- All right, welcome everyone, I would like to call tonight's meeting of the Monroe County Council to
- order. Today is Tuesday, May the 12th, and I want to note for the record that we have.
- Councilmembers, Jen Cross and Trent Deckard are not gonna be present. We do have Councilmember Henry
- to my right. We have Councilmember Feidl and we have Councilmember Wilts here as well, including myself.
- So we do have quorum. All right, as is our custom, we're gonna begin tonight's meeting with the Pledge
- of Allegiance. So please rise as you are able and join us. To the flag of the United States
- All right, thank you all very much for that We're going to start tonight by adopting our agenda and
- when I look to my council colleagues and ask if anyone wishes to amend this evening's agenda
- noting that council member Hawk just arrived. Welcome council member Hawk. Hearing no amendments to
- tonight's agenda. All those in favor of this agenda, please. We can do a voice vote, can't we? All those
- in favor, please say aye. All those opposed, same sign. The ayes have it unanimously. Next, we are going
- to go to public comments.
- This is for items that are not on the agenda. There will be a time limit of three minutes per speaker.
- Please come forward to the podium here in the NatU Hill Room, or if you were joining us on Teams, please
- raise your hand to be recognized. And so if you'd like to, please come forward to raise your hand.
- All right, last call.
- Seeing none, it's time to move on to department updates. There'll be a time limit of 10 minute
- per department. Do we have anyone in the NatU Hill Room that would like to give a departmental update?
- Anyone on Teams would like to give a departmental update? Seeing none, we will move on to, we do not
- have any consent agenda items, which is,
- Interesting, but then that means we'll move up. Hold on one second. We'll move on to the building department
- for a hiring freeze review. Council, I move to open for discussion and possible approval of the building
- department's request to be exempt from the hiring freeze and be allowed to hire and fund 1,000 dash zero
- three, one, two, county general building, one full-time commercial building inspector. Second. All right,
- we have Robert LaRue, building commissioner here. What do we need to know? Good evening, Councillors.
- Thanks for having me here tonight. We have, the county has
- two commercial building inspectors proposed and a senior commercial building inspector. These folks
- are responsible for doing plan review, reviewing and issuing permits, and then performing inspections
- on all of the commercial structures which include apartment buildings in the county's
- jurisdictional area. So Monroe County and the city of Bloomington. Currently the senior inspector has
- stayed and the commercial building inspector has decided to take a different position with a different
- governmental agency. And then the second commercial building inspector position has remained vacant.
- as requested with the hiring freeze. I want to let you all know this is the single most difficult position
- in the department to fill. It has been very problematic to get folks to do this. It is a complicated
- job. We have to know about building code, mechanical code, plumbing code, fuel gas code, electric code.
- All of those things that go into building and building inspection. And to boot, I ask and we work hard
- to know all of those things. So it is a tricky position to fill, but we have to have it.
- We're getting towards inspection time for apartments and final inspections to commission and to provide
- certificates of occupancy to lots of housing in the jurisdiction. And that is one of the responsibilities
- of the commercial building inspector. I'm happy to answer questions about what it is we do.
- I'll be working to do inspections, but I really need to fill one of the positions and get them going.
- I think I mentioned to you before, takes probably about two years to actually have a fully functioning
- independent building inspector, and we need to get started.
- I did mention that we have a lot of final inspections coming up here very soon. All right. Thank you,
- Mr. Leroux. Any questions from Council? Yes, Councilmember Hawke. Just a comment that this is really
- in part not just supporting this department, but also supporting our local builders and all of that
- comes together in supporting housing. So I certainly support this. Just a addition and I appreciate
- that comment a lot. We are currently
- you know, having to kind of restrict people to only certain, so many hours of inspection a day so that
- we can get around to everybody in the community and try to make sure that everybody has their needs
- met by our department. So that is going to, I mean, that's only gonna get worse. It's only going to
- push this project out timeframe-wise, all of these projects out to a longer timeframe.
- Thanks. I had two questions. The first is I just want to make sure that I understand you're keeping
- one position open. Yes. You have been doing. As requested. With the hiring freeze, I'm not asking to
- fill that second position, but I don't know how to function without at least one, and we're already
- stretched like a rubber band.
- and I see that the position is 35 hours. Are all of the positions in your department 35 hours?
- They are, yes. Okay. That's all I have right now, thanks. Any other questions, comments? All right,
- go to the public. Any questions or comments on this item? Seeing none, can we please, can we do a roll
- call vote on this? Yes. Can we please have, oh, we need to do a roll call, excuse me.
- Who's that? Councillor Iverson? Yes. Councillor Feidl? Yes. Councillor Hawke? Yes. Councillor Wilts?
- Yes. Motion passes unanimous. Thank you all very much. And I also want to say thanks for your commitment
- to our interlocal agreement. It really helps me plan and understand what's before us. And I know I wasn't
- here super late,
- couple weeks ago, but I really appreciate your help. Thank you so much. All right, that concludes our
- hiring freeze reviews. Let's move on now to council business and we'll start with item number A, the
- highway department.
- Council I move to approve the highway department and fund 4920 dash 0000 Westside economic development
- tip for an additional appropriation of $200,000 in the services category.
- And with us today, we have Lisa Ridge, our Highway Director. What do we need to know? Good evening.
- So we're just working to get this project closed out. I know we have some outstanding change orders
- and stuff that go back and forth between NDOT and the contractor. So we anticipated these costs. So
- we were just wanting to do the additional to start the process to try and get it closed out. Council,
- do you have any questions about the Vernal Pike connector? I do not. Stumped them.
- You stumped them. It's fine with me. All right. Let's go to the public for any questions. Seeing none,
- may we please have a roll call vote? Councillor Feidl? Yes. Councillor Hock? Yes. Councillor Wilts?
- Yes. Councillor Henry? Yes.
- Councilor Iverson yes motion passes unanimous. Thank you. Thank you Next we're moving on to item B emergency
- management Council I move to approve the emergency management department's request in fund eight one
- eight eight dash nine six to five EMPG salary grant for additional appropriations of fifty five thousand
- dollars in the personnel category second
- And we are joined by Mr. Justin Baker, our Emergency Management Deputy Director on Teams. Mr. Baker,
- when you are available, the floor is yours. Tell us what we need to know. Good evening, counselor. Yes,
- this is the annual grant that we get each year that pays back our salary for $55,000. Comes from the
- FEMA and it goes out to the state and it's a reimbursement to the county. Thank you Mr. Baker. Council,
- do you have any questions for emergency management? This is just a way for us to help support this department
- and it pays a certain percentage of their salaries and expenses. Please help. All right.
- Any other comments or questions from council? Seeing none, let's go to the public. Do you have any questions
- or comments about this emergency management appropriation or grant? Seeing none, may we please have
- a roll call vote? Councillor Hogg? Yes. Councillor Wilz? Yes. Councillor Henry? Yes. Councillor Iverson? Yes.
- Councillor Fiddle? Yes. Motion passes unanimous. All right. Thank you, Mr. Baker. Next, item C,
- the courts. Council, I move to approve the court's request and fund 4018-0000 court interpreter grant
- for an additional appropriation of $20,300 in the services category. Second.
- All right, we have Lisa Abram here with the courts. Tell us what's going on. All right, I applied for
- and received in an emergency interpreter grant to help offset costs for interpreters for the county.
- And I was surprised, but they awarded me $20,300. So for the whole year, I only got 9,000, which I used
- that in about two and a half months. And this time they gave me 20,000, which will be spent in about
- two months time. So yeah, I have already, I think I calculated this morning about
- 16,000 in change invoices that have come in. So most of this is already gone, but at least I got it.
- Absolutely. This will help immensely. Yes. Council, any questions or comments for the courts? Councilman
- Watts. Thank you. Miss you. Yes, this is the last time you have to see me. So, Jama Chandler, my deputy
- is going to take over my spot and she's been here a couple of times. She's already familiar with her.
- and writing more grants, right? Yes, she has already written a couple herself that she received the
- court technology grants twice already. So, and I've showed her how to do this one, so we can keep going.
- All right, thank you so much. All right, we've exhausted council questions and comments. Now we'll go
- to the public. You have any questions, comments for the clerk? Seeing none, Michelle, may we please
- have a roll call vote? Councilor Will? Councilor Henry? Yes. Councilor Iverson? Yes. Councilor Feidl?
- Yes. Councillor Hawk. Yes. Motion passes unanimous. Thank you. Thank you for all you've done. Next,
- we'll go to item D, the Youth Services Bureau. Council, I move to approve the Youth Services Bureau
- request and fund 4111-0000 donations hyphen BTCC for an additional appropriation of $7,560 in the services category.
- second. All right we are joined here by Melanie Veselaj, YSB prevention coordinator. Tell us what we
- need to know. We have some money and we'd like to appropriate it and
- To the appropriate line, delta head, we're in the fourth year of this grant, which is the CDC grant
- with ICDV, the Indiana Coalition Against Domestic Violence. The purpose of this grant is to decrease
- risk factors and increase protective factors related to intimate partner violence by modifying the social
- determinants of health. So we've got a lot of overlap with that in YSP. And then the MC3 summit sponsorships,
- we're working on making sure that we have sufficient funding to pull off the MC3 for this year.
- Think it's pretty simple, but I'm happy to answer any questions if you'd like that being said counsel
- Do you have any questions or comments for the youth services bureau? Yes, that's my will Congratulations
- on bringing money in and keeping these programs going they're really important Thank you All right.
- I second that Are there any other comments or questions? Let's go to the public. Are there any comments
- or questions from the public for the youth services bureau? I
- Seeing none, Michelle, could we please have a roll call vote? Councillor Henry. Yes. Councillor Iverson.
- Yes. Councillor Fiddle. Yes. Councillor Hock. Yes. Councillor Wills. Yes. Motion passes unanimous.
- Thank you. Thank you. That moves us on to item E, aviation.
- I move to approve the aviation department's request and fund for eight zero one dash zero zero zero
- zero aviation construction fund for an additional appropriation of sixty three thousand three hundred
- and fifty three dollars and fifty five cents in the capital category second all right we are joined
- by mr. Carlos Laverdy the director of our airport who has joined us on teams welcome mr. Laverdy good evening
- Tell us what we know. We would like to replace a truck that was damaged in an auto accident. Our insurance
- provider totaled the vehicle, which was acquired with an FAA grant. It was one of the electric trucks
- that we had acquired. Insurance wrote us a check for a total of $62,438.34.
- we would only have to pay $915.21 for the difference of a replacement vehicle. So the insurance funds
- are deposited into the aviation construction fund and we're just asking that the dollars be appropriated
- to the equipment line for the purchase. All right. Council, any questions or comments for Mr. Laverty?
- And Mr. Laverty, the motion that was read, at least the materials we have do indicate that the funds
- will be going into that construction fund as you requested, so. Thank you. We just might want to make
- it clear to anyone who's listening, this is not local tax dollars. It's still public dollars, that's
- not local tax dollars. Great clarification, thank you. All right, any more questions from council?
- Seeing none, let's go to the public. Does anybody in the public have any questions for the airport?
- Seeing none, Michelle, may we please have a roll call vote? Councillor Iverson? Yes. Councillor Feidl?
- Yes. Councillor Hogg? Yes. Councillor Wilts? Yes. Councillor Henry? Yes. Motion passes unanimous.
- All right, thank you, Mr. Lavergne.
- Next, we're moving on to item F, the clerk's office. Council, I move to open for discussion and possible
- approval of the clerk's request to be exempt from the overtime transfer freeze and be allowed to complete
- an in-house transfer in fund 1215-0062, election fund, election board clerk within the personnel category.
- Second. All right.
- With us, we've got the whole crew. Welcome, Madam Clerk. Glad you're here. And all those who are joining
- us to really put the pressure on council here. Just to be clear, there is no child labor law violation
- within the Monroe County government. That's fine. But you're looking at a pre-Harvard law student, so
- she might learn something. That's just what I was thinking. Pre-Harvard law, yeah. All right, tell us
- what's going on here. What can we do?
- This is a request for the in-house transfer to cover some shortfalls so that we can pay our staff who
- helped us with preparing for the primary election. All right. Anything else to add? All right. Council,
- do you have any questions or comments for the clerk's office?
- I don't really have like critical questions or anything. I just would like to know if you wanted to
- take the opportunity to talk about the primary in any way. Well, I think let us tag team on that if
- you don't mind. So first, I'm very proud that we got
- Monroe County through the primary that you asked for, which was a robust primary. We did have better
- than expected turnout every day of early voting. Everything got off to a good start on election day
- until we found a glitch, but I'm very happy to report that that was less than 20 minutes long, and for
- whatever reason, our e-poll books
- would not if if you went to scan those of you who have early voted would know if you went to scan your
- driver's license it did not show you as being in that polling site we are very very fortunate to have
- an incredible e-poll book vendor as well as an incredible it vendor and they got together immediately
- and by 6 18
- everybody was voting and everything was going smoothly. That did not create any kind of issue. We had
- more than 10,000, I don't have the number, more than 10,000.
- Voters who voted on election day without problem and the weather cooperated in a better than expected
- way than we anticipated I checked with Kylie this morning, and I'll certainly let her add anything We
- did not have as many provisionals as I Anticipated we will reconcile provisional ballots on Friday,
- but I think the winners were very clear-cut You know who won? You know who lost?
- and so I don't have anything other than because of an incredible group of people and of course our poll
- workers early in absentee voting we were able to deliver you the primary that you asked for. I'll add
- that our staff was able to come together and work together as much as we possibly could with us being
- a little bit short staffed in a couple of areas but thankfully we
- We're able to just come together. A lot of us were working more hours than what we're used to.
- A lot of us, well, I should say all of us were there until 6 PM almost every single day helping in some
- way, some form in one of the many different areas that we needed to be. And then I was there some nights
- later than the 6 PM helping with training and other items with our training specialist. And just majority,
- it was really good
- I have a team that is so easily able to just be flexible and say, hey, wherever you need us,
- we'll be there. That's member final.
- Did you mention something about provisional ballots? Did I hear that? I said we'll be reconciling provisional
- ballots. So of course, and I just got this email. I asked Kylie for it this morning. So people who did
- not show up with their identification or people who showed up at the wrong polling site. And unfortunately,
- those who do not realize that you have to be registered in the county that you live in, there are some
- I'm going to venture to guess that they are largely from the Indiana University community.
- who were registered in different counties, although I have to say, Kylie does an incredible job of going
- over to the university to encourage students to change their voter registration ahead so that we don't
- have moments like this. Still, we find people who just were not willing to let go at the time, forgot
- that they did not change it, and then it becomes too late to get an absentee by mail or something like that.
- If I remember correctly, you said about 60. Yeah, we have 62 provisionals. 14 of those were no ID when
- they showed up to vote. Another 14 where they were not registered in this county. 13 were not at the
- correct polling location. And an additional 13, I believe, were the ones who went to the wrong polling
- location. And then, so can I add something?
- So, and then for this 18 minute. We're calling it where their provisional balance. Take it and then
- no so actually only one provisional ballot was taken in during that time. It was because that location
- didn't fully understand the concept of a form 42 which is a county created form to check in voters who are not
- showing up in the poll book, or if there is an issue with the poll book, then we have that form to be
- a backup check-in that we then check them in after election day to get their voting record up to date.
- All right. Any other comments or questions to my right? Please, Mr. Henry. Thank you, Mr. President.
- When we originally budgeted this cycle,
- The thought was we would take a look at how the primary went, you know, in terms of spending and where
- we spent and where there were adjustments, and then revisit for the fall. I mean, I know you just, you're
- still dealing with provisional ballots and the like, but when do you think you would be back before
- us to start talking about fall budget? The next meeting, correct? At the next meeting? Not for the fall.
- Not the next meeting for the fall.
- I asked Kylie if we could get through, I have an annual clerks conference in June. I'd like to sit down
- with our budget. And I obviously haven't had a chance to do that in the last seven days. But I mean,
- we are coming back to you in two weeks for some additional appropriations, but it is not connected to
- the fall money. Just thinking ahead to, you know. I am thinking ahead to, sir. Good, thank you.
