you. Good morning. I'm going to call to order this meeting in the Monroe County Board of Commissioners. It is Thursday, April 17th. And I will note for the record that Commissioner Madeira and myself are here and present in the Natu Hill room and Commissioner Jones is joining us via teams. And we have a special commitment to welcome and protect the rights of all people, regardless of age, race, color, creed, disability, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, marital status, economic status and national origin. And we affirm the right of every person to live peacefully without fear, and we will fight and resist at every step discrimination and harmful policies, whatever their source. We also stand in support of our county public school systems, both RB B and MCC SC. And with that we will begin our department updates. Is Kelly is joining us. Good morning. Good morning, commissioners. Just a few updates as of April 15th emergency visits for COVID like illness have continued to decrease and wastewater concentrations are now trending down. Flu activity is still minimal. The health department in collaboration with the Indiana Department of Health is hosting an MMR vaccine clinic. This will be held on April 21st at the Monroe County Public Library, Ellisville branch. This will be from 12 p.m. to 6 p.m. in meeting room B. Our public health clinic has vaccines available for all ages. You can call 812-353-3244 for an appointment. Great. Thank you so much. Comments or questions, Commissioner Madura? I have none other than, you know, now the measles virus is in Indiana, and so these measures are really critical, and this is a virus that can take lives very easily, and so vaccines are all the more important. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Jones? No, I don't. Thank you. Thank you. I went to the last MMR clinic, so it was very quick and actually painless, so it was kind of nice. So I highly recommend folks check their records and verify. All right, any other departments have an update for us? Okay, great. We will now move on to public comment. This agenda item is reserved for conversation and commentary on items that do not appear elsewhere on our agenda. We ask speakers to limit their time to three minutes per person. Please give your name and county of residence when you begin. Good morning, commissioners. This is Christopher MG. I work at the Greater Bloomington Chamber of Commerce, but now I'm speaking as a Monroe County resident. I just want to say I just gave blood to the American Red Cross donated at City Hall today, and it took 30 minutes. It was painless, and it really is the least you can do. It's amazing now that they tell me where my blood goes. I got recently, I think it was one or two times ago, that it was a runner who was struck by a car, and they were able to save his life because of people donating. And I got this fun T-shirt today, so I just want to say it's so easy to do. It's not painful at all, so I just encourage all of the residents here in Monroe County. I know the commissioners do a great job of plugging those, but there are opportunities everywhere around, so just look at the American Red Cross website for further details. Thank you. Thank you. Important. Anyone else have public comment for items not on our agenda? Make sure, TSD, please ensure the clock is visible on our monitors. Thank you so much. Good morning. Good morning. My name is Janae Trimble, and I reside in Monroe County. I worked in the Monroe County's assessor's office from October 2023 to October 2024 as the assistant property director before putting in my two-week notice and taking another position within the county. During my time there, I witnessed multiple violations of Indiana state code. This is not rumor hearsay, but experiences that I personally witnessed and partook in. I saw the violations, heard the violations, and was instructed to perform them. The practice of sales-chasing and the manipulation of racial studies are causing the housing and rental markets to increase inorganically, and this has been practiced by this office for years. I have hundreds of examples of documentation proving the state code violations, many of which I have already provided to this board of commissioners. 50 IAC 27-4-5, 50 IAC 27-11-2, 50 IAC 3.3-2-2, 50 IAC 15-1-3.5, just to list a few and there are many more. I first blew the whistle and followed the suggested guidelines found on IndianaGov for reporting illegal and unethical practices from elected officials in the proper chain of command. On 3/3/2025, per these guidelines, I reported this activity to my supervisors, the Department of Local Government Finance, and then I reported it to you, the Monroe County Board of Commissioners, and the Monroe County Legal Department. And you have yet to hold a conversation with me concerning this matter. Instead, I experienced retaliation, bullying, and harassment from the assessor, HR, and from the county attorneys, from whom I filed a claim against. False accusations coming from social media that were in fact rumored with no supported documentation were made against me and my employment threatened. Instead of the county investigating or even inquiring about the Frado's reporting, the county opened an investigation against me to try to terminate my employment once again. I've been bullied and harassed by the assessor dating back to October 2024. I choose to publicly stand up for myself, my family, my friends, my neighbors, and for all the residents of my county and ask that you do the same and open an investigation into the reported illegal activity of the assessor's office. In closing, I'd like to quote part of your opening statement, and I'm putting a demand on that statement, and I'm asking that you fulfill the oath. We, the Monroe County Board of Commissioners, renew our commitment to protect the rights of all people, and we affirm the right of every person to live peaceably without fear, and we will fight at every step discrimination and harmful policies, whatever their source. We believe in diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging. Repeating and stressing harmful policies, whatever their source. I'm pleading the Indiana whistleblower laws in my defense, and I ask that I do not receive more retaliation for exercising my local state and federally protected right as a resident of Monroe County to speak at this public meeting. Thank you for your time. Thank you. When else have public comment to offer. Raise your hand on teams. Or come to the podium. Thank you very much. We will now move on to our next item please make a motion. Yes, I would like to approve a move to approve the minutes from April 10 2025. I will second that any comments edits or corrections. I see no, no, no, neither. Mr King. Since we have a zoom attendee we would need you to call all the role please on this item. Thank you. Commissioner Madera. I commissioner Jones. I commissioner Thompson. Yes. All right motion carries three to zero. Look at the next item please. I move to approve the claims socket of accounts payable from April April 17 2025 and for payroll from April 17 2025. Miss Guyardo. Good morning. Good morning everyone. The accounts payable claims docker for April 17 2025 totals 10 million three hundred thirty three thousand six hundred eighty eight and seven cents. This includes all emergency claims and adjustments. The payroll docker for April 17 2025 includes one million six hundred sixty five thousand eight hundred and six and twenty seven cents in direct cost and the remaining seven hundred one thousand nine hundred and twenty and twelve cents were for indirect costs for a grand total of two million three hundred sixty seven thousand seven hundred and twenty six and thirty nine cents. Thank you so much. Comments or questions. Commissioner Jones. No I don't. Commissioner Madera. No thank you. I don't either. Let's see if there's any public comment on this item. You raise your hand on teams or come to the podium. Seeing none, Ms. Turner-King, if you would please call the roll on accounts payable April 17th, twenty twenty five and payroll April 17th, twenty twenty five. Commissioner Jones. Yes. Commissioner Thomas. Yes. Commissioner Madera. Yes. Thank you so much. Motion carries three zero. I will note for the record that we received a report from the treasurer. This is from March of twenty twenty five. We will now move on to new business. Commissioner Madera, if you would make a motion, please on that item. Yes, I would like to move to ratify the emergency declaration. I will second that. Who's managing that one? I don't know. I don't see if Jamie's on. Yeah, I think what I could maybe give a little recap of over. I don't have the dates in front of me, but due to the weather issues that we've recently experienced, the commissioners had to enact an emergency declaration at that point in time. This will help potentially some of our residents as they move forward, trying to mitigate the expenses incurred as a result of the damages from the storms. Yes, so I signed, I signed the first one for April 5th and the second one was signed on April 12th. They both appear in the packet. So we don't know if there will be federal assistance or state assistance available. However, without the emergency declaration, we know it would not be available. So we have no idea what's going to happen at the federal level or state level either. So all kinds of things can happen in that, in that context. So, all right, so any comments or questions, Commissioner Madeira? No, just that we really critically need to get funds to people whose property, whose lives are being disrupted by these storms, even before we get more weather this summer and spring. And this weekend, yeah, because there's a chance of flooding this weekend. Commissioner Jones, comments or questions? No, I don't. Thank you. All right. Any public comment on this item? You can raise your hand on Teams or come or come to the podium. All right, seeing none. All those in favor of ratifying. I'm sorry. So, Mr. King, if you would call the roll on ratifying the emergency declarations of April 5th and April 12th, 2025. Thank you. Commissioner Madera. Yes. Commissioner Jones. Yes. Commissioner Thomas. Yes. Thank you. Motion carries three zero. Before we go to the next item, maybe you want to explain item B being tabled. I mean, do you want us to table that? Yeah, I'm just requesting that you might want to consider tabling that. I have some concerns as I read the synopsis and it states that B and L IT services would be involved in our potential planning and preparation for vote center implementation. Oh, that's item C. So you would like us to table item C until the May 1st meeting. Got it. We can do that. All right. Okay. Because I was looking, I was like, what is this? We're all good here. We've got it together. All right. Next item, please. Yes. I would like to move to approve the 2026 application for section 5 3 1 1 5 3 3 9 assistance for rural areas grant and authorizing resolution 20 25 dash 21 funds named county general fund number 1000 in the amount of $80,000. We're kind of chuckling because this is an item. I was like, why would we table this item? It's gotta get passed today. All right. So thank you. Thank you for catching that. And we have, who's joining us? Good morning. Good morning. Thank you. I'm Chris Myers. I'm with area 10 agency on aging and rural transit specifically this morning. So thank you for making sure that got on the agenda. This is annual renewal grant to operate rural transit in Monroe and then three other counties. Um, in your packet, you have the application or the parts of the application that you need to sign and approve. But, um, just to let everybody know, it would be for a total operating budget of $1,781,275 of which the federal, um, 53 11 grant would be $856,438 in the state match would be $311,595, which hasn't changed in years. And then of course, leaving the local burden, um, at 562,242. And we're hoping that the Monroe County commissioners and council will approve $80,000 towards that local match along with other county, um, governments. And then the other part of that is putting in to replace four vehicles. Three are buses from 2018 with almost 200,000 miles on them. We always stretch it as far as we can. In fact, a couple of them probably won't be running this year and we're going to be waiting until next year's, um, grant. And then one low floor minivan, all of which will have ramps or, or lifts in order to be 100% accessible. Uh, that application, uh, is for 459,000 of which the federal government will pay, hopefully 328,400. And then the local match is 68,850, which area 10 commits from other sources and not asking for Monroe County help. So that's the entire numbers game. If you have any questions. Great. Um, we actually don't have it in our packet, but I feel very familiar with all of this, uh, because it's been so many years, but I do want to see if, uh, commission Madeira has any comments or questions. No, I've actually looked at documentation from prior years and you and I, when you kind of walked me through the history of transit and how this is funded a long time ago, this was very helpful. So thank you so much for that. Commissioner Jones, comments or questions? No, I don't. Thank you. All right. Um, I do actually have two questions for you. Um, one is, uh, the USDA has already cut a billion in food relief, uh, and spending for, um, lunch programs and food banks. Uh, are they talking about cutting transit as well? They are not talking about cutting transit. I reached out to Todd Jennings, our NDOT program manager, and he believes that, um, because it's considered infrastructure, that it will be supported and continued. There hasn't been any threats to that. Yeah. I know on the food bank piece, you know, area 10 also has a mobile food pantry for, not that I want to take up time, but we are feeling the hurt for that. In fact, this Saturday is our stuff of us, which isn't great weather for it as it turns out to be, but you know, you can't predict that, but we are, everybody's feeling that hurt for sure. Yeah. It's terrible. Um, it's