- Good evening. My name is Liz Vital. I'm the chair of the Collaborative Justice Project Working Subcommittee
- Group. And I'd like to introduce myself, Liz Vital, county council member, Mayor Carrie Thompson, Karen
- Renbeck, representing the Public Defender's Office, and April Wilson, representing the Prosecutor's
- Office with us this evening. We may be having one more come. I didn't hear she wasn't coming, so maybe
- we'll have a special one here shortly. But we have a quorum. So I'd like to begin.
- So we talked about adopting an amended agenda. Did you want to go through that again? So there was an
- agenda published for this meeting, but I'm recommending to committee members to adopt an amended agenda,
- which adds a discussion or an update on what County Council did last night at their meeting that adds
- that amends the election of a chair, vice chair to just the election of a chair.
- And then to have a discussion about scheduling a future meetings, meeting procedures, including whether
- the committee wants to adopt an electronic attendance policy. So should we have a motion and approve
- that or? That's my recommendation. OK, who wants to make a motion to approve this adopted agenda? I
- move approval of the adopted agenda. Is there a second? Second. All those in favor? Can we do a voice vote?
- Yes. All those in favor. Hi. All right. So we've adopted the amended agenda. So the update on the county
- council action. Did you want to do that as well. So last night the county council met and they considered
- resolution 202625 which was to ratify the actions that were taken on June 11th to form the working subcommittee.
- During that conversation, they did vote to make amendments to the resolution specifically regarding
- composition of membership. So originally there was eight members appointed to the committee and now
- there are six members appointed which consists of a representative from the board of commissioners,
- the mayor or the city of Bloomington, the mayor of city of Bloomington or her designee,
- A county council member Bloomington common council member member of the prosecutor's office and a member
- of the public defender's office and. Then. The sheriff and the representative the judges are still included,
- but they've been moved to ex officio status and the. Resolution indicates that the designation of them of.
- their status as ex officio members is based on communication from each of the identified entities that
- we received that indicates those entities will not be participating at this time. But it also leaves
- open for the option for if for some reason they would like to participate in future meetings, they are
- allowed to do so. And then language was added in regarding the duties of the working subcommittee to
- clarify that the committee is to evaluate three or four properties within city limits
- previously there was not the within city limits language in there, and recommend one location back to
- the larger group that met on June 11th, and that the collaborative justice project working subcommittee
- shall focus, their focus shall be on location only. And then there was language, sorry, council member
- Feidl, one more thing. And then there was language added that the county council members should serve
- as the chair and will be responsible for working with county staff on the creation of agendas.
- Any questions from the committee? All right. So I see next on the amended agenda, we probably thought
- about electing a vice chair. Would we have someone that is willing to serve in that role? I'm happy
- to, but what are the responsibilities? Well, I think you'd show up if I can't. And do. At least. And
- then I don't know about anything else. Why would I want to be there if you're not there?
- So can she motion herself? I don't know. You can motion yourself. I motion myself to be vice chair.
- All right. Is there a second? A second. All those in favor? Aye. Okay. So now we're doing schedule of
- future meetings.
- We had talked about having maybe submission of agenda items, because I think there might have been some
- discussion from others about getting things on the agenda. And so I think we need to have things put
- on the agenda if we're going to call this a public meeting so the public knows what we're talking about.
- Can you speak close? Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah, you're sitting too far away. I am too far. I've done this
- before. Thank you. I play that game pretty well. OK, so we talked about having submission of agenda items.
- so that we can and the public then can know what it is we'll be talking about at any meeting that we
- have with this working group. So shall we vote on doing that? Or is that just something that? President
- Feidl. I'm sorry? President Feidl, I actually have a suggestion if I could. OK. I'm not sure if you
- want me to do it now because we've come up with scheduling. It's regarding next steps. And I've come
- with a proposal on how to meet our deadline.
- I wasn't sure if you'd like me to, now since we're talking about the agenda. Well, we have number 10
- on my revised agenda, but the next steps is number six on the original agenda, and it's still number
- 10 on mine, so the next steps is there. I just wanted to make sure it was okay for me to share it now,
- or if you wanted me to wait, I'm happy to. I'll take advice, so do you think we should wait or do it
- now? I think that's at your discretion. I think we'll wait, but thank you, okay? I won't forget you,
- believe me.