- All right, any other comments or questions?
- Seeing none, let's go to the public. Does the public have any comments or questions for the clerk? Seeing
- none, may we please have, we have one public comment. Please come to the mic and state your name for
- the record, please.
- Good evening council members. My name is Joe Davis and as a clerk for circuit court I was there early
- voting every day and I have to say to the job that everyone did the volunteers were amazing who were
- working the polls. Kylie had a tight team. Anything that came up they were on top of it.
- Ms. Brown was over there constantly double checking to make sure everything was going fine. They did
- a fantastic job. I know for a fact that on election night some data had to be entered all the way up
- until 3.30 in the morning and you know therefore that put those employees for sure into overtime but
- it was just a few of the staff so at any rate
- Everything went fantastic. I would constantly ask the voters as they came out after voting how it went
- for them and they all had nothing but praise for the experience. It was very fast. However, there was
- one issue and that many elderly folks who came who had mobility issues, for them it could be
- quite challenging to walk all the way through
- the whole where you enter to vote in early voting and where you exit so it might be worthwhile to staff
- someone in the future who could be sort of like a concierge who has a wheelchair out there ready for
- anybody who might need that assistance but overall everything went fantastic and again hats off. Thank
- you very much. If I may respond.
- First, I want to thank you that that your praise is incredibly generous. I is like a proud parent I
- always know that I have the best team this side of heaven and that that is how we make it through so
- I appreciate your publicly acknowledging that, you know,
- Thank you. That's very, very generous of you. Regarding your concern, you are breaking news to me here
- in this room that there were elderly people who everybody that I talked to spoke very highly of the
- space, spoke very highly of how quickly things when they were able to get in and out without any issue.
- And of course we have wheelchairs
- on site should someone need them so unless there's something that my own election supervisor has not
- told me you are breaking news that there were complaints regarding elderly voters. Oh there weren't
- complaints but one time actually one of the voters who parked close in the handicapped parking area
- needed a wheelchair and so I ran up to the front area to let
- uh someone know that uh someone needed a wheelchair assistance and actually I got in trouble for that
- for being in the shoot so you know that's why I'm gonna I'm gonna pull this back anyway yeah yeah thank
- you we're talking about overtime here and yes yes and I'm I'm I'm sure this conversation will continue
- on the over
- over time deserves to be paid. Thank you. I simply did not want it to be on a televised meeting that
- we were not attuned to the needs of our voters. I am aware of an incident where a person had a medical
- unexpected a medical emergency that was addressed and I believe that I know to what he is referring
- but I simply would never want any voter to think that we were not prepared to receive them receive them
- well and have them have a good voting experience which was
- all of the feedback that I was given. All right let that be the final word. Sorry. That's all right
- it's a good final word to end on. Michelle may we please have a roll call vote. Councilor Iverson. Yes.
- Councilor Feidl. Yes. Councilor Hawk. Yes. Councilor Wilts. Yes. Councilor Henry. Yes. Motion passes
- unanimous. Thank you very much. Thank you. Have a good evening.
- All right, next, let's move on to item G, our waste reduction district. Council, I move to approve the
- Monroe County officially, excuse me, I move to approve that Monroe County officially accepts responsibility
- for the post closure care on behalf of the waste reduction district of Monroe County, pursuant to Indiana
- Administrative Code 329-IAC-39-3.
- All right. We have Mr. Tom at glass and with us. Tell us what's going on. Yeah. Thank you. This is become
- an annual request for us. We're required to put up financial assurance for the closed Monroe County
- landfill in the northeastern part of the county.
- there's a required third year post closure monitoring and maintenance period. So in essence, we're required
- to demonstrate to the state that the funding is available to complete the monitoring and maintenance
- for the remainder of that post closure period. You can see in the documents included in the meeting
- packet for this year, the remaining post closure cost estimate, $2,172,977.
- That's about $80,400 less than last year's cost estimate. The administrative code provides several different
- mechanisms by which the demonstration can be made. We prefer to use the local government financial test
- option as that does not require any expense on the part of the district or the county to make
- that demonstration. This is something we've done for
- 12 or 13 years in a row now. The county has graciously made that demonstration on our behalf. The district
- does not meet the requirements of a local financial government test option due to our annual revenue
- in relation to what the post closure cost estimate is.
- To date, we have never had to request any funds from the county as a result of making this demonstration.
- We've been able to absorb the monitoring and maintenance costs into our annual budget. We certainly
- foresee that to be the case for the foreseeable future as well. Additionally, the district does have
- a post closure trust fund.
- That as of April 30th at a balance of just over eight hundred and thirty thousand dollars and those
- funds obviously would be utilized before we would ever ask the county for any assistance With that I
- have Lee Polson here with me who is our landfill director. We'd be happy to answer any questions Great.
- Thank you so much for explaining that to us I'm gonna look to councilmember wilts first since yeah,
- you have signed this document Yeah
- So thank you for being here. I have some questions just for the good of the order. And then I would
- like to hear a little bit from Lee about just how things are going as we're winding down on the period,
- the 30-year period. But my first question, as you mentioned, a post-closure trust fund, what happens
- to that money if you don't spend it by the end of this period?
- management is a co-trustee on that fund so they would have to approve the disbursement of any monies
- from that fund but it is the district's money and at the end of the post closure period upon approval
- from the state those funds would revert back to the district.
- So the other question, what is the date of anticipated all done? 2039. Sorry? 2039. OK. It's coming
- up faster than you think. The tree planting. I'd like an update on how the trees are. And anything else
- you'd like to tell us about what's going on out there? The trees are growing.
- They're still pretty small. So we've actually Mary Beth and I have been starting to try to eradicate
- some of the invasive species that are growing very quickly around those trees, but that just takes time.
- But everything seems to be going just fine. Landfill is doing what the landfill is supposed to do. We've
- been able to absorb all the costs that we need to maintain and keep up with it within our normal budget.
- And right now everything is in decent good shape. So we're moving forward. So, yep. All right. Does
- anybody else have any questions now that Councilmember Wilts asked them all? Right. Let's go to the
- public. If you have questions for the Waste Reduction District, please come to the mic or raise your
- hand on Teams.
- Seeing none, Michelle, can we please have a roll call vote? Councillor Iverson? Yes. Councillor Feidl?
- Yes. Councillor Hawke? Yes. Councillor Wilts? Yes. Councillor Henry? Yes. Motion passes unanimous.
- Thank you. Thank you, folks. All right, next we'll move on to item H, the Board of Commissioners. Council,
- I move to approve the Board of Commissioners request and fund 4-1
- One two dash zero zero zero zero donations Sudak for the creation of account line three zero zero one
- three professional services and simultaneously approve an additional appropriation of twenty nine thousand
- five hundred sixty dollars and ninety four cents in the services category.
- All right. Thank you all we have with us Angie pretty commissioners administrator and one of
- the commissioners herself in the flesh. All right. So what do we need to know about this Sue
- DAC appropriation? Okay, so this is money that's currently remaining in the specific to that and this
- is based on
- Excuse me, you're going to have to pull the mic here. Thank you. So this is requesting appropriation
- of the funds that remain in the fund that is specific to the SUDAC fund, the SUDAC board. And these
- funds will allow for the current SUDAC to begin preparing for the
- all I think it is, event that's going to be handled and managed by SUDAC. All right. Are there any questions
- or comments from council? Please. Councilmember Wilts. This says donations slash SUDAC. I just wanted
- to make sure that it was made very clear. These are all donations from private entities.
- So these are revenues that have been earned from prior events and then just straight up donations. Could
- you tell us about the event? Sure. Each year we have an opioid summit and the summit is largely for
- professionals in the field and those who are interested in the subject matter and this year we have
- We expect approximately, I think, what, 150, 160 attendees. And we expect to get roughly 30,000 to 50,000
- in subsidizing donations. And so think about like a continuing education type of event. But this is
- a great opportunity to bring together resources at Indiana University, resources in the community, resources
- across the state.
- date set for this? Early September. September 1st and 2nd. Yes. The Bloomington Convention Center. And
- for the edification of the public, we keep throwing around these acronyms as government. What is SUDAC?
- We've said it 100 times. SUDAC is the Substance Use Disorder Advisory Commission. So there you go. Answering
- my own questions.
- I don't think I need to. All right. Councilmembers, do we have any other comments or questions?
- Seeing none, let's go to the public. Do you have any questions or comments for the Board of Commissioners
- regarding substance use disorder? Seeing none, Michelle, may we please have a roll call vote? Councillor
- Feidl? Yes. Councillor Hawke? Yes. Councillor Wilts? Yes. Councillor Henry? Yes.
- Councilor Iverson. Yes. Motion passes unanimous. All right. Thank you very much. All right. Before we
- move on to the much anticipated next item, we on the council are going to take a 15 minute break.
- I know, I know, because we need to prepare a little bit here. So council, we're looking at five forty
- three. Please be back by six o'clock.
- All right, welcome back, folks. This is, of course, the Monroe County Council. Thank you for joining
- us online. Those of you who are joining us on Teams, we're going to hop right back into our agenda.
- And we're going to go to item number I, which is the Board of Commissioners. And this is going to be
- a long one. So buckle in. Council.
- I moved to open for introduction and the first reading of ordinance twenty twenty six dash seventeen
- fixing terms and conditions for the purchase of property as follows. Whereas pursuant to the authority
- granted to the Monroe County Council Council excuse me by the General Assembly of the state of Indiana
- under I see thirty six dash two dash two dash twenty the council
- a conveyance or purchase by a county of land having a value of $1,000 or more must be authorized by
- an ordinance of the county fiscal body, fixing the terms and conditions of the transaction. And whereas
- the Monroe County Board of Commissioners intend to purchase land from the Logan land development LLC
- seller under certain terms,
- which are described in the attached and incorporated contract for purchase of real estate marked as
- exhibit one. And whereas exhibit one indicates a purchase price of $11,375, the agreement requires council
- approval pursuant to IC 36-1-10.5-5 and IC 36-2
- Now, therefore, be it ordained and established by the Monroe County Council as follows. Section one,
- the Monroe County Council has been provided two appraisals for the property owned by the seller and
- shown in exhibit one. Section two, the council wishes from Monroe County to acquire the property owned
- by seller and described in exhibit one.
- Fiscal body for Monroe County, this ordinance serves as the expression of the council's interest in
- purchasing the land as required by IC 36-1-10.5-5. Section three, per IC 36-2-2-20, the council approves
- of all the terms and conditions described in the contract for purchase of real estate.
- act hereto as exhibit one. The county recognizes that the purchase price does not exceed the average
- of two of the appraisals received and accepted by the council. Section four, to the extent council approval
- is required, the council approves the execution and deliverance of any and all documents necessary to
- approve the contract for purchase of real estate and authorizes
- officers of the county to take any and all action necessary to ratify, approve, or finalize the transaction.
- Thank you so much, Councillor Feidl. All right. And I think we need a second. All right. So we do have
- a whole group of folks before us from the board of commissioners who is going to open up today.
- I will start today, but I will note that we have attorney Jeff Cockrell. We have our administrator Angie
- Purdy. Commissioner Madeira and myself are here. Commissioner Jones is online. So if you could promote
- her, I would appreciate it, TSD. And we're also going to ask the sheriff to offer his commentary as
- well. So we do thank you for having this first reading.
- to consider the purchase agreement for North Park. And for folks who are new to this or need
- more information, we invite you to go to in.gov slash county slash Monroe. And in the department section
- on the left-hand side menu of our website, you will find a webpage for the Jail and Justice Center.
- So there are a lot of documents there and a timeline as well. So if anybody wants more information,
- it's there.
- We are definitely grateful and lucky that Mr. Falk of the ACLU Indiana agreed to extend the private
- settlement agreement on their lawsuit against the board of commissioners and the sheriff until the end
- of May. The county council had resolved to identify a specific site for the jail by April 7th ahead
- of the last ACLU deadline of April 15th. That deadline was missed. The second deadline was poised to
- pass without a site selected
- And a member of county council asked Mr. Falk to agree to another 30 day extension, which brings us
- to today's looming deadline for the end of the month. Yes. Mr. Falk has made his expectations clear
- to all parties as outlined in the most recent extension. And he made it very clear to our attorneys
- last week.
- that he will not consider in additional extension. So one of the things that has been brought up a number
- of times is the issue of our current facilities and whether they can be renovated. And Mr. Cockrell
- wants to offer a few comments on space issues in our current jail facility.
- I'm not sure I'm the most adequate person in the room to do this, but I did go through the report that
- we have from Mr. Ray. And it has a whole section on deficiencies of the current facility. And this was,
- again, produced in 2021. And a lot of those dealt with space inadequacies. So I went through, and I'm
- just going to list off the space inadequacies. And I think we've all discussed the difficulty, if not
- impossibility, it is to add space to that building.
- So inadequate counseling spaces, inadequate housing spaces, inadequate housing for segregation, inadequate
- isolation, inadequate processing booking, inadequate programming space, inadequate public lobby,
- excuse me, inadequate staff areas, lack of medical interview rooms, lack of medical treatment space,
- lack of padded cells, lack of suicide cells,
- limited separation of contagious inmates, no segregation of sexes or special needs inmates, and no sick
- beds. And I would note that that report had two different columns, a low and a high. And so the total
- of all 53, including the ones I mentioned here, the low was $22,122,000. The high was $56,484,000. Again,
- 2020, 2021 prices.
- Of those, the ones I just mentioned were about 90%, 80 to 90% of those expenses. So this was by far
- the, what required more space was by far the, cost-wise, the biggest percentage of what that report
- indicated. Thank you. Commissioner.
- So if the settlement agreement lapses at the end of May without meeting our obligations, a site selected
- will then be open to new litigation, both from the ACLU and from individual inmates. This isn't a suggestion,
- it's a real threat. A federal judge can order any number of remedies, but let's be clear, this is a
- burden borne by all Monroe County taxpayers. This isn't a risk or a cost that the commissioners are
- willing to accept when a good solution exists.
- If the purchase agreement isn't approved, the private settlement agreement will end and we are subject
- to being sued. The court will establish requirements which might be structural mediations, moving inmates
- to facilities in other counties, and it may be punitive. These only divert our attention and necessary
- funding from what we need to be focused on, building a new jail as soon as possible. To suggest a solution
- like transferring inmates to other counties is irresponsible.
- The estimated cost of $3 to $11 million in structural remediations, $1 million per year to house at
- least 50 inmates in other counties' facilities, $100,000 for a transit van and $1 million per year in
- wages for six new guards, and by the way, these are estimates in 2021 dollars, are sunk costs. They
- do nothing to move us towards developing a new jail. They also add significant risks to our jail staff.
- Our bond council has advised us to complete the bond process by July 2026, but a specific site needs
- to be selected before that bond can be initiated. We're already collecting a portion of the local income
- tax that aside for this project. The funding is available. It has to be structured into a bond to allay
- residents concerns in the words of George HW Bush, read my lips, no new taxes. North park is shovel ready.
- With a purchase agreement and a bond, we can break ground early next year and the facility can be operational
- by 2030. We've done our due diligence investigating properties across the county. A few years ago, we
- brought a petition before the city planning commission and the city council to build the justice center
- on Fullerton Pike. Both bodies rejected the petition. We spent nearly a year on that process. We stated
- at the time that if Fullerton Pike was rejected by the city, the county would look outside city limits
- for this facility.
- What does Thompson offer? Yes, it's in the city and yes, the county owns it. But here are the issues
- with that property. The City Plan Commission and City Council must approve a change to the planned unit
- development or PUD. We can't proceed with that approval. It's a necessary public process that we have
- to respect and it can't be shortened or avoided. That fact alone makes any project on Thompson impossible
- to complete either by Fox deadline of May 29th, 2026 or the bond council's deadline. In addition, there
- are other issues with the Thompson property.