really terrible. Um, and we have, we're currently, um, the Monroe County government is currently supporting the, uh, bus program that allows you to take non-USDA buses, uh, um, into, out of Ellisville and Bloomington and, uh, how's that going? It's fine. It's continuing as it has been. Um, so it has about the same ridership as it's, you know, been supporting the last year. I don't have the numbers right in front of me, but, um, you know, I look at it every month and it's, it's right there where it has been. So I think that the funding that you've allocated for this year out of the remaining ARPA funds is going to cover, hopefully we'll cover all of that through the end of the year. And of course we've got the struggle of figuring out how that's going to be fixed for 2026. Right. Well, I, I think we, I think we just get it on your calendar. I think we are going to make sure that it gets in the budget proposal first, the very first thing, uh, instead of having to be added later. And Angie's writing it down. I can see her doing that. Thank you, Angie. And, um, and we will make sure that it's heard. Um, and I'm, I'm just glad to hear that ridership continues apace and I'm grateful for your ability to juggle and provide these services for our residents. So thank you. Thank you. And I, I mean, I want to say Monroe County has been so supportive of rural transit, especially in the last few years. Um, but, you know, I've been at area 10 for 11 years and it hasn't always been the cleanest and best relationship. And I feel like we've done a great job, um, building that rapport and reputation over the years. But, you know, it, I also work with Putnam, Lawrence and Owen County governments, so I can tell you that it's not as easy to exchange information and get people who are genuinely interested and concerned about trans public transportation in your position. So I do appreciate that. It makes my job a little easier in that regard. Well, we're grateful. Thank you. Yes, thank you. All right. Uh, let's see if there's any public comment on this item. You raise your hand on teams or, um, come to the podium. Mr. King, will you please call the roll on a 2026 application for section 531-5311-5339 assistance for rural areas grant authorizing resolution 2025-21. Commissioner Jones. Yes. Commissioner Madera. Yes. Commissioner Thomas. Yes. Motion passes. Thank you. 3-0. Thank you so much. Thank you, Ms. Meyer. Um, I'm going to go ahead and make a motion to table item C, um, until our next meeting, which is May 1st, uh, B and L IT services, LLC renewal for election support. I'd like to, uh, table that to May 1st. I second that motion. All right. We have a motion and a second. Any comments? Um, Commissioner Jones. Hi. No, I don't. Um, Mr. Madera, I have none. Okay. Um, I don't know, Angie, if you have, if you'd like to speak on your concerns and yeah, um, just, just so that everybody's understanding, I was looking at the synopsis here and it references that B and L would have, um, it states here. Um, they covers, um, upgrade of heart equipment once approved by the state, potential equipment moves and potential planning and preparation for vote center implementation. I need to know clarification as to what that input actually is because this is a Monroe County government, um, project. And, um, I think we need to ensure that missionaries who are responsible for these, um, buildings and spaces have the authority to do what they need to do. So that was my only concern. And, uh, may 1st won't hurt you if we delay this. It does. We actually have, we are holding claims waiting for this to be approved. So if we can pay some claims before this is actually approved, then we can submit it for clarity is the claims regarding the storage unit. Yes. So thank you. The, um, previously the clerk's office had a agreement with a storage unit and now that storage unit is going to be, um, encompassed in B and L's, um, service agreement. And so the claims for the storage unit, I think are waiting to be paid. The storage unit is going to be a two year agreement, um, and it's going to be in Mr. White's name, who will provide access to the clerk's office. And it's also for a reduced rate. They agreed to keep us at the current rate rather than giving us a bump up if we pay in the two years. So, and they have been very kind and very, very patient for their money, but we, I mean, it is a small business. We do need to get them. Right. Um, I don't know that I understand why it would not be in the county's name. That become, I will defer to Mr. Turner King. So the agreement was, um, previously in the county's name. And when it come to time to renew it, I had mentioned that to renew it, we would have to have a public hearing and there are some several steps and clauses that need to go to the agreement for it to be a county agreement. And, um, and explaining that to the clerk's office, the option that they elected to do was place it in this agreement. Um, it is for storage of equipment that I believe it's, it's the only thing I know is it's election equipment. So I don't know what equipment is there. It is a lot of election equipment, not the voting machines per se, but everything that goes along with it. And so there is a stipulation in the agreement, please correct me if I'm wrong, that everything in the storage is property of Monroe County. They're just paying the bill and they're going to be held. Um, they're not going to be held liable if any natural disaster happened because it is Monroe County's property and legal did suggest this option for us to just get it paid and move on. It is more complicated. And it did need, I think, correct me if I'm wrong, to be this complicated. I think we could put the lease in the county's name. There are two options and this is one of the options. A third option is to see if there's a place for the storage of this equipment that is county owned, but I don't have an idea of what this equipment is. Nice. Good question. Please. Why would we put it in another party's name? So the, um, contract previously has Mr. White, um, I'm trying to find the clause. It said he would maintain storage loc- er, that's an old version. Previously the contract alluded to that he was maintaining and inventorying the equipment that was already in storage and because he was already doing that it seemed appropriate to have him manage the storage unit too. And he was doing that pursuant to his duties under this contract? Under the previous version of this contract. Yes. And just for clarification, we also do have keys and access to that storage so it's not just the vendor, it's us as well. Just make sure that is very- No, I understand that and I think for a normal business that's fine to do- assign an agent to manage a lease or a storage unit but my concern is this is the people's property and I don't feel- I can't think of an example where we've ever done this before, where we've given somebody that ownership of a space, oh you'll have access, it's the people's property. And I agree when I was looking at this I couldn't find an example where we have had a storage unit in someone else's name and I think that's because most of departments don't have outside storage units. But I can't think of anywhere else where we've got county property in someone else's possession. Is it really going to be problematic to wait two weeks? It is. We're already a month late and given the storage and they've waived the fee, the late fee. I just don't feel- I'd rather pay a late fee than do the wrong thing here. I agree. I don't know. I don't feel comfortable with this. It's nothing you've done. I mean I get it. But I just have real concerns with something that I've never seen before and I've been here 12 years doing this job 12 years and unfortunately we weren't giving any other storage options so this is where they resorted to actually store and I'm trying to think of- so we have tables, we have equipment, we have dividers, we have voting booths, we have- and he has inventory of all of this. I mean he's very meticulous. Our vendor is amazing. Can we get a copy of that inventory? Yeah let's get a copy of the inventory. How big the storage unit is. Let's talk to Richard or Mr. Kreider and let's see if there's a way we can do something else so that it is in our hands. We'll pay whatever's due to them at that point as well and we're not going to short anybody. Certainly they, you know, I would never do that but I would rather just wait on this than do the wrong thing and save a few bucks. This is one of those few times I'm going to say that. Write it down because it won't happen much. Commissioner Jones, what are your thoughts? Yeah I'm pretty much in agreement with you. Thank you. All right so just to clarify, I just want to make sure we can pay the claims for the storage even agree to the contract for the being just yet. Let me ask this question. Can we pay it out of our budget for a month? Our budget for a month if we have to instead of having this contract? In other words is there another way to pay it? I don't know that there is. I don't know that we can. Okay. I think the concern is that the all safe storage contract is expired. I think we could, one option is we could ask all storage if we could do a month to month agreement. I know that will cost more but the reason it's being included in this agreement is because it's for a longer period of time and I know they have a month to month option. I think we've utilized the month to month in the past and I don't know if they we can have a conversation with all safe to see if that's an option. Okay so where should we pull the overage cost from someone else's budget or because you guys are incurring additional expenses the clerk's office budget by us just not being able to pay so I'm I'm not trying to be rude I'm just trying to get this out in the public so I know everybody knows I get your question um I think we have to figure that out and we'll figure it out we'll figure it out I this isn't um the appropriate forum to dig through and figure that out I think between legal staff and Angie and Mr. Kreider um there's some work that can be done 1215 um I just can't imagine late fees are that much yeah pull it out of my pocket and generally you know so everything associated with election comes from that so we can track all the costs incurred um so I'll I'll work with Molly and see what we can come up with that it will just come from the same fund yeah I I want to acknowledge your concern I do hear that um because I know that it's your budget and it's not our budget to mess with I hear that I hear that we'll figure it out okay um and we've done our job uh let these magnificent women do their job and then we'll all come back together and do our job again in on May 1st does that sound good feeling uncomfortable with it we just want to pay and just I mean well I I want to make sure the people's properties and the people's names so I think I'm gonna have to you know we'll figure that part out I get I get it I want you to know I hear you I hear you um and I respect your concerns and thank you for sharing them okay uh so uh Ms. Turner King um would you please call the roll on tabling uh item c until May 1st okay Commissioner Jones yes Commissioner Madera yes Commissioner Thomas yes motion passes three to zero thank you so much uh sorry this was all last minute but we will we'll we'll get there we will get there okay we'll figure it out all right next item please I would like to move to approve resolution 2025 19 approving the ratification of the help americans vote act grant received by the Monroe county clerk's office I will second that okay thank you this word tells us I wanted to make sure if you guys had any questions it's basically we received a grant to help with the um the ballot emitters which will help us whether we have vote centers or not yeah uh so it's it really it really is a benefit for the the citizens of Menor county um we thank the state for giving us this grant it it's amazing uh so 35,873 so basically it's kind of a shift uh we were informed that we had to pay it out before they're going to pay us and so that's basically I think we do have a line but we had to go before the council uh to have it brought up so we can have that money come in so we just need to make sure y'all are okay with it good deal thank you yeah the HAVA act is very very important uh comments or questions commissioner jones oh no turner king go ahead sorry and I did want to add that I prepared a resolution to go with the approval of this um uh HAVA grant um so on july 9th of 2024 the clerk submitted this um grant application and so it would be ratifying the grant application and then um authorizing the execution of attachment c in communication with the secretary of state's office there's not an executed attachment c yet and so I was trying the resolution is written as an ether or because at the time that I wrote it I didn't know how if it had been executed or not so um this is again specifically for the thirty five thousand eight hundred and seventy three thousand dollar um grant for the printers there was a prior version of this but I wrote the resolution to specify which one we are ratifying and authorizing the execution of attachment c for got it thank you sorry commissioner jones comments or questions no I don't thank you every dear no very very important thank you okay um I don't either thank you for doing this um and yes the printers always come in handy always all right um let's see if there's any public comment on this item you raise your hand on teams or come to the podium seeing none oh uh miss turner king would you please call the roll on resolution 2025 um dash 19 to approve the ratification of the hava act grant commissioner jones yes commissioner madero yes commissioner yes motion passes three zero all right thank you so much thank you just a quick question molly does uh clerk brown need to sign that c or will clerk brown will sign um attachment c and provide it back to the secretary of state and once she does so can you please provide me a copy absolutely thank you very much thank you thank you so much all right uh next