- Okay. So then, so then submission of agenda items, do we think then collectively as a group that we
- will want to have people want what they want on to talk about on the agenda? Is that important to everyone?
- I think for me, I think it is makes running the meeting a little easier and the expectations are a little
- easier. So for instance, if you have something under that next steps, we that would have been on the
- agenda if we had some sort of guideline like that, right? Yeah.
- So can we agree? Do we need a motion to agree that we're going to submit items for each agenda? Well,
- if I may interject, I think more importantly to identify the procedure for doing so. So I think our
- recommendation is if you have an agenda item that you would like, you would email your corresponding
- attorney and then we would collaborate and put together an agenda. How's that sound?
- request that it be 48 hours before the meeting 48 hours before the meeting all right that clarifier
- okay email the proper legal so if your city city if your county your county right and then 48 hours
- in advance all right and then is that it for that then um i guess there was an idea do you want to go
- ahead and try to figure out the schedule for future meetings or yes okay
- That was later. That's later. Somebody. That was good. That was Michelle. I was talking out loud. Sorry.
- Sorry. Your microphone works. Can I make a motion or whatever is needed to hear April's plan proposal?
- Because I think if if a process is going to impact our schedule, we ought to talk about that process.
- Um, and, and it's at least important for me and, uh, perhaps I assume for everyone here that we figure
- out the schedule very soon so that we can all do our best to make these meetings. I'm going to be in
- the middle of that. What are the rest of you think? Okay. So where would we put, where are you suggesting
- we put April in now? All right.
- Is that okay? You think or shall we talk about public comment at meetings first and then we're capable
- in. Okay, so I'm trying to take notes here. I'm not sure what we're doing. So I thought we were still
- on submitting items. So I think this is broadly covered under scheduling future meetings. And so since
- the plan may impact the schedule of future meetings, that's why I think they say it's included under
- item number five. That's fine.
- So we can include to have a different agenda than everyone else, right? Which maybe I am not following
- it. It's because we amended it at the beginning of the meeting. I can print a whole bunch of admitted
- agendas real quick or throw it up on a screen or something. Thank you so much. Print them off. I'll
- run into the counselor. OK, so we're on five scheduling of future meetings. Great and then we just talked
- about submitted
- submission of agenda items do we need a motion to make that happen or we agreed enough to make that
- happen i think you're good we're good okay so then now i think we're gonna hear from april is that right
- that's okay i think that's fine thank you um i thought it might be easier i actually emailed miss turner
- king uh a copy of what it
- Thank you, Michelle. I just emailed Ms. Turner King a digital copy, and I have paper copies with me.
- So that way, anyone watching online can see it. OK. So I'm going to pass out a copy. If I may, do you
- want me to display this? I wouldn't mind. I was worried that I wouldn't be able to share that effectively.
- Then I have one other handout.
- to acknowledge that since we have such a truncated schedule and hoping to accomplish the task that's
- been given, I was proposing a process which is results to scheduling. So one of the documents I gave
- you was proposed process. With the truncated schedule, I think one of the things we should do is create
- a site evaluation metrics, identify properties, apply the site evaluation metrics to the identified
- properties, discuss our findings and make recommendations. I recognize we only have three weeks.
- That's why you have a calendar which is included as well. Can I have permission to share? TSD did you
- hear the request? Thank you TSD. We got it. From watching prior meetings, I wasn't precisely clear on what
- The return date is, they just said one month. The next county council meeting that I think would be
- around that time would be July 14th. So that's why I've put that on the calendar. Ms. Turner King, there
- are two tabs on that Excel spreadsheet. There's one for a calendar and process. If we could click on
- that one, if you wouldn't mind. So this is the calendar. That's why I picked July 14th as our deadline
- and trying to reach that deadline with this process.
- It seems like we would have to have multiple meetings. I just put some meetings on a calendar. Obviously,
- I haven't checked with anyone's schedule, so I understand that they might have to be moved. I did take
- a look at the Nathalie room, which is why I put it on the 9th instead of the 8th in July. But my hope
- was that in order to meet these deadlines, we could use this process and this pacing so that way we
- can stay on task and hopefully achieve
- asking us to do. When I talk about the site evaluation metrics, that's the third and the other tab.
