1 00:00:00,130 --> 00:00:07,880 - We are doing second readings of our budget ordinances, and we have a first reading of the budget ordinance. 2 00:00:07,880 --> 00:00:15,199 - There'll be opportunities for public comment during each of the ordinances, including whether there's 3 00:00:15,199 --> 00:00:22,590 - any amendments. You'll also get opportunities to comment on that, both in person and online. Are there 4 00:00:22,590 --> 00:00:24,958 - any motions before we get going? 5 00:00:27,842 --> 00:00:38,109 - I'm so sorry Yes, I move that we amend the agenda to put item 4b before item 4a second motion in a second 6 00:00:38,109 --> 00:00:48,376 - all those in favor I Any opposed thank you very much. So item 4b, which is the Bloomington Transit Budget 7 00:00:48,376 --> 00:00:56,318 - will go first and then and then we'll proceed with a C D then E any other motions 8 00:00:57,698 --> 00:01:06,083 - All right, would anybody like to make a comment or any other such thing at this moment? All right, seeing 9 00:01:06,083 --> 00:01:13,518 - none, then we will proceed with legislation for first readings. Are there any motions? I move 10 00:01:13,518 --> 00:01:21,744 - that appropriation ordinance 2026-04 be read by title and synopsis only by the clerk. Second. All those 11 00:01:21,744 --> 00:01:26,174 - in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Will the clerk please read? 12 00:01:27,298 --> 00:01:32,311 - Appropriation ordinance twenty twenty six dash zero for an ordinance adopting a budget for the operations 13 00:01:32,311 --> 00:01:37,134 - maintenance debt service and capital improvements for the water and wastewater utility departments of 14 00:01:37,134 --> 00:01:41,532 - the city of Bloomington Indiana for the year twenty twenty seven. The synopsis is as follows 15 00:01:41,532 --> 00:01:46,308 - this appropriation ordinance approved by the utility service board in July of twenty twenty six sets 16 00:01:46,308 --> 00:01:48,862 - the water wastewater budgets for twenty twenty seven. 17 00:01:57,090 --> 00:02:05,609 - Okay any other motions seeing none we'll move on to legislation for second reading Excuse me point at 18 00:02:05,609 --> 00:02:14,127 - point of order. So is there nobody here from utilities to so that we can have a discussion tonight on 19 00:02:14,127 --> 00:02:16,382 - since his first reading or 20 00:02:21,890 --> 00:02:27,948 - Yes, I believe director Zager is online and available for questions if council has any questions I just 21 00:02:27,948 --> 00:02:33,889 - did just want to clarify that this is the first reading for the Water and wastewater utilities budget 22 00:02:33,889 --> 00:02:39,715 - and this budget is not connected with the state process that we're going through for the civil city 23 00:02:39,715 --> 00:02:45,714 - of her Bloomington transit But I believe that there are utilities folks online available for questions 24 00:02:45,714 --> 00:02:50,782 - of council council has any Excellent. So then in which case are there any motions? Yes 25 00:02:51,170 --> 00:02:59,272 - Move to discuss appropriation ordinance 20 2604 second Second motion in the second all those in favor 26 00:02:59,272 --> 00:03:07,215 - of discussing I any opposed All right Will the clerk please read up? Sorry that is before us. So So 27 00:03:07,215 --> 00:03:15,555 - with that Director Zager if you would like to take it away we get these computers on as well Don't worry 28 00:03:15,555 --> 00:03:20,638 - if not, don't worry. We can always turn around But take it away 29 00:03:21,122 --> 00:03:29,753 - Director Zee if you're there. Yeah I'm just bringing our appropriation ordinance for our budget for 30 00:03:29,753 --> 00:03:38,902 - the year 20 27 which you saw a presentation during the budget presentations. This is just the legislation 31 00:03:38,902 --> 00:03:47,620 - reflective of that. All right. Thank you so much. Are there any questions. Council member Stossberg. 32 00:03:47,620 --> 00:03:49,950 - So just for clarification. 33 00:03:50,082 --> 00:03:57,786 - This ordinance is just what was presented during budget hearings. There's nothing different about what 34 00:03:57,786 --> 00:04:05,265 - is here this evening versus what we heard during budget presentations No, great. Thank you customer 35 00:04:05,265 --> 00:04:12,894 - Puma Smith Can you explain what the depreciation fund is for both the water and then the wastewater I 36 00:04:15,330 --> 00:04:25,985 - Yeah the depreciation fund those are depreciating assets. And that is just reflective of the value of 37 00:04:25,985 --> 00:04:36,640 - those depreciating assets. OK can you explain it to me like I'm 12. So yeah yeah. So we have you know 38 00:04:36,640 --> 00:04:45,310 - all of our our trucks and our equipment just like your car loses value every year. 39 00:04:45,762 --> 00:04:58,802 - And so that line is reflective of that for all of our assets. Does that help make sense of that? Well, 40 00:04:58,802 --> 00:05:11,461 - if something is depreciating, it's decreasing in value. So why do we have $4.9 million appropriated 41 00:05:11,461 --> 00:05:15,006 - from the depreciation fund? 42 00:05:17,506 --> 00:05:27,939 - Let me, sorry. Like where does that money come from? Because things depreciate, they become less valuable. 43 00:05:27,939 --> 00:05:37,787 - So where does this 4.9 million come from? That is a good question. I will get back to you on that. I 44 00:05:37,787 --> 00:05:46,270 - apologize that I don't have the explanation for depreciation in front of me right now. 45 00:05:47,202 --> 00:05:54,936 - but I can get back to you on that. Controlling McCam is approaching the podium. I did not help formulate 46 00:05:54,936 --> 00:06:02,597 - this budget, but I can tell you that in general, a depreciation fund for a utility would be essentially 47 00:06:02,597 --> 00:06:10,405 - a fund that would house resources that would be used to repair or maintain depreciating assets. So that's 48 00:06:10,405 --> 00:06:14,014 - why there's actually a positive number in there. 49 00:06:17,826 --> 00:06:26,652 - Okay. So maintenance and replacement of depreciating assets usually essentially. Yes. Okay. Well director 50 00:06:26,652 --> 00:06:35,311 - Zager if you could research that and get back to us I'd appreciate it. Absolutely. Mr. McCain any other 51 00:06:35,311 --> 00:06:43,138 - questions. All right. Seeing none we'll go to public comment if anybody would like to comment 52 00:06:43,138 --> 00:06:46,302 - on appropriation ordinance 20 26 0 4. 53 00:06:47,714 --> 00:06:56,825 - Anyone in chambers. Surprise. Anyone online. Surprise. So let's come back to council. Would you like 54 00:06:56,825 --> 00:07:06,747 - to make any comments. Councilman Smith. I'll just say for the benefit of the public we also have a stormwater 55 00:07:06,747 --> 00:07:16,670 - utility but that budget is included with the wastewater. Excellent. Any other comments. Councilman Stossberg. 56 00:07:16,670 --> 00:07:17,662 - Thank you. 57 00:07:17,986 --> 00:07:25,923 - I'll just thank the utility folks directors acre and whoever else is online for being there to be available 58 00:07:25,923 --> 00:07:33,712 - in case we need them. Thank you All right with that then we'll move on to legislation for second readings 59 00:07:33,712 --> 00:07:41,208 - we'll be discussing this Don't we need to recommend it first? Yeah. Yeah, actually motions. Are there 60 00:07:41,208 --> 00:07:43,486 - any motions? Thank you. I move 61 00:07:43,618 --> 00:07:51,973 - to send appropriation ordinance 2026-03 to the next Regular session on October 14th Oh for can you amend 62 00:07:51,973 --> 00:08:00,327 - can you amend your motion to be the correct ordinance? Oh my gosh. Yes. Sorry. I amend my motion I meant 63 00:08:00,327 --> 00:08:08,364 - to say appropriation ordinance 2026-04 to our next regular session on October 14th second motion and 64 00:08:08,364 --> 00:08:10,910 - second all of those in favor of 65 00:08:12,194 --> 00:08:20,190 - Thank you very much. This will be discussed at our next regular session moving on to legislation for 66 00:08:20,190 --> 00:08:28,502 - second readings I Move that Appropriation ordinance 2026-03 be introduced and read by the clerk by title 67 00:08:28,502 --> 00:08:36,735 - and synopsis only Motion in a second any discussion all those in favor No, we motioned to move oh three 68 00:08:36,735 --> 00:08:39,902 - before oh two and then all said yes Yes 69 00:08:40,034 --> 00:08:52,358 - Alright, so the motion is to read 20 2603 by title and synopsis all those in favor Any opposed all right, 70 00:08:52,358 --> 00:09:05,032 - and will the clerk please read It's 20 26-03 in ordinance for appropriation and tax rates of for Bloomington 71 00:09:05,032 --> 00:09:09,566 - Transit Corporation for 2027 Thank you 72 00:09:11,522 --> 00:09:19,912 - I move that appropriation ordinance twenty twenty six dash three be adopted. Second. All right. Would 73 00:09:19,912 --> 00:09:28,138 - you all like to add anything since last week. Just introduce yourself sir. Yes thank you. I'm James 74 00:09:28,138 --> 00:09:36,446 - McClary chairman of the board of limited transit. I would like to introduce our new general manager. 