item please yes i would like to move to approve multiple mo us or memorandums of understanding regarding mass countermeasure dispenser clinic sites i will second that um is kelly please tell us all about this um yes so our preparedness coordinator um just has been working to uh ensure that we have updated memorandum of understandings with certain locations throughout the county in the event that we do need to host a mass countermeasure dispensing clinic site so the purpose of that site location would be to be able to provide medications or vaccinations or information or education in response to an emergency that involves an infectious disease threat right thank you so much comments or questions commissioner madeira no a very important uh community project and hopefully one that does not get more important before the year's out there you go commissioner jones yes i agree with commissioner madeira uh something that is wonderful to have in your back pocket and you hope you never ever ever need it uh but i'm so glad um that uh you your staff the board have had the foresight to ensure that this is in place these are nice sized areas and a shout out to surewood oaks christian church for doing what they didn't have to do for the community let's see if there's any public comment on this item raise your hand on teams or come to the podium all right miss turner king would you please call the roll on the multiple mo us regarding mass countermeasure dispensing clinic sites commissioner jones yes commissioner madeira yes commissioner thomas yes motion passes three zero right thank you so much uh next item please i would like to move to approve tyler technology's iot website hosting fund name cumulative capital fund number one one three eight in the amount of twelve thousand dollars i will second that mr crone good morning everyone morning so currently our co dot minero dot i n u.s domain is provided force free of charge by the department u.s department of agriculture but it is our intent uh hopefully at third quarter in the later and third quarter of this year to be migrated over to the i n dot gov domain provided by the state of indiana the dot gov domain provides increased security and puts us more in alignment with what other counties across the state are doing which which helps with visibility for the public part of that that goes hand in hand with that is a website underneath the same domain address so the state of indiana has a program going with tyler technologies for at a very minimal cost they will provide all website hosting for the counties under that domain so for the last year and a half the county webmaster has been working with the departments to clean up their current website that they have all the data that's on the back end it's taken some time the average county has 500 to a thousand html's on their website which is documents videos pages connected to it here at manero county we had 12 000 and we're only allowed the maximum of a thousand the reason that was is early on whenever we started a website we didn't have secure server that we could host that data on that the public could access without having to worry about security coming back so i understand how all that documentation got there but now we need to move it so like i said the webmaster for the last year and a half has been working with the county offices and we've gotten 12 000 painstakingly whittled down to 1500 html's so this contract with tyler's kind of two parts yeah way we've done that is we've had to move everything over into our sharepoint site that we now have the webmasters had to painstakingly rename relabel and redirect off of our website to that sharepoint site so yes it's it's taken a lot of time so we've been working with tyler technologies in the state and they've been really helpful on all this but in addition to a much cleaner improved website the state's hosting provides us much more flexibility over what we have with our current site i do get a lot of criticisms about how our current site looks and things people like to see changed but we are limited on what we can do with that page and so is the provider so with states hosting we have much greater flexibility with that they are open to anything we want to see changed they work with us on that they have a ticketing system one of the big perks of this it also includes the ada compliance software that we currently pay seven thousand dollars a year for so after this is implemented we'll be paying 250 a month which is three thousand dollars a year does for the site hosting we currently pay seven to egev for that so we're going to go from fourteen thousand dollars a year approximately down to three thousand dollars a year to host the same site i don't know how many of you spend much time on the state's website but it's very clean it flows well it's just a much updated from what we have so i'm asking for both these agreements for a total of twelve thousand dollars to be approved all right thank you so much i appreciate the explanation um comments or questions commissioner jones yeah this sounds like a good idea to me commissioner madira i agree you had me at increased security yeah there you go um and you know and our when we changed over our website last we had this really great search capability and then that disappeared and i i'm hopeful that the search capability will become improved again it will be and part of the reason you saw issues with the search capability was how that data was structured and back into that website that's where we run into problems early on and it has got exponentially worse over time got it so uh one difference that we will have in under the current system each department had some some departments had two or three content editors but there was at least one per uh as staff would leave new staff would come in the training wasn't always there so it was kind of the wild west a little bit and under this new system uh will be eliminating most of those content editors and it'll be a very very controlled environment so that way we can maintain consistency through the whole thing nice nice document naming and things like that have a lot to do with all of that as well um and then our our email addresses will be changing in the future in the future so right now all that the county domain will stay the same for now the only thing that changes is the county web page if uh visitors to the site go to go to the co.manero.in.us they will be redirected to the new site so they can either go straight to the in.gov or then go to our old address they will still land on that same page once all work is complete excellent um then like I said in third up for shooting for third quarter there's a lot of work to be done to make sure we don't a lot of dots to connect there to make sure we don't break any systems whenever you change a domain that's a big undertaking so we are taking our time to get that done good but yes eventually we will be over on the in.us yeah right thank you so much um and I appreciate that time that's being taken to do this right I think we're all going to benefit from that including the residents of this county who need to use our website so thank you for that let's see if there's any public comments on this item raise your hand on teams or come to the podium seeing none uh Ms. Turner King if you would please call the role on the Tyler technologies iot website hosting commissioner jones yes commissioner madera yes commissioner thomas yes motion passes three zero thank you very much thank you so much um do two motions the one yeah can you add this to the next motion it's yes thank you so much um so please item g yes I would like to move to approve the dlz traffic study agreement uh and the traffic study cost share contract fund name edit edit ban fund number four eight one six in the amount of twenty eight thousand two hundred dollars i will second that miss prudy thank you um this is a proposal for traffic engineering services related to proposed developments that are anticipated along state road 46 between interstate 69 and west arlington road this development is expected to include our plan justice center um as well as other residential and commercial development according to the north park pud and include extension of west hunter valley road east of state road 46 to west arlington road this is um this traffic engineering study as indicated here is covering both the county's interests as well as the developer's landowners potential interest on the other areas and that is why item number two the traffic study cost share contract has come into play as um i believe it's called logan land development is agreeing to pay half the cost of this particular engineering study thank you so much comments or questions commissioner madera i just think the public might be interested why we need a traffic study at this critical moment in time um in other words they might think they might think we're building a jail in north park why do we need a traffic study um there is concern and i will also let lisa step in if necessary there is concern that due to there might be increased traffic um use in that particular area there's going to be increased traffic to our facility um there's also then the concern that as part of the north park pud with the expansion of the other side of things that they're just going to be a higher input of traffic and we're wanting to kind of look into the future we don't have the crystal ball that we're trying to kind of get an idea and make sure that we are anticipating potential needs before they actually happen miss ridge that was perfectly said it's very typical to do a traffic impact study when you're making new connections uh to see try and anticipate where the traffic's going to flow and then prevent uh you know traffic backup at certain intersections um so it's kind of just staying a little bit ahead of the game if you can thank you so much i just think that you know we we so rarely get an insight into what it takes to build a major project of this scale and i want the community to appreciate how much we are looking out for you know traffic and making sure we have the requisite infrastructure as this important project develops thank you so much and i and i will note as well that the uh entire north park area uh planned unit development which is basically a set of laws and structures and regulations regarding the development of that entire property um is coming to us soon um and that's also part of this as well um comments questions commissioner jones no i don't great uh let's see if there's any um public comments on this item you raise your hand on teams or come to the podium looks like there's a hand raised uh tsd can you help facilitate that it is not on my screen but i see it on the other screen and please give us your name and county residents and ask your question or make your comment hi my name is lee runetaefer can you hear me yes we can hi i'm a mineral county resident this traffic study will it uh address pedestrian traffic or just vehicular traffic thank you thank you um we will go ahead and and field that question with um ms ridge and ms purdy so at the time it is just for um vehicular traffic but also in the design of the new hunter valley road connection there is um sidewalk and um a side path that is being constructed also for the safety of the pedestrian traffic yeah so we've kind of already done that part of of that research but thank you for that great question i'm glad that we were able to clarify them uh any other public comment on this item all right uh seeing none um ms turner king if you would please call the roll on both the dlz traffic study agreement and the traffic study cost share contract commissioner jones yes commissioner madera yes commissioner thomas yes motion passes three zero thank you so much all right next i would like to move to approve the amendment to the 2020 sofia travis community service grant for the health department i will second that miss turner king tell us all about it so in february of this year the representative of the health department reached out to the council office because they determined that they have approximately it's a little more than 400 left of a sofia of travis grant funds that they received um as part of the 2020 sofia travis agreement um the agreement indicated that the funds were supposed to be used for disposal um and that the funds were supposed to be used by the end of the calendar year of 2021 and so the health department was requesting um an amendment to the 2020 agreement to allow them to use the remainder of the funds and so i did um talk to the sofia travis committee about this i think it was last week well it was last friday um and their recommendation was that the health department should be allowed to use the funds so this is the amendment to the contract that would allow such excellent thank you uh so much comments or questions commissioner jones yeah that makes sense to me commissioner madira i just had one quick question um down in the synopsis uh it mentions wheeler mission yeah it should say health department is that correct okay just wanted to just wanted to make sure i had that's gonna i was gonna make the same point for the public record that if you're looking at the packet there is an error all right uh we wheel away yes um so let's see if there's uh any public comment on this item you can raise your hand on teams or come to the podium all right um mr king if you would please call uh the role on the uh motion to approve amendment to 2020 sofia travis community service grant for the health department commissioner jones yes commissioner madera yes commissioner thomas yes motion passes three zero excellent thank you so much um all right so uh we'll now move on to item i please move to approve ordinance 2025 11 sunset hill rezone i will second that um mr meyers morning can you hear me okay yes um tsd could raise the volume a little bit in the room but yes we can hear you great thank you so this is ordinance 2025-11 also known as rez-25-1 the sunset hill rezone from hd to res as requested by the commissioners the plan commission voted six to two to