- These need to be resolved before we can move forward. Cars features need to be studied and remediated.
- There needs to be a large amount of dirt that must be removed. Relocation of high voltage power lines
- that Duke estimates 1.5 years to complete. And a road needs to be built from the summit development
- onto the Thompson property. Even if everything goes well, we would be years away from breaking ground
- on Thompson and at a significant cost. And meanwhile, human
- lives and inmates are suffering while we wait. This doesn't include increases in construction costs
- also during that time period. The Fullerton Pike property poses concerns. It requires us before May
- 29th to complete a purchase agreement and to acquire a zoning change again by the City Plan Commission
- and City Council. Both are impossible.
- The property was only slightly less expensive than North Park to purchase, but it has less buildable
- area and will also require additional costs and time to complete stormwater remediation. It's also further
- from downtown than North Park, and there isn't a transit route at this site either. The County Council
- has only provided approval on two sites to date, Fullerton and North Park. Mr. Falk and the ACLU are
- focused on the construction of a new jail, not a full justice center. We intend to get the jail built
- as soon as possible.
- The jail, jail administration offices, sheriff's office, and a few criminal courts are included. Once
- we are able to, based on the state legislature, we should proceed with the construction of the remainder
- of the justice center. And may I remind you guys, in the election, we just elected a whole swath of
- red, red people, red Trump state electors. These people are not going to give us any relief
- from criminal laws. They're going to put a more punitive slate of criminal laws before us. So the imperative
- to get this project done doesn't just relate to criminalization of homelessness and the cash bail bond
- amendment coming before us. We have five new people that stand to be elected in November that Trump
- put lots of dark money into the election to get into place in the primaries.
- We have to keep that in mind. So once we're able to, we should proceed with the construction of the
- remainder of the justice center, co-location reduces security risks and overall costs in the long term.
- And folks have raised questions and concerns about transit. We have the time to figure this out. Either
- we work with Bloomington Transit or we expand the bus service we already provide
- with rural transit shadow service. We can contract with a ride sharing service provider when transit
- is not available to ensure that person gets home or to beacon or to whatever location they need to go
- to in Monroe County. This would actually be better than what we currently offer at the jail downtown.
- And think about it. We hear transit thrown around all the time. Is transit an issue that can be addressed,
- an issue that can be managed more important than providing a community standard of care for people housed
- in the Monroe County jail? The people who are not going to be at the microphone today are central to
- this issue. The people currently housed in the jail and jailers who face increased risk.
- If you truly care about creating a jail facility as soon as possible that can provide constitutional
- care and meet the level of community care we expect in Monroe County for people that are housed there,
- and you understand the potential risks and costs of a lawsuit are enormous and will impact every single
- taxpayer of Monroe County, we ask you to support this purchase agreement at the second reading on May 26th.
- We did take this time to review things that you've already been presented, and I apologize for that,
- but we did so because there's been a lot of misinformation bandied about, and we need to make sure that
- we set the record straight for the public. We do believe you understand the issues. Mr. Cockrell, can
- you address the appraisal issue, please?
- And in accordance with state law, we're required to get two appraisals, and we're not allowed to pay
- more than the average of those two appraisals. The document before you, you guys, the appraisals are,
- once we received them, were put on file with you guys two, three years ago, and so we're required to
- not pay more than that. And we also want to invite Sheriff Marte to come up
- and offer whatever comments he wishes to at the time. Before he speaks, I would like to just make a
- comment. Yeah, no, I'm gonna finish this. Council Member Hawke. I am. The sheriff has been invited to
- the microphone and there will be time for council to react to what has been said. All I am saying, the
- comment was made. There will be time. To try to split up this council that's worked together
- no matter what the politics, and that comment was inappropriate. Sheriff Marte, the floor is yours.
- Let me start by saying that for me, this has never been about politics. Never. When I took over three
- years ago, very transparent, I gave a PowerPoint and showed you what I was walking into.
- and what was taking place. That was very intentional. Because I said then, and I'm saying now, time
- is of the essence. I know for a fact what I said at times bothers certain people when I said we're moving
- too slow. And I said it. Some of you might remember I said we're moving too slow. And it was intentional
- when I said that. Because as I'm walking into that facility day in, day out,
- and I'm looking at people that we're supposed to be taking care of because this city, this county, supposed
- to be occurring and giving county. If everybody saw what was going on, they would be embarrassed. Not
- everyone sees what goes on in there. Everyone has good ideas that they think they do, but those are opinions.
- I'm dealing with facts. The years of experience that I have around me, of people that have done this
- for a long time, it's offensive to us that no one has listened to us to a certain degree. We are not
- going to make everybody happy. We're just not. We're not. Three years ago, I know for a fact I gave
- a PowerPoint presentation. And here we are, three years ago, and here we are.
- Ken Falk came to the jail, gave a last tour. I invited the council members and I invited the commissioners.
- Some of you came, some of you did not. He was crystal clear what he saw. And what he saw, he's correct
- because I've been saying it from day one. We cannot provide the programs that is needed
- According to people that want to have. I program so they don't end up in that facility. But yet when
- they do. We can provide the programs that we should be able to provide. The medical care. We can't even
- keep up. And it's not my fault because I've done everything that we can. My staff has done everything we can.
- When I came to you three years ago and I asked for help, then again, in 2024, I asked for help.
- If you notice, I kind of stayed away for a few meetings because I just couldn't understand what else
- can I say, what else can I do to have this body move on this. Now, North Park.
- To me, when I first started, it was Fullerton. Okay. It didn't work out because of the zoning with the
- city. Okay. And then, when we understood the challenges of Thompson, and when we, a few of us, went
- and spoke to the community in that area, and they were very crystal clear
- we move to North Park. So to me, I want to be crystal clear, it's not about North Park. If you could
- say tomorrow morning, I have another location that we could move right now, not me right now, that's
- the place I want to go to. In other words, I want to go to a place that's the fastest. And North Park
- is the place, is the place. And I'm going to say it again, we are not going to please everybody. It's
- just not going to happen.
- I'm sorry, it's not going to happen. But I can tell you this. Every minute, every day, every hour, there
- are people in that facility. But not everybody in this room sees except for me and my staff. And I'm
- telling you, it's very difficult. I'm telling you, it's getting worse. It is getting worse.
- I can't tell you anymore about the elevator breaking down. I just can't, I really, I don't know what
- else to say about that. Now because of the mold, the mold, for me to clean the windows, the bag that
- I showed some of you three years ago with the filth in there that some of you didn't wanna touch, those
- windows now have to be cleaned professionally, which is gonna cost $30,000.
- I can't save money now and do it myself because of the mold. So when people say you could go ahead and
- remodel that place, no. I understand it's innocent when they say that. They don't understand the structure
- until you're in there, day in and day out. So now, when something else happens, which I don't know when
- it's going to happen, when it will happen,
- It's gonna be me and my staff to deal with that. No one else in this building. Me and my staff. So yes.
- Yes. I stayed away for a few because I didn't want to offend anyone. I did not. But I've never gone
- to anyone's backyard and try to tell them how to do their job. I have not done that.
- But people have done that to me, to my staff. It is offensive. It is. I wish I could please everybody,
- but I cannot. So. You have a tough decision to make, I understand that. Please remember, there are people
- in that building still waiting. And I do not want something
- just let you happen. And I have to come back here and sit here and explain to you what just happened
- because I just don't know. I don't know what's going to happen later. I don't know what's going to happen
- tomorrow or next week in that building. This is urgent. This is urgent. Now, if you have questions of
- me, I'd be more than happy to answer them. If not, I'll go back and sit down. And we can take questions
- as well. Any of us
- All right, great. I think this is what we're gonna do moving forward since Council Member Crossley just
- arrived to the record. The way that I would recommend that we move forward is that we have a time for
- council members to ask questions, then we go to the public and allow them time for public comment, then
- they come back to council for a final round of questions. If we choose. And yes, and just I wanna make
- sure that we're prioritizing
- public comment and that we preserve the right to have a dialogue between Council Commissioners and Sheriff.
- All right, Madam President, the floor is yours. Thank you. Duties call, but here we are. Okay, so looking
- to and by the way, I was listening via cats. So I heard a lot, but I'll refrain for right now. But I
- want to look to my colleagues to see if they have any questions. Yes, Council.
- Well first of all I want to have a comment for our sheriff because as you know this council has been
- many times bending over backwards to be supportive of our sheriff's department of our deputies of the
- jail and the jailers when the commissioners were saying we're not going to let you put lipstick on a
- pig this council stepped up and said
- we will make sure you get the money. All you have to do is come on, we will make sure you've got the
- money that you need to operate. And it seems to me that right now, we have every council member here
- who wishes to proceed with building a new jail. So you shouldn't, in my opinion, be concerned that that
- won't go forward. Yes, once again, we are reminded that the Sheriff's Department, the courts,
- Commissioners at the time the council at the time Had an offer to purchase that was accepted But several
- million dollars less to go to Fullerton Pike That was when we had a different mayor and different people
- on the council that changed over how many years ago and I am told by the mayor nobody has come to her
- to say that
- Now, maybe that's changed last week or so, but at the time, nobody came to say, could we move forward
- with Fullerton? If we had just grabbed the reins and started moving forward with Fullerton right there,
- we would have been, you know, the first would be in, we'd be going. So it takes the commissioners, but
- it also takes the council. So at one time, the commissioners and the council both agreed on a location.
- That location was Fullerton.
- If we could go to Thompson, then we don't have to pay money at all for the ground, but the repairs or
- whatever, whatever it take it. I understand that it'd take a while, but any way you go, you're not gonna
- have a new jail to go to tomorrow. So we've got to figure out what's not just best for the jail and
- how that's gonna operate, but for the community at large and where is the best location that's going
- to provide the best services for the entire county
- and for the people that we serve there. So I just want you to know, we support you. We do. This council
- as a whole has supported moving forward. And so if we don't agree on the same location, I think we need
- to find one that we will agree on and that might, that's either Thompson or Fullerton.
- Let me say it this way. I've only been here three years. There's some members of the council have been
- here before me. This issue did not start when I came here. And I did say three years ago, let's move
- on this and let's move quickly. So the matter to me is not what happened with the commissioner's annual
- council. And I said that I don't want to be part of a political football here.
- I want to be able to get this fixed as soon as possible. And if there's another location short of North
- Park that could do it tomorrow, then that's what I prefer. Something that we could move very quickly.
- Simple as that. There are certain things that I came to the council that was denied. I'm not bringing
- that up. So what I'm saying very crystal clear right now,
- I'm not gonna get into that right. This is not the place or time, but I will down the road and make
- a crystal clear of what I was denied. However, right now, the issue is, because if you keep going the
- same path, and three years ago, when I started, we're still here, some of the council was here before
- me. So I don't understand why is it now we're saying, okay,
- we all have to agree in the same location. We're not going to agree in the same location. We're just
- not. May I also respond briefly? Sure. Thank you so much. I appreciate Sheriff Marte's words. We, as
- the Board of Commissioners, have supported the Sheriff's Department's contracts throughout all of this.
- And really, let's talk about, rather than pointing fingers, I think it's important to remember that this
- facility, especially if we are eventually talking about a co-located facility, requires everybody to
- work together. A lot of different elected officials and department heads have to work together. And
- that's the only way we're going to be successful moving forward. I also want to remind the council that
- when we talk to city planning, we were told that there is a six to nine month window to get
- a planning zoning request through. That is their process, much like the county has a process. And even
- if that were shortened by five, they're still talking about missing the deadline at the end of May.
- So it's, Mr. Falk requires that a site be selected. The other thing is we have,
- We have talked through a number of things that are important to us. And no site is perfect.
- None of them are. But right now, all of our priorities, all the things we've talked about, oh, proximity
- to transit and downtown and this and that, all of these things that we've talked about that are important
- to us, we now have that element of time that has become critical because of this pending lawsuit.
- And that one element has risen to the top of our priority list. And because time is going to be money
- if we don't make that deadline. Thank you. So if I can council members, I want to jump in here because
- specifically since time is money. And that was a question that you or something you just post Commissioner
- Thomas, I guess, and not trying to play political football this point,
- to whomever, but in order for us to get to where we need to go, we kind of have to know where we came
- from. And this is to you specifically. I guess since time is money, how has it been that county government
- has sat on this for as long as we have and has had the ACLU extend, extend, extend
- throughout all this time and nobody has said anything up until the moment when we took the vote October
- 28th. That's one thing. The other thing that I want to say is, yes, we did hear in city planning back
- in February that they were saying approximately. However, I would like to say for the record, though,
- we also heard you need to give us what you need in order for us to
- to make this work. I've heard that more than one ways, I've talked to more than one city colleagues
- and officials, and yet here we are. So I guess, you know, when I hear you say that we all need to work
- together, that's fine, that's great. I think that's a common denominator that all of us can say that
- that's something that we can
- But it's frustrating to sit here and say that to us when, in January, during our public meetings, we
- heard all along that North Park was a thing, even though back in October, we voted it down. That was
- something that you had mentioned. And the ball's in our court, the ball's in our court, the ball's in
- our court. Well, we picked it up, we dribbled, we did what we needed to do, and then we passed it back
- to our colleagues who are on the same colleague team. And so what you did with that, I don't know.
- But my question that I would like to ask since, and looking around, I know you've been around in county
- government, both on council and as a current commissioner is, how did we get to the point where, I guess
- I'd just like to know anybody. I don't know if anybody can answer this because public has been asking,
- how have we sat on this for so long?
- I was not in government at all, only had one child at the time, now I have three and we're still sitting
- where we sat way back when. So can you explain to us and the public for that matter, how did this extension,
- how does extensions keep getting granted and why didn't we do anything in the first place? I can answer
- part of that question and I'm gonna ask Mr. Cockrell to also address it
- because he's been here as well. I will say that the first settlement agreements related to caps on the
- number of people in the facility at any given time. And I was not privy to that as a member of council
- at that time. Now, there are a lot of things that have happened
- between 2009 and today. But I will disagree with the assessment that we suddenly appeared last year
- with a purchase agreement. This has been an ongoing discussion interrupted by COVID. It's not what I
- said. That's not what I said. Okay. That's what I heard. Yeah. Okay. Because I heard, why is it suddenly
- now we have to do something? It's not sudden. There isn't a rush here. But what's happened is
- We have done the due diligence of working through properties, engineering reports, geotechnical, all
- that good stuff, identifying, working through all of that, pros and cons of each one, meeting with neighbors,
- Broadview, Vernal Pike, and at North Park especially.
- but we've looked at way more properties than that. Fullerton, we didn't have to, there's only one neighbor
- and that conversation was had. And those conversations were helpful and enlightening and it helped us
- determine the kinds of things we need to focus on. But no property is perfect. Now we did community
- study, we did the report
- with Ray, the Ray report. Then there was COVID. And I will also say that it depended on which sheriff
- was in charge of that jail as well. How much did they bring to us as commissioners for remediation and
- remodeling, et cetera.
- The fault lies everywhere. But between the Great Recession and COVID, I've consistently heard that it's
- too much money. And it is a lot of money. It makes my eyes water to think about how much money this
- is. And that's a huge commitment. And I get this is a big decision, probably the biggest you'll make
- as a council member. It's huge. I respect the gravity of that decision.
- But we, right now, are thinking about time. And Mr. Cockrell, did you want to add anything? I guess
- I can maybe add a little bit. I would just start that Bill Sager handled the litigations back in 2008
- and 2009. So I wasn't really a whole privy to that. But look through our geo bonds that we have issued
- in the last 15, 20 years, you'll see
- double bunking certain cell blocks as part of that. I mean, it's not like it was nothing was happening.
- I mean, things had been happening. We double bunked our things we had. We built in the mental health
- area, whatever we call it, whatever it's called now. So there were things doing that were being done.
