- and so we will go ahead and get started. So I will call our meeting to order. This is the joint county
- council and city council, along with our mayor, and we have a commissioner joining us today. Today is
- Thursday, June 11th, 2026, and the time is 6.03. And so we have a quorum of county council. To my right
- here, we have counselors Wilts, Henry,
- We also have Deckard and Fidel and joining us virtually, we have Councilmember Hawke. And I will kick
- it over to the City Council Vice President, Sydney Zulek. Thank you. Can we have the clerk call the
- roll or should I just... Okay, nope, I will announce people. Okay, we have Councilmembers Rallo, Stasberg,
- Flaherty, Zulek, Daly and Ruff in attendance with us today. And I will kick it back to Councilmember
- Crossley. Thank you very much.
- kickball. Okay, before we go ahead and get started with this, I want to go ahead and have the conversation
- with saying thank you to our city colleagues who have taken to the invitation to come
- with us together. I also want to give, you know, a special thank you to Mayor Kerry Thompson for joining
- us. But the other thing that I want to make sure that we also note as well too is that we do have a
- county commissioner, Commissioner Madera, that is joining us as well. I know I've gotten some questions
- about, you know, who was invited and who's not. And so I wanted to say
- as we had discussed on the 26th when we were making our decisions, that we wanted to have a
- joint collaboration with our city colleagues, with us here in the county as well. We did invite the
- commissioners and the sheriffs as well. However, we do have Commissioner Madeira here. Some individuals
- respectfully declined to participate, but nonetheless, we have what we need to have here to keep doing
- the business at hand. So we have that. Council President Crossley?
- Yes. I got a note that council member Piedmont Smith is on Teams. Oh, I am so sorry. No, no problem.
- I didn't notice either. Just wanted to read it for the record. Yay. We have everybody or just about
- everybody. So I wanted to make sure that we are saying this because in our last meeting, I know we kept
- saying, you know, we're not we're saying no to things, but we're saying yes. And saying yes is having
- this conversation. Much is what we've had tonight. I think I dreamed about something like this much
- so than we did.
- A few years ago when the Convention Center expansion conversation was happening, we got in a bigger
- room to talk. And I think we need to do more of this. And I appreciated that. That was actually something
- that Mayor Carey had said way back when. And I appreciate that. So without further ado, I will also
- say tonight's conversation is going to be a little different. I am not going to be chairing this meeting.
- I think one of the biggest things that I wanted to do is sometimes leaders kind of have to take a step
- back and really try to look at some good things and people that really do some good work. And so I have asked
- for a co-facilitator, Kate Wiltz and Mayor Keary to collaborate together. And we will do this together
- in a collaborative approach. And they both said yes to this and I will kick it back over to them. So
- thank you very much. Thank you. I can get started. I want to start by just saying
- that while I am happy to help facilitate discussion here, this meeting is is really a collaboration
- session to see how the city can assist the county in getting a jail built. The jail is
- the county's project, obviously. The county runs the jail. The county will build the jail. But obviously
- the jail impacts our entire community. And so while the mayor does not per se have oversight over the
- jail, nor does the city council. This is something that impacts our entire community. And I
- I won't speak for my council colleagues, but they have taken official action to express their desire
- to support innovative solutions around the jail.
- I am here likewise to make sure that we do everything we possibly can to make sure that when this new
- jail gets built, and that is a foregone conclusion, we need a new jail, that we carry that project out
- in the best way possible. And so to that end, we have a couple of framing questions that we wanted to
- pose to the group tonight.
- If we can, oh, I get to kick it over to Kate, who's gonna go through our operating assumptions and rules.
- Our community rules. Community rules. Two things. I agree that this is meant to be very deliberative,
- very collaborative, and I really appreciate the support that the city colleagues here
- have shown just by even coming tonight. But what I'd like to make sure that we do is especially for
- the county side of the table. But we've all taken time on this issue and said a lot of things. And I
- think we've been pretty clear on our opinions. And today I would respectfully ask that we stay focused on
- the questions that we're here to answer, and that we have goals at hand, which are coming in a moment.
- The other thing is, of course, respect and try to pass the little talkie baton, so to speak, in a generous
- manner. So we'll try to keep everybody on task, and we will
- try to keep us focused and I just ask for your assistance with both those things. So when I was talking
- with Councilor Crossley and Mayor Thompson about what our goal today is, the things that came to the
- surface are we want to make sure that we as a collective group here align around
- where we are in this process and what's happening next. And in order to do that, I think we need to
- discuss and lay out next steps and a timeline for that and identify the actions each of us as individuals
- and collectively need to take to get to
- a jail, a construction of a jail, to be specific. So between today and jail construction, I'd like for
- us to think about what our roles are, what needs to happen, and we have some ideas on what needs to
- happen. That doesn't have to be whole cloth, but I think getting some agreement around how we get there
- and doing so in a way that we can
- maybe make a formal commitment together to work on what we come up with as those items. That's a lot
- of words. Usually goals are more succinct than that. But I want, first of all, to see if anyone has
- an edit or a concern around that purpose for this meeting.
- So I always have questions. So this one is, is there a timeline with which we think we're working? Yes,
- I think that what we need to do is get there as fast as we can and talk about what that looks like.
- So I think that our meeting won't have
- much impact if we don't leave having made some official decisions on next steps that we can agree to.
- Those steps may have steps on the city part and on the county part. And while it's great to have deliberative
- dialogue, we really are in a position now where the county
- has to make some decisions. And so I would just ask that as we're talking, we're talking tangibly about
- how we can participate in moving this forward and what that will look like for each entity, each of
- four entities. Hi. To that end, I think it might be useful
- for, in sort of a brainstorming way, us to go around and each identify something that you see that needs
- to be done to get us toward the construction of the jail, and meaning that you don't have to come up
- with the full list yourself. Come up with one tangible item, we'll list the items, assuming that there
- are markers. Are there markers for that thing?