forward this with a positive recommendation to the board of commissioners with one condition of approval and i'll get into details of that in a moment but this is 100 parcels on approximately 64.44 acres in perry township section six and it is currently zoned hd all right so the request as i stated is to rezone from high development residential or hd to residential one or res and the purpose of this rezone request from the commissioners is to preserve the overall character of the area which contains older established neighborhoods the presence of sinkholes and other cars features in the area it also incorporates the recent approval of the historic preservation overlay on 25 parcels in this neighborhood as well as most existing homes stating that they don't have access to sewer that most of them operate on a septic system this request was made by the commissioners immediately following the adoption of the county development ordinance on december 18th 2024 that request was reinstated on march 13th 2025 during the commissioner's work session planning staff sent out approximately 85 property notice letters and 170 notice letters for this rezone specifically on january 31st 2025 evidence of that the the documents are included in the packet that show what those letters looked like and the information that was provided to the property owners and neighbors access to this sites these sites are through south corey lane west piper lane south annalee lane west wiley street west corey drive or west bloomfield road so here is the rezone request for this neighborhood just some images here you can see on the right side of the screen all the properties that are zoned in the yellow or hd are the ones that are subject to the rezone to the res zone this is the former zoning map of this property before the county development ordinance was approved in december of last year so you can see there was a quite a bit of a mix of different zoning districts in this neighborhood these were all a result of the former fringe areas of the interlocal agreement that was back before 1997 with the city of bloomington so you can see there was quite a bit of different zones here and on december 18 2024 this was all rezoned except for this pd into the hd zones and then of course the commercial districts the the salmon color here those were transitioned into the limited business zone that you can see on this screen but now we are requesting a different a change in the zone from this hd district to the res zone on this screen you can see the current zoning map those hatchings on the screen are the properties that exhibit the historic preservation overlay the historic preservation overlay does not affect the underlying zoning district but does provide protections as well as some flexibility with respect to zoning uses and also does provide some guidance on the certificate of appropriateness process which is related to the external features or appearance of some structures in those areas it only applies to those properties that are designated it does not impact neighboring properties that do not have the designation okay so a bit of a background here and a lot of this information with respect to design standards and uses will also apply to the next ordinance that you'll be hearing from fellow planner sean smith because the the reason request is the same going from hd to res so with respect to lot size the hd zone's minimum lot size is 0.14 acres and the residential zone's minimum lot size is one acre and the lot width will also change from 50 feet to 75 feet now with respect to the one acre requirement for the res zone i will state that there is a provision in the ordinance that does allow for lots to be smaller than the one acre in the res zone and would not require a minimum lot size variance to further develop the property as long as other design standards are met such as setbacks previous cover things like that now the proposed rezone is also impacting side and rear yard setbacks side is going from 5 feet to 10 feet through this rezone and the rear yard is going from 10 feet to 20 feet accessory buildings less than 15 feet in height can have reduced setbacks of 5 feet in all zones so i wanted to make sure that that was clearly communicated that even though the setback is changing accessory buildings that are short meaning five feet in height or less can be still five feet in any zoning district if a property in the res zone i already talked about this bullet point so yes this basically talks about that one acre minimum requirement and that being a little flexible in the res zone as long as setbacks and other things can be met a variance is only activated with new construction slash development is occurring on the property which would require a permit otherwise a property that's not compliant with lot size or setbacks is considered pre-existing non-conforming and they can remain as such in perpetuity until a new structure is built or expanded altered or changed or new development occurs in the property that would require a permit and a planning procedure okay so on this screen now we have the descriptions of the two zoning districts the res district as well as the hd district i'm not going to read from the screen this is also included in the packet but it provides information on the district character between the two zones as well as their purpose statement now on the screen is the table that's found in the county development coordinates that details those design standards that i spoke on a few minutes ago as you could see the differences here between the hd on the left and the res on the right and those changes in minimum lot width lot size maximum impervious cover which i'm going to talk a little bit more on in a moment changes a bit between these two zones as well as the setbacks on the the side and rear setbacks i will state that these properties are in the critical watershed of clear creek so that does provide that more restrictive state provision here regarding the maximum impervious cover so you just want to note that those two are the ones that would be applying here and we'll talk about more about that in a moment on the screen now is the background discussion for the uses of the properties with respect to the two different zoning districts the highlighted items are items that are changing between the two zones and if there's an asterisk next to it it means it has standards that must be met in order for it to get approved so you'll see on the hd zone side on the left side of the screen multifamily dwelling three to four units multifamily dwelling five unit five plus units senior housing single-family detached dwelling three to five units two-family dwelling and child care center are all in the permitted use section whereas on the residential side on the right side of the screen two-family dwelling is conditional use child care center is a conditional use and you'll note that you don't see multifamily units anywhere located on that residential zoned side and then of course on the hd side on the left side of the screen again in the conditional uses we have firearm sales retail sales small scale which do not appear on the residential zone side conditional uses i will say they need to go to the board of zoning appeals at a public hearing and so neighbors get noticed that there's going to be a petition requesting that particular use nearby and there's an opportunity for them to discuss or ask questions or speak their concerns or support for those particular uses in their neighborhood okay site conditions map sorry for the resolution it's a bit blurry but it does show the presence of sanitary pipes as well as water pipes on the screen the blue being the water pipes and sanitary lines shown in green so you can see that sanitary line is somewhat present in the neighborhood however a majority of the properties are all still operating on septic as sewer services are not being extended at this time a brief discussion on the comprehensive plan phase one of the comprehensive plan for the monroe county urbanizing area designated these areas as see it's in the orange so it's the mixed residential you can see on the screen on the right that star indicates the location of the neighborhood and then the comprehensive plan discussion for phase two describes it as n1 or urban infill neighborhood and all this information is included in your packet with more discussions about what those terms involve now i'm going to take a moment to discuss the non-conformity in a bit more detail because that has been a topic of a lot of discussion between the planning commission meetings as well as the county commissioner work session so non-conformities on the screen now you see the definitions for non-conforming use non-conforming structure and non-conforming lot and as i stated any of those items and those definitions can apply to a property if it doesn't meet those specific standards and it can remain as such until a permit process is triggered for the new development so from the last work session we the planning department with the assistance of the surveyor's office and gis coordinator dr john baten were able to provide some calculations that provide a little bit of guidance on where we're at with respect to non-conformity and at least the respect of impervious cover so as i stated sunset hill is located in the clear creek critical drainage area so those more restrictive impervious cover standards do apply so hd has a maximum impervious cover of 50 percent while res has a maximum impervious cover of 10 percent of the lot size so with the assistance of the gis coordinator using information that was provided from assess structures which does not include driveways or parking areas mind you we found that approximately 67 percent of the properties were conforming to the standard in the res zone and in the hd zone all but one parcel was conforming to the standard so there's a little bit of a there's a difference there from 67 percent to you know 98 percent or so with respect to impervious cover conformity we did exclude the parcel 717 south analee lane to 725 south analee lane um that is the one parcel that exhibits multifamily use within the sunset hill neighborhood and is part of the condition of approval to exclude that from the res zone request and that property specifically exhibits nine percent impervious cover which would meet the standard from either the hd zone or the res zone i will take a moment too to discuss that the planning commission is considering an amendment to the impervious cover maximums this amendment in part has been drafted to we consider the res critical watershed impervious cover maximum from that current 10 percent of the lot size or 4500 square feet whichever is less to be 30 percent of the lot size or 5000 square feet which could provide some relief for folks because we are seeing a large uptick in variance requests specifically to the maximum impervious cover across the county so we're working on adjusting that text in the ordinance to address that and then if the text and i were to proceed this would increase the number of conforming lots to this particular standard so that is a bit of a non-conformity analysis for the impervious cover and again you know it's not totally conclusive because it did have to exclude driveways and parking areas um finally on the screen i have letters of support and these were included in the packet so i will not leave them on the screen for very long as they are all accessible in the packet as well as this letter of support and then we also had a letter of opposition from the greater bloomington chamber of commerce again this is included in the packet for your review okay that brings me to staff's recommendation um so staff recommended that the planning commission forward a positive recommendation to the intercounty board commissioners they did so in their march meeting with the one condition of approval that 717 south annalee lane and 72 through 725 south annalee lane be excluded from the rezone request you can see that image here on the right side of the screen be excluded from the rezone because the use of the property is multifamily and the use would be considered non-conforming with the new zoning district of res which would be a non-conformity with respect to use which can be a little trickier for any property owner to go through the variance process to remedy oh and i'll take any questions all right thank you so much mr meyers we really appreciate um your explanations um and and your clarity for the public uh let's see if there's any um oh miss turner king did you have a comment or a question i do have a comment um and speaking with mr schilling he would have liked me to provide the following advice um so an interpretation of case law indicates that um the applicant can amend their request so in this case since the commissioners are the applicant they can amend the request but if the applicant chose not to remove or amend the request the rezone as proposed could still move forward um the planning commission's um recommendation is advisory and they can either approve their recommendation is either approve or deny not amend okay thank you right because it was amended to remove in this for this petition um these addresses which are on one lot but they're multiple addresses it's one parcel but they're also in the historic overlay yeah just to make things even more interesting uh commissioner jones comments or questions yeah this is an interesting area here and uh i i'm very much in favor of this it's one of these situations where the city is just kind of grown around an area that's really in nature somewhat more rural and i think it's important that people be able to people who are already there be able to continue to enjoy things as they've known them in the past um to suddenly be enveloped by the city would be pretty unpleasant for a lot of people thank you commissioner madure comments or questions um no and actually i was coming at this from a slightly different angle and i very much appreciate the uh very thorough and you know complex analyses given i was there for the planning commission uh reports