- I think the other thing I would say is really the ACLU started being a little bit more skeptical of
- us in 2019, which is what triggered
- the study, the Kenray study and the accompanying community assessment study. So, you know, that's when
- this all started from a ramp up from kind of the ACLU's perspective as in 2019. I remember being in
- a conversation with Mr. Falk who says, I think you've been using our agreed order as a crutch and I
- don't think your facility is adequate. Maybe it is. Why don't you have a study done and show it? And
- so we've seen the study, we know what it says.
- That's really when it started ramping up from the ACLU's perspective, in my opinion. Just for the record,
- I want to also say in terms of a rush, I guess what I mean by that is October 28, we sat here close
- to midnight. We voted it down.
- We also kept hearing, again, as I said before, you said the ball is in our court, and so we did it.
- And then we answered the five questions. I guess it seems to be that if we really were truly on the
- same playing field, that after that moment, we could have all sat down and we could have had
- that conversation. And that's why members of the public feels that this is just a big rush. I understand
- that Falk is upset with us.
- But I just, it's frustrating and it kind of ticks me off that we are sitting here having to deal with
- things when folks back in 2021 kept going around and saying they were the last ones to be on board with
- this and now here we are. That's the part that is frustrating to me. But I digress and I'll go on. Yes,
- Councilor Iverson.
- I have a statement and then a question. The statement is something that I think has brought up in one
- of the commissioner's remarks is that this is indeed the first reading of this ordinance. The second
- reading of this ordinance will be on the 26th of this month. And so we wanted to make sure that we're
- speaking that into the minutes. So I'm glad that when we can have a more robust conversation about that
- should we need to.
- My question to the commissioners is, in terms of costs associated with the bonding of this, we were
- given two options for what this facility could be. It could be courts and a jail with corrections, or
- it could also include sheriffs. So do we have any more clarity about which option the commissioners
- are leaning towards at this very moment? Do you want to address it?
- I have it. OK, please. So the intention to make the most sense was to option B, which was having the
- jail administration, sheriff administration, and this particular estimate is based on having three courtrooms
- also built out. And so for justice.
- Simplify it total cost based on Sheriff Sheriff mystery jail jail administration three courtrooms is
- one hundred and fifty seven million eight hundred and sixteen thousand seven hundred and two dollars
- Did you say one hundred and fifty seven million or twenty seven million fifty one five seven
- includes all costs that includes the soft costs before we had the 127 that did not include soft costs.
- The, the, the idea for having some of the courtrooms there is to help for the security of the sheriff's
- department. So that criminal
- And that's what we're trying to do. We're trying to make sure that all cases can be heard where the
- inmates are rather than moving them back and forth and keeping the courts all downtown now they're going
- to be options. When we finally get to that point- they're going to be options- a million read a million
- dollars for redesign because we're splitting the
- there would have been before relating to the size of the jail, whether the sheriff's department is there
- or not, et cetera. But it would have to include, we think, at least two courtrooms. So there'll be options
- like how many courtrooms and how large the facility is in terms of the bed count, et cetera. So it's
- not a flat number. It is a number that
- You all will have to talk through that. We'll talk through with you, of course. But we don't have specific
- numbers yet. I mean, that's the thing. We haven't asked them to go to bid or anything. That's the issue.
- So what happens is you already know what our bonding capacity is. You guys attach that to your resolution.
- Nobody wants to bond at 170 million, which would be using up all of our cash. But we can, in fact, I
- believe comfortably bond at 135 million. And then we are sitting on about 70 million in reserves in
- these particular funds. So the other thing to keep in mind is when we bond, we get the bond for
- Whatever amount we think that we are going to want to have and the tax rate is already in place. We
- are already collecting those dollars. To pay the debt and I think I need to clarify something.
- We don't have $70 million in cash reserves in these funds, right? I mean, we don't have that, right?
- That is a number. That's just not true. What your report indicated was that there was $135 million bonding
- capacity, and then there were two areas where it says cash available for project. You added all those
- up, it got to $170 million. And that was at that point in time. We are collecting still, and we're not
- spending it all. So it's a little bit higher now, but it's certainly not 70, right? My mistake. And
- that's based on your resolution.
- I understand it. And in terms of getting to the place where we have a schematic design and we're getting
- into those architectural studies, I think is the intent that the building corporation is going to be
- the vehicle in which that's going to be completed in? Or is it going to be like last time where we're
- having a bunch of meetings on this floor and we're going to be discussing all of those? I guess a building
- corporation should not be involved with those kind of architectural decisions. That should be
- the funders and the commissioners, right? I think you guys are the ones who should play a role. The
- building corporation should function as the, and I think we've, I've explained this before, is their
- primary function is to be able to gather enough financing in order to fund a project without coming
- into butting heads with the constitutional debt limitation. It's something that the state legislature
- came up with a long time ago and it's widely used.
- So the building corporation's function is not to make these kind of decisions. I think that is the sheriff
- clearly and his team clearly have a role to play in a lot of how particularly the jail and the sheriff's
- office is designed. And I think the council and the commissioners play a role for a lot of the other
- areas. And much of this has been done. They have worked with the transition team and DLZ
- so much of this has basically been designed however now they have to figure out how to cut this building
- in half so that it can be co-located in the future or not even but either way the building has to be
- cut and that there's a fee for that and that's included in those soft costs and I and I will note that
- you know we spent
- about four million on design to begin with. And so there is an additional cost because we're only doing
- a portion of the project. And that is something that we're not willing to spend the next approximately
- million dollars to finish a new design.
- until we get the purchase agreement done. Well, they won't do it because we can't. Yeah, we don't have
- the property. We have to have the property for them to finish the design. I have no more questions.
- I'm gonna go to Council Member Wilts and then I'll circle back to Council Member Henry. I just had a
- follow-up from some things I just heard, which is about the desire to have courtrooms on site
- and who is at the table making decisions because while my immediate thought is, oh, that makes sense
- that you would tack courtrooms on to make it convenient for everyone, every single person that I've
- talked to who works in the courts, judges and defenders, prosecutors, I've talked to
- many people none of them want that and they've all actually said that would be that there's no way they
- can see using that and and where's the disconnect and have you had them provide input and and that can
- be something that once we initiate the bond and we get through to the point of design if that's a bid
- option you want we can talk about that but the question is
- the inconvenience of people who have to get in a car and go from one job site to another job site,
- if they're, for example, a judge, they would have to go to do court or they could do it online, but
- they would have to, they're inconvenienced and there's time involved and there's transportation involved,
- so they may charge mileage, et cetera.
- That's one side of the balance sheet. The other side of the balance sheet is having the jailers having
- to maintain a part of the jail as operational here and also having the jailers moving people every day.
- And I think that's a discussion we all need to have, but that's a discussion that needs to happen this
- year, but it doesn't have to happen now, but it is out there as an option.
- I agree that it seems like a very undeveloped concept, just based on all the things that I've discovered
- in my conversations, but I also think that we're here to talk about a bigger issue, so let's. Council
- Member Henry. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, commissioners, for being here and walking
- through some of this.
- Some questions I want to ask, but I kind of need to follow up on what I've just heard up here too, before
- I get into it. And first I want to address the sheriff in saying that I don't question any of the seriousness
- of what you've presented, the operational expertise your team brings to that building, the operating
- environment you've been in. But I think for me, it's always been the question of the jail, which is
- where you are, and where we get into these conversations that kind of grow off of them. The idea of
- co-location, the idea of all these other
- activities that are not really part of the lawsuit. It's always been about the jail and trying to get
- back to what that care is. And so I want to honor that. I know I can tell from the frustration that
- you have there. And to the extent that I've contributed to that, I want to honor that and apologize
- from this seat anyway if I've contributed to that agita on your staff in any way. But I got to pick
- up on this.
- I don't think the answer is for us to approve a bond and hand over the purchase agreement and all of
- the activities that move forward without establishing a different set of ground rules because we just
- heard it. Councilor Iverson asked, well, who's the entity that's making architectural decisions? And
- you rightly asked, is it the building corp, which doesn't make sense because that's a fiscal activity.
- I think the community understands that we just built a convention center with a capital improvement
- board that met very publicly and walked through requirements and dismissed requirements and explained
- the artwork even and what was in that space.
- And that's, I think, our public understanding of how one goes about building a multi-million dollar
- project. That has definitely not been how this has gone up to this point. So when we have a comment
- that says, oh, well, we'll work on it, or we're gonna get to it, where are those requirements gathered,
- adjudicated, dismissed, or kept? Many of the public have asked for things that have been taken off the
- table. This council has asked for things through the CJRC, and the JFAC activities were taken off the
- table. And there was never an explanation as to why
- Kind of similarly, we went through a process from January until now, where we were meeting behind closed
- doors, the council had suggested properties in the city of which have never been made public, but we
- went through a process in some way. But I think I would need at least a guarantee that says, I mean,
- that's the question, how would you answer that to say, how can we do it differently so that we don't
- relive the same process where we agree to a purchase agreement and then a few months from now, once
- the design comes back and it's considerably more expensive,
- for whatever reasons or maybe that we end up right back reliving last fall? I mean, how are we gonna
- do this differently to make sure the public and this body is very aware of the requirements we're keeping
- and the requirements we're getting rid of? I project manager, right? And I would say that in this instance,
- we have one of the largest projects I've ever been involved with.
- even though it's been cut in half, essentially. And I've been involved in quite a few in my time in
- county government. And the process is, and as it should be, because initiating the bond is one thing,
- and I know that July date is in there from our bond council. It's not something we made up. And I think
- between July and December, and I know you have budget hearings in between there, but we have to talk through
- we're going to have to talk through what amount we're bonding for. And if we're talking about what amount
- we're bonding for, we're talking about what's included and what's not, and what our hopes are. If you
- talk to those same judges, prosecutor, public defender, clerk, clerk's employees, you're going to hear
- that they want co-location. That's what you hear. We can't do it thanks to the legislature.
- And, but that's the bonding process. And Jeff, can you correct me if I'm wrong on any of that or add
- anything if you need to? I think I might add a little bit. I think the bonding process would kick off
- in July, but until the bond is finalized, which would likely be in November-ish, I don't remember the
- time off my head, the amount of the bond isn't set, right? And so part of the,
- Part of your question is, it got out of control. I guess I have a little different perception, but that's
- fine, right? It did increase, and I don't think anybody doubts that. But the question is, how does the
- council and their role is to set the budget? And so the budget gets set when, in this case, when the
- bond is approved, but we can't
- designed to the approval without having some idea of what the budget, you anticipate the budget to be.
- Does that make sense? It does, except I would go as far as to say the budget needs to be more granular
- at this point, based on trusting but verifying information that's been presented in this room up to
- this point. I appreciate that walkthrough, but it gets away from what I asked, which is when someone
- brings a requirement, like whether or not an office needs to be co-located or not,
- It's the decision about that before the presentation of the product by the LZ to us to say, well, here's
- the design.
- It's the gray space. That's what I'm after. Mr. Thomas, I read the Herald Times archive way too much.
- And back in 2008, when you first ran for office, you were as ardent as Counselor Wilts when it came
- to alternatives for diversion programs. And you have chased some of those stride centers, for example.
- I mean, there's been a history here. And so I guess for me, it's hard to sit across from you after your
- 17 years of August service, where you fought for these things early days, and now we're at a point where those
- things aren't in this facility and I don't know why they're off the checklist okay and so it's so it's
- not even about relitigating that I just want to know how we decide when something is proposed why it
- gets jettisoned or why we're keeping it and how to do that publicly okay so to answer both your questions
- I would say that one of the things I would like to see us do is to combine our opioid settlement fund
- dollars from the opioid lawsuit settlements with the cities. And put those things together and come
- up with a mental health substance use disorder facility inpatient outpatient whatever we can do. And
- maybe Thompson's the site or you we can decide to sell Thompson all of those things are things that
- we all need to work together on. The other thing I will say is that
- We don't have granular information about what the design looks like at this moment. We had it, but we
- don't have it with the courts sort of lopped off the side of it. So we don't have that. But we don't
- want to, and they won't do it, pursue that granular design work, which he said will take about a month
- to readjust things. You have to readjust HVAC and plumbing and all kinds of things.
- until this purchase agreement is done. And at that moment, yes, we all need to work together to figure
- out what, you know, when you put out that bid, again, you put out a range of items. And it may be that
- three of you want to see what it will cost to add another cord. And, you know, I might say, well, what
- about this? And we put all of those things in that bid package as a range of options.
- right? Two courts, one court, one in-house court, whatever it might be. Those are things that we will
- be talking about. I don't think there's anything that our office would be involved in in terms of the
- jail or jail administration side. Certainly, that's not our purview. So there are some issues of granularity that
- are not in our... There are issues of granularity that are not things that we are masters of and that
- we know enough about to be involved in. But you can clearly say, what about the size? What about this?
- What about that? Et cetera. So I think there are a number of issues that would have to be resolved.
- We'd have to...
- We'd have to have a range of items to go out for bid. Mr. Cockrell, maybe you want to add something?
- I would just say, in some ways, it's a chicken or an egg thing, right? As somebody who's worked on this,
- if you gave me a budget, then I could say, we could do this, this, or this, right? And we could work
- with our design team, and we could say, here are your choices, right?
- what do you want in it? And then we get to tell you, well, this is what each of these components costs.
- I mean, I guess from my perspective, what are people comfortable with? How do they wanna proceed forward?
- Do they wanna go with the, we wanna know, I mean, I think we've said with that $157 million, which is
- scary to me, I'll be honest, number that we've got three courtrooms, we've got the jail administration,
- we've got the sheriffs
- the sheriff's office and we've got the jail, well, at some point in time, I think we would need to know
- what each of those components cost. So we can trim that number down if necessary. I appreciate it, Jeff.
- So this wasn't really where I wanted to go, Madam President. I can't do project management 101 at 6
- o'clock on a Tuesday.
- you know, we build everything from a birdhouse to a battleship with an idea that there's a manager and
- there's milestones and timelines and all that's very public and transparent. And it's something we still
- need to work on because I'm talking right past the tables here. I mean, I really don't know how to get
- at that this evening. Let me get to the question of the council, which is really the fiduciary piece
- of this. And it was mentioned earlier because there was an article in the Herald Times asking about
- this. So I want to start off by saying that I'm going to ask some questions about valuation. And it's not about
- cases and divorces. It's about how we got an appraisal on a property that's been presented in the purchase
- agreement, and I need to understand how we got here. So I'm going to ask some stuff about this. And
- the point of that is to help the public understand where the $5 million number came from on a property
- that is no longer going to be generating any economic benefit or part of it to the community. So that's
- where we need to ask what we're being asked to purchase here.
- We had, and I appreciate that we've mentioned tonight, there were two appraisals. Those were offered
- to council. It's part of the resolution that we accept or at least entertain those or look at those.
- Those appraisals started, I believe, in 2024, late 24, and they were presented to the county in March
- and April of 25. I think that's the way I understand it from the sheet. One was March and one was April.
- Does that last year does that sound right to Jeff you're telling me but it sounds like to me honestly
- because I think when the council approved the original purchase
- ordinance for North Park, I believe they approved it in October of 2024. So those appraisals would have
- occurred prior to that time. Okay, so we got appraisals that are a year and a half or so stale, or at
- least understanding that. There's a really big thing that happened in that timeline between the two
- appraisals of the property, and this was the adviceo and the first appraisal group's assessment, and
- where we are now. And it happened in April of 25 when the plan commission in this room
- change the PUD for some of the properties with Mr. Crider to figure out how to simplify. I think that
- was the way it was put in the room, to simplify the PUD for the purpose of doing something with the
- balance of the property. In that room, I asked him, he was standing right there, I was sitting about
- here in plan commission, I asked him, first of all, is this something you want to do? And it seemed like that
- was affirmative and I also asked him, you know who initiated the question which I never got an answer
- on if that was a council or county driven question to change the PD or if it was his desire to change
- the PD based on the fact that the county was interested in purchasing that property again that's neither
- here nor there tonight what's important is the timeline.