- Did we just get a white board with nothing? Sorry, that was cut from the budget. Don't worry, this is
- my time to take over with pink. Is that like an eraser? White board. Oh, that's rough. I thought that
- was a black pad. Yeah, it looks like we are getting some. Yep, they're getting some. All right. In the
- meantime, I will write it on a paper.
- I can't even introduce myself with one thing. Well, okay. I think we need a shared vision of what it
- is we're building. That has been elusive on the county side. The city partners, of course, don't have
- a direct say in that, but ultimately when we say jail, which is what we were being sued over
- or challenged about that is not a lot of the other things that have been added on over the past designs,
- right? So what is required versus what's desired, I think, and understanding that. We need to make sure
- we all share our understanding of that. Commissioner Madeira?
- I would say to build on that, we need that within a certain period of time. So we don't have forever,
- and it's not according to community preference. We also have that third party in the room. We need a
- deadline, but we also need something that's not just community preferable, but court preferable.
- So I'll state the obvious, which is location, location, location, because that obviously plays into
- a lot of things. But I won't take up too much longer because I think Councilmember Henry said it as
- well is what do we need, what's required and go from there. I'm going to jump on to location as well.
- And in the premise that I hear it from a lot of folks in the community that say,
- they're not sure we have exhaustively put a call to the community for any and all location that fits
- kind of a criteria within the city. And so I would sort of say that to all of us, what are those places
- that are not places that, or what are those places that could be viable, perhaps could be viable with
- a slight relook from where they are now. And for us to think a little bit exhaustively around that,
- with the demands that we have, which is that it's access to resources, et cetera, so that we're thinking
- creatively. And it could be the real estate communities engaged on that. It could be just some other
- folks not in this room. But truly, what is the end-all, be-all list of places that might factor into
- this so that we're not just siloed into, oh, we've been talking about that for a long time, so I'm just
- gonna keep saying that word. So that's what I thought. So I think size.
- I think we have to agree on what size of a facility we need and what's. So I think size, what size do
- we need and what is going to be in the facility, right? Oh, mine's not working. Might need to pull it
- as close as possible. So if I didn't need to say it again, size and
- What is the purpose of the size of the facility? What purposes are going to be in the facility? Is it
- just the jail? Is it going to be what? What is it that's going to be in the facility? Thanks.
- Is this working? Yes. OK. Well, I'll just cut to the chase. You know, my preference has always been
- for a jail to be proximal to downtown or within the city, at least.
- I voted against the Fullerton option. I'm open minded about various options, but I've always thought
- for decades now that Thompson was the site, the preferred site. So, I mean, I'm in a position perhaps
- of a site location and zoning as, you know, any approval by council. And, you know, I'm looking forward
- to working with you to that end. But I'm sort of
- A tabla rasa, if you have ideas about where else it might go and what we can do, I'm open for that.
- North Park is not preferred by me, and I appreciate the efforts that has been done to preclude that.
- Thank you. I have to jump on the location bandwagon. I think that that seems to be a huge question right
- now, and we need to figure out where something is going to go and go from there.
- I think some combination of several of county council colleagues, specifically what is required for
- a location. I think Councillor Fiddle was getting at that. So depending on what your assumptions are
- about what is required as a bare minimum and on what timeline, that's going to dictate how creative
- we can be about location. And so narrowly scoping that to keep, I think, the locational options as flexible
- and as many as possible as
- Well, that's not a tangible step. That's a preference. But that's where I was going. I'm going to take
- us a different route. I am curious as to the number of beds that we actually need and how that number
- might change with different prevention efforts. I think that prevention is one of the opportunities
- that the city has to better collaborate with the county. If we decrease the amount of beds, the project
- is, in theory, less expensive.
- Kind of going back to the, you know, pulling back further what we need between now and the end of this
- process, you know, and other things that we need to kind of keep in mind and put on the table is we
- need community buy-in. We also need buy-in, you know, and support from the sheriff's office as well.
- We need to take their viewpoints all into consideration as well.
- Do you have to hold your finger on it the entire time? No. You just talk. Just talk. So there's probably
- 1,000 people in this town that know far more about this issue than I do. The practical nature of it,
- the history of it, the needs, everything. So I say this in all humility to weigh in in any way, shape,
- or form. But I think with any location,
- I really want to see, I would like to see, the community needs to see some, what I would call full cost
- accounting of what the full costs are. Not just construction costs, but impacts on
- incarcerated folks, their families, all the coming, environmental impacts of all the comings and goings,
- not just environmental impacts of materials and construction, of decades and decades of comings and
- goings compared to where it is now. Impacts on existing users in whatever area it might go. Put a dollar
- value to all these things. Some, I know it's hard, but come up with some kind of dollar value that if
- we move and build a new facility in a new place, it's going to have
- some real impacts on existing uses and users, residents, business, whoever's there, any institution
- like this. And so I would really like to see accounting for those costs when we actually make comparisons
- for different possible locations. Thank you. Thank you.
- I know we have two members who are joining virtually. Council Member Hawke, would you like to offer
- input? Yes. What I'd like to make sure is, boy, this is making noises here. I'd like to make sure that
- we recognize the purpose of this meeting was for location.
- At least that's what the agenda showed me. And I think that if you're ever going to get to the end of
- what we need to do, we have to start. And the start is finding the right location. And certainly, we
- already have property that's paid for. If we can make that work, I would like to see it there. If it
- doesn't work there, then I would like for us to move on to Fullerton.
- But what we need to see is which of those two would the county council and city council agree to because
- we know that planning has to help with that. And we also need to make sure that we are in agreement
- on that. And we understand starting the process is not having to do with
- what's going to be in the jail. It has to do with the location. We need to get that started first.
- Thank you. And Council Member Piedmont Smith. Yes, thank you. I would just add concurrent to the construction
- of a jail.