75 00:09:36,578 --> 00:09:44,873 - He started action yesterday and we've got him fully engaged Nick Good evening council. It's nice to 76 00:09:44,873 --> 00:09:53,749 - be here. Nice to meet everyone and I'm looking forward to Working hard for Bloomington transit. Wonderful. 77 00:09:53,749 --> 00:10:01,630 - Thank you so much and welcome Nick last name stand-off er Good to meet you director center for 78 00:10:05,154 --> 00:10:12,824 - All right. Anything else. I believe we had four questions. Is that correct. I think we had four questions 79 00:10:12,824 --> 00:10:20,566 - from council at the last hearing and I think we've responded to all of them. And I don't know if everybody 80 00:10:20,566 --> 00:10:27,874 - is comfortable with our answers but we gave answers to all of them. So thank you. Thank you so much. 81 00:10:27,874 --> 00:10:33,662 - Council members first. Happy with answers. All right. Any other questions then. 82 00:10:36,962 --> 00:10:44,865 - Councilman Smith. So in a packet of denim today we received a presentation of your budget proposal. 83 00:10:44,865 --> 00:10:52,847 - I didn't have time to look at it. Was there any change from last time. OK. So I wasn't for sure what 84 00:10:52,847 --> 00:11:00,987 - we did at this meeting the third means I don't normally come to this meeting. So I reached out in case 85 00:11:00,987 --> 00:11:03,358 - we need to do a presentation. 86 00:11:03,778 --> 00:11:11,029 - Never spend no changes since the September meeting. So I just kind of prepared something real fast if 87 00:11:11,029 --> 00:11:18,281 - I needed to present something So there's no changes now Okay. Thank you. Ms. Browning That was Krista 88 00:11:18,281 --> 00:11:25,461 - Browning for the record. Thank you. Sorry Okay, any other questions? All right. We'll move to public 89 00:11:25,461 --> 00:11:32,286 - comment. Does anyone is there anyone who'd wish to comment on ordinance? 2020 603 Anyone online 90 00:11:34,338 --> 00:11:46,939 - All right, coming back to council, any comments here? Seeing none, I'll just make one, which is, well, 91 00:11:46,939 --> 00:11:59,785 - I'll save this joke for later, but I think obviously, thank you BT, one of the highlights of Bloomington 92 00:11:59,785 --> 00:12:02,110 - is that we have a, 93 00:12:02,210 --> 00:12:09,498 - a relatively strong public transit. We know that given the, you know, fiscal constraints, especially 94 00:12:09,498 --> 00:12:16,787 - with the end of ed lit funds, both going to you but generally that fund ending, you know, as well as 95 00:12:16,787 --> 00:12:24,436 - just general pressures in the space that we're facing, you know, hard times ahead and I, you know, really 96 00:12:24,436 --> 00:12:25,374 - look forward 97 00:12:25,442 --> 00:12:31,660 - over the next year, working together, try to figure out what that looks like and how we can best support 98 00:12:31,660 --> 00:12:37,938 - that to make sure that we continue to maintain a really strong public transit, especially if those things 99 00:12:37,938 --> 00:12:43,978 - involve combining with IU, whatever those type of things, conversations that need to start happening, 100 00:12:43,978 --> 00:12:50,078 - and hopefully we can start having those conversations now, rather than, I don't know, a year from now. 101 00:12:50,078 --> 00:12:55,408 - And so, very much thanking you all for the work and welcome to our new director and thank 102 00:12:55,408 --> 00:13:00,888 - Thank you to the amazing board members who continue to serve the city and many of whom who served the 103 00:13:00,888 --> 00:13:06,529 - city for almost as long as I've been alive. So Thank you all very much for that. So with that Oh council 104 00:13:06,529 --> 00:13:11,901 - member Stossberg. Go ahead. Sorry. Yes I just wanted to mention because I had a couple of questions 105 00:13:11,901 --> 00:13:17,327 - last time and I just wanted to mention that those did get answered to me by email and just say those 106 00:13:17,327 --> 00:13:19,422 - out loud one of my questions was about 107 00:13:19,522 --> 00:13:26,885 - The reference to health insurance for BT increasing by so much and whether or not the city insurance 108 00:13:26,885 --> 00:13:34,905 - could cover BT and that answer is no That's just not not possible and then the other one was about increasing 109 00:13:34,905 --> 00:13:42,487 - fares and the conclusion is that increasing fares is going to decrease ridership and disproportionately 110 00:13:42,487 --> 00:13:48,830 - Affect lower-income folks. So the decision at this point is to not increase fares, but 111 00:13:49,058 --> 00:13:58,111 - And I just wanted to put that on the record somewhere. Thank you so much customer be much with And and 112 00:13:58,111 --> 00:14:07,428 - the answers to my questions were sent via email and they're were included in our packet in case anybody's 113 00:14:07,428 --> 00:14:16,569 - wondering Thank you so much. All right with that Will the clerk please call the roll on ordinance? 2020 114 00:14:16,569 --> 00:14:18,942 - 603 Councilmember Flaherty 115 00:14:19,234 --> 00:14:28,756 - Yes, Stossburg. Yes, Piedmont Smith. Yes, Zulek. Yes. Sorry. Yes, daily. Yes, rough Thank you. Thank 116 00:14:28,756 --> 00:14:39,126 - you very much. Have a wonderful year All right any motions Thank you. Thank you all I move that appropriation 117 00:14:39,126 --> 00:14:47,422 - ordinance 20 2602 be introduced and read by the clerk by title and synopsis only second 118 00:14:47,554 --> 00:14:53,490 - There's a motion to second all those in favor any opposed Appropriation ordinance twenty twenty six 119 00:14:53,490 --> 00:14:59,664 - dash zero two and ordinance for appropriations and tax rates establishing the twenty twenty seven civil 120 00:14:59,664 --> 00:15:05,779 - city budget for the city of Bloomington the synopsis is as follows an appropriation ordinance adopting 121 00:15:05,779 --> 00:15:11,715 - the city's annual budget and establishing the necessary tax rates tax levies and Appropriations for 122 00:15:11,715 --> 00:15:16,702 - the city's obligations for the fiscal year ending December 31st twenty twenty seven 123 00:15:18,082 --> 00:15:25,054 - Thank you very much. I move that appropriation ordinance twenty twenty six dash zero to be adopted. 124 00:15:25,054 --> 00:15:32,026 - Second. OK. Fantastic. Before sort of searches how would you all. I mean we have lots of amendments 125 00:15:32,026 --> 00:15:39,138 - there's response from the mayor to a lot of proposed things. How would you all like to structure this 126 00:15:39,138 --> 00:15:46,180 - part of the conversation best if you have any opinions. Otherwise I'm happy to just say what I think 127 00:15:46,180 --> 00:15:48,062 - is best. And any thoughts. 128 00:15:48,258 --> 00:15:50,014 - or strong thoughts here. 129 00:15:50,242 --> 00:15:55,740 - Let's hear what you think is best. OK. Well, what I would suggest that we do is maybe first we can either 130 00:15:55,740 --> 00:16:00,927 - if any council members have any particular things they'd like to say, it would be a good time to do 131 00:16:00,927 --> 00:16:06,321 - it. You can do that any time you want. I will happily engage with that. I think it would be very useful 132 00:16:06,321 --> 00:16:11,560 - to hear from the office of the mayor that wrote a very useful memo to some of the conversations that 133 00:16:11,560 --> 00:16:16,954 - we've had and some of the pending questions. And then I think it will be good for us to then go through 134 00:16:16,954 --> 00:16:20,222 - amendments as the sponsors may wish to introduce those or not. 135 00:16:21,314 --> 00:16:28,445 - Seem appropriate because we're pretty much Smith It may be more efficient to Since the the mayor's office 136 00:16:28,445 --> 00:16:35,441 - both had an introduction I think they're welcome to speak on first, but they also had specific feedback 137 00:16:35,441 --> 00:16:42,168 - on So maybe when we get to so those reactions could be when we when and if we introduce those Yeah, 138 00:16:42,168 --> 00:16:48,962 - I think that's a great point. Thank you. Thank you for saying that does seem good for everybody Does 139 00:16:48,962 --> 00:16:50,846 - that seem good for you all? 140 00:16:51,938 --> 00:16:59,191 - All right. Well great then any would you like to say anything as we open up anyone sitting in the beautiful 141 00:16:59,191 --> 00:17:06,042 - corner over there? No. All right, then we'll come to you councilmember Stossberg. I'll move amendment 142 00:17:06,042 --> 00:17:12,825 - one to Appropriation Ordinance twenty twenty six oh two second All right, go for it You want to tell 143 00:17:12,825 --> 00:17:19,676 - us a bit about it? Amendment one is the one that reduces the sanitation subsidy from 1.6 million down 144 00:17:19,676 --> 00:17:21,086 - to 1 million pending 145 00:17:22,498 --> 00:17:29,844 - The fiscal committee got a presentation from sanitation regarding increased rates. And so there is an 146 00:17:29,844 --> 00:17:35,966 - assumption that that increased rates would would mean that less subsidy is required. 