- Site evaluation metrics, what I did is I tried to use, I watched the meeting from June 11th with the
- county council and the city council and Commissioner Madeira in that talked about six factors and I
- tried to use that as a basis.
- Site profile, she actually said site control, so it's a little bit different and I fleshed it out. It's
- not precisely how she worded it, so I wanna be clear that I've taken some liberties with it. But I wanted
- to find concrete questions so we could gather the facts that we needed to be able to have a more methodical,
- transparent and comprehensive conversation in front of the community that also included their input
- and from the perspective of a metric, so separate,
- I know there's a lot of positions and feelings about it, and I understand that, but I was hoping we
- get facts and be able to base the decision off of that approach. The metrics I've come up with is just
- a start. I am sure that there are many people who have some other input. I do think it's important to
- start with screening questions. So I did include two, is the property in a floodway? Is the owner willing
- to sell the property? I won't get any more into the subject of it, because I know we're talking about
- scheduling.
- but that's why I wanted to bring up this approach to see what everyone thought of it. Does anyone from
- the committee have anything to add to what it is April's presented here? I like the approach. I would
- add a couple other locations. Thompson's not on the printout. It is on the site, the one that's elected.
- I would still add some other locations. So thank you. I'm really appreciative of the approach. And I
- think when evaluating sites, having a rubric that we can all work with makes a lot of sense. I would
- just like an overnight to review the criteria and add to it or comment on it.
- really appreciative of the work that went into this and the thinking through the timeline, because I
- think this is the best approach that we can probably hope for in order to make a sound recommendation
- based on where we are right now. Yeah, so can we all think about what it is that's being presented here
- and come next time with any additions or corrections? Would that be suitable?
- My calendar actually includes that, which might help with the agendas. So what I was proposing for today,
- we had so little time, I wanted to make sure we came prepared. So what I was proposing for today is
- that we start talking about the site evaluation metrics, that we open it to public comment this evening
- to see if anyone who's came today has additional metrics. That's the sole purpose of that.
- then identify properties, which it sounds like Council Member Zulik has some additional ones to add,
- and then invite the community members to submit additional metrics before the next meeting. So that
- I thought would give us all time to process and look through it, because I know I've given you a lot
- of information. And then at our next meeting, we will have an opportunity to incorporate those metrics
- from the public and committee members, finalize those metrics, and then start our site evaluation, applying
- it essentially to the properties that we have.
- I would suggest that members of the committee submit suggested additions by email ahead of time so that
- we get to a near final, at least something that we can all look at and the public can look at before
- our next meeting. So maybe giving us until Friday to review those and comment on them so that we can
- post that with the next meeting. And where did those suggestions go?
- who's going to collect the suggestions. I thought you were sending submissions to your, Molly, do you
- want to collect? I can collect, but I will preference this that we are all at conference the next two
- days. And so I will attempt to collect and work on this at conference, but I also am at conference.
- So I'm happy to collect them.
- I don't know if this is appropriate in this context, but if this is a Google Sheet as it appears to
- be, could we just add them into the Google Sheet? No. We're slowly getting into an open door thing,
- I think, there. OK. So what we could do? I'll have my computer at conference tomorrow. I'm perfectly
- fine multitasking. Send away. What we can do for open door law, you just can't simultaneously edit.
- So if you want to send them to us, which pick
- Pick your favorite attorney. I'll feel a little left out if you don't pick me at least once. But what
- we'll do is we'll create a read-only document. So as they're submitted to us, we can put them on the
- read-only document so that you'll have access to it. You'll be able to see that document, but you won't
- be able to live edit with each other to consult. So that helps with the violation. I think Larry just
- volunteered to take all your comments.
- Okay, great. Thank you. Thanks, Larry. And this document is just the collection of any of the committees
- or the public's recommendations for metrics? Okay. Great. And then so at the next meeting, will it be
- okay to discuss those at that point? Is that what? Yeah, we should have them ready to discuss them,
- yeah. And how will the public submit them? Do we have a single contact that we can have? We're working
- on that right now.