- there should be continued collaboration on prevention efforts and also on well this is more just county
- but continued support of the current jail and immediate remedies to any unconstitutional aspects of
- the current jail because whatever it is that we agree to no matter how fast we go it'll be
- a few years before there's a new jail. Thank you. Have any other council members joined online that
- have not been called upon yet? No, we're good. Okay. I'll add my two cents. I would agree location is
- the most important thing for us to figure out that is of
- course impacted by the various other questions that have been brought up by these bodies. And I would
- say the way I would frame the location would be we need to expedite the process for a single alternative
- location. And I would frankly recommend doing that with a smaller body that comes back to a larger body
- because with the
- court case as it is, we've already run out of time. And so an exhaustive process on many different properties
- is probably unrealistic, especially because that process would warrant a design specific to each one
- of those sites. And so I think if we want to make some progress
- My two cents would be, let's pick a single alternative site fairly quickly. Not in this meeting,
- to be clear. Okay. I think what the mayor said actually kind of sums up.
- a lot of what's here, not everything, of course, that in order to streamline our work tonight, that
- we should focus on how we get to the location because that's a tangible that we know we have to have
- before we can go any further.
- We have a lot of information from the work that our transition teams have done. And so we do have a
- lot of information about size and related purposes for the design that exists. And we know
- kind of preferences from the various county departments involved
- in a justice center and what they have said they need and the scaled back version of what they say they
- need as well, given budget constraints. So we've had a lot of that information gathered. I totally see
- how that is related to and will inform what happens on a site that we choose.
- but we need to get to a site. And in order to vet sites or a site, there are probably some key things
- that have to be either discussed, decided, or just have happen. I'm thinking around, I think it was
- Councilor Aralo who said something along the lines of zoning. We know that there are processes
- If we are looking in city limits, and I'm kind of gathering that from the letter, from what I've heard,
- that is a preference that we build in city limits. If we can make that assumption as a boundary, then
- we can take a next step and look at what are the processes and steps that get us from
- Just having some ideas around what properties might work to building on a site. Reactions and thoughts
- about that. So are we looking for factors for a site? I honestly don't think that we can... I think
- we've already... I think we've vetted a lot of the factors already. And that's what a lot of this is.
- Really? Yeah. I don't see a whole lot up there that I would put on a list. So I would summarize six
- factors for a site. Just to be bold, I will take notes on those. I say that we need site control. The
- county owns it and can acquire it immediately. I think we need legal permissibility. The zoning or permitting
- path is clear and fast.
- I think we need construction feasibility. There's no or few known utility, road, environmental, geotechnical,
- or design barriers that cause major delay. Slow down so she can write it down. The second is, so we
- need site control or county ownership, legal permissibility, or clear zoning or permitting
- paths, construction feasibility,
- So no known utility road, environmental, geotechnical, design, major delays. We need operational adequacy.
- In other words, sheriff and design professionals confirm that it can support their needs, classification,
- circulation, intake. We need a fiscal path. Can we fund it and vote on a timeline? And is it defensible
- to a court?
- In other words, can counsel present it as a reasonable, timely remedy in federal litigation? I'm guessing
- that six hangs on the rest of them. Yeah. But I think that that's a good independent consideration,
- too. Can I ask a clarifying question? Is that OK? That's related. And pardon my ignorance on this, because I just
- don't follow this issue as closely as you all do, of course. Implicit in a lot of what's being talked
- about is the urgency of ensuring we have a constitutional justice or jail and that we need to have a
- plan in place. Is it impossible or is it possible? And how much have you all explored? And again, I
- don't mean to derail. I'm just curious because it informs this.
- flexible that timeline is, not based only on what the plan is, but how much we are resourcing an existing
- building that may be unconstitutional in this level of care now. I don't know. But I guess I'm asking,
- is it possible with a real investment, several million a year, I don't know, something, to buy yourselves
- two years while you think more creatively? I'm seeing a head shaking no, so someone thinks it's impossible.
- Can we kick that back to our county attorney who probably knows the answer to that? Molly's right there,
- so. Yeah. So just to make sure I understand the question, is your question inquiring whether it's possible
- to remedy the current conditions to an essence by time on building the lawsuit? Yes, even on a temporary
- basis. OK. So let me pull up.
- In 2020, the county had a study commissioned by Mr. Kenray, and that study lists several unconstitutional
- or conditions that would need remedied. I have read that. Most of those conditions require the addition
- of space. And so I don't think that it would be possible to add space to the current facility. There
- is a cost, and I can try to find it, a cost analysis of what
- of those conditions we could fix, what it would cost. If you give me a second, I can try to find it.
- I think Mr. Cockrell's going to come way in while I look for that document. Maybe the consensus view
- of county elected officials is that it's impossible to buy time through investment in the current facility.
- I see some heads going either way.
- I guess my response and Jeff Cockrell, county attorney, my response is there's probably there's probably
- not a way to avoid additional litigation. But I would anticipate that once the litigation begins, if
- we had some kind of settlement agreement, there would be some interim steps. I mean, I think it's been
- mentioned before, we're not going to be able to build this jail in the next few years. Right. So there
- has to be some interim steps that we would we could take.
- as that process is going forward, what those are. I mean, that's a matter that we'll have to get to.
- Does that answer your question? That is very helpful. Thank you. Again, I didn't mean to derail. It
- sounds like there is a little bit of a diversity of viewpoint. It has bearing just like how many beds
- has bearing on site selection. And so I'm not in a position to say one way or another if that's possible,
- but I wanted to ask. Thank you. I have a different clarifying question.
- different. All on you next Councilmember Rallo. Go ahead. That's okay. I just actually following up
- on Councilmember Flaherty's his question. There was overflow of space located in the county parking
- garage. Is that being utilized right now and is there any possibility for that to be expanded on? I
- don't think that they're really
- That's where the Stride Center is and there's no other space allotted to. Okay. Just checking. Thanks.