- Because the appraisal was done at a time when both the appraisals had said that the the valuation was
- based on commercial multifamily mixed-use that was advisee Oh the first Appraisal group said commercial
- or mixed-use and so when they were appraising the property at eleven point seven five or whatever it
- was looking at comps of a of what like Property in the county would generate that economic benefit,
- right? It wasn't a governmental use of the property
- So we made it a governmental use by rezoning to create a government center at the PUD, instead of a
- lifestyle center where one would go out and buy mall type things, which was the original vision under
- the comp plan. And that's where I'm having a hard time with understanding the current value. And that's
- why I said what I said in the paper. So my first question on this is, and maybe for the public to understand
- this a little bit better, what we're really talking about is the land out there,
- isn't just dry land that has a price tag on it. There's future potential value in that property because
- your county government has invested TIF bonds in that to build out infrastructure, had done a planned
- urban development around it, thinking that someday the North Park property would generate a whole bunch
- of tax revenue income or property for the county as a major exit point off an interstate. Now, when
- we put a jail on that, that doesn't detract anybody. No one's going to do that.
- And that's the challenge I'm having with the amount. So imagine a layer cake, first layer is the out
- of the box yellow cake of, you know, that's North Park. Put on the chocolate layer of the PUD and then
- the toppings, the fondant, the frosting, that's your TIFBOT. And when we start ripping that out through
- our process, it devalues that slice of cake. We lose some layers there. It's just the value is tied
- to the economic potential of that property.
- So where I'm trying to get to, and helping me understand this, based on the actions of the county to
- change the development plan out there, is have we ever looked in the appraisal of it as a government
- property? What's its value otherwise? Is it time to take a look at that? So I'll take a look at that.
- And I know, by the way, that case that you referred to in the
- newspaper article intimately because I teach it. So I'm happy to talk about that. I don't think the
- newspaper article reflected that case fairly or talked about the fact that that case actually rejected
- the $6,000 valuation nor did it mention that the property sold, 84 acres of that property sold to Bloomington
- Hospital in 2006 for $150,000. And so clearly the Bloomington Hospital is comparable to a jail site.
- And that was not a particular commercial value either but your question you know was should the properties
- commercial value be relevant to government. So I think that is factually true the fact that it is commercially.
- is true is a description of appraisal methodology. I think but the framing of that question or the premise
- is incorrect. Appraisals generally assess fair market value based on highest and best use, not the buyer's
- intended subjective use. A government just doesn't get to purchase land at a discounted jail price because
- it gets to build a public facility there. So if the property's market value reflects commercial or mixed
- use development potential, then that's relevant to what a willing seller could command in the market.
- I don't think there's a basis for the claim that a government use necessarily should be valued differently.
- And certainly, we haven't ever made that claim. Well, OK. I appreciate that. And I appreciate the cases
- used in divorce law or family law. I'm not really concerned with that. Here's where I'm at, Commissioner
- Madera, on it. The highest and best use, according to the two appraisals, was commercial mixed use.
- removing elements of the PUD that would have encouraged that development and said, now it's governmental
- use and a conservation easement. And by Mr. Kreider's own words would not be used for density,
- but in fact, park space. Using TIF bonds to build a road in, I don't want to lose everybody in the room,
- but it's important to say, is to say originally the road was for the purpose of building commercial
- things on it. And so now we have a TIF bond that funded a road that will go to a park, a jail, and
- And that value of the bond is now a question here, too. So what I'm trying to get at is, I appreciate
- the highest and best value use appraisal concept. I'm not denying that. But what can be built there
- today is very different than what was appraised in 2013. At the end of the day, we're stuck in the same
- position as any buyer would be, and we're stuck paying the same price. So if a buyer wanted to go in
- there, we're
- Stuck paying the same price as a Meyer would want to pay and so we don't get a discount there's no discounted
- price that the government gets essentially when they go into property right we've removed value through
- the PD if that's not the same value anymore we've removed I mean this is a cannot hear in a second this
- is the question is that that.
- the county's actions have taken value from that property. It's interesting to say, well, if it did go
- on the market and we did build a commercial or residential properties there, that's where the valuation
- is. The only other comp I can think of in the past two years would be the county taking into inventory
- the 400 acres of Huntington Farm, which was valued much lower and is on state routes, but it will not
- generate revenue. When I say, have we looked at other government-use properties in the county,
- Yeah, the valuation of that particular property is very different. It was a question worth raising.
- I'm concerned that we don't have an up-to-date understanding of the value of that property, but I've
- taken up a lot of time. I'll turn it over. I'll just say one more thing. On the 150,000 per acre in
- 2006 for Bloomington Hospital, that's a 46% increase if we're
- that this this acreage at two hundred nineteen thousand in twenty twenty four by any major Bloomington
- property values have appreciated far more than forty six percent so let's by all means get another appraisal
- and we'll see how much this property has appreciated today I'm no expert on it though I know counselor
- hogg sold a few things in her life I mean that could happen there could be another round of appraisal
- price goes up it's not gonna go down the other thing is is that there's nothing
- on this property now, and I do want to answer the question that was posed because we get thrown questions
- and then, oh, don't worry about that. Mr. Crider contracted with a developer and came up with a proposal
- for his revised PUD. The other thing I will say is that sometimes you put a Bloomington hospital or a
- A whole criminal, which our hope is in the future justice center on a site and it drives development
- as well. So there's two sides to that coin. Um, I'm going to move on. Um, and I'll go to counselor Irison
- and then I'll pop back to counselor wills.
- Section 3.3 of the contract identifies that the phase one environmental is no longer valid. How long
- is that going to take to conduct a phase one environmental on this property? Not very long. We set the
- period for review longer than I think twice as long as we anticipate it would take to get the phase
- one reevaluated. Okay, great. And are there other evaluations we need to do on this property?
- Pending approval of the purchase agreement, all that stuff. That's the important one. I think we were
- ready to close on it, clearly, last October until we weren't. So I think we had everything up to date.
- At that point, our phase one would have still been good. And so I think this is just the one thing we
- need to make sure we get redone. And that's exactly why I asked it. In the intervening five months,
- has anything dramatically or good? OK.
- I think that our conversation about how we're doing this and the process, the issue that originally
- is baffling. Anyway, I think it's an area that we need to work on. That said, I would really like to
- hear from the public, and I do not have any more questions right now.
- I just got a couple more and then we can move on. Since we keep invoking the city and now and we want
- to work with them. The question that I have is because the noon edition that y'all did on Friday was
- very enlightening and there were some questions that had brought or had
- been brought up. And again, members of the public have asked this question, and I continue to say no,
- say. And so I'll ask again for everybody, what is the transit plan? I know literally on my way here,
- I was here, and we have that. Or we can figure out that plan. But I guess we got to move from concepts
- of the plan into actual plan plans.
- And so I've heard Commissioner Thomas like There's this notion of like uber lift. So I guess How do
- we work with the city on that? What happens if the city says no and what is this contract plan? Regarding
- uber lift. Okay so first and foremost we can work with the city of Bloomington which can if it chooses
- decide to expand the boundaries of Bloomington Transit. And again, with commercial development and housing
- and other things being added to that area, I imagine that that would happen. But we also have rural
- transit shadow service, which is the urbanized area, not the rural areas, which is served by USDA money.
- But this is the money that you all have allocated.
- our money we purchased buses not knowing how much it turned out we needed them and You've paid for this
- in the past to provide that bus service including Ellisville, which has not contributed any money We've
- paid for it as the county This year fortunately in dot decided to pay for it, which has been awesome,
- and I hope they do it again next year so we can add a route we can add a
- to what we're already doing, right? The Uber Lyft is mainly for when transit isn't running. We don't
- offer it now as though magically everybody lives within two blocks of the jail, they do not. And what
- I've learned from working with BT and their micro transit system is that it's contractually possible
- to establish a per ride contract with Uber and Lyft for
- those times when transit is not running. So a Sunday afternoon, if somebody is released, for example,
- that they would have that option at no cost to that person. But we take that cost in. And right now,
- I can't say what it's going to be when the jail opens, because we never know. But right now, I think
- that cost is about $20 a ride.
- I think it was $20 a ride, but that would get them anywhere in Monroe County for that money So that's
- sort of that backup backup plan, right? we I Know that we are we are concerned about transit. We're
- concerned about distance. Although this is closer than Fullerton to downtown Fullerton Pike site that
- we've looked at and I will say that
- You know, much like when we first talked about Fullerton, there was nothing there. There wasn't even
- a road there. There was an exit, but no roadway. And now, look, there's a roadway. And what will come
- next? So you will see that other development will follow. And that will bring transit. It'll bring more
- activity. And if it doesn't, we will figure that out. That is a small problem compared to we need a new jail.
- And we figured out transit before, and we can do it again. And I think we should work with the city
- first and foremost on a route. But we know how much it costs, because you all have agreed to the 13
- line extension for this year. And that was pricey. And I imagine that that would be a similar price point
- In a few years, I don't know. But but I would imagine that that that would be a similar price point.
- But we've worked with the city, Bloomington Transit before it can be done. So all of this is we're not
- building a rocket ship. So it's not. All that complicated, but we do have we are taking it into consideration
- and we are concerned about it. And I can leave that at that.
- I think also we can come up with creative solutions and contract with our local service providers and
- win-win solutions where we help to fund them perhaps in paying for transportation. And that way we get
- people directly who need the services directly where they need to go instead of in a warm handoff, instead
- of relying on middlemen and transit. So I think that is actually what I would prefer to see.
- No, I know we're not building a rocket ship. However, we are asking taxpayers to help us fund this.
- I understand that's like the little potatoes, like the transportation route is like the small ideas.
- But again, I keep hearing concepts of a plan. And if you're asking the fiscal body to do something that
- will have consequences for decades plus to come, I feel like we got to have a little bit
- more of an idea of a plan. That's what I'm saying. And transportation actually factors into this entire
- thing, because as it stands right now, there's no dang gone transportation that's back there. So we
- have to look at all different things. Again, I know as mentioned before in meetings before, council
- needs to stay in the lane or whatever the case is. Well, I am. That's what we're trying to do here,
- because we're all trying to figure out
- how to pay for all of this. That's what I'm saying. So if we have, do we have any other? So, whatever,
- okay. I just wanted to make a comment, and it'll be very brief. So in our April 20th, 2025 Planning
- Commission meeting, the only abstention on the change to the PUD came from the surveyor, Mr.
- Andrei Randolph, who brought up these concerns about transit in April of 2025.
- This is where I have a challenge where we can speculate in public about plans, but then those speculations
- have to become a thing. Yeah, so, so that's that's. I'll just trust what I've heard in the room today
- is movement movement or ideas that could move forward. But, you know, that was 13 months ago.
- I'll go to Councilor Hawke and then I will, one second, I will go to Councilor Hawke and then after
- Councilor Hawke, I do want to be respectful of public time since they are here in person and virtually.
- So briefly, Commissioner Thomas, if you want to wrap it up and then I'll go to Councilor Hawke. I just
- want to say that I would not institute a bus service now to North Park.
- to talk about a plan for transit is part of a timeline. You know what it costs for the county and the
- city to share a bus line. It's the 13 line. So you know that cost. You know what we're paying for rural
- transit services, for the shadow service that we're doing in the urbanized area. So all of those things
- are part of it.
- There's no bus at Fullerton. There's no bus that runs to Thompson right now. But we would certainly,
- we know it's important. But we know it's important, and we would make sure that there was. And if you
- want to see a plan for that, I would say I would like to see a purchase agreement first, because a plan
- can be made for any property, right?
- I feel like we researched all these properties. We did our due diligence. We did our homework. We shared
- everything publicly with the council. Then the council said, no, let's do it all again. And we did it
- all again. We did it all again. We reviewed our homework that we'd already done. And to say that not
- having a bus going to a farm field right now is,
- somehow detrimental to what can be done, I would say we can do it. And if you understand and you do
- understand the fiscal costs of bus services, you do know it. I know it. Let's work on that next. And
- I also want to work on mental health and substance use disorder treatment. So a lot to work on.
- That was something that Kate Wilson actually talked about. All right, I'm going to go. I really want
- to move to public comment now. So that's what I'm all about. OK, I just wanted to make sure and I've
- done is have to listen to it. Sure, I want to hear what they have to say. I do want to rebut a little
- bit about that transit because you know there's 1.2 that we you know when we start operating with income tax.
- We got 1.2 for county operations, we got 0.4 for fire or EMS, and we've got a 0.2 at the bottom that
- we could use for transit or for the library or for townships. Transit would love to see us do the whole
- 0.2 to them, but does that mean we don't help the library already? And we can't even do
- the whole 0.2, we may have to cut it to 0.1 because we can only have 1.7 as a total. I'm not hearing
- that from anybody. Maybe they don't know. Maybe they think the sky is going to open up and drop money
- for transit. But I just think we need to know that. But please, let's listen to these good folks who
- take the time in their evening to talk with us.
- I know they may all think that we're crazy and that's okay because we probably are. So we will go on
- to public comment. There is a public comment sheet at the lectern here and then at you hope room. If
- you are making a public comment again please since we got a lot keep it to three minutes once three
- minutes is up all of the monitors around here will have a timer tst please make sure we have that
- I'll do two in the NETU Hill room and then I'll alternate between here and Teams. So if you have a hand
- raised via Teams, we'll call on you as well. I already see one that's already raised and like lightning
- round. Here we go. So again, if you want to make public comment, go ahead and start lining up so this
- can go on. And we already have our first one here. Again, state your name for the record and you'll
- have up to three minutes.
- Thank you. My name is Cheryl Langdon. I'm a Monroe County taxpayer. I live on Vernal Pike. I was there
- at the meeting that was held with the commissioners and they explained us. We were absolutely against
- it. We have one neighbor who would have ended up having her house literally sitting in the middle of
- this at when they were proposing that. And it was a Ellisville Bloomington Chamber of Commerce backroom deal.
- didn't include us, and I spent my time, my money, and canvassed not just on the outside of Bloomington
- city limits, but on the other side, because they would be affected as well. So I covered both people
- that are just county and city taxpayers. We weren't happy with that. We weren't happy with how it was
- just kind of snuck in.
- I understand that they're using the ACLU to bully us, to hold us hostage, to quickly find this. And
- I understand that we wanna make sure that the welfare of inmates are taken care of, but the welfare
- of citizens, the taxpayers who are paying the bills is number one. No, it's Sandra Betts, buts there,
- because we are paying the bills. And having that jail word,
- they were going to propose to do it, this Hail Mary at the last minute, would have brought a light pollution,
- noise pollution, traffic to neighborhoods right next to a park where kids play. So I think it's a lot
- more than just the money and all of that. It's what that land is getting used for. So that was important
- about the value, how the zoning is done. We're literally a neighborhood of residents.
- So I wanted to point out that I feel that it's terrible that the ACLU is allowed to bully taxpayers
- to quickly make a decision. And that was it. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Next up here in the night, you over.
- Good evening, counselors. My name is Susan Easton. I'm a resident of the Stony Brook neighborhood which
- I think you're aware of is adjacent to the proposed North Park site. First of all, I want to thank you
- in advance for your past support of voting against
- North Park as the new jail site and ask you for your continued fiscal diligence in that area and continue
- voting against it. I want to enter into the public record tonight an email that I sent to all of the
- county commissioners and this council group in early April. Dear Monroe County Board of Commissioners,
- Monroe County Council,
- We are writing to urge both parties to unify behind the Thompson PUD as the most viable fiscally responsible
- and humane site for the new Monroe County jail. Well, we understand the commissioner's concerns regarding
- the unreasonable delay clause in the recent March 26th resolution. And we know there's been other resolutions
- besides the March 26th one.
- We believe the Thompson PUD offers the only path that reconciles the Council's $118 million to $135
- million budget with the modern constitutional care requirements that our community deserves. The Thompson
- PUD is the superior choice for three primary reasons. First, fiscal stability.
- Unlike the North Park proposal, which requires now greater than $11 million land purchase and significant
- new utility extensions, the Thompson site is already in county hands.