- Just consult on that try to create a single contact for public submissions and then what I would suggest
- if and this is just a friendly suggestion no It's not bound by law We would create a separate tab for
- all the public comment so that your comments would be on one read-only tab The public comments would
- be on another read-only tab and then in the meetings you could choose to merge those as you reviewed
- them Everybody good with that
- And so I think my question based on this conversation is, are you okay adopting the proposed schedule
- as displayed on the screen and prepared by Ms. Wilson? Do you want me to? It has you meeting on Monday
- the 29th at 6 p.m., July 1st at 6 p.m., Monday the 6th at 6 p.m., Thursday the 9th, and then again on
- Monday the 13th. Let me check my schedule.
- So I'm going to have a conflict on Monday the 13th. Can move. I think I can move things to be here for
- all of those. The only thing I would add on this calendar is I think the recommendation is to be made
- but to the larger group of the city and county councils.
- or the group that met on June 11th and not the County Council meeting. So I don't know when you would
- like when that larger group would schedule to hear the recommendation. Well, the deadline of the 14th
- is not presenting to County Council at the County Council meeting. Right. Since we just agreed to have
- it done by July 13th, as I remember. And then the larger group would have to find a time they could
- schedule a meeting. Yes. Since the 14th isn't then when we be sending it and maybe
- Thompson is not available on the 13th. Would you be available on the 15th? There's a council meeting,
- a city council meeting. Is the only time this group can meet after 5 p.m.? No, I can make anything work.
- It just depends, yeah. But it depends on every day.
- Does after five work for most folks? You and mayor, depending. Just on the 13th, I could just propose
- an alternative of a noon meeting. Oh, I see. Make a new meeting work. I could make a new meeting work
- on the 13th. I could make it work. Is this room available? Let me check. Thanks. Thank you. Make it work.
- Yes, the meeting is this room is available at noon on the 13th. We just switched that. All right. So
- does that firm up the 24th, the 29th, the first, the sixth and the ninth and the 13th at noon. I move
- that we adopt the agenda as amended and changing only the noon 13th. Everything else stays the same, right?
- second. All those in favor? Aye. We have our meeting schedule. Six times is from what I see. Okay so
- looking at the agenda we scheduled future meetings we've dealt with the submission of agenda items.
- The next item on there is how you would like to deal with public comment. Do you want to have public
- comment every meeting? Do you want to have public comment just at the meeting on the 13th? Any preference?
- Well, we are making public comment available through email, a dedicated email, as I'm hearing, right?
- So there's that. Those are just from the metrics. That was just for the metrics. I think what we'll
- probably end up doing is we'll have something posted. I can't guarantee it'll be an email. We'll figure
- out the mechanism. But there'll be a way for the public to chime in or whatever we're going to call
- that, right? Yeah, if the suggestion is we could have one part of the submission to be
- the metrics themselves, and then another is just general public comment on the process. We could set
- that up, certainly, if that's your preference. And that's the good preference. It certainly would be
- my preference. I don't know. That certainly would make the meetings a little bit more efficient.
- I think so, yes. Does that make sense? Anybody want to motion that? I'll just throw out that we could
- also do public comment on one or two meetings, just so that people who prefer to come speak in person
- have that opportunity. OK.
- So pick a meeting, what do you think? I would say July 6th because it's in the middle of site evaluations
- and nothing is firmly set in stone. Perhaps the 29th and the 6th just because there's the solidifying
- of the metrics and then the site evaluations. I think there are two different thought processes there.
- 29th and 6th? Is that right? Yep. And is there a motion? So moved.
- second. All in favor. I have a I and I have a question. Are we going to set parameters for that public
- comment? It can. It would be certainly that would be our recommendation to have rules and time limits
- that the committee would set. I think prior to
- your next meeting, what we could have drafted for you is a standard draft of public comment rules based
- on some combination of what both councils have adopted already. So that way we're going off pretty well
- trod rules that the public's familiar with. Those will typically be time limits, topics, et cetera.
- Just note that we will have public comment at our next meeting.
- and we will have that policy ready for you to adopt at that meeting. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Attorney
- Allen, when we have the opportunity to publicize that, can we do that as well, just so the public is
- prepared to make their speeches? Yes, one of our goals here, to the extent possible, this meeting, maybe
- notwithstanding, is to have a packet prepared ahead of the meeting for you all so that you can react to that.