147 00:17:36,354 --> 00:17:42,928 - This does not guarantee in any way for the public that your rates would increase because we've always 148 00:17:42,928 --> 00:17:49,760 - come back next year for an additional appropriation for that six hundred thousand dollars if the increase 149 00:17:49,760 --> 00:17:56,270 - fails at the council level. But I think that it's a good preemptive step because we don't know right 150 00:17:56,270 --> 00:18:03,166 - now what's going to happen with that increase. Yeah. Thank you so much. Any questions or further comments. 151 00:18:07,746 --> 00:18:16,533 - member Zulek Just read for the Public record the administration's position as they support it and they'll 152 00:18:16,533 --> 00:18:24,822 - bring new rates to counsel in the fall Okay Thank you very much any other comments All right, would 153 00:18:24,822 --> 00:18:33,194 - you all like to add anything? Okay, fantastic Let's go then to public comment. Would anybody like to 154 00:18:33,194 --> 00:18:36,510 - comment on amendment one? Anyone online 155 00:18:38,274 --> 00:18:49,603 - All right. We'll come back to counsel. Any comments here. All right. Fantastic. Will the clerk please 156 00:18:49,603 --> 00:18:59,710 - call the roll on amendment one. Let's try that again. Sorry. Council member Stasberg. Yes. 157 00:18:59,710 --> 00:19:07,262 - Piedmont Smith. Yes. Zulek. Yes. Sorry. Yes. Daily. Yes. Ruff. Yes. 158 00:19:07,554 --> 00:19:20,035 - Yes, thank you. Thank you very much that carries I'd like to move that we introduce amendment three 159 00:19:20,035 --> 00:19:31,518 - Yeah, amendment three Second I don't think you can second if you're gonna second Councilman 160 00:19:31,650 --> 00:19:38,937 - President Asari, would you like to tell us about Amendment 3? So first, I'm not introducing Amendment 161 00:19:38,937 --> 00:19:46,653 - 2 after our work session. I think that was a fairly good answer about what that $600,000 was for. Amendment 162 00:19:46,653 --> 00:19:54,012 - 3 removes funding for corridor and sub-area and other planning studies. Again, I think we talked about 163 00:19:54,012 --> 00:19:59,870 - this in depth about sort of my thinking around this amendment specifically, but I 164 00:20:00,642 --> 00:20:09,115 - would like us to have very clearly scoped out studies with clear sense of what we're going to do with 165 00:20:09,115 --> 00:20:17,838 - them would prefer fun plans than studies. And so generally speaking my position has not changed on that. 166 00:20:17,838 --> 00:20:26,394 - So that's what Amendment 3 does. All right. Does anybody have any questions for President Asari or for 167 00:20:26,394 --> 00:20:28,222 - the administration or 168 00:20:28,450 --> 00:20:35,915 - I invite you to come up and make a comment. Yes. Thank you. If you have any thing that you would like 169 00:20:35,915 --> 00:20:43,306 - to say Good evening. I'm Lynn coin. I'm the interim director of planning and transportation pleasure 170 00:20:43,306 --> 00:20:50,697 - to be here this evening. I We gave you a detailed response to the budget so I won't belabor that and 171 00:20:50,697 --> 00:20:54,942 - go through it I'm going to assume everybody reviewed that 172 00:20:55,106 --> 00:21:02,728 - Think the key points to remember are one. This is a precursor the study is a precursor to Gateway to 173 00:21:02,728 --> 00:21:10,425 - other funding and projects down the road as we mentioned in the response the timeline is very far out 174 00:21:10,425 --> 00:21:18,499 - and everything begins with a study such as what we're proposing so Would very much appreciate you allowing 175 00:21:18,499 --> 00:21:22,046 - us to go forward with this as it's scoped into 176 00:21:22,274 --> 00:21:30,227 - It's scoped generally at this point because we do not know Until the study is done where the specifics 177 00:21:30,227 --> 00:21:38,103 - will lead and that then leads to applications for funding it leads to engineering design And so forth 178 00:21:38,103 --> 00:21:45,979 - our follow-on events to this. So this is the precursor event without this that doesn't happen Okay in 179 00:21:45,979 --> 00:21:48,990 - addition It wasn't in the memo but the 180 00:21:49,634 --> 00:21:58,598 - This is part part of this responds to the safe streets for all grant the 1.44 million dollar grant that 181 00:21:58,598 --> 00:22:08,078 - was awarded the city earlier and the transportation portions of this study Will be eligible for reimbursement 182 00:22:08,078 --> 00:22:16,094 - under that grant as an example if 50% of this grant is allocated to transportation work then 183 00:22:16,418 --> 00:22:23,214 - We could submit for an 80 percent reimbursement of that portion of the grant. So the cost likely will 184 00:22:23,214 --> 00:22:30,077 - not be two sixty five in the end depending on how much reimbursement we can get for the transportation 185 00:22:30,077 --> 00:22:36,873 - portions of the study. Again I won't go over all the details of our response. I'll spare you that but 186 00:22:36,873 --> 00:22:42,270 - I'd be glad to answer questions if you had any. Does anybody have any questions. 187 00:22:44,514 --> 00:22:53,366 - Councilmember Stossberg and then councilmember Piedmont Smith what happens to your process if this Amendment 188 00:22:53,366 --> 00:23:01,487 - passes and these studies are defunded Well the process stops We'll continue with studies we have in 189 00:23:01,487 --> 00:23:08,958 - progress and then we'll have to regroup and figure out what we can do with what we have and 190 00:23:09,698 --> 00:23:15,791 - Take it from there the last study for example on downtown land use was in 2008 18 years ago and one 191 00:23:15,791 --> 00:23:22,127 - of the things we really want to get going under the comprehensive plan is a re-evaluation of that given 192 00:23:22,127 --> 00:23:28,524 - the Convention Center everything that's going on downtown plus the land south of Second Street The Clear 193 00:23:28,524 --> 00:23:34,616 - Creek corridor study that's going on. Those are also very important components. So there's the land 194 00:23:34,616 --> 00:23:35,774 - use component that 195 00:23:36,226 --> 00:23:44,283 - Will back off there's a transportation component. There's the economic development and vitality component 196 00:23:44,283 --> 00:23:51,884 - these just Will get put off. But what's the consequence of those things? stopping like or being put 197 00:23:51,884 --> 00:23:59,789 - off like what is the well We will not be able to adapt to changing conditions Okay, which is what we're 198 00:23:59,789 --> 00:24:03,742 - trying to anticipate. Let's talk for a moment about 199 00:24:04,674 --> 00:24:11,546 - The land immediately south of second Street down Walnut Street is part of the downtown zone. It's a 200 00:24:11,546 --> 00:24:18,555 - gateway downtown zone. It has very restrictive zoning. We have properties that are Increasingly going 201 00:24:18,555 --> 00:24:25,426 - unused and vacant. We need to find a way to revitalize that and part of that could be an adjunct to 202 00:24:25,426 --> 00:24:33,054 - this for example plus the downtown the square the coming College walnut study the impact of that and so on and 203 00:24:34,882 --> 00:24:45,874 - We just have to go back and regroup see what we can do to move those along. So OK. Thank you. Sure. 204 00:24:45,874 --> 00:24:57,415 - Councilmember Piedmont Smith. Yes. So in the memorandum from the administration regarding this amendment 205 00:24:57,415 --> 00:25:04,670 - talks about the downtown corridor stay including Kirkwood Avenue. 206 00:25:04,834 --> 00:25:14,084 - This is a question for the mayor Since it's only tangentially related to planning and transportation 207 00:25:14,084 --> 00:25:23,701 - But prior to the study of the Kirkwood corridor and As as called for in the transportation plan to think 208 00:25:23,701 --> 00:25:31,486 - about how to convert it to a shared street What is the administration's position on? 209 00:25:31,618 --> 00:25:40,292 - having Kirkwood seasonally close to vehicular traffic next year? Well, our position remains the same, 210 00:25:40,292 --> 00:25:48,881 - that we need a study to figure out exactly the right way forward with Kirkwood and how we can design 211 00:25:48,881 --> 00:25:57,896 - it to be the street that we envision that really maximizes safety and business and vibrancy for downtown. 