- It's not significant square footage either. Is Thompson zoned for a jail? Yes. Okay. I don't know if
- everyone else is thinking this, but that does seem like one of the more appealing properties out of
- the ones that we have.
- Yeah, it's currently on the table, so it might be worth starting there. I'd like to make a public motion
- that we stop referring to it as the Thompson property. It's Thompson with a P. It's not Thompson with
- a P. That's right. Did somebody else have their hand up? No, that we missed, OK. Yeah, I did. President Costner.
- go ahead and say I think the idea for us because which is why I'm kind of not kind of I am glad that
- we have our city colleagues here is the fact that we've heard so much assumptions of what the city's
- process is and so for me personally I kind of want to hear from the city in terms of like what is the
- process because
- you all know best, especially if we're talking about properties within city limits, what does that look
- like? Because we need to know. I think everybody needs to know. And it would be great to hear from city
- to say like, you know, from county's perspective, this is what we need from you all in order to make
- things work. Because again,
- There's been a lot of assumptions and a lot of things that have been said, maybe not by city. And I'd
- like to hear from city how that would work. The process and how long it takes depends entirely on what
- kind of zoning changes need to be made. And so, you know, some things can get done
- at the administrative level. Other things have to go to plan commission and even council. I have and
- will recommit to the administrative side being as expedited as we possibly can. We would put this at
- the top of the stack and absolutely work in an expedited fashion.
- And I'll leave it to council colleagues to reflect on their process. But it really is site dependent
- and what's going on that site. Thank you. I maybe want to put a hypothetical out in the room because
- we need to test how a planned commission in the city would take a request. And I know
- Councilmembers Rallo and Ruff were on council, I think, when the county purchased the Curry building,
- which is right next to the current Zillow building. In 2003 and 2005, the county committed to investments
- in that building to add it into the justice system. We had the family court in there. Suppose we said
- that we owned that property, Curry, what is now
- the garage, but was to fight this building. We said, look, if we were to level that and build a vertical
- or a different jail, compact urban form in that space. We own the property. It's right next door. It's
- surrounded by probation and clerks, and it's down here. But it's urban. It would clearly be a problem
- with Ingrassi Egress for a while to do such a build verse in the Knott Thompson property.
- What would that look like coming to the city, where if the county were to say, we own this property,
- it's in the urban core, it's next to our justice building, it has a historical piece to it with the
- Curry building being a historical building. What does that mean for plan commission, historic preservation?
- To me, let me just throw that out there to test what that sounds like across the table, if that was
- a solution.
- Is it a historically designated building right now? I believe the Curry part is, or at least the facade,
- but I'd have to check that, yeah. It can be undesignated through request of the owner, I believe, but
- that's a process that has criteria. That's a few weeks. What's that? That's like weeks or months. My
- gut would be a couple of months, maybe faster if expedited. I think I'd have to go through HPC and then
- to the city council. That's my... I'm not certain of that, I guess.
- I am the Historic Preservation Commission liaison. I'm happy to check with our staff liaison and the
- chair of the commission and get back to you on that. I'm sorry. I was just going to say the other part
- of that site is I don't actually know what the downtown
- zoning layer says about jails. I mean, I know the jail is currently listed there, but I'm not sure what
- it says now in terms of something being new. So I don't know if that would be something I'm trying to
- look it up right now. But I, uh, you do is really long and I don't usually look at that, at that overlay
- layer. It's kind of in a different spot than, than what I end up usually being faced with. So, uh, I,
- I feel very favorable toward it personally. Um, I wonder if the proposal would be,
- And this might add to expense, of course, to maintain some kind of the historic facade of the building
- might be possible. And that might expedite it to with the HPC, et cetera. But. I was just wondering
- if there were any types of grants for that type of thing. No. OK.
- Councilmember Piedmont-Smith has her hand raised. Thank you. Councilmember Piedmont-Smith. Yes,
- thank you. I wanted to go back to the Thompson site. I'm sorry, I don't know what else to call it, Mayor.
- But I did want to relay some information that I received from the City Director of Planning
- and Transportation, David Hiddle.
- So he said, a jail is allowed as a permitted by right use in tract D in the Thompson PUD via approval
- of case PUD 1202, which amended the original Thompson PUD. One condition of approval requires that the
- site plan for any jail must be approved by the plan commission, unlike other by right uses, which require
- only approval from staff.
- Another condition of approval states, quote, any jail facility will be a public, not a private facility
- and will generally conform to the size, location and population density proposed by the petitioner at
- this time. And the associated staff report references plans showing an approximately 170,000 square
- foot, 400 bed jail. So I just wanted to relay that information. So,
- It was a conditional approval that it would be similar in size to what I just said. I don't know.
- I mean, I think if it went back through Plan Commission, like the site plan has to go through Plan Commission
- anyway. So I don't know if a PUD amendment would be required to go to Plan Commission first, if you
- don't stay within the 170,000 and 400 beds. And I don't know what,
- the latest proposal of the size of the jail is, but I wanted to relay that information.
- Thank you. Councilmember Stossberg. Kind of related to that, if we're talking about the site off Roger
- Street, formerly known as the Thompson site.
- that anything there would have to go to planning commission simply because it's above a certain size,
- so it has to go through planning commission. And as long as you work with staff and tick the boxes,
- I mean, we had one last night that essentially it was by right because it checked all the boxes, but
- because it was more than a certain size, it had to have that public hearing piece. Planning commission
- tends to have two hearings is kind of a thing. You can always waive the second hearing depending on
- what the build is, how well it ticks the boxes. I mean, if you come at the first hearing and it's like
- an impeccable plan and it meets all of the necessary guidelines related to design and all of those things
- for the zoning, often they do end up skipping the second hearing. We just waive the second hearing and
- approve it through. That is a process that doesn't involve council at all. It only involves planning
- commission. If something has to have a change of zoning,
- which I don't think the Thompson site would actually need a change of zoning, then it would have to
- go through planning commission and then through council to approve a zoning change because council is
- the body that has to approve the zoning changes, but it has to come as a recommendation from the planning
- commission. So it really does, as Mayor Thompson said earlier, depend on which site you want to do and
- what the current zoning is of the site.