- have that published also for the public to understand what's going to be talked about to the extent
- possible. Right. So we finished with a public comment topic. Yes. I guess I will just throw out an idea
- perhaps to be considered later that we do a at the culmination of our process, we schedule one additional
- meeting that is just for comprehensive public comment.
- So that the public can watch the entire process and then we listen to. Reactions before we take it to
- the whole group. I don't know if it's worth doing that or not, but. So are you suggesting the 9th? Would
- you want to add another meeting for that? I was suggesting if we're not going to have if if we're not
- needing to. Present anything that we we schedule something, even if we do it on
- to the public. I'm a little lost. Can you just help me here? What is the plan here? We would do when,
- when? We would do a full public listening session. In addition to what's here? Correct. Okay,
- thank you. That's what I was confused. After all the meetings on April's calendar? Yes. Do you think
- about making that meeting on Friday?
- Because then we would have completed the site evaluations. Will that work? And then we have to make
- a recommendation the next time. So then it allows us to really listen to what they say, go back and
- look at the information we have, and then be able to make a recommendation, including public comment
- and our evaluations. So what time are you thinking on the 10th? I guess I would defer to everyone else's
- schedule. Well, my only comment is a lot of the people who might want to speak
- probably would not be able to attend a Friday meeting, whether it be at night or during the day. That's
- just my concern, especially, is there are a lot of people who are going to be directly impacted by the
- new location who are at work. Kate, do you think would be better? It might be worth doing, could we
- do an hour after
- Thursday, yeah, the ninth. On the ninth? Yeah, we're here anyway, right? Yeah, it's already fresh on
- our minds. Has everybody got a little more time on Thursday the ninth available? So we'd have a six
- to seven and then a seven to eight, right? As long as this room is available past that time. Yeah, that's
- the question. Is this room available after seven or after? I'm guessing it is, but. On July ninth? Ninth,
- uh-huh. Yes.
- like the room is available. Yes. All right. Thank you. We're going to schedule that in. Would that take
- care of the public comment, your concern there? Thank you. Everybody else OK with that? Yes. OK. So
- we have one more, a little longer meeting on the 9th then. All right. Anything else about public comment
- before we move on? Mm-hmm. Then electronic attendance policy, it was suggested we talk about that a
- little bit.
- So the question that I posed to the committee is, do you want to adopt an electronic attendance policy?
- If you want to allow members to attend electronically by statute, you have to adopt the policy. If you
- do not adopt a policy, that just means if a member can't come and they join on Zoom, they will not be
- participating in the meeting. Are we thinking? I would move that we adopt an electronic attendance policy. Second.
- But let me just clarify, do we not still need four in person for the quorum? You would still need four
- in person. So no. Attend electronically and count that as a quorum, right? There are five of us. I know,
- but if we have two that happen to say that they want to attend electronically, that's just not going
- to work. So only one of us. Only one can attend electronically. The commissioner haven't appointed someone
- yet, though, too. So we will have six, essentially. That's right.
- It's really just if someone's sick or something last minute but still wants to attend. I think it makes
- sense. So how would that policy be? Do you think you have any guidance on that for us? I can draft it.
- I can include language that only one member would be allowed to attend virtually. I would also suggest
- that we include language that if a member does intend to attend virtually
- that they give 48 hours notice because then we will be able to identify any quorum issues. And maybe
- a substitute, right? Attendee. They can always send a proxy, right? Right, OK. Right, would that make
- sense for the electronics changes? OK, so we'll see something next time. Is that right? Yes, thank you.
- Alright, so now we're on.
- Number seven, where it talks about in the new revised agenda, but it's basically the phase one and two
- and three of the property search that we have done all along. So I think there's some division over
- there who's gonna take what? So there's three of them over there. I'll let that figure that out. I guess
- if you guys don't mind. I can start and I'll just briefly run through kind of the property search history.
- And again, some of this was five years ago.