and debates and we received a very very comprehensive assessment in the last work session and i very much respect my colleagues and opinions and i very much respect the residents opinions as well and i just have one concern and that's the process by which this happened and so this was left out of the cdo and i think if it had been discussed in the cdo it would have been handled a different way if it's since it's been handled outside the cdo process uh it's my interpretation that it's actually under a sort of different code provision which um is indiana code 36 74 603 and i was grappling with everything all of this complex information and section 603 i think was kind of instructive and spoke to me in a different way and it said in preparing and considering proposals under the 600 series the plan commission in the legislative body shall pay reasonable regard to one the comprehensive plan two current conditions and the character of current structures and uses in each district three the most desirable use for which the land in each district is adapted four the conservation of property values throughout the jurisdiction and five a responsible development and growth and several of those classifications are just subjective it is subjective what considered what is considered responsible development and growth and that often evolves as certain areas evolve but i think when i looked at the case law that i saw most cases involved the designation of the comprehensive plan the comprehensive plan has not been updated actually since 2012 and so i think we have some parcels here that it's not so much for this parcel as it is for the following one maple grove baby farms but i would give due consideration to section 603 and that's sort of where my thoughts have been going in this in this matter yeah and and i appreciate that and that's part of what's driven some of this as well is that specific code so these i'm going to talk about both of these areas and when folks come up to comment they may you know comment ahead or they may speak twice if they wish just to let you all know that but these two areas were formerly part of the areas intended for annexation between the city and a county and this agreement lapsed more than a decade ago in 2011 and during that time we had to use city zoning the city set the zone and we had to live with it and work with it so we had to learn counties that when you got on the planning commission you had their county zone and city zoning and now this is something the city doesn't even use anymore and it was still on our books so it was a little crazy um but um the city did not do anything uh did not annex did not extend sewer and um and there's um one of the things that happened in the process of the CDO is as we had our work sessions we addressed other areas like this elsewhere in the county that were still under city zoning jurisdiction and because of that they were just dropped into the same thing um because that's how it got moved to our new zone based on what it was under the city we're not the city that's not us that's not who we are and if you spend any time in these areas you'll know for folks who haven't that these are not city looking lots um these are definitely not that um so what was occurring at the city zone was automatically transferred to a county zone and again we had we addressed most of this during our work sessions and through the CDO process however inadvertently missed these and so this is a very unusual thing to have the commissioners at this juncture asking for a planning petition because we don't typically do that um but postcards had already been sent out um with and the new map had already been passed and so um in order to provide people with the opportunity to offer commentary um uh this is the process that was deemed to be the most transparent um and um and i'm and i do apologize to the property owners who had to contact me and correct me and tell me what you didn't fix that i was like oh my gosh so um and again where it was where it happened before we addressed it and we dealt with it um and yes one of the key things um in that ic 36 legislation or statute regarding zoning current conditions and character of current structures and uses in each district and that's kind of the way um to think through this because that's what folks who live there have they can as folks who live there decide they're fine with the change and that's how change happens but it doesn't happen by somebody sitting somewhere else who doesn't live there making a decision for them that higher density will benefit them somehow um and then they wake up one morning and find another student apartment towering over their house um so um so county advise we follow this process that we're following now and um the um again most of the properties are on septic um this is not vacant land that y'all can sit uh you know outside of these neighborhoods and make a decision that they should be this that or the other we are to me this is a reflection of what's there as close as possible um and again non-conforming is i've lived on a non-conforming property for years decades uh never had a problem um as a result of that and if you are adding onto your house you may have to add onto the back instead of on the side we don't have and there's a lot of information we still don't have and i appreciate what dr baten did with the impervious um service but again with the the next piece that we're looking at doing again to continue to improve and correct the cdo then all of that changes anyway so um and and again if your impervious surface is already there it's a legal non-conforming impervious surface um so you won't run into difficulties um so with this process neighbors can be alerted can be part of the process of changing their neighborhood if they choose to do so instead of having it foisted upon them um from uh someone else also recognizing here we have a historic district um we have hobby farms we have a whole lot going on um so um i just um you know because right now somebody could come in purchase property put in a high density apartment and it doesn't really fit right if you think like what would that look like well it doesn't really fit now um i'm you know perfectly okay with um keeping these exemptions um which is one parcel but it's multiple addresses 717 to 725 south analee lane um i'm perfectly okay doing that um but it is already historic so it's not going to become something completely different anyway um and it allows that um that property to conform more closely um with what's there um so that's where i'm at on this i think this is a good move i think this is you know obviously something i had hope we had done during the cdo process and hadn't um so that's where i'm at so uh since we are the petitioner let's go ahead and hear um from folks who are uh supportive of this petition if you would um please come to the podium in the natu hill room or raise your hand on teams we'll take the podium first does anybody here wish to speak in favor of this petition please give us your name and county of residence and um we do ask you try to limit your comments to three minutes per person thank you my name is delores brinniger i live at 621 south analee lane i actually grew up in that house moved back there when my husband passed away it's a very quiet neighborhood very narrow streets very little sidewalk and i'm off for going to where you're going for the residence thank you so much i appreciate you being here and being patient through our sitting through the rest of our meeting but that's you know you get no problem all right thank you all right um it looks like we have uh comments uh commenter online um tst if you could make that happen third one down i think it's that one right there can you see that inch good sir i guess uh susan miss brackney are you there okay well we can come back to her is there anyone else who wishes to speak in favor of this petition in the net you hilbrim can you hear me now ah yes if you don't mind thank you uh yes thank you miss brackney sorry about that i would have been there in person but i'm a little bit under the weather so um uh my name is susan brackney i'm a property owner in the sunset hill area i do support this rezone um for several reasons for those of you who aren't familiar with the area it is environmentally sensitive and historically significant you can think of it as a depression era working class village its residents worked in nearby quarries in many of minero county's now defunct factories additionally the properties were originally set up to accommodate supplemental or incidental farming and livestock multiple homes in the area are part of the historic preservation overlay as you see um and still other homes in the area are included as contributing in the indiana historic sites and structures inventory database but in addition to the age and architectural styles of many of the sunset hill homes there's a vernacular landscape that is important to consider um as a site as a whole the relation in this site consists of the way the houses were positioned on the land the fact that the lots are comparatively large and there is a back 40 for each home this was neither accidental nor coincidental it's an intentional relationship which enabled sunset hills original working class residents and frankly as well as many of its current residents to farm incidentally or supplementally um it's also worth noting that in early september i completed a request for determination of eligibility for the national register of historic places and the indiana register of historic sites and structures and in mid-september the assistant director of preservation services with that body at the dnr contacted me to say quote we believe the district meets the criteria for inclusion in the state and national registers so that doesn't mean that it it's a green lit done deal it just means that we have more work to do um but we are moving forward with the next steps to apply for inclusion in both of those registers and that's for that kind of that whole area doing so doesn't cause any um undue hardship for the residents it it at least in theory could open them up just to have some grants and funds and stuff if those things are even available down the road i don't know but um but anyway there's a lot of good reasons to to support this and uh and that's that's all i just wanted to go on the record as giving some of those reasons thank you thank you so much uh anyone else wish to speak in favor of this petition rarely on the side of the microphone so thank you very much and i'd like to thank you for um this thoughtful rezone of um the neighborhoods that you have described i referred to them as annexation areas three and four because they are what the city kind of has called islands although um that because they're surrounded completely by the municipality that being said these are distinct neighborhoods and um one of the aspects about my service as president of the monroe county plan commission and of the monroe county board of zoning appeals and as a citizen planner from that is recognized by the american planning association one of the aspects of my service that i'm most proud of is how county leadership listens to the people in these areas you know uh 66 of the people in annexation area three which is the baby farms area and 71 of the people property owners in annexation area four which is sunset hills have remonstrated successfully against involuntary annexation they have expressed their will to remain as they are and not become part of the city and i think that they have an identity i know they have an identity because i've spent a lot of time in both of those neighborhoods i've spoken with the neighbors i've gotten to know people from that involvement people i cherish and they have spoken that they would really value remaining as they are they live in single-family homes without a shared wall they have large lots it they are what peter dorfman refers to as naturally occurring affordable housing it for all of the lip service given to affordable housing these two areas are two areas where that's actually feasible within a somewhat of a proximity to the municipal area i think there's an over estimation by people who live in the city of bloomington to think of themselves and the community where they live inside the city as more valuable to the people who are not necessarily involved with the university than it truly is and these people um have farms they can vegetables that they grow on their lots they uh have a value for each other they are neighbors to each other they take people to doctor's appointments as they age they check in on each other they have chickens they lay eggs on the chickens lay eggs and uh i'm very moved to find this type of community in our larger broader area and i'm also very proud that monroe county listens to the people now uh this area had been previously intended for annexation that annexation never took place and um as someone who is certified by the american planning association as a citizen planner it's just a lot simpler for everybody if we go ahead and rectify the code to what is currently existing and um and i think that this is i commend also the commissioners for bringing this to our attention this way acknowledging that it was an oversight and taking care of it in this uh administrative manner so i uh i'm in favor of this i think it's important to do i think it's important because of the fragile landscape and i um i think it's important for a way of life and preservation of affordable housing so thank you very much for your efforts in this regard thank you i thank you again for your service appreciate you thank you morning i'm roger steward i don't live in that area but i did at one time i kind of stand here uh representing the fathers and mothers that live there when i lived there and how i witnessed uh those working people doing their jobs coming home and taking care of their families and uh and taking care of their properties uh i'm in favor of this rezone for area three in the sunset hill and area four the maple grove baby farms neighborhood i kind of like to