212 00:25:57,896 --> 00:26:00,702 - But the plan was, if you recall, 213 00:26:00,802 --> 00:26:08,394 - that we would put the RFP out for this corridor study so that we could get moving on that in good time. 214 00:26:08,394 --> 00:26:16,060 - So we had anticipated putting that RFP out this fall so that we could get the plan done early next year. 215 00:26:16,060 --> 00:26:23,506 - And just to connect the dots here, I think Council Member Stossberg asked what happens if we don't go 216 00:26:23,506 --> 00:26:29,054 - forward with these plans. If you don't go forward with the plans, we can't, 217 00:26:29,634 --> 00:26:38,245 - Complete the work that is in things like our transportation plan We we fall behind on that if we don't 218 00:26:38,245 --> 00:26:46,857 - complete these plans. We also can't apply for funding so these various safe streets for all grants the 219 00:26:46,857 --> 00:26:55,134 - the the corridor improvement plans and the grants that we get from federal transportation they all 220 00:26:55,266 --> 00:27:03,036 - are contingent upon having these plans done well in advance and having the community commit to the planning 221 00:27:03,036 --> 00:27:10,375 - process and having it signed off on. So it is not the case that we can wait for the grant to come out 222 00:27:10,375 --> 00:27:17,858 - and then do the plan. We have to have a plan in place so that we can apply for these grants. So we lose 223 00:27:17,858 --> 00:27:22,750 - out on funding if we say no to plans is the long and short of this. 224 00:27:24,482 --> 00:27:31,888 - Specific to Kirkwood you're saying that this bigger Kirkwood corridor study which is only funded for 225 00:27:31,888 --> 00:27:39,294 - 30% of the design is Needs to be done before we consider a seasonal opening of Kirkwood next year Is 226 00:27:39,294 --> 00:27:47,140 - that what I'm that was part of the plan? Yes to to get this done and get it moving so that we can consider 227 00:27:47,140 --> 00:27:52,126 - carefully what it's going to take to close Kirkwood if we do it and 228 00:27:54,466 --> 00:28:05,477 - All right, thank you. Any other questions? I have one or two clarification questions. So we talk, 229 00:28:05,477 --> 00:28:16,825 - you know, I understand we have to have a plan set to be able to apply for the funding. Could we have 230 00:28:16,825 --> 00:28:18,398 - theoretically 231 00:28:18,530 --> 00:28:25,495 - I'm not talking about any particular project but theoretically could we have a plan for something without 232 00:28:25,495 --> 00:28:32,198 - having done a study first do we have to show a study that has crafted that plan or Dictated that plan 233 00:28:32,198 --> 00:28:38,834 - as a general rule to apply for the federal funding. They have very specific requirements You have to 234 00:28:38,834 --> 00:28:46,654 - have as I listed in the memorandum your study problem your study objectives conditions assessment alternative analysis 235 00:28:46,850 --> 00:28:53,582 - Transportation project a basis for quantitative marriage determine how the alternatives work. It's It 236 00:28:53,582 --> 00:29:00,315 - is an analysis. It's an analytical plan of current conditions and what you intend to do in the future 237 00:29:00,315 --> 00:29:06,981 - it is and It takes a lot of time and expertise and a consultant to get that done so that it's in the 238 00:29:06,981 --> 00:29:13,648 - drawer and ready to go Not only for funding but actually for our own activities internally so but it 239 00:29:13,648 --> 00:29:16,222 - is a critical precursor to the funding 240 00:29:16,418 --> 00:29:22,788 - Okay, so you couldn't just say this is what we want to do I cannot give you a one-pager of this would 241 00:29:22,788 --> 00:29:29,034 - be really good if we could do this right and hand it to the federal government It's competitive and 242 00:29:29,034 --> 00:29:35,279 - we wouldn't make it and I I think so my sense is some of the frustration around the studies is that 243 00:29:35,279 --> 00:29:41,650 - we hear about several studies and Then nothing seems to happen from them, you know, we hear that, you 244 00:29:41,650 --> 00:29:46,334 - know college and walnut is being studied Indiana is being studied and then 245 00:29:46,466 --> 00:29:52,778 - A long time will pass and we don't hear anything. What is the shelf life for these studies? Like, 246 00:29:52,778 --> 00:29:59,219 - you know, how long can those be good to then later come back and be like, oh, here's the grant. Now 247 00:29:59,219 --> 00:30:05,789 - we can implement it. That depends on the funding situation. How long is the shelf life? You'd hope in 248 00:30:05,789 --> 00:30:12,230 - your analysis that it is a long shelf life, that it is a good plan. It's a durable plan and it will 249 00:30:12,230 --> 00:30:16,030 - stay in place as you seek funding as it becomes available. 250 00:30:16,514 --> 00:30:23,701 - The city doesn't have the funding to do the entire project It depends on federal support state support 251 00:30:23,701 --> 00:30:30,889 - and that is situational. Some of them have five-year lead times The tip for example is a two-year lead 252 00:30:30,889 --> 00:30:38,076 - time. So It is constantly in use as those funding cycles present themselves to us So how long it takes 253 00:30:38,076 --> 00:30:45,054 - a lot of that is outside our control. It depends on funding availability from the state and federal 254 00:30:45,054 --> 00:30:45,822 - government 255 00:30:47,394 --> 00:30:55,181 - Thank you, and we hope we're there when that happens. That's the point of all this understood. Thank 256 00:30:55,181 --> 00:31:02,892 - you So I think the the sequence of the study that planning does and then and sometimes some of that 257 00:31:02,892 --> 00:31:10,679 - work is done in-house and sometimes when it's complicated it requires external expertise and then it 258 00:31:10,679 --> 00:31:17,310 - moves on to engineering for design so a study is typically only 30% of design because 259 00:31:17,602 --> 00:31:23,734 - they're not doing the actual technical design. They're saying 30% of this is what you should be doing 260 00:31:23,734 --> 00:31:29,986 - in general. And then engineering flushes that work out. That work also takes time. So for example, with 261 00:31:29,986 --> 00:31:36,179 - Indiana Avenue, if planning had been able to arrive at a consensus that pleased everyone, or even most 262 00:31:36,179 --> 00:31:42,191 - of the people, or even some of the people, none of the design satisfied anyone, the next step would 263 00:31:42,191 --> 00:31:45,918 - have been for it to go to engineering for design. By the time 264 00:31:46,146 --> 00:31:52,835 - Completed the design then it would be eligible for funding that is a multi-year process It just doesn't 265 00:31:52,835 --> 00:31:59,332 - go fast one of the questions I asked planning recently that might be of interest to you was When you 266 00:31:59,332 --> 00:32:05,828 - have a project like the college and walnut study very big study and at the end of it we found out it 267 00:32:05,828 --> 00:32:10,974 - has 120 million dollar price tag, which is a very large number now we can still 268 00:32:11,394 --> 00:32:16,915 - Execute pieces of that and apply for funding using that plan, but 120 million dollars is a lot So the 269 00:32:16,915 --> 00:32:22,435 - question I had for planning was when we hire a consultant, how do we both? Leave room for imagination 270 00:32:22,435 --> 00:32:27,901 - and creativity show us what we could do with downtown show us. What are the options for Kirkwood but 271 00:32:27,901 --> 00:32:33,422 - also not Put ourselves on a path to getting another hundred and twenty million dollar plan if we were 272 00:32:33,422 --> 00:32:38,942 - designing a house the first thing our architect would ask is what's your budget, but we don't want to 273 00:32:38,942 --> 00:32:39,646 - restrict and 274 00:32:40,130 --> 00:32:45,957 - We want to see all the ideas. So there's a balance there. And it is frustrating that things take a long 275 00:32:45,957 --> 00:32:51,727 - time. But that is the process. And I was sharing with Councilmember Piedmont-Smith earlier that I hear 276 00:32:51,727 --> 00:32:57,666 - in council meetings every year the question for the planning director, why isn't there any implementation 277 00:32:57,666 --> 00:33:03,492 - money in your budget? Where's the implementation money? It's because planning isn't the department that 278 00:33:03,492 --> 00:33:07,134 - does the implementation. That's engineering. They do the design. 279 00:33:07,266 --> 00:33:14,589 - issue the RFP supervise the construction. So plannings implementation would be more like quick studies 280 00:33:14,589 --> 00:33:21,770 - with temporary measures to see will this work if we put it in concrete. Does this is this having the 281 00:33:21,770 --> 00:33:28,880 - effect that we want it. So just a little extra context. Thank you. Any other questions second round 282 00:33:28,880 --> 00:33:30,942 - other first round questions. 283 00:33:33,666 --> 00:33:40,073 - I'll have one quick second round question, then, since nobody else has a question. This is for President 284 00:33:40,073 --> 00:33:46,174 - Asari. How did you come up with this number for this? It's just the total number. The total number. 