- as the member of the planning commission from council, I don't think that that body would be a crazy
- impediment, especially depending once again on the zoning and how well it kind of ticks all of those
- boxes that are pretty standard. It just takes working with our planning and zoning staff or our planning
- and transportation staff.
- to help you do those guidelines because, I mean, the UDO is complex, just as the county development
- ordinance is also complex, and those staff members are the best ones to help lead any development project
- through. Mr. Madera? So in the interest of process and getting back to the purposes of this meeting,
- I would like to
- suggest that we move on from discussion of specific properties to discussion of the process. I do think
- that the power lines property is going to be a political fig leaf that ultimately buys us six months
- of process before it collapses before a federal judge because of the two years of poll moving that I
- think that we have at the end. I spoke with Duke on Monday, and I'm happy to go into that at a later
- time. I do think that that's something we need to discuss in front of a smaller body at a later time.
- But that is, I think, outside the ambits of this meeting. But I would like to hear more about the city
- process. And going back to Mayor Thompson's
- comment about putting us at the top of the stack. When we are at the top of the stack, what happens
- from that point on? How long is that process? Assuming we would need to go through the Planning Commission
- and then through the City Council. If you had everything in, if the file was absolutely complete when
- it was submitted,
- I would say the fastest we could probably, and somehow waived the second plan commission. And the council
- now can discuss on first reading, which means they, in theory, could decide on a first reading. So if
- all of those things happened feasibly, you could get through in four months.
- That's a lot of ifs. But that is, I would say that's the fastest expedited process that I would anticipate.
- Council Member Crossley? Yeah, so I'm glad you mentioned that because we got the current planned commission
- person here, or council member here, Council Member Susberg, because that was gonna be my next question,
- because we've heard so many times it's a six to nine month process,
- But from what I gather, what you just said, if there's no changes that needs to happen, it technically
- doesn't have to have the two-prong approach where it goes for planning and then it goes to council.
- Is that my understanding? If there's no need for a zoning change, it doesn't go to council. If there's
- a zoning change need, then it does have to go to council because council's the only one that can make
- that kind of legislative change. OK.
- including an adjustment to the PUD. So it's just because a jail is allowed, if you change the size,
- that is a change to the PUD, which does have to go to counsel. But not the false evidence appear in
- real factor of idea of it going beyond a six to nine month process. No, I mean, it really does depend
- on how much you have your ducks in a row.
- in the beginning because there are boxes to check in terms of staff and bringing things to plan commission.
- Until the package is complete, staff won't bring it to plan commission.
- It just really depends on how well you have your ducks in a row in terms of that six to nine month.
- I mean, Mayor Thompson said four months. I would say that that almost could be faster if you really
- have your ducks in a row. I mean, there's a planning commission meeting every month. And except for
- summer recess, there's at least two council meetings a month that it can get dealt with. If there was
- a great deal of transparency and communication, if there did have to be a zoning change,
- thus necessitating it going through council. If there was a great deal of communication with both plan
- commission and city council kind of at the same time, so when city council gets it, it's not like starting
- from scratch, then that process part can be expedited too in terms of the minimum amount of turnaround
- between plan commission and council.
- Sometimes, and I as the planning commission person, I'm like, OK, I'm going to be strategic about when
- this goes to council because it's something big. Or I think that council is going to want to put amendments
- on it. And so let's give it a little bit more time before it goes to council. If council is really aware
- of it, then it can go to council pretty quickly after the planning commission meeting. And it really
- just depends on how
- good the communication is beforehand, and then just timing the process out in terms of when meetings
- are. I'll tell you, it would be kind of rough to try to throw this in in August because of budgets,
- right? So some of that has some dependency, too, in terms of council's schedule. Okay. So I'm going
- to encourage us to move out of the nitty-gritty details of a planning process. And it may be that you
- ask for commitments on
- you know, expediting to the best of our ability and engaging, et cetera. But I think for the purpose
- of this meeting, we'll get bogged down in a lot of details that may or may not need to happen. And I
- think we have some sort of broad timelines. And so I'm going to invite Council Members Zulik to comment.
- Sure. Question. Thank you. Would it, at this point in time, be best to set up a working group to work
- through some of the more nitty-gritty details?
- I think that is a that would be one of a positive a group of positive outcomes from this meeting. Yeah
- Do you want do you want to make a proposal on delegation to that group Like yeah, how many from each
- body who needs to be on it, etc I would recommend
- a city executive, if somebody from county executive wants to be a part of it as well. And then of course,
- representative from city and county council, I would think sounds good. Good plan. I would agree. County
- executive as well. You mentioned, okay. More people. Yeah.
- Unless other people have other objectives. Because I think sometimes when we have bigger, bigger groups
- of things, it's not to say that we can't have the smaller working group come back to the larger body
- and have a conversation. But I think that could happen where we have a smaller working group.
- that has the task of what we are all saying and taking from this meeting, go work on it and then bring
- it back to the larger body, unless anybody else has any other suggestions. I think that would be. And
- is that is that larger body this group or is it the county council?
- County Commissioners, what is the next step? I think it would be worth meeting all together again. Okay.
- I'm going to suggest that while we're proposing this, we make it time bound so that we know we're getting
- a team together that's available in the near term and whoever's volunteering can make appropriate time
- commitments.
- and task? Yeah, I was just going to ask that because what would the subgroup of four, what would their
- purpose be? Because I think councilmember Zulek said like for that nitty gritty kind of detail stuff.