see the homeowners have the right to live in these neighborhoods without the worry of multi-family structures being constructed in the future they are affordable homes uh and this is a these neighborhoods uh as i said earlier it was was in fact the home i lived in i think's over 100 years old still standing when i grew up there there was probably 20 kids on my road 20 kids in the neighborhood trailer park and and d's place over in an alien land it was probably 23 kids about 60 kids in that in that one uh sunset hill area a lot of uh baby boomers so to speak but everybody got along everybody worked as margaret said people had gardens some of them had chickens some of them had a cow or what have you but uh if almost if not all those homes are still standing and many are approaching it if not already over 100 years old these areas have stood to test the time and i think we need to continue that test i like to take a minute and thank the commissioners for their work and correcting this zoning oversight if you have any questions okay appreciate that in favor of uh this petition please come to the podium surveyor and right randall well i'm here to speak neutral um but i wanted to come up here maybe before you ask for opposition sure okay so this is a good time so really i came to kind of um clarify just a bit of uh some of the discussion that was at the work session so um my name is tron inwright randolph i'm the elected minro county surveyor um on the county website you can go to the surveyor page and you can find the responsibilities of the surveyor's office that has a large list of things that was helped put together by the county surveyor association of indiana um and then within that you can also see some of my statutory duties under indiana code title 36 article 2 chapter 12 section 135 that stipulate my charge of the perpetuation effort of the county so that does intel surveying work because we do have the ability to do boundary perpetuation surveys with a professional surveyor but that does not include private surveying private property so it's very complicated in nature and i actually deal with a bit of uncertainty and uh things that are pretty ambiguous so i just really wanted to clarify for the public that my charge is not to go out there and survey out individual properties and understand how they conform with certain compliances and setbacks i do serve on the minero county plan commission but i'm not here to advocate kind of my position there i'm just here to really make sure that the public is aware of my charge and my duties some of my core functions is the public land surveying system in the gis within the county i'm very happy that planning is working with my office and the gis coordinator to figure out better ways to do calculations of impervious surface we're also working with the auditor's office to help improve the representation of parcel lines so i have just a bit of information i'd like to share too because this compelled me to kind of just dig in a little bit because i could address these questions but again i'm going to read this disclaimer so you understand why this isn't concrete information and why planning has certain provisions where they do ask for surveys so they really have clear under case indication of if things are in compliance or not so the disclaimer i'm going to say is the gis disclaimer minero county does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of the information contained herein and i have a map so uh it contains herein and disclaims any and all liability resulting from any error or emission in this map the lines and corners represented by gis do not represent legal boundaries users should not rely on them for any purpose other than a low accuracy approximation of location or lines or corners they are of limited precision and are simply geographic representation so with that said i did run some analysis and i did um do a couple selects by locations so parcel lines you know in uh being in 2018 uh did uh building footprints um so anything that has expanded since 2018 doesn't really fall in this but i think it gives us a good baseline as you can tell planning does use gis to kind of have certain understandings and then they go from there to make sure that they are requesting what they need to make a very informed decision with that analysis uh 64 out of 105 parcels fell within 10 foot so that's the setback but to be fair i did the five foot with the uh district that they're in and it's about half that so we're already going to see issues with if it remains the same or if this gets approved and it changes so i wanted to make sure that i'm telling a whole complete story and i'm not just trying to present information that really kind of you know might boister one side or the other 89 out of the 98 which i know is 100 which is another outlier of using gis i did talk with drew and he did recognize the one that wasn't part of it but from the analysis i had 89 out of 98 don't meet the minimum lot size but again that might not be an issue i did some calculations with impervious surface but there's a lot of things in motion to address that and relieve that concern and i applaud the commissioners and i applaud the planning office uh to address those and continue to move those forward um thank you um i hope i didn't go over my time or maybe i wasn't being timed and i just really want to make sure that everyone's aware of my duty my charge and my intentiveness to the impacts on the county and whenever i can provide a service i do my utmost to provide that service um enjoy the rest of the day thank you i think it's it's just been a um long-standing frustration for residents who look at the gis map and you know the lines going through their house or whatever and um and it's just it's just um a functionality of putting on a flat screen something that's on a slightly rounded part of the earth um but um if if somebody is going to call for hey we really don't know this well if you could find that out that's a good thing so um i appreciate that dr bayton did the um impervious uh study um that was helpful um from the gis office so thank you um anyone else have comment in support anyone wish to speak in opposition to this petition good morning commissioners this is christopher mg on behalf the greater bloomington chamber of commerce um the proposal before you on downsizing the sunset hill and maple grove baby farm areas we uh oppose this ordinance change these rezonings are unnecessary reduce housing capacity in very urbanized areas hinder economic growth and really conflict with the county's own long-term developmental goals and it seems to be based on a 30 year old mindset clouded by annexation as we heard from ms clemens earlier um and what i've learned more and more about this process it's gotten more and more complicated where it's hard to figure out i needed some sort of decoder wheel to sort of figure out what's included what's not and i don't you know i heard from the neighbors today which i do appreciate i've been on their side of the aisle which i'll talk to a little bit but you know it's not what's happening now is not going to change their quality of life it's not going to push them out of their homes um i can recall this happening and um as a perry township resident in uh sunny slopes where i live where the echo park apartments came in and i spoke out against it it was too large it was going to cause this it was going to cause that 10 years later i was wrong it i was completely it didn't cause any of the issues that we brought up probably even enhance the neighborhood and this would be something that probably most of you would be against on a multi-family basis but this is this is a solution looking for a problem um i appreciate everybody's comments on this but it really forecloses on some of uh opportunities to be creative with this land and you know really look forward with something that we could do with it instead of sort of being stuck in the past where we're not moving forward on it i mean i'll probably spend a little bit time later on to sort of discussing i think the complications of getting variances for doing any little thing with your property um other urban growth and some other things but i think at this time i think i've said enough thank you very much thank you anyone else wish to speak in opposition it looks like there's a hand raised online but i cannot see the information i'm going to log in keep doing this a t s d it looks like there's a hand raised um nancy jones yes uh can you hear me yes we can okay my name is nancy jones i'm a bloomington resident bloomington native and i'd like to speak in support of the resolution and to just echo the statements by president clements and others in support of this um largely and and the comment i want to make is i don't think this is a an issue of nostalgia i think one of the uh the county has an interest in supporting the wishes of the residents um and that this uh this land is theirs and that they have the right that changing the that not changing it back not changing it to a um downzoning the uh the two uh districts in question um would really undermine i think the the great uh goal here which is to uh support uh long-term uh residential use patterns that have been very um as we said a form of natural affordable housing and i think those reasons were clearly articulated um i think it's in the county's interest to support the kind of use pattern that supports long-term residency and long-term uh residential ownership that that is my chief uh comment at this point thank you all right thank you so much so we'll log that as a point of uh support uh anyone else wish to speak on this item either for or against if you haven't had an opportunity get hand raised oh is it still there okay perfect thank you all right uh so um well i'll start with um commissioner um jones did you have anything you wanted to add or any other comments you wanted to make on this particular item yes i do want to comment on the agricultural nature of this area and in times coming up urban agriculture is going to become more and more significant and important we cannot always count on having food shipped off from all over the world to get to us we a time may come when we actually need to be able to look locally to sustain ourselves and places like this could become very relevant for that and i just i i am concerned that people are not paying enough attention to the need to support this kind of local agriculture thank you that's really insightful i appreciate that commissioner madera do you have any comments you wish to make um yes i very much appreciate all that i have heard thank you so much for your thoughtful testimony and you've given us a lot to chew on um and i will also go back and think uh the the residents who were able to attend the um planning commission meeting who who logged their commentary um for and against and i think asked some good questions and i think those have been addressed now by staff i really think that one of the key points here and i think commissioner jones is onto something is you know you can't you can't have been addressed now by you can't build your way out of um the the necessity to sustain a community and more building is not going to be more affordable um and because even if just throwing this out there but even if uh someone were to buy um significant acreage and put um what are the infamous paired patio homes or whatnot on them they're certainly going to end up costing much more than the homes that are there which have a historic value and yes that's a subjective thing a historic value the agricultural value the neighborhood ties the um the way this community obviously has um a great um advocate for historic preservation and and hopefully will become state and federally recognized in the very near future if they even do that anymore who knows but um you know uh but but i do think that there are a lot of opportunities here and um and to the agricultural side of course you can do farm stands in res one which is nice so um but um i really um do think that you know change may come if the city decides they want to provide sewer if if if change may come and but but i think what this does is it says the residents will have the opportunity to say at that moment whatever moment that is yes we want to change we want to see a change in our neighborhood no we we want to have high density housing whatever it might look like um but those residents at that moment are the ones who should decide not city planners from 1990 whatever it was uh so it really puts the control back into the hands of the residents recognizing what's there uh so with that uh i'm going to go ahead and call for a vote on ordinance uh 2025-11 miss turner king if you would please call the roll certainly and for clarity this is ordinance 2025-11 which rezones the 100 parcels and doesn't exempt any ah no i will i will go ahead i didn't realize i had to go ahead and do that because this is part of the um resolution that came out of um the plan commission so um that would be to follow um uh this recommendation from the plan commission and exempt the single parcel which carries the addresses of 717 south annalee lane to 725 south annalee lane thank you you're welcome and so this is a a roll call on ordinance 2025-11 now exempting those parcels commissioner jones yes commissioner madera no commissioner thomas yes motion passes to one okay thank you um next item please i would like to call to approve ordinance 2025-12 the maple grove baby vote farms rezone i will second that um mr smith if you would share with us those aspects that are different from what um mr meyers addressed already in the other uh ordinance that might make your life a little easier but it's up to you yeah absolutely um just doing a mic test are you able to hear me yes okay um so this is again the maple grove baby farms area um so there are a total of 138 parcels uh 132 after we uh factor out the duplicate parcels um so it's the same request as the sunset hills so this is a rezone request from high development residential to residential one the purpose to preserve the overall