285 00:33:46,174 --> 00:33:52,764 - Yeah, it's all of the studies. Got it. And also, I mean, I probably should have said this at the beginning, 286 00:33:52,764 --> 00:33:58,988 - but we talked about this in other ways. I think that an extent of this, and I think we're having that 287 00:33:58,988 --> 00:34:03,198 - conversation now, which is very useful, is whether or not we want to 288 00:34:03,330 --> 00:34:11,706 - have sort of studies commissioned, like just as a standard protocol in practice, whether we would like 289 00:34:11,706 --> 00:34:20,245 - those type of things to have to come to council on a individual basis or not. I'm putting that out there 290 00:34:20,245 --> 00:34:27,646 - as a discussion point rather than as a position point. And again, I think as I said in the 291 00:34:27,874 --> 00:34:33,856 - As I said in our working session, I think that perhaps this is somewhat influenced by some recency bias 292 00:34:33,856 --> 00:34:39,780 - where we funded a thing and then got a thing back where we're sort of like that isn't necessarily what 293 00:34:39,780 --> 00:34:45,646 - we would have funded had we have had more influence on it or something like that. And so I think sort 294 00:34:45,646 --> 00:34:51,455 - of that's the approach here of saying, are these appropriate? I think the conversation is spot on in 295 00:34:51,455 --> 00:34:52,318 - the sense that 296 00:34:52,418 --> 00:34:58,117 - Look I mean there's there's three distinct studies that are that are being put here. One of them not 297 00:34:58,117 --> 00:35:04,042 - totally scoped out two of which are somewhat scoped out. So I mean sort of depending on what the feeling 298 00:35:04,042 --> 00:35:09,684 - on councils but I but I don't I don't think of the things that we've proposed. I mean I don't. Yeah 299 00:35:09,684 --> 00:35:14,142 - I mean I'm happy to happy to not waste time and move on. All right. Thank you. 300 00:35:14,466 --> 00:35:22,159 - We'll move to public comment now anybody in chambers or online like to make public comment on amendment 301 00:35:22,159 --> 00:35:29,557 - 2 For appropriation ordinance 2026 dash amendment 3. Yeah, forgive me amendment 3 for appropriation 302 00:35:29,557 --> 00:35:36,954 - ordinance 2026-02 Nobody online. I don't see anybody Trampling each other to come to the podium All 303 00:35:36,954 --> 00:35:43,390 - right. We'll come back here for council comment before we take a vote on amendment 3 I 304 00:35:43,714 --> 00:35:50,064 - Whose hand is that I'm sorry Councilmember Stossberg. Thank you. I'm not in favor of this particular 305 00:35:50,064 --> 00:35:56,477 - amendment I don't have any I don't think that it's good use of council time to approve these sorts of 306 00:35:56,477 --> 00:36:01,758 - things as they come I think that it's really important to keep in mind the the long 307 00:36:02,082 --> 00:36:08,495 - Picture in planning and land use and that doesn't just have to do with transportation corridors Even 308 00:36:08,495 --> 00:36:15,352 - though a lot of them have talked about transportation corridors It also has to do with economic development 309 00:36:15,352 --> 00:36:21,892 - related stuff and just what are we going to do with? the land that we have In terms of within the city 310 00:36:21,892 --> 00:36:28,495 - of Bloomington what what kind of initiatives should we have? What kind of zoning should be in different 311 00:36:28,495 --> 00:36:30,654 - places? There's lots of potential 312 00:36:30,754 --> 00:36:39,347 - Study kind of stuff and I think that recently some things that have been highly cited have been safe 313 00:36:39,347 --> 00:36:48,025 - streets for all plan and the changes that we as council said that we wanted to get to zero fatalities 314 00:36:48,025 --> 00:36:57,044 - and serious injury crashes and in order to do that we need to have studies to To make that work possible. 315 00:36:57,044 --> 00:37:00,702 - And so I think that it would just not be a 316 00:37:00,930 --> 00:37:12,539 - Beneficial thing for the city to to cut off these studies. So that's it. Thank you Thank you any other 317 00:37:12,539 --> 00:37:24,035 - comments on amendment three All right, seeing none will clerk please call the roll on amendment three 318 00:37:24,035 --> 00:37:30,910 - Councilmember Piedmont Smith No Zulik No Sorry also no daily 319 00:37:31,170 --> 00:37:42,965 - No breath yes clarity no Stasburg no All right that amendment fails something to two one two three five 320 00:37:42,965 --> 00:37:54,420 - to two One to one. Oh, sorry. Yes six six six one Oh, I have to do it the other way one six I Didn't 321 00:37:54,420 --> 00:37:59,070 - have training for this job, please. Okay 322 00:37:59,458 --> 00:38:07,545 - Apologies great. Thank you moving on to amendment for also councilmember. Sorry, would you like to present? 323 00:38:07,545 --> 00:38:15,258 - Oh, I'm sorry. I Don't want to move it. Yeah Can we move amendment? This is some of some of the simple 324 00:38:15,258 --> 00:38:22,895 - ones like amendment 14 I would propose we do amendment 14 instead of amendment What's the next one of 325 00:38:22,895 --> 00:38:28,062 - mine amendment five? Thoughts that's yours councilman Piedmont Smith 326 00:38:29,186 --> 00:38:37,504 - I mean I suppose I can move your amendment but you know so I'd move that we put forward amendment. Well 327 00:38:37,504 --> 00:38:42,782 - actually I'll put forward Amendment 5 if there's a second second. 328 00:38:43,298 --> 00:38:51,419 - It will not waste time on this because I think you know we can consider at the same time amendment 5 329 00:38:51,419 --> 00:38:59,862 - and amendment 14 Within the response given by the mayor's office to amendment 5 they make a counteroffer 330 00:38:59,862 --> 00:39:04,606 - I think reasonable so I'm happy to amend this amendment to 331 00:39:04,706 --> 00:39:14,060 - counteroffer which Keeps the money for leadership development cuts the the branding money while retaining 332 00:39:14,060 --> 00:39:23,150 - some of the money for promotion of business I Would happy to do this or would happy to take number 14. 333 00:39:23,150 --> 00:39:32,063 - So just sort of maybe we could have a discussion on which is better Councilmember Stasberg, I have a 334 00:39:32,063 --> 00:39:34,622 - clarification about this one 335 00:39:35,234 --> 00:39:52,688 - So let me find the clarification exactly in Amendment 5 it states that that $10,000 for branding is 336 00:39:52,688 --> 00:40:02,462 - in oh Geez oh my gosh, I can't even find it. Okay, yeah 337 00:40:02,562 --> 00:40:10,694 - In one in in councilmember Piedmont Smith's it has the ten thousand dollars for branding in a different 338 00:40:10,694 --> 00:40:18,748 - line than in councilmember Asari's ten thousand dollars for branding so councilmember Piedmont Smith's 339 00:40:18,748 --> 00:40:26,567 - takes that out of management fees consultants and considers that branding and councilmember Asari's 340 00:40:26,567 --> 00:40:32,510 - takes it out of I put a note about this somewhere and I'm trying to find it 341 00:40:32,802 --> 00:40:41,802 - Other services and charges so I would like clarification about exactly where that 10,000 for branding 342 00:40:41,802 --> 00:40:50,713 - is There it is. Yeah, because the office of the mayor Respond this is it the count the office of the 343 00:40:50,713 --> 00:40:58,654 - mayor's memo responds to councilmember Asari's amendment on line item 2 as as taking that 344 00:41:01,346 --> 00:41:10,304 - Talks about that that is the leadership retreat and then the 10,000 for branding out of the other services 345 00:41:10,304 --> 00:41:18,677 - and charges but But councilmember Piedmont Smith has the branding out of consultants and workshops, 346 00:41:18,677 --> 00:41:23,198 - so where exactly is should the branding come out of I 347 00:41:30,210 --> 00:41:38,036 - is in other services and charges the leadership development it the amendment is correct in stating that 348 00:41:38,036 --> 00:41:46,088 - leadership development is under consultants and Branding support is under under other services and charges 349 00:41:46,088 --> 00:41:53,614 - Okay, so that means that councilmember Piedmont Smith's Amendment number 14 which the synopsis says 350 00:41:53,614 --> 00:41:58,430 - it's taking it out taking ten thousand dollars out for branding 351 00:41:58,530 --> 00:42:05,564 - but the line item that it refers to is Taking it out of management fees and consultants and it's actually 352 00:42:05,564 --> 00:42:12,332 - should be taken out of other services. That's correct So that means that amendment 14 is actually not 353 00:42:12,332 --> 00:42:19,166 - correct The proofreader yeah, yeah, I mean this but but point is if we adopt 14 We'd just have to edit 354 00:42:19,166 --> 00:42:25,470 - it or we can edit this one. However, we see fit what I mean again, I think we have to clear up 355 00:42:25,666 --> 00:42:32,567 - Approaches one is just limited to branding. The other one is sort of across the board Neither of these 356 00:42:32,567 --> 00:42:39,334 - are probably worth us spending too much time on it's not a big move the needle thing So so I'm yeah, 357 00:42:39,334 --> 00:42:46,101 - so I'm very I'm very happy to just do 14 if it makes it if it makes it simpler But we'd have to Well 358 00:42:46,101 --> 00:42:53,002 - right now we've moved us amendment five. Yes. Yes But I'm happy to withdraw that and move on if that's 359 00:42:53,002 --> 00:42:54,878 - what everybody would prefer 360 00:42:57,858 --> 00:43:06,609 - I would have to see in writing for Amendment 5 what the new deductions are because right now I would 361 00:43:06,609 --> 00:43:15,794 - have to switch back and forth between two documents to figure it out and maybe it's we need the amendment 362 00:43:15,794 --> 00:43:24,718 - to be in writing anyway. So maybe it's easier to to do a minute 14 first because that's one correction 363 00:43:24,718 --> 00:43:25,758 - whereas the 364 00:43:26,530 --> 00:43:36,084 - Changes to amendment five are multiple But we have the amendment five on the table so it would have 365 00:43:36,084 --> 00:43:46,116 - to be withdrawn This is a question for the office of the mayor it says in your response to Councilmember 366 00:43:46,116 --> 00:43:54,046 - sorry's third point with the promotion of business and cutting that to zero that's 367 00:43:54,786 --> 00:44:02,558 - That particular line is used for boarding Commission reception and state of the city public events, 368 00:44:02,558 --> 00:44:10,640 - but There has not been any funding in that line since 2023 and We have had those events Since that time 369 00:44:10,640 --> 00:44:18,567 - so what line were those events actually being taken out of? So I don't have the notes on where it was 370 00:44:18,567 --> 00:44:24,318 - in the 2025 budget, but I know that controller McClellan in the worksheet 371 00:44:24,802 --> 00:44:31,375 - That we use a separate worksheet outside of to go over drafts of what the budget could include It was 372 00:44:31,375 --> 00:44:37,884 - included in the mayor's promotion of business and that is a confusing title for a line. That's where 373 00:44:37,884 --> 00:44:44,651 - she felt it belonged But There was It did not get entered into new world. So when it doesn't get entered 374 00:44:44,651 --> 00:44:51,159 - in a new world, it's not going to pop up on The sheet so for this year, for example, we have to draw 375 00:44:51,159 --> 00:44:52,126 - on other funds 376 00:44:52,290 --> 00:44:58,504 - From the mayor's office and move things around to be able to cover those costs because we do want to 377 00:44:58,504 --> 00:45:04,779 - keep putting on those events So it was just an error that it wasn't included last year Previously, it 378 00:45:04,779 --> 00:45:11,055 - might have been included under Another line. I'd have to look that up historically, but it's the same 379 00:45:11,055 --> 00:45:17,146 - it's the same amount and Essentially, it's paying for you know renting a facility AV sign language 380 00:45:17,146 --> 00:45:19,422 - interpretation for state of the city 381 00:45:20,066 --> 00:45:27,219 - and food and beverage which in city events is tricky to pay for and can only be done in certain circumstances 382 00:45:27,219 --> 00:45:33,852 - and that's where controller McClellan wanted to take that out of Ultimately was the mayor's promotion 383 00:45:33,852 --> 00:45:40,485 - of business. So that money was actually spent last year it just wasn't allocated to that line because 384 00:45:40,485 --> 00:45:47,118 - of an error even though it was in our worksheet and Was expected to be included So it would have been 385 00:45:47,118 --> 00:45:48,158 - I don't know if 386 00:45:48,514 --> 00:45:55,950 - It was included in the final tallies or not but it didn't get transferred over from the worksheet into 387 00:45:55,950 --> 00:46:03,459 - New World with a manual entry. Well I guess I just feel like it's interesting that that line is getting 388 00:46:03,459 --> 00:46:10,896 - funded for the first time in several years and trying to figure out since we've had those things where 389 00:46:10,896 --> 00:46:16,094 - the actual reduction is going to come or if it is going to come and so. 390 00:46:16,674 --> 00:46:22,674 - The reduction would come from the proposed budget that we sent in which included Funds to cover what 391 00:46:22,674 --> 00:46:28,851 - has been historically the cost of those two events plus an extra seven hundred and seventy five dollars 392 00:46:28,851 --> 00:46:34,910 - in case some other Public event came up where we needed to provide interpretation or rent a facility. 393 00:46:34,910 --> 00:46:41,088 - No, I mean I mean that we've had those events and so Those events have been paid for yes somewhere from 394 00:46:41,088 --> 00:46:45,662 - the office of the mayor So I'm trying to figure out where they have actually 395 00:46:46,082 --> 00:46:51,686 - Paid for because it's not as though I mean we paid for them. So there's there's you give me money for 396 00:46:51,686 --> 00:46:57,345 - them somewhere in the budget So I'm trying to go. Okay, like which lines would they have been paid for 397 00:46:57,345 --> 00:47:02,949 - that should now be lower? Because I are now being paid for out of this mayor's promotion of business. 398 00:47:02,949 --> 00:47:08,773 - That's what I'm trying to figure out Let me let me dig into that a little bit and I can get you an answer 399 00:47:08,773 --> 00:47:14,377 - But the short answer is in the 2026 budget it would not have been in there at all due to the error so 400 00:47:14,377 --> 00:47:15,806 - we we have to essentially 401 00:47:16,162 --> 00:47:22,438 - borrow money as we do at the end of the year when one line runs over within a category from another 402 00:47:22,438 --> 00:47:28,839 - category and cut costs somewhere else to cover that for this year. But I can look up for you where it 403 00:47:28,839 --> 00:47:35,303 - was in 2025 and in 2024. That is a recurring call. So it lives somewhere. I just don't know the answer 404 00:47:35,303 --> 00:47:42,206 - off the top of my head. That would be very helpful. Thank you. All right. Any other questions on Amendment 5. 405 00:47:43,522 --> 00:47:49,074 - This is five right and just for the sake of I mean thinking about how to how to go through this because 406 00:47:49,074 --> 00:47:54,520 - I think we have a couple others where we might want to make some like line item changes to them might 407 00:47:54,520 --> 00:47:59,912 - I suggest for the good of the order that what we do is you know we can sort of talk through them now 408 00:47:59,912 --> 00:48:05,304 - say we're say where we're at then recess for like 10 minutes very so that we can then go through and 409 00:48:05,304 --> 00:48:10,856 - actually make the the line item edits before voting on on on the amendment. So I mean just just as just 410 00:48:10,856 --> 00:48:11,870 - as one suggestion. 411 00:48:13,730 --> 00:48:20,131 - But I'm not in charge. Well, I was going to say so I think we can finish discussing this do public comment 412 00:48:20,131 --> 00:48:26,293 - comment and then set this one aside and keep moving on. So if there's any questions we'll do that now. 413 00:48:26,293 --> 00:48:32,335 - I see somebody. Yes. Go ahead. Sorry. It would have been in other services and charges and in twenty 414 00:48:32,335 --> 00:48:38,377 - twenty six controller McClellan for the twenty twenty six budget controller McClellan wanted to move 415 00:48:38,377 --> 00:48:43,582 - it back into mayor's promotion of business which she felt was a more appropriate line. 416 00:48:43,682 --> 00:48:49,884 - And then it didn't get entered. So other services and charges is where it would have lived in the past. 417 00:48:49,884 --> 00:48:55,908 - Thank you. Council member Stasberg. So in twenty twenty five those events came out of other services 418 00:48:55,908 --> 00:49:02,050 - and charges. Yes I guess I'm kind of mystified by that because the actual amount in twenty twenty five 419 00:49:02,050 --> 00:49:08,193 - in our budget book is listed as four thousand eight hundred and twenty dollars. And that's that sounds 420 00:49:08,193 --> 00:49:12,606 - that sounds correct. Okay. That's about the total of those two events for 421 00:49:12,962 --> 00:49:22,257 - all the AV and translation and services and Okay locations and stuff Okay, if there are no other questions 422 00:49:22,257 --> 00:49:31,466 - then we'll We'll flip it on over to councilman sasper. Sorry. I have another one then so Right now though 423 00:49:31,466 --> 00:49:39,806 - the in the 2027 budget proposal the other services and charges a sixty six thousand budgeted so 424 00:49:40,610 --> 00:49:46,804 - What is that supposed to include again because I mean councilmember Asari's amendment just takes it 425 00:49:46,804 --> 00:49:53,493 - down ten thousand dollars for the branding. But what is the rest of the fifty six thousand dollars supposed 426 00:49:53,493 --> 00:49:54,174 - to be for. 427 00:50:17,922 --> 00:50:26,288 - For the benefit of the public the deputy mayor is trying to look that up for me right now so why don't 428 00:50:26,288 --> 00:50:34,491 - we go ahead and move to public comments and We hope that we can get that answer. Is there any public 429 00:50:34,491 --> 00:50:42,775 - comment on amendment five? Online or in chambers No, all right No comment among council, I'm assuming 430 00:50:42,775 --> 00:50:47,486 - council member Stossberg I Mean I I have comments on this 431 00:50:47,650 --> 00:50:56,554 - I'll say I'm in favor of reducing the branding by 10,000 and I am OK with putting money into the mayor's 432 00:50:56,554 --> 00:51:05,204 - promotion of business if it's specifically just to fund these two events. But there needs to be a cut 433 00:51:05,204 --> 00:51:10,462 - to where they were previously being funded and right now that 434 00:51:10,594 --> 00:51:17,185 - Isn't what the budget looks like and here Deputy Marinap can maybe tell me what the fifty six thousand 435 00:51:17,185 --> 00:51:24,032 - dollars is supposed to be so I'm not seeing fifty six thousand I'm seeing sixteen thousand and ten dollars 436 00:51:24,032 --> 00:51:30,751 - that was in our worksheet the ten thousand of that was for the branding five thousand was for the winter 437 00:51:30,751 --> 00:51:36,702 - shelter support there's three hundred dollars for the host well the Hopewell website hosting 438 00:51:36,994 --> 00:51:43,490 - Three hundred and sixty dollars for public engagement AV that would be at town halls for example and 439 00:51:43,490 --> 00:51:49,922 - three hundred fifty dollars for actually a state of the city interpretation lives in other services 440 00:51:49,922 --> 00:51:55,582 - and charges so I'm not sure where fifty six thousand dollars is coming from. That's not 441 00:51:56,450 --> 00:52:06,634 - in the 2027 Budget that got presented to us during budget week. So it's the Wednesday, August 26th in 442 00:52:06,634 --> 00:52:16,818 - the office of the mayor General fund with your expenses it has line 53 990 other services and charges 443 00:52:16,818 --> 00:52:22,110 - as sixty six thousand ten dollars and that is in the 444 00:52:24,610 --> 00:52:31,208 - So maybe there was a typo somewhere but that is what we have been given. It's not a typo. Sorry. I had 445 00:52:31,208 --> 00:52:37,807 - forgotten that there was a change we made after the worksheet. That is where the 50,000 of that is the 446 00:52:37,807 --> 00:52:44,726 - emergency management consultant that we had treated as a temporary employee and then turned to a contractor 447 00:52:44,726 --> 00:52:51,580 - for a host of reasons that we did explain in the budget. That's where the big money comes from. Apologies. 448 00:52:51,580 --> 00:52:53,374 - Okay. Thank you. All right. 449 00:52:53,634 --> 00:53:02,706 - so with that any other comments or questions before we Set this one aside and move on to another amendment. 450 00:53:02,706 --> 00:53:11,274 - I Withdraw this this amendment at the moment. All right. Thank you That point of point of order do we 451 00:53:11,274 --> 00:53:20,094 - want to withdraw it or do we want to table it? Good point. Um, I Would like to table it. I would I moved 452 00:53:20,094 --> 00:53:22,110 - to table amendment five 453 00:53:24,866 --> 00:53:35,392 - That needs a second. Thank you All right, so that would bring us to amendment six President sorry, do 454 00:53:35,392 --> 00:53:45,918 - you want to bring that's okay. I hear you take your time So I move to introduce six with haste second 455 00:53:46,242 --> 00:53:54,241 - This one I'll just note was reducing travel budgets across the board The the mayor says that that they 456 00:53:54,241 --> 00:54:02,084 - they think they can cut by 35,000 That seems appropriate. I would just note though with amendment 16 457 00:54:02,084 --> 00:54:09,927 - I think some of these might be wrapped up into amendment 16 and where we sort of land on that so I'm 458 00:54:09,927 --> 00:54:16,062 - very happy to You know table this one for now as well Table or table introduce 459 00:54:16,994 --> 00:54:25,575 - Well, I mean We've introduced it but I'm just saying that they if there's the action that we can take 460 00:54:25,575 --> 00:54:33,988 - on this is either vote for it as is and or Talk through the 35,000 counter offer I think regardless 461 00:54:33,988 --> 00:54:42,568 - that will take a little bit, you know of Rewriting and thinking where where that counter offer exists 462 00:54:42,568 --> 00:54:46,270 - And then I'm saying because of amendment 16 463 00:54:46,370 --> 00:54:53,594 - This might be a moot point. So Okay So unless anybody has any questions right now, I think maybe we 464 00:54:53,594 --> 00:55:01,179 - can table this one as per councilmember Asari's suggestion, but councilmember Stossberg, I would suggest 465 00:55:01,179 --> 00:55:08,620 - that we go through the process of public comment, etc Oh, yes, we table things so that then absolutely 466 00:55:08,620 --> 00:55:14,110 - take it up from the table. We don't at that point have to do public comment 467 00:55:17,570 --> 00:55:26,044 - Okay, so without no more questions right now on this one, we'll go ahead to public comment anybody in 468 00:55:26,044 --> 00:55:35,016 - chambers or Online have burning thoughts to share on amendment six. They do not. Oh, yes. I do see somebody 469 00:55:35,016 --> 00:55:43,573 - approaching the podium. Thank you please sign in and State your name for the record and you have three 470 00:55:43,573 --> 00:55:46,398 - minutes My name is Iris bull I am 471 00:55:46,722 --> 00:55:52,504 - member of staff, but I'm just here for myself tonight. I think that pushing the city to improve its 472 00:55:52,504 --> 00:55:58,287 - preparation and documentation of the city's budget and staff's appropriation requests is undeniably 473 00:55:58,287 --> 00:56:04,242 - the right thing to do because it improves transparency, accountability, and stability to the provision 474 00:56:04,242 --> 00:56:10,256 - of municipal services. But as council members have publicly reviewed budget appropriations for the next 475 00:56:10,256 --> 00:56:15,518 - year, you have failed to distinguish between the expenses that we can attribute to postage 476 00:56:15,778 --> 00:56:21,865 - The ones we can associate with needless bureaucratic process and I think in doing so you've proposed 477 00:56:21,865 --> 00:56:27,952 - amendments that will require more of the very thing I think a lot of people actually kind of despise 478 00:56:27,952 --> 00:56:34,040 - and that's political theater and On this item. I really just want to sort of speak from the heart it 479 00:56:34,040 --> 00:56:40,127 - is so petty to remove the travel budget because it is one of the easiest ways to invest in staff and 480 00:56:40,127 --> 00:56:41,694 - improve city services and 481 00:56:44,674 --> 00:56:50,684 - I think if you want a leaner government, you need to start by looking at processes and asking people 482 00:56:50,684 --> 00:56:56,633 - to document their workflows so that people can understand why things are taking so long. Why are so 483 00:56:56,633 --> 00:57:02,643 - many people involved in a specific process? You need to be thinking about the kind of average labor, 484 00:57:02,643 --> 00:57:08,831 - the average amount of labor involved in every little thing that we're doing. On the staff side, we have 485 00:57:08,831 --> 00:57:11,806 - to justify every single dollar that we spend with 486 00:57:12,002 --> 00:57:18,216 - painstaking detail and redundancy. And it's honestly really wild that so much of this process right 487 00:57:18,216 --> 00:57:24,679 - now is being drafted and it's not even available for staff to review and publish. I'm only here because 488 00:57:24,679 --> 00:57:31,328 - I'm upset. But I'm not the only one who's been paying attention this week and has been totally demoralized 489 00:57:31,328 --> 00:57:37,729 - by the process. And that is also taking up staff time because instead of talking about our work, we're 490 00:57:37,729 --> 00:57:41,022 - talking about how bummed out we are. And that sucks. 491 00:57:41,410 --> 00:57:48,433 - So I just hope that in the future, when we're talking about things that have some real gravity, like 492 00:57:48,433 --> 00:57:55,457 - dissolving departments and firing people, that there's some amount of empathy and seriousness to the 493 00:57:55,457 --> 00:58:02,619 - conversation. Because over here, we're trying really, really hard to provide the absolute best service 494 00:58:02,619 --> 00:58:07,070 - with what are often substandard accommodations for some people. 495 00:58:07,618 --> 00:58:16,224 - The appearance that like this is easy for people to come up with an honest number is It's just really 496 00:58:16,224 --> 00:58:24,998 - difficult. That's why it's called a budget and Why it's not always spent down every year, but sometimes 497 00:58:24,998 --> 00:58:33,519 - it is because things are hard to predict That's it Thank you very much any other comment in the room 498 00:58:33,519 --> 00:58:35,038 - or online No Okay 499 00:58:35,266 --> 00:58:41,881 - last comments among council members councilmember Stossberg Thank you. I'm not in support of this one 500 00:58:41,881 --> 00:58:48,431 - I generally don't like the idea of making everybody split or like cut things by a certain percentage 501 00:58:48,431 --> 00:58:55,436 - because I think that it doesn't take into account the Uniqueness that goes along with different departments 502 00:58:55,436 --> 00:59:02,505 - and different needs and and different costs related to that I also want to really thank our public commenter 503 00:59:02,505 --> 00:59:04,126 - for speaking tonight and 504 00:59:05,730 --> 00:59:12,778 - Think mostly like apologize to city staff for some of this conversation and some of the ways that these 505 00:59:12,778 --> 00:59:19,691 - potential amendments have been approached because you know and I felt like that last Wednesday during 506 00:59:19,691 --> 00:59:26,875 - the work session when we're talking about about staff and positions and staff are really really important 507 00:59:26,875 --> 00:59:34,398 - because they actually make everything run and I I just I'm I'm not in I'm not in support of this one Thank you 508 00:59:36,770 --> 00:59:45,271 - Councilmember, sorry. Yeah also note. I think I think that I mean first off I think that that's a very 509 00:59:45,271 --> 00:59:54,019 - persuasive argument and and and frankly