- So is that like a site selection? And then you go, okay, like on this site, what would the steps all
- be? And is that the same subgroup that we should have discussing what those sites are? Do you know what
- I'm asking?
- Or should there be? Because I guess I'm kind of looking at that and going, should we only have a subgroup
- of those four debating or discussing the different possible locations versus a subgroup of those four
- running through the details of the chosen possible locations? Sounds reasonable. But should there be?
- I think for highest efficiency, my proposal would be that that subgroup is going to propose the best
- two or three locations and come equipped with the zoning and other implications of each of those sites
- for a larger group to make a single recommendation to move forward.
- I think that there are only two or three locations possible. I mean, I'm not saying that there can't
- suddenly be from the ether someone arriving with another location, but in all of our discussions, it
- has narrowed to really only two or three, three or four max maybe, that could possibly work if we are
- talking about within city limits.
- I would add, and this is more procedural, to help that group conduct its business. We have two types
- of government sitting in the room here. A strong mayor system can release notes from your office on
- your administrative tasks. The County Council has never been privy to the full set of notes that the
- Board of Commissioners have used to determine and disqualify sites over the past six months. I have
- really asked the Board of Commissioners to release
- all the documentation from executive session to that body so it can look and not re-invent the wheel
- and duplicate effort that's already been done to dismiss or include sites. We've never seen that material
- and so Commissioner Revere I just ask respectfully if we can take that back to your peers. It would
- be rather great to see those notes because we did bring I think up to six sites between January and May that
- It never came into the public view. They were an executive session. You all need to know that, otherwise
- you're going to be flying blind. We need to see those notes. Jeff, have those been released? Are they
- on the drive?
- I'm not aware of any executive session that the commissioners have to discuss property that didn't involve
- the county council. So I guess I'd start with that. I don't know what we're talking about with the six
- sites. I mean, I will tell you, I get emails every, I got emails a couple weeks ago about
- People who say, hey, what about this site? What about that site? I guess maybe I'm missing what you're
- asking. Yeah, well, I'll ask it again. And if I have to go as far as actually naming the sites we talked
- about in the executive session, I'll do it. I mean, we brought multiple sites to those meetings and
- discussed them. They were eliminated for different factors. One, I believe, had a DLZ overlay that we
- never saw made public off of TAP.
- I think was one of the properties. So those are the list of properties that our peers would need to
- look at so they're not flying blind and making the same assumptions and reinventing the wheel. I thought
- I heard that there was meetings outside the council that had... It's loud in here, Jeff. And I apologize.
- I'm screaming over a fan. But I guess I have no problem having those. I mean, we have those notes.
- I mean, you have those notes. I think we can share them with the group as long as
- We have legal guidance not to share those, but if we can get those released is what I'm asking. This
- is in the weeds, but all I'm asking is that we provide that subcommittee the same information so they
- don't reinvent the wheel. I guess from my perspective, some of those are held by private individuals.
- I would want to reach out to them first to make sure they're aware that we're releasing that information.
- I'm not sure any of them will have any concerns with that.
- But that's just the courtesy that I would do, to let them know that that is occurring. That doesn't
- stop it from occurring. It's just reaching out to them first. OK, so I'm going to assume that legal
- counsel will make an attempt to release all possible documents. And we have Zulek, Flaherty. Thank you.
- Overall, I think the thrust of where this
- the structure that's being proposed could work. To make it effective, it seems like we need to spend
- more time in this meeting trying to at least get a fuzzy universe of assumptions that are shared, because
- it seems like the different tangible steps that people were outlining all impact any site location.
- So flexibility of timeline, number of beds, these kinds of things. And then Commissioner Madeira kind
- of laid out
- her six factors as a synthesis of that. But I think there's a diversity of opinions. So one factor,
- like acreage. Is there a minimum assumption that people have in mind about acreage? And does that vary?
- Is there anything credible we can actually all agree on for that committee to be working with? I don't
- know how much progress we can make on those types of questions. I still have questions about
- the constitutionality thing. And if it's mainly space-related,
- What are outside the box options of transporting some people in the near term? Maybe that's not possible.
- Again, but just putting it on the table is like, if we're talking about creative solutions like Councillor
- Deckard encouraged at the beginning, knowing how much those factors can move depending on some different
- pieces really impacts a lot the viability and possibility of different sites. And so if we can't get
- somewhere on that,
- Or at least people can't, at minimum, I'd love for the county electeds to all kind of share what they
- think are the requirements, kind of in a similar way that Commissioner Madera did, so we can at least
- get that out there and hear the viewpoints and see what Koala, you know. I'm going to just take a point
- of privilege in response to that, that I think it
- To that end it would be good to have at least to invite and I know we invited Sheriff tonight, but somebody
- from the sheriff's team and judge
- if they're able to participate. They are the insiders who have the most knowledge about the building
- and how things operate. And so while we're getting creative, it would be good to have at least invitation
- extended to members of those two groups, I believe. Council Member Zulek. Thank you. Council Member
- Daly and I both have to leave at 7.15, and I realize that we will no longer have quorum for council
- at that point in time. So I just want to raise that.
- Thank you for letting us know. Council Member Rallo. So this may be a naive question, but have you all
- resolved on the county side whether everything needs to be co-located? Because you were talking about
- a site location where it would be a campus. But does it preclude things like having courts here, having
- the Curry Building utilized, phasing things?
- In other words, then attending to the justice building, renovating that, then having another site in
- process that could then expand occupancy of the jail. Is that part of the menu here, or are we looking
- at one single site for everything? Where are we? So I'll take a hit at that.
- Listening to the general conversation of everybody in county government, I think there is a strong desire
- to co-locate because we see the needs for having everything in one particular location. We see the need,
- as we have it so good right now currently downtown, of ensuring that attorneys, public defenders,
- You know, everybody in the same area would be able to get to certain things, because I understand caseloads
- and things like that. With people kind of going back and forth, it's a lot. With co-location, and I'm
- not saying one way or another, so if somebody hears something, please don't at me or send me an email
- about it. I'm just saying the general question, since you asked it. What I think I've heard concerns
- from colleagues is the co-location amount.