- Using our local income tax and economic development income tax reserves to fund the cleanup of the debris
- pile is a far more efficient use of taxpayer dollars than the $50 million budget gap currently stalling
- the North Park plan. Secondly, accessibility and social justice. The North Park site is essentially
- a suburban island.
- disconnected from public transport, as we heard earlier here this evening, and legal services. The Thompson
- PUD is located on a Bloomington transit route in the Beeline power line trail. This ensures that families,
- public defenders, and those reentering society are not further marginalized by a lack of transportation.
- a key factor in reducing recidivism and helping improve future public safety. And thirdly, concurrent
- progress versus sequential delay. Concerns regarding the Duke energy power line should not be a deal
- breaker for us. Given the 40 acre footprint of the Thompson site, construction and site grading can
- begin on the uninstructed portions of the land while utility relocation happens simultaneously.
- Engineering 101 for some of us. And that is your time. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Next up, we
- will go to I'll go to the two individuals on team, and then I'll kick it back to here and the NatU Hill
- room. So again, the screen name Richard Garza, if you are able to unmute
- Again, state your name for the record and you'll have up to three minutes. Hello everybody. Can you
- guys hear me? Yes. Wonderful. My name is Richard Garza and I worked in the justice center last summer
- and I am here to implore the council to approve this purchase agreement. It is
- incredibly irresponsible and not caring to deny this. Enough is enough. It's been almost 20 years. There
- are people who are working in harsh conditions. There are people who have to live there in harsh conditions.
- And if it was not for this lawsuit and the ACLU and the Constitution, I imagine the county would do nothing
- to improve the situation of those who have to work there for their careers or those who are there as
- incarcerated individuals. Again, I implore you to do the caring thing, stop delaying, stop kicking the
- can down the road, approve the purchase agreement. I yield the rest of my time. Thank you. Thank you.
- Next up is Peyton Prospell.
- Again, you should be able to unmute state your name for the record and you'll have up to three minutes.
- Okay, first I want to thank you for the opportunity to share a comment today. My name is being possible.
- and I'm a staff member at New Leaf New Life. I am the READ2ME program coordinator and I facilitate the
- reentry class at the Monroe County Jail with help from volunteers. READ2ME is a program where incarcerated
- individuals are able to connect with their children through reading. I interact with many different
- people and READ2ME becomes a staple for many when it comes to staying connected with their family and
- looking forward to their reentry.
- When working closely with incarcerated individuals, I see how eager people are to discuss resources
- and coordination with their reentry. I also see how reentry planning is already a struggle for many.
- They deal with different types of discouragement, whether that be due to the uncertainty about when
- they'll be released, where they're going to go, and how they're going to get there. It takes a community
- to help someone to support someone with their reentry.
- By having a jail built in North Park, it complicates their access and can lead to more discouragement
- for them to have a successful re-entry. It also makes it harder for them to be able to access community
- resources to support them during their release. I stand with New Leaf New Life in the stance of being
- opposed to the building of the North Park jail. Thank you for your time. Thank you.
- Next up, we'll go to two here in the NetUHO room. Again, if there's other people that have their hand
- or would like to make public comment on Teams, go ahead and raise your hand. My name is Heather Bland.
- I appreciate the opportunity to speak tonight. I'm representing New Leaf New Life and work closely with
- individuals impacted by incarceration, substance use, mental health challenges, and reentry into our
- community.
- We stand opposed to the new jail at North Park because we believe we're being asked to invest millions
- of dollars into a system that addresses the symptom rather than the root causes of incarceration. One
- of the biggest concerns of North Park location is lack of access to resources. When people are incarcerated
- far away from treatment providers, social services, transportation routes, attorneys, family support
- and community programs, it becomes even harder for them to successfully reintegrate into society.
- Isolation does not improve outcomes connection does We already know that many people entering our jail
- system are struggling with untreated mental health conditions substance use disorders poverty homelessness
- and trauma Expanding a jail without equally expanding meaningful treatment and prevention services risk
- continuing a cycle that's failed people for way too long
- Imagine what would happen if even a portion of the funding for this project were directed toward solutions
- that actually reduce incarceration in the first place. We could invest in addiction treatment, mental
- health care, supportive housing, transportation assistance, workforce development, crisis responsive
- teams, and reentry services. These are the kind of investments that create safer communities long term.
- As someone who works directly with people returning from incarceration, I can tell you that stability
- and support are what reduce reduce recidivism, not building a bigger, larger, newer facility. A jail
- should never come before the primary response to unmet social and behavioral health needs. If we truly
- want to improve public safety, we must prioritize rehabilitation, treatment and prevention over the
- expansion of incarceration.
- I asked the council to carefully consider whether this project reflects the future we want for our community.
- We have an opportunity to invest in people instead of investing primarily in confinement. I hope we
- choose solutions that strengthen lives, strengthen families, and strengthen our community as a whole.
- Thank you for your time.
- Good evening, Council. Eric Spoonmore. I've been here before to talk to you about what I thought some
- of the human consequences were for putting a jail at North Park. Now, tonight, I want to talk about
- some of the numbers behind that. And I know Commissioner Thomas mentioned she didn't have specific numbers,
- but I do have specific numbers that I want to present to you all because I know you all care about numbers.
- So the proposed purchase price is approximately $11.3 million for 52 acres.
- or about $219,000 per acre. The figure deserves serious scrutiny before the county council commits taxpayer
- dollars to this purchase. When we look at other Indiana counties who have recently moved forward with
- jail or justice center projects, the comparison is striking. Allen County, which faced a similar ACLU
- case, purchased approximately 140 acres for its new jail site for $6.3 million or about $45,000 per acre.
- That property also included the largest existing building on it. Marion County in Indianapolis acquired
- approximately 140 acres for its community justice campus for $4.2 million or about $30,000 per acre.
- Vigo County, which also faced a similar ACLU case, moved forward with land for its jail project
- at approximately $900,000 for around 22 acres or roughly $41,000 per acre. So the question for taxpayers
- is straightforward.
- Why were Allen County, Marion County, and Vigo County able to acquire land for jail or justice center
- projects at roughly $30,000 to $45,000 per acre, while Monroe County is being asked to pay approximately
- $219,000 per acre? That's about five to seven times more expensive per acre than those comparable Indiana
- jail land purchases. For families in Monroe County, the median household income is approximately $66,000.
- That's what an entire household lives on for a year.
- Under this proposal, the county would spend the equivalent of more than three years of median household
- income for each acre of dirt. And that's exactly why this decision deserves more scrutiny. At a time
- when residents are struggling, residents and workers are struggling with housing costs, taxes, childcare,
- utilities, and everyday affordability, it's difficult to justify paying a land price that appears
- dramatically higher than what other Indiana counties paid for comparable jail projects.
- And I understand that Monroe County has unique challenges, but the common refrain that Monroe County
- is unique cannot become the default explanation for why everything here always seems to cost more for
- our people. At some point, local leaders have to push back on that pattern and demand clear justification.
- Every unnecessary dollar spent on land is a dollar that cannot go toward public safety, mental health
- services, substance use treatment, staffing, infrastructure, housing or economic development.
- So given the scale of this project, I respectfully urge the council to take the time needed to ensure
- taxpayers are not being asked to absorb an unavoidable cost. Please insist on stronger justification
- before approving this purchase and make sure Monroe County is not once again accepting a cost that other
- communities somehow manage to avoid. Thank you. Thank you.
- Next up, I only see one hand on Teams. So screen name Nicole, you should be able to unmute, state your
- name for the record, and you'll have up to three minutes.
- Nicole Myers and I just am wanting to ask the council again to vote no on North Park. I don't know a
- lot about how local government works, but I'm actually surprised that you guys can be asked to vote
- again on the same thing when it seemed like it was decided back in October. So I just hope that you'll
- vote no again today. I feel like we've heard from some folks that live near the North Park site and
- that don't want the jail built there. I live in Broadview near the Thompson property. I really don't
- think we need a big giant justice complex anywhere, but I still feel like the Thompson site is a better
- choice than North Park. Building a jail out there on a big four lane highway is just dangerous and just
- seems like a terrible idea. And also just the idea that in general Bloomington's been working toward
- more density, which is just good for the community in lots of ways. I feel like it's brawling. Just
- this complex is just the opposite of what we've been moving towards in so many ways. So just asking
- that that you vote no on this and that we can look at something different. Thank you. Thank you. Are
- there any other members on members of the public on teams that would like to speak again? Raise your hand.
- We'll go ahead and move back to, oh, sorry. Before we move back here, we just got a hand that popped
- up. So Robert Freeman Day, again, state your name for the record. You'll have up to three minutes, but
- you'll also need to unmute first. Hello, this is Robert Freeman Day.
- just wanted to put out that if we're looking to communicate and work with folks that are, you know,
- community support areas like New Leaf New Life or the city of Bloomington itself, I think that we need
- to listen to the input of them. And so I'm just kind of putting it back to, you know, if they're expressing
- a little bit of concern and
- a put opposition to the North Park. I think that the council should be definitely considering that.
- That's really all I had to say. I yield the rest of my time. Thank you. All right, now we'll move
- Good evening council, I thank you for the opportunity to speak and also for wanting to involve the public.
- I have five points that I'd like to make so I'm going to try and make this quickly. First, I want to
- begin by responding to some of Commissioner Medea's comments.
- regarding what the state legislature could do with these potential new Republican Trump candidates.
- I think it's inappropriate to try and state what a legislator and a lawmaker's gonna do when they haven't
- even won a general election. Because running on a platform and actually doing something in office are
- two different things, and I think it's important that we recognize that.
- And then secondly to Commissioner Modillo when she said it's irresponsible if we do something, I believe
- that this is one of the least fiscally responsible things that council could do. So I would just respectfully
- disagree with that claim completely. And to my second point, I now like to respond to some of Commissioner
- Thomas's comments. I'd first like to make a quote of Commissioner Thomas regarding the transit. Quote,
- we have time to figure this out.
- end quote. Why should we vote on something when we can figure it out later? I would like I feel like
- as a human, I want to know exactly what I'm going to vote on before I'm going to do it. When I
- Thank many council members that asked about the transit. And I wasn't able to get any response. And
- regarding at one point when Commissioner Thomas brought up the idea of this being a farmland bus route,
- logically, if we were to do this North Park, which I am no way stating we should, we wouldn't have a
- bus route that would go solely from downtown, see the bus transit center to North Park and then come
- back. That makes sense to absolutely nobody.
- I will say on my way here I was going from 10th Street to the courthouse. I was late to the meeting
- because I couldn't get a bus that got me there on time. Logically we would not have a bus route with
- a single location and furthermore
- while we can get a bus route out there. We have bus route 13. It is just not logical. And then I would
- also like to thank and further restate a point that Councilor Henry made when Commissioner Thomas has
- been in county government virtually the entire time that this lawsuit has been done. I still don't know
- what has been done.
- to say that, oh, we had COVID and we had these other problems. The lawsuits still remain during COVID,
- and we didn't do anything. I'm going to have to speed it up here. I'm running out of time. Thirdly,
- I would just like to say that this location just sucks. And I would also like to add that government
- is about collaboration. I heard many commissioners say this. But then why are we going to vote on the
- exact same thing twice? I haven't seen any differences.
- Fourthly, very quickly, I would like to thank Councilor Wilts' thoughts about co-location, and that
- if the people that work there don't want it, why are we doing it? And then fifth, very quickly, in regards
- to the city and Commissioner Thomas' thoughts there, we have a new mayor, and five out of the nine city
- council members were new after the 2023 elections. So that's a new thought. You can hear more from me
- later. Thank you, Council.
- You did well, thank you. Can you please state your name for the record? Oh yes, Kayden Smith, sorry.
- Okay. Thank you. Next up here in the room, again, state your name for the record and you'll have up
- to three minutes.
- Okay, sorry. Okay, hi. Good evening, my name is Jessica Groves. I have three points to make. I'm a mom
- and a resident. You've seen my kids running around and crying. I live in the neighborhood right next
- to that area, the proposed area. First of all, I wanna say I'm not opposing the jail. I wanna thank
- the charity for being a compassionate person and caring about the inmates. I care about that too, but
- I have a family. Our neighborhood, have you driven to our neighborhoods?
- There's kids running around, we have block parties, we have Easter egg hunts, we walk at night. I don't
- even lock my car. We live in this safe neighborhood. You should see how many kids we have. Only in our
- cul-de-sac we have like 30 kids, and we're always playing outside. We save so much money to buy our
- house. We put in a pool this year, and now doing this is gonna affect my property value.
- you know, I'm not gonna be able to sell my house if I ever wanna sell my house. That's our
- biggest investment. So I feel like, and my third point is $200 million, like someone making $60,000
- a year will have to work 4,000 years or 3,000 years to make that money. And we're just talking about
- like, oh, we'll see, I don't know. I know this is,
- Honestly, it's heartbreaking. I worked for a school. Sometimes we don't even have paper. We don't have
- pencils. And we're just talking about $200 million just like that. We'll see, we'll figure it out. Honestly,
- it's so sad. As a resident, as a taxpayer, it's so sad. I thought about this house, our neighbors, being
- my forever home. But if this happened, I know my family, some of our neighbors were just moving.
- We're gonna find another community. We'll probably move to Fitchers somewhere else, but we're not staying
- here. That's it, thank you. Thank you. Don't see any hands raised via Teams, so while we wait for more
- hands to light up on our Teams screen, I'll keep going back here to the Nattie Hill room. So please.
- I have a special request. I'm not able to see the countdown of the three minutes. Is there any way that
- Jeff McKinnon always was so kind to turn his computer around? And if it helps Mr. Davis? But I'm addressing
- all of you council members. I don't want to turn my head like this. Do you want me to give you like
- a 30 second warning?
- Tell me when you want me to tell you your time's almost up. One minute and then 30 seconds. One minute
- and 30 seconds. Yeah, thank you. Good evening. My name is Joe Davis and thank you council members for
- hearing my comments. First off, I want to say I strongly encourage you to not
- move forward on the purchase of the North Park property. It doesn't make any sense at all. As any independent
- candidate for county clerk for the circuit court and also while campaigning during the primary,
- I had many, many, many conversations with individuals who do not wish for the justice campus to be
- to leave the downtown area. As a matter of fact, that translated into 2,545 or 49 votes for me. Many
- of those people felt this strongly. This is my constituency already established. It makes no sense.
- There's a sunk cost fallacy. We should not throw more money, bad money, at this project,
- this architectural design that came from a sprawl state, an architectural firm that devalues the cost
- of the land because
- They come from Arizona or the Southwest where land is dirt cheap. OK, it makes no sense. We have the
- possibility of developing something, keeping the jail, the justice center still downtown. The ideal
- spot would have been where the expansion of the convention center is happening right now. And if you
- ask me, that frame would be a great start to a new jail. But right next door,
- or close by is the Hopewell area where the former hospital site was. The least buildable site right
- now for those homes is the one where the actual hospital was on top of the hill.
- This is a very logical place for the Justice Campus to be built. There's already a parking garage. It
- is shovel ready. There is no need to put in a water treatment plant. It's already hooked up to the sewer.
- All the infrastructure is in place. The city of Bloomington is responsible primarily for the individuals
- who are being housed in the jail. They offend in the city of Bloomington. It's not the county people
- who are doing it. It's the people in the city. So the city should pony up. There could be a land swap.
- which could take place and then the county could use that property to build a multi-story jail.
- This could be the jail on the bottom, the courts on the second level with ramps to be able to get the
- individuals up just in case their elevators would break. There could be community justice above.
- Above that, even there could be an exercise yard where those inmates could look out over the city of
- Bloomington and be inspired to get their act together and get out of there. So please do not
- Go forward with this. We have the opportunity to find something in town that is going to serve us better
- Thank you very much for considering these comments Again, please do not move forward on this purchase.
- Thank you. Thank you Still seeing no hands raised via teams will still keep coming back again and
- If folks want to make public comment in their own teams, again, raise your hand. Good evening. My name
- is Seth Mutchler. I'm a resident of Monroe County.