- I might not remember all the details. But the first round was when we had Sheriff Swain. And Sheriff
- Swain had a request that we look close to the I-69 corridor so that they could transport inmates to
- the medical facilities in Indianapolis if there was an event that was needed. And I think you guys all
- received some material about this. It's in the packet. So we basically looked at and we called one property
- north, which is a property off Vernal Pike, which
- also was in round two and then we looked at Fullerton Pike and we looked at a property further south
- the one further south they can get a lot of traction because it's so far south but there was a lot of
- back and forth at least the initial meeting between the Fullerton Pike site and the Vernal Pike site
- we reached out to the owner of Vernal Pike and they weren't interested in selling at that time so that
- kind of eliminated that so that's how we got to Fullerton we went through the city council process city
- council rejected it so then we went the
- phase two. And phase two, we looked at, I'm going to say four, but it's really six sites. The first
- is there was a site right next to where the Fullerton site was in the county just south of Monroe Hospital.
- Right off the bat, we looked at that. It was too small to be able to do a co-located facility there.
- And then our second site was Hopewell, which was clearly the closest
- to downtown, the old IU Health slash Wilmington hospital site. We reached out to the people in the city
- and the city indicated that they weren't interested in utilizing that site. I mean, I think one of the
- questions is, is that answer still the same or has that changed? The third, and I'm going to call it
- the power line site, out of deference to committee members, we looked at that and really, you know,
- Do we have an address for that site? I would really like to just call it the address. I guess one of
- the issues with that site is that there's no real road infrastructure that leads to it. So I think if
- you look on the GIS, it's just called a site off Rogers Road. OK, well, that's the only one we have
- that we ever considered off Rogers. Is that correct? Is that the only one we ever considered off Rogers?
- Seriously, I think yes. OK, so can we call it the Rogers Road site?
- We could, you could, whatever you, whatever the committee wants to call it, we'll call it that.
- All right. But my notes say power line, so it might be power line for the night and we can rename it
- after. Okay. But really, and I don't think, there were a few issues that needed to be addressed. Yes.
- I think that the one that really was the one that caused us all to quit looking at it was when we discussed
- it with Duke Energy, that they,
- needed time and quite a bit of time too to two years to move the power lines before we could begin the
- construction and that was an issue and then I also think we knew that they were going to have another
- issue but we never got to it because of the two year with looking at the infrastructure making the road
- infrastructure making sure it was adequate to have serve a co-located facility right I that process
- we never got going although we knew we were going to have to
- And then the fourth was the North Park property. I said six because when we initially looked at North
- Park, we were looking at a different portion of North Park. We were looking kind of more North, Northwest,
- kind of where that, if you drive on 46, there's a stubbed out at 46 that is not used. We were kind of
- looking in that area of North Park and I think
- when we went through the process, and that had some ravine and those kind of issues with it. But when
- we talked about North Park that went to the county council, we're talking about one that's much more
- central to that area and right off of what was Curry Pike, now Hunter Valley Road. So we looked at both
- of those. And then finally, we looked at the vernal site again. When I said before, we looked at kind
- of an extended version because at that point, the cellar
- indicated yeah we're willing to sell now and so we looked at that again there were a variety of issues
- with that mostly dealing with co-location because we did not feel that we could co-locate that or the
- facilities would allow for the transportation of inmates from the jail side to the court side without
- going outside or really doing some strange things. So that's kind of the round one and round two and I'm gonna
- turn over round three to my colleague. Any questions, though? I'm more than happy to. Just to be clear,
- on that vernal site, the transfer of prisoners was insurmountable, according to the design experts.
- Am I remembering also there were karst issues at that site? I think the karst issues as well in the
- slope. I mean, I guess at that point in time, and I want to be clear, at that point in time,
- we still had different rules when it came to slopes and what we could do with planning wise with slopes.
- And if they moved it to 25, I'm not sure that would look the same, right? I just don't know, because
- we were looking at slopes when they hit 15. And now if the rules change to 25, I don't know. But the
- engineering group is the ones. And I think we could probably provide you with some pictures of how they
- had everything crammed in there.
- and all that kind of stuff if you guys need it. I don't know if that was provided or not, but certainly
- that. Carst topography was also a major issue there. Carst topography is a major issue pretty much anywhere.
- I mean, yes. So that's why I was clarifying. There was some karst, but I think the slope was kind of
- the bigger because it was carved up pretty well. OK, thanks.