- I think a long time ago, I think the idea and the crystal ball was to have everything all at once right
- where. And then SB1 came into the situation and kind of changed the game for a lot of different things.
- I think maybe the idea, and colleagues can jump in if I say anything different, was to try to do that.
- And then SB1, with the restrictions of a lot of different things, really kind of put a pause on that.
- Plus, the cost, as we talked about so many different times, with everybody wanting certain things that
- we've asked for, that just kept ballooning. And so right now, I think the general consensus is, what
- does that look like? Because it goes back to the beginning of what is required in this whole ordeal
- versus what we need to bring along with it in the beginning.
- The idea is to try to potentially do things in phases, maybe to get to that co-location. But again,
- I think it also depends on the location aspect of everything as well. And again, colleagues, please
- feel free to jump in if I need to add anything or misspoke. One thing we know from our system is that
- even if you choose not to do co-location,
- you're still managing and paying for not being co-located. So when Councilor President Crosley talks
- about that proximity and location, you've got everything from transportation to transportation of your
- prosecutors, your public defenders, and every other apparatus to it. And so while the SB1 has set us
- back on how we would do this, we know the county will be figuring out
- all of those details alongside every elected official in the system. Council funds it, but they will
- have to figure out the management of that and logistical system because we've been co-located since,
- well, at least since they've been in the Justice Building and maybe even when they were near the old
- City Hall. I'm going to jump in because we know we will lose City Council
- forum in 10 minutes and suggest that someone might want to make a formal resolution for the record on
- our next steps that we can commit to. And I think we have some elements up there. We still haven't talked
- about a timeline for
- when this group would have its first meeting, and then when it would be prepared to come back to the
- larger group. I think that it would be a good idea for the working group to evaluate two to three locations,
- assess the pros and cons of each of them, and come back to this body with a recommendation on a location
- and an explanation on the thresholds and the criteria that were considered.
- Commissioner Redira. Yes, and I'll just note that since I'm the only commissioner present tonight, I
- will have to take this back to my colleagues and consult with them as well. Thank you. But to be fair,
- though, we can still move forward with the working group. OK, all right. That's what I want to make
- sure, because yeah. Number Decker. And since we have a working motion that we're drafting here, I would
- add to President Zulek's comments that
- If any of the entities, specified commissioner, mayor, county commissioner, Bloomington Common Council,
- sheriff or judges for any reason, cannot participate or opt out, the commission would continue its work
- under under the timeline to come back. I propose three months. Three months. OK, do you have a clarifying
- question? I was just wondering if the working group would be public meetings or not, just as a logistical.
- I don't think they're
- there's likely to be a requirement of that because it's not going to be a quorum of any body. Right.
- Can I just say I'm concerned about that approach. I think the public is going to demand more transparency
- and more knowledge about just the whole process of selecting these locations and a small group bringing forward
- You've already said here that location is the critical element. I just I have concerns about that approach.
- I'll just say that I kind of share those concerns, but I think on the timeline that we're doing, I don't
- think that it's necessarily practical to have all of those meetings public, and that was kind of why
- I was asking, is that if they did have to be public, then that would, I think, change our timeline.
- But I think some kind of mix of those in terms of that transparency of going, here's our big list, and
- then privately whittle down to a smaller list, and here's the smaller list, and why.
- might be a compromise on that kind of thing that could make sure that the public is well informed about
- what is happening. Daley? Yeah, I think that sounds reasonable as long as like the reasoning for each
- of the locations, why they were looked at and then why they were rejected or moved forward.
- So would this magic group take input from the public? I think we need to make it public who's on that group.
- You should probably come to the microphone. I can summarize what Jeff's going to say. I think the attorneys
- in the room conferred, and I believe if you formally form this group, it's subject to open doors, so
- these have to be public meetings. Is that true even if there's only one council member on the group,
- or do there have to be two city council members in order for it to have to be public? But regardless,
- why would it not be public? Why would that slow this down?
- you just advertise a series of meetings once a week for the next six weeks and then come back.
- And to me, you just do it. And I realized- So who will be doing that? What body is going to publicly
- notice? I think much like we did this meeting today, it would be a joint effort, like working with county
- council and then working in tandem with
- I know the clerk's office has to do the notices and staff also has, we have to make sure that the biggest
- thing is making sure that staff is available to be at these meetings before we can commit to that. But
- the biggest thing that we need to make sure is, is that staff from county and city clerk's office is
- available for those as well too. Okay, so it's been decided that there's going to be public meetings.
- We know who's doing the noticing.
- I think we're down to four minutes and I think we have a somewhat formed resolution, but I haven't heard
- it. The deadline for I would. Is it realistic that the group could meet for the first time within one
- week from today? An initial meeting that I think that goes to who?
- Which which council members should be on the group? I mean, it's pretty we don't even know who we're
- talking about here. And and then Commissioner Madeira, of course, has to go back to the commissioners.
- So maybe that doesn't matter. But is there a particular county council member or city council member
- that anybody would like to nominate or self nominate or think makes most sense in this working group?
- Yeah. Councilor Decker, I recommend that we trust the presidents of both
- of the councils to appoint a member. Those presidents would likely pull their members and the rest would
- take care of itself. City Council has no more regular sessions. And so see how somebody has to do it
- now. I'm happy to do it. I'm also happy to appoint one of you. I'm in town for all of recess, so I am
- available. I'm not in town for all of recess, but I'm wondering how much my involvement with Plan Commission
- matters right now.
- I can keep you informed. Always be supplemental. Yes, that's true. Any? Would you guys have recusal
- issues? What? Sorry? Would you guys have recusal issues? So for example, if Hopi served and this later
- came before the plan commission, would there be recusal issues? I think it's been decided that Zulik's
- serving. Okay, great. I will keep you informed.