- I know many, and I think I know all of you, you know that I like my prepared remarks, but I'm just trying
- to try to speak from the heart today. I know I have said to you before that I do not envy all of you.
- You have hard jobs. You have to make hard decisions. And even on the easiest day, your job is hard.
- And I know this is not an easy day. There are a lot of factors here. I know that your job is to take
- many different constituencies, many different
- influences, many different things, juggle them all and make the best choice you can. I also know that
- we elected you to do that and to do the hard thing and to make the right choice. I know that it has
- been said many times that if we don't do this, that we're gonna get sued. And that might happen. I can't
- say it won't. I can't say it will, I can't say it won't. But it might happen. But that doesn't mean
- we make mistakes out of fear and that doesn't mean we
- We do the wrong thing, even if we think we might be doing it for the right reason. We step up and we
- say, I'm going to do the right thing. And we all know North Park is just not the right place for a jail.
- We could talk about big picture. I've had many conversations with all of you. I could go for more than
- three minutes, three hours about all of the reasons about criminal legal system and all of this. But
- the decision at hand is North Park. And we just know it. You all voted last year.
- no on North Park, the city council has said no on North Park, the community says no, so everything else
- set aside, we just know that we can't make this choice, we can't say yes to no North Park in order to
- save ourselves because we're just setting ourselves up for decades of hurt and for decades of the wrong
- decision and I feel that we will as a community regret it and so I'm just gonna ask you, I'm gonna
- I'm going to thank you in advance for making the hard choice for even when your backs are up against
- the wall, looking out for your constituents. And I hope that will end up in a Novo North Park. Thank
- you again for all the work that you do and for your public service. Thank you. OK, like we have a hand
- raised via team, so screen name Kathleen, you can state your name for the record and you'll have up
- to three minutes.
- Hi, can you all hear me? Yes. My name is Kathleen Paquette. I'm a longtime Bloomington and Monroe County
- resident. I just really wanted to second everything that Seth Mutchler just said. And I think I also
- just really want to make it very clear, especially to the public, that we have all talked at length
- and heard a lot about all of the reasons that North Park is a bad location.
- And what we're talking about now, like back in October, you all voted against North Park as mostly based
- on concerns with the cost and the location. And if we're talking about phasing this project now, we're
- talking about a higher cost. So what you all voted against in October was the cost and the location.
- And now we're looking at the same location at a higher cost. So to me,
- The choice here seems obvious, but I also really want to, like Seth said, I know that you all have such
- difficult jobs and this is a really hard thing and the threat of a lawsuit is really scary. But yeah,
- I also just really want to second that we shouldn't make these decisions out of fear of what might happen
- in a way that's going to deeply, deeply affect our community for decades to come.
- And I would really like to see more finances invested in things that actually make our community better
- rather than a larger jail. Thank you so much. I appreciate your time and work. Thank you. Next up, we'll
- come to back to the lectern here in the room.
- Yes, my name is Jeff Richardson. I have no position on what site you select, ultimately. I just want
- to just clarify, as I did last time when I briefly spoke to you, ACLU is not the enemy. They are not
- the Antichrist. They did not cause this to happen. And President Crossley, I'm glad you, although it's
- well known, I'm glad you asked for that repetition. How did we get here?
- Some of you may remember Marty here from my generation, Jamie Murphy, who was a big presence back in
- the 60s and 70s, and she talked about againers. I'm against this, I'm against that, I'm against this.
- We have a lot of people against certain things over the past 17 years, and only recently now is it some
- clarity around what we're for. But that's how we got there, a lot of againers, and we've gotta somehow
- turn that around. I was encouraged,
- by the photo that went around with you, President Crosley, Isak Azari, President of City Council, Julie
- Thomas, of course, we all know, and Mayor Thompson. And I sent it around to many, many people and I
- said, hope abounds. And so I'm curious to know, this is a question for you folks, what happened?
- What is happening between meetings? What is the plan? We know what a lot of people are against, and
- I appreciate that, and I've been against a number of things, but I also feel, in my life, I've tried
- to also come up with a solution, like a plan, or at least a pathway to a plan. So my plea, once again,
- is what is happening between meetings? What is the plan? What is the plan for the plan? And how can
- we best move forward?
- with the commissioners, working with the mayor, working with the city council to get this done. Again,
- bears repeating, I think what I'm gonna, my plea again is we can do this and I hope that you folks come
- up with a plan sooner rather than later and thank you for your hard work and I would echo what the young
- man just said earlier. This is what we hire you to do. These are complex, multi-layer problems but that's
- why you're elected and I wish you
- all the best moving forward. Thank you so much. Thank you. Next up in the room, again, sign your name,
- state your, sign your name, state your name for the record and you'll have up to three minutes.
- My name is Christian Easton, and my wife was up here earlier. She's very well prepared. I'm not. I wasn't
- going to say anything. But I've sat here and listened to a lot of rhetoric, just things that are going
- on. It doesn't sound like there's been a really good plan for years. That's just my opinion. I started
- out in law enforcement in 1970 after I got home from the Army. I can remember the old building down
- on South Walnut Street. It had been down there since the turn of the century. They were still using
- it. We maintained it.
- It was cleaned up every day. We took care of the building. Right next door was a jail. They took care
- of that building forever. We built the new one. Myself and another officer moved everything out of our
- police department into the new place for Bloomington Police Department, which used to be down on the
- bottom floor. I can't believe that, and Sheriff, you took that place over. I saw what it looked like.
- There's no reason for that. It was not your fault, but that needed better maintenance.
- I think that rather than spending money on a whole lot of other things like buying property all over
- the county and still looking for another piece of property to buy, we ought to fix the jail or at least
- build one and take care of it and spend the money, try to spend the money on maintenance and the future
- because these buildings ought to last a lot longer than that building lasted. I can't remember the exact
- date that they built that.
- but it's less than 50 years old, and I'm a little older than that now, and I'm still gonna make it for
- a while longer, and I'm taking care of it, okay? So I'm asking you all to do the same thing. If you
- own property somewhere already, this is my argument to begin with, why are you still shopping for property?
- You got property. You had an opportunity to already make a decision to build on that property.
- down to crunch time now, you should have already got started on that. OK, so I'm for the sheriff having
- the best facility he can have. The people need to have the best facility they can for the people that
- are in there. They're not all bad. I served as a minister in that place for as a police officer that
- I would go in and do Sunday night services there, prisons and stuff. I've had a lot of good people,
- a lot of good people.
- I met some really bad people. They need all of the courts and all the things that need to be in that
- facility, need to be there and not taking everybody on a tour all over your community. Because these
- guys are at a greater risk when they hit the Sally port and are transferring criminals in and out. And
- that's where the accidents happen. That's where the attacks happen. And if we could just keep this design
- that was here in Bloomington,
- was a great design. And they touched it very much before they built it. They just needed better. They
- just need a little better maintenance. So that's my that's my take on it. That's my recommendation.
- Thank you. Thank you. Great. Still again, raise your hand via teams. I'm going to go back to the room
- here. So again, if you're on teams, please raise your hand.
- My name is Stacey Dosky and I am here to thank you for the support that you've given us in rejecting
- the North Park site. I am begging you to please continue to hold fast to that decision and to support
- the community. I feel that it is an injustice, one, that you're having to go through this again with
- the public and have another vote and all of this to have commissioners tell you that
- we have to do this. I don't understand how something can be done back door or whatever under the carpet
- all of a sudden it's going to be pushed through without the public being involved in that. That's not
- my understanding the way government works. I will say regarding the jail I feel for the
- Inmates there the employees who work there. They should not have to work in those types of conditions
- Back to what Chris was saying take the money invest in what you have Do maintenance we can't just buy
- things. Let it go. We have to continue to invest invest in the positions and the properties what we
- have spend the money wisely the way most people would and
- I don't just buy a house and get rid of it when I need needs a new roof and go do something else. Remediate
- the mold. Do those types of things. Spend the money the best. We don't have a community that has a lot
- of money. We just don't. Where are you going to get all this from? You're going to put it out forever
- and ever? I mean, I want to know, honestly.
- Who's getting a kick back here? Why does this keep coming up? The same people are getting offered, oh,
- it's their property, and then they're getting offered to do all these different things. I don't understand.
- I don't understand how this keeps coming around and what the problem is. Again, we need to address this.
- We need to address the jail. It needs to be taken care of. Use the money to maintain it. Do not, I beg you.
- go to the North Park site. It is not the best use of our finances, of our money, anything for the community.
- That site, like Councilman Henry was saying, we could get all kinds of revenue. We could make money
- from that location. It is a prime location for all sorts of different types of activities that will
- be bringing in
- money to our community, bringing in services, all sorts of different things. So think outside of the
- box, find a different way instead of just buying more property to start something else that what you're
- not going to maintain it because you don't have any more money anyway. So like 10 years later, we're
- going to be in the same position means ridiculous. It's just insane. There's no way that we can't utilize
- the land that's there to add more.
- Clean up what we have. I guarantee you, it's not just disposable. Clean it up and use it. Thank you
- for listening to me. And I appreciate the support that you have given us. And I apologize that you're
- having to revisit this again. Thank you. Anybody else here in the net? Oh, hello again.
- Sign in your name, state your name for the record, and you'll have up to three minutes. My name is James
- Hovias. And if you could speak into the microphone so it can pick it up in team's land. My name is James
- Hovias, and I just walked in. I've been to a few of these meetings in the past as this thing's kind
- of rolled on over the years. And I think I'm probably going to echo what other people have said about
- fiscal responsibility, transparency.
- You guys specifically are looking at this site that is overvalued. You're going to pay too much for
- it. Former Superfund site, as an adjacent property owner with a well, I would have to test my water
- before I could drink it, but you're going to build a facility here? You find issues with all the other
- properties. Oh, there's dirt piled up here. We can't surmount that. Oh, no, this one's got some other issue.
- just a litany of issues with North Park, right? From the lack of infrastructure, from bus lines. And
- from my point of view, I see you guys looking at these problems in the future, no support, no infrastructure,
- you're gonna solve those problems with more taxpayer money. Again, you guys bought the Thompson property
- specifically for a jail. How about we follow through on that, right?
- How about we treat government the way we treat private enterprise? You know, I built bridges and roads
- in the state for 27 years. And if I sucked at my job, as much as I see some of you guys suck at yours,
- I wouldn't have a job. Right. So how about that person who decided to pile up all the debris on the
- Thompson site rather than prep it for the jail that we knew we were going to need? How about that person
- gets their walking papers and clean it up and build it where it goes, where it's supposed to go?
- That's it. Thank you. Very much. All right. Next up in the room.
- Good evening. Thank you, Council. My name is Andy Klein. I'm a property owner in Stony Brook, also a
- public school teacher and have financial responsibilities as a public school teacher for the school
- system that I serve. And I would challenge you listening to this this evening and listening
- to the conversations over a year ago at the Ellisville Fire Station. I know Councilman Hawk was there.
- Commissioner Thomas was there that
- The challenge for you to work together with the commissioners, I think you need to take a step back
- because it bothers me when I heard Commissioner Thomas talk about, we got to come up with ideas, we
- got to figure out ways to cut this, but you have no dollar amount that you're talking about in setting
- a bond. And I know a little bit about bond and bond counsel with my job. So when you issue a bond, correct
- me if I'm wrong, counsel, you have three years to spend that money, correct? Five. Five?
- Okay, I am limited to three. But I would charge you to make sure you know what you are bonding and what
- you are spending your money on. Because as the taxpayers are going to be dealing with this, you're also
- dealing with the impact of Senate Bill one. And I'll allude to the fact of the other Commissioner, I
- apologize, I don't recall your name, you know, impacts of the elections coming up
- in November, what may or may not happen, Senate Bill 1 is still there. And with the homestead credits
- and the impacts of those, the $300 that we're all getting back, I didn't see $300 on my property tax
- that I paid just the other day, but that's going to have an impact as well. So I would ask you to consider
- those things as you are going through this. I'd also ask you to have a further discussion with
- the commissioners about, they talked about design, bid, build,
- Why don't you do build, occupy, transfer, that model. And I have a corporation who's building a $100
- million school up the road under build, occupy, transfer. And if it comes in over cost, it's not the
- school that's paying for the extra cost. It's the person who said they would build it for $100 million.
- And I would ask you to think about those things as well. I yield the rest of my time. Thank you. Thank you.
- Are there any other members of the public who have yet to make public comment on this item? Again, you
- can come forward to the lectern here in the room and then, or rather you can raise your hand via Teams.
- All right, last call via Teams. Seeing none and last call in the room.
- Sorry, I just saw a hand go up. Okay. Screen name, Matt Jacobs, state your name for the record and you
- all have up to three minutes. And then you also need to unmute. Sorry. Maybe. Yes, we can hear you now.
- Okay, cool. Again,
- I think you all heard most of the comments are going to be echoed. Here we are, you know, almost 20
- years into this. And the $219,000 an acre. I don't know, has there been any kind of a study done about
- maybe moving the
- back to the original courthouse and expanding the jail where it's at and renovating that to see what
- that cost is. And then, you know, understand there's still potentially a transportation issue to get
- prisoners across the street, but there's several options for that. I mean, we just, we're building the
- skyway right now for the convention center.
- I'm sure that could be an option. Just down the road from there, there was industrial commercial property
- that with utilities ready to hook onto it at $75,000 an acre.
- believe is the old Westinghouse site. I just, after obviously just, as we all know, pay property taxes
- that have went up a lot. I still just don't understand how it's even feasible to think about $219,000
- an anchor for an old quarry hole. To me, that's just insane. And then,
- I think as I look at attendance here, I think there's maybe some council members that are not there
- this evening, but I just think it's important that as elected officials that everybody stays transparent
- and stays, you know, when you're making the laws, you're still not above them. And then also, I do want
- to thank the sheriff
- He is a very compassionate person. This mess should have already been handled before he was ever elected.
- And it's really unfortunate that he's having to deal with it and all of our law enforcement. I know
- just a few weeks ago was a crazy weekend. But that's really all I have is just, if it was your money
- and your bank account, would you spend $219,000 an acre?
- You know, I know we got to get these inmates some better facilities, but I think there's a lot of buildings
- around where things can be moved around. And that don't come with that kind of a price tag. And that's
- all I got. Thanks. All right. Thank you very much. Looks like we got another hand raised via Teams.
- Curtis Cummins, you should be able to unmute state
- officially say your name for the record and you'll have up to three minutes. Yes, good evening. My name
- is Curtis Cummings and I'm a Monroe County resident. I also work professionally in public service and
- human systems. I'm in and out of the jail on a weekly basis. I'm also in and out of the courtrooms on
- a weekly basis. So I really understand that the county's facing a
- obviously real pressure regarding the jail situation and the ACLU concerns. But I wanna begin
- by acknowledging that the constitutional jail conditions do matter. Staff safety matters, the dignity
- and safety of incarcerated individuals matter. Monroe County does have a responsibility to act, but
- I believe that tonight's discussion is bigger than simply a jail decision. This is a long-term land
- use and economic development decision that will shape Monroe County for decades.
- My concern is not whether the county needs to address the jail. My concern is whether North Park is
- just too strategically important to become only a jail. North Park may represent one of the county's
- most valuable future development corridors for retail, restaurants, mixed-use development, jobs, long-term
- tax-based growth. As I've heard council members talk earlier, the jail is a permanent land-use decision.
- Once it's built there, the county loses flexibility for generations.
- And I worry that we may be unintentionally conflating two separate ideas, the urgency to act and the
- urgency to permanently commit North Park. They're just not necessarily the same thing. I hope that the
- county carefully considers the opportunity cost of placing a non-revenue generating government facility
- on land that may otherwise strengthen Monroe County's long-term economic future.
- And I also hope that we continue investing in broader solutions alongside construction discussions,
- including diversion, mental health, and just adding more mental health resources and addiction treatment,
- reentry support, and upstream strategies that we can use to help with more prevention.