- So I think that take just summary takes us up to roughly October of 2025. At that point, the council,
- we've already voted. We've already talked about North Park. So DLC, which was the engineering company
- was requested to identify properties downtown on the outskirts and on the outskirts of Bloomington.
- within your packet there are six properties including a property south of the post office the bloomington
- transit garage uh tap road south a tap road north uh the ht building and the fell iron bender lumber
- property um considerations that were taken into account when looking at those properties were was the
- property large enough to accommodate future expansion or co-location because as depicted in the packet the
- only a footprint of a jail was placed on that property so the in the packet it does not have a co-location.
- Then we looked at was the property located within a floodplain floodway or the floodway fringe and is
- the property set for sale by the owners and based on those three questions all six of those properties
- were not found viable. And in the packet
- if you look on the side of each property, there's notes that the engineering company put regards to
- why that property could slightly be problematic. That brings us to now, if anyone has questions. A question.
- Thank you for that. I've heard from multiple people that the site, that there's a site that's directly attached
- or near the Zitlow building, that is a potential, but I'm curious if anyone knows more about that. Are
- you talking about the Currie building? It might be. Is it to the west of the Zitlow building,
- do you know? Yeah. To the west. Yeah.
- several buildings that are near this little building. And one of them is Curry and Curry is actually
- I included it. I'm glad you brought it up. Someone had mentioned Curry to me, so I included it on the
- list. So that's where that market is. Thank you so much. It was discussed in our first in the large
- group meeting that we had and with potential of needing some historic facade preservation, et cetera.
- we're throwing that one in there now, right? Yeah. Okay. Oh, I think that concludes the historical review
- of the county's property search. And so if there's no questions, and I think we can move on to the review
- of the zoning PD process. And since this is preliminary, I'll keep this fairly short, but it is a good
- segue into that process. So whether you're talking about the Curry building,
- Or the Roger Street property, both of those would require for instance re zones within the city. The
- exception is the Thompson property did include as part of the PD for inclusion of a jail, but there
- were very specific.
- metrics. So if you do go outside of the specific metrics that are approved in the PUD, you would just
- have to amend the PUD, which essentially goes through the exact same process as a rezone process. And
- the thing to keep in mind is that does come with timelines, timelines that are statutorily set, notice
- timelines, but they're not insurmountable by any means. It just is something that we would need to line
- up as you discuss these properties. One of the things I think we would want to present you with is how
- to meet those deadlines and what the fastest possible route for consideration is.
- Because you have to give notice obviously to all the neighboring landowners at least 21 days before
- any hearing It would go before the Plan Commission and then it would get finally approved by the Bloomington
- City Council for those changes So that is a little bit of a deeper process as we narrow down the properties
- and even with the list of properties as you add to them what we will try to do is have current zoning and
- It would take to change it and what that process would look like so have those links so you all can
- have full information if you want more detail about that, which I assume you absolutely don't at the
- moment. Then i'm happy to answer those questions. Larry forgive me curry and which other property definitely
- needed rezone.
- Curry is the biggest one that we talked about recently. It has another, potentially if the facade is
- historic designation, you would also need some sort of historic preservation commission review. Those
- can happen in parallel though, so they don't necessarily ruin each other's timelines, both come with
- public notice. Thank you. I'll reach out to the chair of the historic preservation commission to talk
- about what kind of timeline it would look like on their end.
- I think the other property that Mr. Allen was identifying was the power line property. Yes, on off of
- Roger Street. That's the one that's subject to a PD already that is allowed jails allowed, but was very
- specific metrics. And I guess I would just chime in that. I'm not sure if we look at anywhere in the
- city. Any of the any of the properties you see are not going to require a rezone. I don't you guys could
- potentially come up with one, but it's very limited.
- on what would be zoned in an area where you would not need a rezone and you would just have to go through
- the BZA process. I think that's likely right. There's a lot of mixed use zoning within the city that
- allows as a not a by right use, but certainly as a conditional use for approval for that type of industrial.
- That is incredibly helpful because it brings me to one of the questions that I had. One of the categories
- that Commissioner Medeo talked about was legal permissibility and several questions listed that I listed
- regarding the site evaluation metric. So when you get to specific property, what is the most effective
- way for us to evaluate a set to understand what the zoning requirements will be?