character of the area this contains older neighborhoods there's presence of singles cars features as well as a number of existing homes that don't have access to sewer but we will note that this particular request does not include historic preservation so there will not be a discussion on that topic this request was also made at the same time as a sunset hill rezone request planning staff you know just to note we did send out uh 99 property notice or property owner notice letters and 142 neighbor notice letters for this rezone so everybody in the area was notified and then access to the site uh derives from west third street so south fairfield drive south kimball drive and south johnson avenue are the three main intersecting streets and they all derive access from the west third street and then i have a image on the screen which just kind of details the overall area and then on the right hand side the hd zoning those are all the zones that are affected by this rezone request i drew went through this uh background discussion board post so i can always revisit this and uh restate um sort of the same talking points if the commissioners would like but i will go ahead and continue so just a little bit of an analysis so if we um are measuring the lot size of all the parcels so the residential one zoning district has a minimum lot size of one acre so for the maple grove baby farms when it's all said and done approximately 82 percent of the parcels are less than an acre 18 percent are greater than an acre but we'll note that in the residential one zoning district the minimum lot size is not an issue so long as all other design standards have been met again the same information as a sunset hills rezone request um just a table stating what the character and the intended purpose of each zoning district is for design standards also the same uses also the same this is the site conditions and infrastructure maps that i have so on the left hand side apologize for the colors it's not as quite clear on the screen but essentially there there is sewer available to specific properties so not all properties in the maple grove baby farms area actually have access to sewer it's only select parcels which i will get into later in the presentation and then on the right hand side of the screen you'll notice the blue overlay color that indicates the area that's within the clear creek watershed comprehensive plan discussion is the same as the sunset hills rezone again it's also an urban infill neighborhood um i do also have a slide on the non-conformities um whether they're used structure or lots i will actually maybe come back to this slide in a moment i did want to use the property 101 south fairfield drive as an example of what uh what we mean by what uh non-conformity is so this uh particular property was issued a building permit in 2014 for 43 units i did want to point out that even if it does retain its hd zoning um this actually exceeds the number of units that would otherwise be allowed um outright under the zoning district outright under the zoning district so we did some calculations and approximately if this were proposed today they could have 22 units in total so i'd also wanted to point out that multifamily developments of more than 30 units on a lot are actually subject to planning commission approval so this kind of goes back to that you know non-conforming so maybe not necessarily the law itself is non-conforming but maybe it's the use that's not conforming because it would actually exceed the number of multifamily units allowed on the property dr john bateman did an excellent job of providing us with some analysis of the non-conformity so specifically for baby farms uh maple grove baby farms approximately 71 percent of the properties were conforming to the impervious standard in the res zone if we were to retain the hd zoning all but one parcel was conforming to that standard and i do have some addresses on the screen these were part of the planning commission's approval to the board of commissioners to exclude so we did like a quick analysis of each of these properties so 101 south fairfield was approximately 54 impervious cover so that would well exceed the res zoning standards the next property at west evergreen was approximately 60 percent 415 north kimble was approximately 40 percent and 215 north johnson was approximately 60 percent and then we have some significant significantly lower percentages for the remainder of the properties that were included in that request so 325 north johnson was approximately 15 percent 2312 west baumont was approximately 13 percent and then 120 south kimble was approximately 25 percent all of these calculations you know these are done on the gis visually but also using that parcel improvement data that the assessor office maintains and then of course to reiterate what drew had already mentioned the planning commission is considering an amendment to the impervious cover maximums so you know for example if what is currently drafted if it were to be changed to be approximately 30 percent of the lot size you may see the last three addresses mentioned they might actually become conforming so i do have a graph just to kind of illustrate what this looks like so on the left hand side we have the res if this were to be proposed as is you know approximately 71 percent of those parcels would be conforming to the impervious cover and 29 would be non-conforming and then on the right hand side we have the hd where 99 percent of them would be conforming and about one percent would be non-conforming but as i just mentioned there is a an amendment that's going through the process at the moment so if that were to be increased you might see the red on the left hand side shrink significantly these are letters of remonstrance that were also included in the packet so like the previous petition i won't spend too much time on these but i will at least go through them really quick with you thank you this letter did include some nice graphics so i also included those for the presentation uh mr smith that letter relates to just to clarify uh the address of 101 south fairfield correct correct and they they also included 111 north kimball but yeah thank you um i also included some other letters of remonstrance um some of these uh i should say most of these did not include addresses or parcel numbers so i'm not entirely sure which they are referring to but they otherwise uh expressed their um opposition this uh particular remonstrance is referring to the 215 north johnson avenue property now i turn to letters of support i don't believe this particular uh letter of support included a specific location but nonetheless did want to voice their support and then this is a letter just generally supporting both rezoning requests as they're presented so the planning commission did vote six to two to afford a positive recommendation to the minero county board of commissioners as presented by planning staff based on the petition's compatibility with minero county comprehensive plan with the following condition so these are the conditions that will include the properties that i mentioned earlier in the presentation so to avoid creating non-conformities consideration should be given to the zoning of the following pre-existing multifamily developments at 101 south fairfield drive 2542 west evergreen drive 415 north kimball drive 215 north johnson avenue 325 north johnson avenue 2312 west baumont lane and 120 south kimball drive does anybody have any questions thank you mr smith appreciate your report and the information you provided comments or questions commissioner medeira i think my comments and questions are pretty much reflective of what i said in the sunset hills i will note that one of the things that i think communities go through when they grow are these kinds of tensions and these kinds of conflicts and i very much appreciate the thoughtful way in which this process was handled and the very intellectual and erudite contributions and on both sides of the issue i did want to say something about the importance of supporting long-term residents and there are only so many areas into which a city can grow and of course we know that these are actually subject to litigation at the present time we also know that with the baby hills i'm sorry maple grove baby farms rezone we have people who have purchased property in reliance on the wish to develop at some point and that that's of a bit of concern to me so this property i think is uh even one that i feel more conflicted about than sunset hills and of course it's bordered by i-69 so i think when we think of the tensions you know there's uh the tensions between the ability of residents to bind others outside their borders and to bind others in neighborhoods outside their borders and that's always going to be uh up against tension with very very important considerations like those mentioned by commissioner jones which is due regard for urban agriculture which is the future of our community in the future of many other communities um and i would say that this process sort of reminds me when i go through and sit on it uh of that old operation game that i play with my kids still and you know you go in to get like water on the knee or uh some facetious parts of the body and if you have batteries in the game which actually we did not always have in our game you know you touch one side and it goes you know and the red light lights up and so i think that determining housing and zoning us basically in this community and many others that are going through these kinds of growth struggles right now is a bit like the game of operation because you try to see can we develop in this area or can we what should we do with this area and no matter what else what you decide you're going to go up against one side or the other and so but i think it's very important for both of those sides to have the ability to buzz and to voice their concerns and i very much appreciate the thoughtful and comprehensive way in which it's been done in this process. Commissioner Jones comments or questions? I'll stand by what i said for the previous one. I will as well and i appreciate Commissioner Madura's points you know the other issue is when you look at this particular neighborhood and you look at the map people look at it and go like well look at all that vacant land well a lot of the people who own a house on one piece of property actually own the vacant lots adjoining i'm not sure why they're not combined for whatever reason they're not that's an assessor question not a not a commissioner question but um you know that's and there are barns there are crops there are farm animals it is uh it's a cool place that's a very cool place um so okay so um and also again we still have the sensitivities of the environment the critical watershed this is a very critical watershed area as well and i'm not sure how much it can take i will point out that yes indeed the apartments at 101 south fairfield are um would not what are going to be are already non-conforming pre-existing entities i will also know for the record that the mobile home parks very small mobile home parks are also pre-existing non-conforming because we would under the cdo require that they produce and create a planned unit development that includes a storm shelter which i hope they have um all right so uh let's go ahead and see uh if there's any uh public comment um on the this petition um first we'll hear from people who support this petition well once again i'm dr margaret clements i have a phd in policy studies and policy analysis and um i'd like to address one common kind of fallacy that keeps getting perpetuated and that's this idea of growth um bloomington population hasn't really grown and uh we have we as government agents need to consider whether or not we're pushing people away or pulling them in and i would argue that we've been pushing people away we're not pulling them in and part of that is because of what we've done to the idea of community annexation area three maple grove baby farms says it all it's it's an area where baby farms are supposed to be um and those people have expressed quite vociferously and on repeated occasions that they would like to be less dense and supporting long-term residents should be a goal of our government and i share that goal to support long-term residents in preparation for this meeting and for this discussion i have telephoned many of the people that i had spoken with in annexation area three in this maple grove baby farm area and they are so appreciative of county government considering their wishes so that they don't feel so harassed by city development goals so i um they don't share the city development goals they were not involved in the discussions for city development goals the city development goals may not serve them and they at least say that they don't serve them and i would say in order for the city of bloomington to be relevant to these people and to long-term residents there's a lot more discussion that needs to take place and it hasn't happened yet so i urge you to adopt this down zone and to respect the will of the long-term residents who uh who have this neighborhood as their way of life they deserve it thank you anybody else wish to speak in favor of this petition mr steward registered again i'd like to tell you i appreciate uh what you've done secondly i support this down zoning i had a uh i thought about people purchase property on speculation yeah it happens so any questions i'll answer thank you anyone else wish to speak in favor of this petition anyone wish to speak in opposition to this petition please come to the podium or raise your hand on teams uh good afternoon i think we're afternoon now commissioners this is christopher mg from the greater limington chamber of commerce uh encouraging you to reject this ordinance as well i think what we we've heard is this thing where that's changing of life uh for the neighborhood and i you know i don't see the status quo as doing that i think this is if you look at the map this is uh area that's ripe for urbanization and just to go through a couple