials, so those have been addressed
and changed.
The only other thing that really has changed is going to be the layout of training, but that's not part
of the materials. It's just the way that we're going to be doing things now. I will note that the dates
were changed within the training materials themselves. So that's a slight update. It has nothing to
do with what's being trained and the training resolution passed unanimously.
The next meeting of the Monroe County Election Board is scheduled for October 14th. On October 5th,
Mayor Kerry Thompson held a traveling town hall at Jackson Creek Middle School. Thompson started with
the town hall by encouraging attendees to vote in the upcoming elections and by celebrating 9,500 potholes
filled on Bloomington Roads. Then the meeting transitioned to a Q&A session. One attendee asked about
a flock camera on his street.
My understanding is the county decided to remove the cameras despite there being a fine associated with
that. I think it was a pretty moderate fine. And then you said that the contracts were not going to
be renewed or they were not renewed. I think one just was canceled a couple of weeks ago. But the camera
on my block is still up. And so I was just wondering if you were committed to removing them despite
a potential fine just so we can be done with that in light of the vote on Wednesday.
And also if you had a commitment to not picking up any new vendors that are out there and are probably
going to replace Flog as that company kind of takes a nosedive. Thompson responded that Bloomington's
automated license plate readers or ALPR contract expired and the camera referenced is likely another
kind of security camera, which she is not in support of removing. We have made very good use of those
cameras in solving two shootings now.
They are a safety risk to remove those. New legislation about motorized e-bikes was also a topic of
discussion and city council member Courtney Daly spoke about the city's considerations. It is scary
when we see them on the trails and when we're walking. I go down and I walk by Sherwood Oaks Park and
in between to Olcott and around there. And I've encountered several of them myself
It is frightening when you hear them coming up behind you. You don't know which way to jump. You think,
do I have to jump? That's actually something that we do address in the ordinance is the behavior that
we expect on bicycles, scooters, motorized vehicles, and we define them. Again, the enforcement is going
to be difficult because Mayor Thompson is right. Chief DeKoff has said, we're not going to have officers
chasing these kids down because
that will end in disaster. That is then when they will get a little bit more reckless, they'll get scared,
they'll try to run, and that's when they will hit somebody or crash into something. So we are considering
the deterrent alternatives. How can we figure out maybe who's riding these bikes if we're not able to
catch them right there in that moment and give them the reprimand or the fine? But there will be a fine
system and a possibility of
repossession of the bike. The next traveling town hall will be on November 7th at Sherwood Oaks Church.
And that is all for Cats Week. Thank you for joining us. For Cats and WFHB, I'm Annalise Poorman.