- And I will appoint myself to serve on the working group, but I believe we have to have a motion first
- to actually form the working group. When I agreed at the fairly last minute that I would sit here and
- help facilitate, I admitted that Robert's Rules was not my thing.
- I'll move on city council's behalf. I'll move to participate in a working group with the other. Monroe
- County officials that are in the mayor. I don't know how to say it. I mean, Monroe County, technically,
- she's the mayor of Bloomington. She also lives in Monroe County. So anyway, to have a county council
- member or city council member on the working group.
- as is listed on the white board right now. How about that? That's a long motion. I know. Right. It was
- horrible. Did you get that? Really? Sorry, Clerk Bolden. We can't hear you guys because of the fans.
- Oh, sorry. I'm not used to this room. So I'm moving that that city council participate in the working
- group as is listed on the white board right now.
- And so we call for a vote of just city council. Once we get a second on that. Yes, we can second. Daily
- seconded. Will the clerk please call the roll? Sure. Councilmember Rallo. Yes. Stasberg. Yes. Clarity.
- Yes. Zulek. Yes. Daily. Yes. Ruff. Yes. Piedmont.
- I can't see the white board, so I'm gonna pass. Okay, thank you. That passes, and I will appoint myself
- to be on that working group. I also just want to note that we should add the prosecutor's office and
- the public defender's office to that group to be invited. Uh-oh, does that change? Could I also say,
- Hopi, Councilmember Salzberg mentioned sort of what she called a compromise approach to being very public on the
- the larger number of sites and the accessibility to the information for why a site was selected or rejected,
- and then taken to the smaller group. Yeah, but then I think the attorneys decided they all had to be
- public meetings, so it doesn't really apply anymore. And so we also need to have a motion from our side.
- So I'm looking into my colleagues to see how that will work.
- do my best here and I do this madam president in the spirit that this moves us towards resolution in
- collaboration with our city partners who are graciously here today. Thank you. I would move that the
- county council similarly appoint a representative via the appointment of the president of the council
- to join with the other county entities commissioner
- the sheriff, judges, prosecutor, public defender, as well as the mayor and the Bloomington City Council
- to make a recommendation on moving this forward towards two to three locations with a recommendation
- of one. Second. Other timelines. OK, we got a motion and a second. Is there any other further discussion
- from council colleagues on this? Seeing none, Michelle, may we please have a roll call vote?
- I didn't hear who seconded. It was Councilmember Henry. Thank you. Councillor Crossley. Yes. Councillor
- Deckard. Yes. Councillor Feidl. Yes. Councillor Hawke. Yes. Councillor Henry. Yes. Councillor Wilts.
- Yes. Motion passes unanimous.
- And so before we end, would it be okay for us to say within the next, let's have a goal line of maybe
- no later than one month to reconvene since I know there's travel sessions and you all are on council
- recess, but you will be here so that we can get back in the saddle of things. So yes. I think that's
- a great suggestion. I just want to,
- Let me clarify a little bit. In one month, this body will reconvene to hear the recommendation on a
- site from the subcommittee that we just formed. That sounds correct. Got it. I want to make sure I had
- it understood. It might be worth meeting several times to talk about the criteria that we decided on.
- and then come back to it as a group, have that discussion, and then go back in and apply it to those
- site plans just so that we're all on the same page with what we decided on immediately. I don't think
- we have time. But I think the idea for us right now for this subgroup and for the timeline that we are
- kind of on is making sure that we get this done and reconvene within the next month. Does that?
- So the subgroup was going to meet and then we could all come back and meet, right? Is that what you
- were getting at? Yeah, the subgroup will meet as many times as they want between now and then in public
- meetings, figuring out there is so much information that hasn't been shared publicly about sites that
- are possible.
- And I have a feeling if we can work through that, to Councillor Henry's point, and share it with that
- small group and hopefully the public, that will change the trajectory of all of this. Because it will
- become clear, I think, what the negotiables are and what the pros and cons are.
- That's all I, I mean, that's all I can really say. Sure. I have faith. Ms. Sherman, do you have? So
- I'll just reiterate the position of my colleagues that as we get closer to litigation, we will be consulting
- with litigation counsel. And that litigation counsel will also have reflections on the property and
- the propriety of characteristics. So that will also come into the conversation. Thank you.
- keeping that in mind, but also knowing that we still have work in progress to do. So with that being
- said, yeah. Are you appointing somebody now? That's what I was just going to ask. Do we know who that
- who's going to volunteer so I can put that in our notes? Are you working on that tonight? President
- Crossley, are you going to appoint somebody tonight? I will look at two colleagues to see who would
- like to volunteer themselves. It is not me.
- Let's step up if no one else wants to. Okay. Or no one else can. I'm available. Does anybody have any
- objections? No objections? Okay. Tag your council member title. Thank you. All right. Clerk Bolden,
- can I get a read on exactly what the resolutions said about, is it a member of the administration or
- is it me in particular?
- that's going to participate in this body. My calendar can be prohibitive to rapid fire public meetings
- with less than a month's notice. OK, I had heard it as a member of the administration. So shall we just
- make sure that we may clarify
- that we are happy to accept a delegate from your office. The mayor or her designee? That's a good word.
- And I'll note that my motion was what was on the board, and the board did get truncated in a couple
- of ways. So the mayor, admin, and commiss will just, yeah. I would similarly say on our end,
- That's awesome. And that we would accept the commissioners and their designee as well in the spirit
- that we're moving collaboratively to move this forward. Yep. That is the goal. And that was the goal
- of this meeting. Do we have a motion for adjournment? So moved. Second. Thank you. Awesome. Thank you,
- everyone, for your collaboration tonight. Do you all have to vote to?
- Leave. No. Thank you. Thank you.