of the concerns raised by two elected officials one was uh county council member david henry which believes it forecloses on opportunities to be creative small footprint development there's an opportunity especially with tiny homes and other type of structures and fill small parcels in a way to not only retain the character but maybe restore the character the fact that down something forecloses on this creates fewer opportunities i'll mention who we heard from today county surveyor tron inron randolph who cautioned that post changes would put a lot of burden on people's property just to do simple things he notes that owners will now have to pursue variance and the board of zoning and appeals for even the most modest changes and we know what a hurdle that can be and the other thing is the pie that needs to grow for the county the county has a lot of bills to pay with the new justice center we're looking at sb1 in order to meet those needs of all county residents that pie needs to grow the best way to do that is for growth these conversations about um urbanized agriculture good conversations to have but it can't be just thrown out every time we want to grow a little bit it we need a larger conversation on this and this is not the platform to make this sort of change we need to think about other you know future generations not just those living in the current development but have a vision and this is not a vision this is something stuck 30 years ago and we should reject this ordinance and this down zoning i thank you for your time today thank you we also have uh jena may from trg management if tsd that's she's online if tsd could get her up here we go good afternoon thank you for your patience we cannot hear you you need to unmute now try it here you go got it okay computers thank you um i think the same comment that i made at the first meeting uh there in bloomington it's not that trg opposes the downgrading it's just we totally understand the infrastructure the watershed i mean we we totally understand that our total interest is making sure that we get our exception if you will um so that we can continue to operate as is it's a very small manufactured home community uh every lot is needed in order to pay the bills for those residents uh it provides nothing but affordable housing for that area uh which is totally residential so again we understand it but it's just very very vital to us that we keep our exceptions that we can keep operating the way we are thank you can i ask you may i ask you a question um is this the can you give me the address of this property i want to make sure that we've got this on our list yes it is it's the 215 north johnson avenue got it thank you appreciate that thank you yeah and just and just to clarify um pre-existing non-conforming means you can continue to do what you're doing on your property um even if it doesn't match either um hd or uh residential one zoning um so that's the good news you can continue to do as you've done um appreciate that um and um anyone else yes yes thank you good afternoon good afternoon i'm christine bartlett with ferguson law on behalf of regency hadley village um we do appreciate the exclusion of 101 fairfield we hope that that will be amended today formally and and excluded from the rezone um but today i'd like to talk about 111 kimble and ask that that also be excluded on the map you can see it's the property just to the east of 101 south fairfield 101 south fairfield actually kind of hugs around it on both sides um and and to be clear we understand that there will be issues already with compliance um and that were already previously non-conforming by the prior change in zoning so we understand that that property couldn't be used to make more units for this development but one thing that it could be used for um would be to add an additional amenity for the property at 101 south fairfield drive when this property was rezoned to hd one change that did occur is it requires multi-building multi-unit developments to have at least two amenities which was not a requirement to our understanding under the prior zoning so this property at 111 kimble which was purchased by regency with the idea that it would be folded into the hadley village community could be used to become more in compliance or closer into compliance with existing zoning by becoming one of those potential amenities for the existing apartment community so we would just ask that that also be considered for exclusion we obviously submitted a memorandum providing some general reasons why we think the property west of kimble drive is is different in character enough that it it could be excluded as a whole but today our primary ask is of 111 kimble shane allen i think is still on the the remote attendance but if not i'm here to answer any questions that may come up thank you thank you anyone else wish to offer commentary that include us no i'm going to come back to the board next i just was checking through the the pictures on my laptop okay we are good i think i don't see any more hands and yes i will now come back to commissioners for final comment commissioner medir yes i wanted to again thank everyone for their thankful commentary and especially those that brought forward new information new requests today that very much helps clarify some some things that you know we will need to know when considering this important measure and i just wanted to address the idea that there's uh growth is a fallacy for this community growth is an imperative it is not a fallacy the trick is to get it in appropriate times and places and spaces and that is the democratic venture and we are elected not just to serve long-term residents of communities but to represent all residents of communities including property owners including business owners and again that's part of the the pool and the tug and i'm very respectful and appreciative of this democratic pool and tug and the opportunity to have a say in this pool and tug but i think growth is a communal imperative and i think looking at our demographics we do have people moving in and we do not want these people to move out we we need these people more than ever before to support the long-term residents who are getting older and to support our businesses that need their dollars and so we must create new opportunities we must get new employers and in fact i think in the planning commission meeting one of the residents of i believe it was the maple grove baby farm area even charged the chamber of commerce with bringing in residents and that is you know and new employers and new residents that in turn can become long-term residents and i think that that imperative is hard to fulfill if we turn every area down for development and so again it's that democratic pool and tug and maybe certain areas are right for development at certain times and other areas are not but we always have to keep in mind that growth is what we owe our community appropriate growth sustainable growth responsible growth thank you commissioner jones comments questions yes well right off i'm afraid that i have to take exception to sustainable growth that is actually an oxymoron we cannot grow forever and ever and ever that's not possible we need to start thinking about how we can pursue life from a different perspective i was elected by the people who actually live in this community no one who wanted to move to this community voted for me i think it's extremely important that i pay attention to what i hear from the majority of the people of this community which is that they like it they like it as it is most people are not desperately anxious to see major changes happen to our community most people do not want to live in portland if they wanted to live in portland they'd probably move to portland they have chosen this monroe county because it suits them the way it is so i will be supporting this all right um thank you both um and clearly there is a great deal of debate um you know is the population going up is population going down um why is the city prioritizing uh creating student housing um for iu instead of housing for people who can live and work in the community um why is the city not providing sewer why is the city continuing to insist on pursuing lawsuits against county residents um lots of questions uh not our job to answer them all today but i think we're acknowledging them all and um i think that um the concerns about hey we need growth yeah okay once again this doesn't say zoning can never change what this says is this is not high density zoning area um this is not what this is now uh what it's doing is it's setting the zone to what it is now uh it is not preventing any changes in the future but what it does do is it protects those folks who live in this community from having something foisted upon them which has not been there yet uh and who knows if and when it will arrive and by the way um we have a lot of talk about gosh we need housing well if you look at the regional opportunities initiative study um they identified a certain number of units that we had to have in this community meaning county city and ellisville and guess what we've already passed that number of new units planned or done so now what now we've met that number we've exceeded that number now we're still somehow doing something wrong uh let's see if there's demand beyond that number uh but at the same time what we're doing is the prudent thing which is um planning staff has been asked to develop a clear housing inventory and my hope is that the city participates uh so far they are not uh let's find out what's vacant and what's not the other concern i have for those of you who do live in the city is how many apartments are sitting vacant and we do not know that number somebody knows that number but they're not telling you why aren't they telling you what that number is i think it'd be really interesting to know uh the next time the city council wants to look at a another apartment complex how many empty apartments are there now do we need to add more because what you're doing is displacing people out of potential homes uh long-term homes not apartments and and that's a different kind of living situation and i think we have to accommodate everyone and i think we are i look at the mobile home park look at the apartments uh look at it all so um i think what we're doing in my book is recognizing what's there so with that um i would um like to um call for a vote and i'm going to go ahead and read in those addresses that the plan commission had um asked us to consider excluding and that is 101 south fairfield drive 2542 west evergreen drive 415 north kimble drive 215 north johnson avenue 325 north johnson avenue 2312 west Beaumont lane and 120 south kimble drive um and i will and i will note uh for the representative from fergus noire that i think what you want to do needs to have a needs to be part of a conversation with planning staff and i encourage you to have that conversation because no matter what i don't think it would work in either zone so i think i think it's a matter of going to planning staff and talking about a bza process which is actually very simple i don't know why people think it's complicated but it's really not all right so that's what's on the table which is what the planning commission handed us and uh miss turner king if you would please call the roll on ordinance 2025-12 so this is a roll call on ordinance 2020 2025-12 as amended um to remove those addresses from section one commissioner jones yes commissioner madera no commissioner thomas yes all right motion carries three zero um again a huge thank you to everyone who came participated plan commission here today thank you all for your patience it's been a long morning but i think really i think we've gotten a lot of things on the table and um have talked through a lot of key issues and i appreciate everyone everyone's participation online as well um so uh we do not have any uh appointments today but i do have a few announcements and i will make them as quick as i possibly can uh believe me um so first and foremost um i do want to note that uh county government is closed uh tomorrow which is um april 18th um and we are not meeting next week so our next meeting is on mayday mayday mayday uh and that is going to be right here in the natu hill room may 1st 10 a.m um and so no meeting on the 24th and per the minutes we're not meeting on the 34th either so uh so with that in mind uh but i do um want to encourage folks uh to contact their township trustee if they do have a rural housing repair the arpa funding that remained um and could not be spent before the deadline is in the hands of um the bloomington oh my gosh foundation oh my gosh it's been a long morning long morning long morning not enough caffeine in the world um and uh so please contact your township trustee and they will help guide you toward making an application i also encourage folks to get onto our website co.monroe.in.us while you're there please click on the megaphone make sure that you are weather aware um we do have storms coming in this weekend we're going to have a rainy weekend and there may be more the f word flooding and uh so you can sign up to receive alerts uh so that you are in the know and keep you and you are safe um also note we do have uh virtual office hours six times each month go to the calendar on that home page and um the next uh blood drive is thursday may 8th 1 p.m to 6 p.m ivy tech uh c 130 a and b um please go to redcross.org to apply um i do i don't think i have anything else is there anything else i'm missing no i just want to say i appreciate you all i appreciate everyone who's worked through these issues on the planning commission and the residents who took the time to respond and again government is as valuable as the people who participate in it so thank you uh commissioner jones anything for the good of the order no i don't okay great thank you so much um so we do have a work session um can we do uh 12 45 for the work session uh tst okay with that cat's okay with that good okay yay thumbs up all right um 12 45 for the work session thank you all