- At the end of the day, urgency just should inform decision-making. It should not replace strategic planning.
- Fast actions necessary, but permanent decisions still deserve caution. Thank you very much. Thank you.
- Another hand raised via Teams and I don't see it anymore. So I'll give it a couple of more seconds to
- see if that other hand will pop up.
- And while we do that, I'll go back to here and see if there's any final comment from members of the
- public who have not made comment yet. See. Oh, the hand came back. OK, so screen name Sherry again,
- state your name for the record and you'll have up to three minutes.
- Sherry, you'll need to unmute. Okay. Hello, my name is Sherry Morris. Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear
- you. Please proceed. I really am no expert in buildings by any stretch. I do work for the county and
- I simply have a couple of thoughts to share. To be honest, every time I drive by a field that is unbuilt,
- near downtown Bloomington, it dawns on me that this could be a potential location, not to start from
- ground Greenfield to build an entirely new facility, but I can definitely understand the need for additional
- structures that would provide mental health and addiction support and
- You know, I heard padded cells, you know, different additional structures and facilities that are needed
- in the current facility that could be additive as opposed to starting and replacing what we have.
- I say, why don't we use the money, keep what we have and build, you know,
- Maybe it's Hopewell, maybe it's reconfiguring the Curry Building, maybe it's the old Johnson Hardware
- Building, the old health center, the fields around the trades district. I don't know where, but there
- are options. And then we can build what we need to add the services that are required. And I also appreciated
- two things, how Mr. Spoonmore did a comparative analysis and we were woefully
- out of line with other communities financially with building structures. And I also appreciated the
- sheriff's comment that where it is isn't important. We just need the facilities, but I don't know why
- we need to start rebuild everything we have to add these extra facilities. Can't we keep what we have
- improve where we need and build additional or acquire and reconfigure existing buildings
- to provide those extra services in downtown Bloomington. That's all. Thank you. Okay, um, see if we
- don't have any other further comment from the public. I want to say thank you all very much for
- Um, making your comment here and coming in the room here and also, um, making public comment virtually.
- So you appreciate that. Um, I'm going to go back for a final comment from council. So just kind of look
- down the dais and see if there is any comments, um, from council based upon what we've heard.
- Anybody have a public comment or comment? Yes, Councilor. I want to hear you talk first. Well, I think
- these good people are here and they want a decision. And we know how we're going to vote, whether it's
- tonight or two weeks from now. And it seems to me that they deserve an answer.
- They thought they had the answer last year. And then, you know, now we're having to do it again. And
- if we don't get it, and here's the way it works, folks. If we don't all agree tonight, then we will
- be required to do it in two weeks from now. Then it won't take all of us. It just takes a majority.
- So it takes four votes if we do it.
- in two weeks from now. But if we do it tonight and one or two do not agree, well, it won't hurt anything.
- We just go ahead and meet again two weeks from now. So not vote at all is, it's just not correct. We
- should just go ahead and vote. People will know where we stand. You like voting? No, vote no.
- We'll just vote again two weeks from now. But my concern is that folks and people at home are getting
- tired of hearing about the jail. I know my daughter's getting tired of hearing about the jail. We've
- been talking about it for years. So I think since we've already decided we're going to build a jail
- someplace, and many of us no longer want to
- build it at North Park. Let's just vote and be done. Anybody else want to vote tonight? Does anybody
- have any other comments before? Councillor Henry, did you? Yeah, I think we've said a lot of words.
- So I agree with Councillor Hawk that I don't know what more we can add in commentary.
- We tend to get in that mode around here where we say it all over again. But I'll go ahead and make the
- motion to call the question on whether or not to adopt the purchase agreement or ordinance 26, 2026-17.
- I'll call the question on whether or not to adopt the ordinance.
- I don't know what the motion is, so I'm. I thought we had any clarification. Councilmember Sir Henry,
- can you repeat the motion? It's calling the question, so I move to vote on the adoption of ordinance
- 2026-17. Move to approve, let's go with that. Second. Okay, we got, excuse me, we have a motion and
- a second. Is there any other further questions or questions or comments from council?
- that a no vote, it says we're not in favor. I think that if you wouldn't mind, Molly, Mr., you did a
- really nice job of explaining the implications of voting up and down vis-a-vis the wording of the motion,
- which is I think what gave some of us pause. If you wouldn't mind explaining that again, that would
- be helpful for I think everyone to be on the same page.
- So pursuant to Indiana code, in order for the ordinance to pass tonight on the same day that it's introduced,
- it requires unanimous consent. Tonight is an introduction first reading. It doesn't require a vote,
- but a vote has been called for. If there's not a vote tonight, then the vote will occur on May 26. And
- that vote would either, if it passed, it would pass by majority. It would not have to be unanimous that night.
- I think Council has two options. They can move forward with the vote tonight or consider whether to
- table it to the 26th. The motion at hand is a motion to approve the ordinance. That is the motion. Unless
- I misunderstood Council Member Henry's motion, I believe the motion on the table is a motion to approve.
- Is that correct?
- Yes. Okay. Whether or not it gets approved is a different story, but the motion is to approve the ordinance,
- right? No vote would signal not approving the ordinance. A no vote would be to not approve the ordinance.
- That is not the same as a denial or to deny the ordinance. A failed motion to approve is not the same
- as a denial. Does that make sense to everyone? I'm getting some concerned looks.
- It makes sense to those of us who've heard it before. So it might bear repeating in a, I don't know,
- I'm sorry. This is the same that would happen. So to be clear. And restate the motion. Councillor,
- one second. So just to make sure I understand.
- This is the same as what we've done back in October. This is the same thing that happened with the additional
- appropriation. A failed motion to approve is not the same as a denial. Right. And so last year when
- we voted unanimously no, we had to come back around and vote around or say it again just to make sure
- that was all clear. OK. So should that happen, we would have to vote again no.
- Just making it clear should the motion on the table? Fail that is a failed motion to approve and so
- that is not the same as a denial as I have an amendment like to motion to deny ordinance twenty twenty
- six dash one seven. That would that would that would solve that would answer the question right? Would
- end it tonight. Is that your interpretation?
- I'm hardly hearing you, sorry. Ms. Turner-King, is that an interpretation of the motion to deny, then
- we're done? If the new motion is to deny the passage of the ordinance, when you say then we're done,
- do you mean that we're not gonna have a second reading? Before I answer, I need to understand the context
- of this question. Let's try again. My intention is to take a vote on the ordinance to either accept
- We accept the ordinance or we deny it this evening. There will not be a second reading because we will
- have killed the ordinance on that vote. The word denial seems to do that. Yes, if a motion to deny the
- ordinance would not require a second reading on the 26th. My amendment still stands. And I didn't hear
- your amendment. Motion is to amend amending the motion.
- to deny ordinance 2026-17. Mr. Iverson was my second, but it seems like he doesn't agree. I do not consent.
- Mm-mm. Okay, may I second it then? Okay, I second. If that's what you want. Okay. So we have a motion
- and a second to deny. On amending. Yes, Councillor Iverson.
- And I wanted to clarify why I wasn't wanting to second that. And the reason is because we have an empty
- chair next to us. We need to have all seven members weigh on this very important issue. And it is not
- appropriate to be making this decision when we have an empty chair. Point of information. We may have
- two empty chairs next to us. Point of information, Madam President. Yes. What was the vote on the last
- time we considered the North Park Purchase Agreement?
- So not 6-0. Were we not missing a member that evening? I believe Michelle is looking up that information
- in the minutes. There's no requirement that you have everybody in. My question is for Ms. Molly Turner-King.
- On a motion to deny, if there is a less than unanimous vote
- Is the outcome the same? Does it need a simple majority? For the motion to deny to pass, it would be
- a majority vote. What happens in a tie? If the motion, if the vote on a motion to deny is three, three,
- it neither passes nor is neither passes nor fails. So it moved to a second reading.
- So technically, this is an amendment to deny, right? And so is a motion to deny the ordinance. And well,
- he also talked about or he made an amendment to his motion. So nevermind, nevermind. I just answered
- my own question. Okay. Can we restate what we're potentially voting on here, please? I'm sorry.
- So Councilor Henry had made an amendment to deny the ordinance. Originally, it was to approve it, but
- when we approve it, because it's first reading, that would require a unanimous consent. If it did not
- have unanimous consent, then see you in two weeks on the 26th for a second reading where majority passes.
- In this particular case, correct me if I'm wrong, Ms. Turner-King,
- because we are denying ordinance, not necessarily approving it, that kills this ordinance for tonight
- and there is no second reading. Did I understand that? It passes majority. Passes majority. If your
- motion to deny passes majority, it would then kill in essence the ordinance and there would not be a
- second reading.
- If the motion ties, it neither passes nor fails, and there would be a second reading. Go ahead. The
- motion to deny the motion to deny fails. We still haven't approved.
- I concur with Councillor Iverson. You know, I think
- I'm sorry, I think that it's important that we have all seven counselors here. We're not gonna have
- seven next meeting either. What, are you skipping? Yes, we're not going to be here seven. Oh, Poopyloo.
- Yeah, and this, I'm not going into my personal life up here, but I had something that was already planned
- and I had not decided to be here, but I guess if duty calls, then I'll
- just like I did tonight, leave what I do personally and come back here, because that's what I get paid
- the big bucks to do. But again, I feel like folks know what they want, or they already know what they
- need to do. Do we need to push this off for another couple of weeks, or do you want to go ahead and
- do it now?
- the topic of the question, and that's the vote. My motion's on the floor, Madam President. So we'll
- take the vote or we don't. I mean, the motion's on the floor. I'll call the question. OK. So we have
- called the question. So now we. The amendment is his amendment to deny. Correct.
- Are we voting on an amendment to his motion? There was an amendment to the motion. There was a second.
- There has not been a vote on the amendment. So you want to take a vote on the amendment first? That's
- usually what we do. So let's vote on the amendment. Let's read the amendment.
- To clarify, what you're voting on is a motion. Counselor Henry made a motion to approve ordinance 202617.
- That's the number. It was seconded. And then there was subsequently a motion to amend that motion to
- change the language to a motion to deny ordinance 202617. So this is not a vote on that
- underlying motion this is just a vote on the amendment to that motion then do we go back to the first
- motion if the amendment passes then you would vote on that now motion which is to be a motion to deny
- if the amendment fails we go back to the approval question correct
- Right, I mean, yes. So do we want to do that? We've got a motion in a second. Madam President, seeing
- as this has caused some confusion to go with the more assertive posture this evening and maybe not go
- for it, I'll withdraw the motion. I'll withdraw my amendment. So that would take us back to the original
- motion of just voting up or down, but it means... Second reading. It doesn't deny it. It means it goes
- to second reading, is that correct?
- Withdrawing your emotion means that the emotion then is a motion to approve ordinance 2026-17. Voting
- yes approves the motion. If it's not unanimous, then it would go to a second reading. Voting no is,
- and if that fails, then it's a failed motion to approve, which is not the same as a motion to deny.
- So Madam President, I withdraw.
- so we can return to the original question. So we have the or it's withdrawn and now it's the overall
- original one where he said to vote to approve. All we have to do is just. So I'm going to ask for a
- roll call. OK, so to reiterate, yeah, so to reiterate. The motion to deny. Has been withdrawn.
- We are going back to the original motion where it's the motion to adopt ordinance 2026-17. So this is
- to approve the ordinance of the purchase of the property. Councillor Iverson. Yes. Councillor Wills.
- We'll come back. Councillor Hawke. No. Did she answer? No. Okay. Thank you. Councillor Crossley. No.
- Councillor Henry. No. Councillor Feidl.
- You're approving. You're approving the purchase. No. Councillor Wilts. Can we need to count? Pardon?
- Count right now. It is four no's, one yes. Not going to pass. So no. No.
- one to five with a second reading required. All right. So thank you all for that. And this comes back
- again for a second reading on the 20th.
- Okay, so I'm going to jump back into the. The agenda, because that was a lot. Alright, so. Presentations
- discussions, boards and commissions. As we wrap up tonight, Council please.
- Council Henry had some scheduling conflicts with emergency management in the MPO meetings, and he also
- would need to step down. So is there anybody that- Can I ask that the audience please be quiet? I cannot
- hear Councilor Crossley. Thank you. Is there anybody that would like to take Council Member Henry's
- appointments? When are the meeting dates and times?
- I think it's like the third Tuesday of the month. It matters when they are. I understand. I didn't prepare
- that. And then the MPO meets every other month. There's a quarterly. It's quarterly. I can look it up
- while we're meeting.
- We do have a little time before the next meetings of these bodies. Do they meet monthly? The MAC is
- not monthly. Say that again. No, neither one of them are monthly. Oh, then can we wait till next time?
- Let me get the date and times here. Can we wait till next time? Madam President, I think we can wait
- till next time. They're not meeting between now and then. And I can always ask for a proxy to attend
- until I figure it out. So ideally, what will happen next is if anybody wants to take it, we got two
- more weeks to figure it out. Sounds great. All right.
- next up update on legal counsel I'm gonna I ain't got it so we're just gonna move on with that one the
- review of our colon numbers Michelle is that something you want to do now or should we I can just do
- it really quick it won't it won't take that long okay
- This is the time of year that we always go through the Midwest Consumer Price Index, which is the CPI.
- We always use the December of the prior year, so this 2026. So we always use the December 2025 CPI.
- And for 2025, it is 2.7%.
- I went through, did a breakdown, did all the calculations. A flat rate of the 2.7% COLA would be 90
- cents on the hour. So that's where you stand with that information. This history, it was in the packet
- for your review. It shows what you've done. I can go back further, but this,
- particular spreadsheet takes you back to 2021 with all the history. So I just want to let you guys know
- this is where you're at. We, you know, Councilor Crossley has yet to do the the 2027 budget president
- letter. I know that there was a push for last year.
- to do the 3% COLA, even though we probably technically couldn't handle it budget-wise, but we did manage
- to get it on there. So, you've said many times, several times since then that there probably wouldn't
- be a COLA, but I just wanted to get you that information out there to you. In the year that I do it.
- Yep. Councillor Henry and then Iverson. Thank you, Madam President. Councillor Iverson, in your very
- statue-wear around here, did this come up at FSG in your long-term finances? It did not. We talked about
- this a little bit, but it's in the sustainability report that we are going to have them come and present
- sometime next month? In June, yes. Yeah, in June.
- don't have it in front of me, but there was a recommendation in that sustainability report, and it was
- 2%? It was a 2%. OK. And we're showing a 2.7 is what CPI is? Yes. So there's your answer. Thank you.
- Appreciate it. Let's see. I did get confirmation. He is coming to the June 23rd meeting. So we'll have
- an update with the sustainability to the entire council at that meeting.
- I was going to raise the same exact topic, so it's been addressed. Anybody else? Seeing none. Yeah,
- don't have the letter for as Michelle said, lots of things have come about that has pushed that back
- for me. And I will have that for my colleagues at the 26th meeting.
- All right, next up we will move on to council liaison updates and comments before we adjourn So I will
- look down to my left here and start with miss vital So I attended the last fair board meeting and I
- want to remind folks This month and next month that the fair coming up is June 27th through July 5th
- of this year So it's a Saturday through the following Sunday if you want
- Vendor space, you can email mcfcommercialbooths at gmail.com. So it's mcf, Monroe County Fair,
- commercialbooths, B-O-O-T-H-S at gmail.com, if you want fair. And then I was involved in an airport
- master plan meeting. I don't have my thoughts collected on, so I'll talk about that next time.
- Councilor Williams? Councilor Emerson? No comments. Councilor Henry? Not this evening, thank you, Madam
- President. All right, well, yeah, that was interesting. Okay, so I don't have anything either. End of
- the school year is upon us for MCCSE, and I'm sure RBB, but I am a mom of MCCSE folks, so hats off to
- those that made it another year.
- And again, I just want to say thank you to the public comments that stuck around and gave comments.
- So with that being said, we are adjourned. Thank you.