- in one of these meetings so the public's aware of what the requirements and we are. Do we need to invite
- someone who's the representative from the historical or can you explain it to us during one of the meetings?
- How does that work?
- I think that would be my primary role here. Otherwise, I'm pretty useless for the meeting. No, it's
- to have that information for you all for each property. So the thing is just having a definite list
- of properties so that we have that list. I certainly can walk through. If we do need to bring an expert
- in, we will absolutely do that at the request of the commission. If you want to hear from a historic
- preservation director, we can do that as well. But in terms of the general rules, what they're zoned
- as, whether it's historically protected, that's information we
- can have for you and the general way of changing that. And as we narrow in a property, we may get more
- granular in terms of what that includes. Thank you. Is that to move on? Does that conclude your? Well,
- I have, unless there are other questions. So next I see is the process to identify additional properties
- for consideration.
- Correct. And so I think this is a recommendation from all of the attorneys on how to identify properties
- that haven't previously been considered. Typically, we discuss properties in executive sessions. And
- so I think it is our recommendation if you are proposing some new property that you would, in the same
- way you submit agenda items, send it to your corresponding attorney. And then we can determine if that
- property is appropriate for discussion.
- outside of an executive session. Can I just add just a little bit in terms of.
- one of the things I think that is a misnomer just for the public, not really for anybody on this commission.
- Sometimes I think we're meeting an executive session to keep things from the public. That's not exactly
- the purpose of this. I think you all are aware, but for the public's knowledge, any time a governmental
- entity is considering buying a property, it really invites speculation on that property. It can inflate
- the values. It can make it very difficult for development and to get things going. And so one of the
- reasons why we use executive sessions and the reason why it's statutory
- So that we can have a conversation consider it that it to the extent necessary of course no property
- can possibly be purchased or approved without a public meeting so I just want to make that very clear
- there's no scenario where.
- We talk about something in executive session and it stays secret behind closed doors through the very
- end. It does come out into the public. It's just in that initial vetting process to keep this affordable
- and economical for the public. And it should be noted that this group does not have the authority to
- actually approve a property anyway. This group is just making a recommendation to the actual decision
- makers. That's right. Thank you for that reclarification.
- All right. Do we need a motion for that? Pardon me? Do we need a motion for? I think it was just a briefing.
- I don't know that we do need a motion. For the process to identify additional properties? We need a
- motion for? No, we're just asking as just a matter of course, just send those to us directly. Right.
- OK. The next steps and goal for the next meeting maybe? So.
- I think this is where we talk a lot less and we look to the committee for guidance on what the next
- meeting looks like. So I was, can I? Yes, go ahead. So one of the things I was hoping we could do is
- maybe add some names of properties already. I know that Ms. Rendon caught that it didn't include Fullerton.
- So I need to add that one as well. But it might be helpful to just
- go through some of the metrics that exist now and see if the public has any they want. I think the next
- meeting is when we're going to try to incorporate them and finalize. So I wasn't sure if you wanted
- to include any discussion or go over what we have now. What does the committee think? I need to depart,
- but you will still have quorum without me. Do you have any final thoughts on this issue before you leave?
- Just that I think that we already discussed the process for submitting
- properties that have been examined and can just go on this list and those that have not been publicly
- vetted yet. So I feel like we've done that and can have a list before the next meeting. Anything else
- we're missing here? And then the goal for next meeting, is that different than anything we've talked
- about or we're pretty set on that?
- I think we're set. Suggesting metrics and identifying properties. Suggesting metrics and identifying
- properties. Suggesting metrics and identifying properties are kind of the two main things, right? We
- hear it over there, suggesting metrics and identifying properties are the two things at least on the
- next meeting. That is the goals identified on Ms. Wilson's calendar. Say that again, I'm sorry. That
- is the goals that are identified on Ms. Wilson's calendar. Okay, thank you.
- and public comment. Public comment to follow the meeting, is that correct for the 29th? That was for
- the 29th. The 29th is going to incorporate. The 9th will be the 7 o'clock public comment time period.
- Yes. All right. So what do we have left? Are we going to adjourn early? We scheduled an hour. Does anybody
- else over there have anything? No other questions? No final comments?
- All right, if I call it adjourned, I think we're adjourned. Thank you for all coming. Thank you for
- your service.