Yes, I I share a council member Stasberg's view of the discomfort 510 00:59:54,019 --> 01:00:03,262 - of a lot of these conversations I also though would like to highlight something that that this was the clearest 511 01:00:03,394 --> 01:00:10,323 - Argument for an outcome that is associated with a line of funding and that then it seems petty I know 512 01:00:10,323 --> 01:00:16,030 - I agree I think a lot of this seems really petty and also later I'll say this clear 513 01:00:16,130 --> 01:00:22,503 - I don't think, and as I've said at the work session, I don't think that it's council's appropriate role 514 01:00:22,503 --> 01:00:28,816 - to be micromanaging decisions at a city level. We're supposed to be like the board of directors of the 515 01:00:28,816 --> 01:00:35,067 - city, not the executive branch. I get that. I think that on the other hand, we've been trying to have 516 01:00:35,067 --> 01:00:40,766 - a lot of these type of conversations about the long-term strength and viability of the city. 517 01:00:40,962 --> 01:00:46,343 - We can't all get together and discuss these things behind closed doors. So the way that we have to have 518 01:00:46,343 --> 01:00:51,725 - these conversations is to put them onto some paper. And when you say these things in any other setting, 519 01:00:51,725 --> 01:00:56,899 - people don't take you seriously until you put it on paper. And so I think I agree. I totally agree. 520 01:00:56,899 --> 01:00:58,814 - I find this very persuasive, though. 521 01:00:58,978 --> 01:01:05,151 - One thing I'd really like to underline is that we've had a lot of opportunities for somebody to simply 522 01:01:05,151 --> 01:01:11,324 - say, you know what? Travel is about this outcome. And you're the first person to say that. And so this 523 01:01:11,324 --> 01:01:17,437 - is the type of thing that I've been trying to surface throughout this budget process. I will note the 524 01:01:17,437 --> 01:01:23,550 - clerk also said something similar about their travel budget specifically. But you've talked about the 525 01:01:23,550 --> 01:01:28,944 - budget for travel overall. And so I really share that view. And so I'm happy to withdraw. 526 01:01:28,944 --> 01:01:38,791 - this one but again, it's you know up to the rest of you Yes, I'm opposed to cutting travel I think it's 527 01:01:38,791 --> 01:01:48,544 - it's a way to invest in our employees to have them communicate with other professionals in their field 528 01:01:48,544 --> 01:01:57,918 - to have them learn more in advance in their departments and I so I I plan to vote against this and 529 01:01:59,010 --> 01:02:09,583 - Because I'm happy to I'm happy to move to withdraw amendment 6. Yes Is there a second second, okay I 530 01:02:09,583 --> 01:02:20,157 - was just being extra cautious. All right. Thank you. So that then moves us on to amendment 7 I'm not 531 01:02:20,157 --> 01:02:24,030 - gonna introduce amendment 7. Okay, I 532 01:02:24,450 --> 01:02:33,696 - I think we have an we have an updated amendment from Councilmember Piemont Smith. I Don't know if you 533 01:02:33,696 --> 01:02:42,943 - could I don't know what number it is, but I think it replaces my number eight amendment 18 Mr. Allen, 534 01:02:42,943 --> 01:02:46,750 - can you display this amendment, please? I 535 01:02:50,786 --> 01:02:59,681 - It was an amendment to reduce the risk management budget to remove the appropriation for a telemetric 536 01:02:59,681 --> 01:03:08,750 - surveillance contract for city owned vehicles. I'm sorry. What amendment number is this. It's up there. 537 01:03:08,750 --> 01:03:17,471 - It's a new one. It's not in the packet. OK. So it would reduce the appropriation in risk management 538 01:03:17,471 --> 01:03:18,430 - 5 3 9 9 0. 539 01:03:18,626 --> 01:03:28,411 - by two hundred seventy two thousand dollars which is the estimated cost of the contract for telemetric 540 01:03:28,411 --> 01:03:38,005 - surveillance in city owned vehicles and my reasoning. Oh well is there a second second. My reasoning 541 01:03:38,005 --> 01:03:46,270 - is that this is surveillance and I think even if it could possibly reduce some risk in 542 01:03:47,042 --> 01:03:54,524 - by addressing unsafe driving practices. I think that comes at a greater risk of invasion of privacy 543 01:03:54,524 --> 01:04:02,156 - of individuals who are using city vehicles who might you know make a stop somewhere on their way back 544 01:04:02,156 --> 01:04:09,863 - to City Hall or on their way to a meeting or something. And then all of a sudden we know exactly where 545 01:04:09,863 --> 01:04:15,774 - they are and what they're doing. And I think that's problematic. So that's it. 546 01:04:17,282 --> 01:04:24,041 - Thank you any questions for councilmember Piedmont Smith councilmember Stasberg. I think that this is 547 01:04:24,041 --> 01:04:30,933 - for the administration actually Can can one of you explain exactly? Again, I remember I'm hearing about 548 01:04:30,933 --> 01:04:37,626 - the sum during budget hearings, but can you explain exactly what these cameras? Do you or what these 549 01:04:37,626 --> 01:04:44,253 - systems do? I'll take a stab at it and then public works director Adam waste may also want to speak 550 01:04:44,253 --> 01:04:47,102 - to it. I'm Margie rice corporation council 551 01:04:47,490 --> 01:04:55,229 - the software monitor speed has cameras to look for Drivers if they're on their cell phones, which is 552 01:04:55,229 --> 01:05:02,892 - obviously against the law It checks for rolling stops. We thought it was a good idea. We have had a 553 01:05:02,892 --> 01:05:10,631 - couple years ago. We had a pretty We had a decent increase in accidents and our premiums went up and 554 01:05:10,631 --> 01:05:14,462 - this was a way we thought would be a good idea to 555 01:05:15,298 --> 01:05:23,915 - Monitor speed another and driver and attention To address for example, we had a large excavator on a 556 01:05:23,915 --> 01:05:32,618 - trailer that tipped over speed to the According to the driver was not a factor But you've got a giant 557 01:05:32,618 --> 01:05:41,236 - truck pulling a trailer with a large excavator on it going into roundabout. We suspected speed was a 558 01:05:41,236 --> 01:05:43,710 - factor excavator was totaled 559 01:05:43,842 --> 01:05:50,348 - very expensive accident speed would have it would have been nice to know whether speed was a factor 560 01:05:50,348 --> 01:05:57,244 - or not. Not so that we can punish drivers but so that we can educate and train accordingly keeping people 561 01:05:57,244 --> 01:06:03,750 - safe keeping our equipment safe. Our goal here is not to violate anyone's rights but I can tell you 562 01:06:03,750 --> 01:06:09,150 - that we do allow our policies employees to make de minimis stops and you know grab 563 01:06:09,410 --> 01:06:17,573 - a drink or whatever. But I will point out that that would not be a violation legally a violation of 564 01:06:17,573 --> 01:06:26,062 - employee rights because they are being paid on their driving a city vehicle. They're being paid so they 565 01:06:26,062 --> 01:06:34,307 - should be doing work. And it's not as if we are so strict that we don't allow reasonable stops while 566 01:06:34,307 --> 01:06:38,878 - driving. So but if there is an employee who takes a big 567 01:06:39,010 --> 01:06:46,539 - Long furlough and doesn't report it on their time card. That would be an issue and I suppose maybe you 568 01:06:46,539 --> 01:06:54,140 - could tell it with this this but again, I think of that as accountability and certainly employees don't 569 01:06:54,140 --> 01:07:01,596 - have a right to You know do whatever they want when they're on the clock As a follow-up to that since 570 01:07:01,596 --> 01:07:05,470 - it was my original question Do they record location? 571 01:07:07,362 --> 01:07:14,533 - They would record Yeah, there would be telemetric somewhere there where they're going patterns driving 572 01:07:14,533 --> 01:07:21,634 - patterns. Okay, so like The supervisor at any time could say like where is truck number 12? You know, 573 01:07:21,634 --> 01:07:28,735 - I'm gonna let Adam interest that Good evening council members Adam waste and public works director So 574 01:07:28,735 --> 01:07:36,254 - there was a lot of different systems that can be used for these different programs think of this from maybe 575 01:07:36,706 --> 01:07:42,461 - From a public works perspective and from a general perspective, you know, it does track locations and 576 01:07:42,461 --> 01:07:48,668 - things what we're really looking to as well is Sanitation routes, so where's the truck at during a sanitation 577 01:07:48,668 --> 01:07:54,592 - route? Where's the truck at during snowplow? So while they're piling snow, so there are other advantages 578 01:07:54,592 --> 01:08:00,234 - to this as well Some of those can be public facing as well depending on which systems you go with I 579 01:08:00,234 --> 01:08:03,902 - Hope that answers your question. Thank you that answered mine. I 580 01:08:05,826 --> 01:08:12,078 - Any other questions? Council member, sorry. I don't know who this is best for, but the actual line figure 581 01:08:12,078 --> 01:08:18,330 - is quite a high one. I mean, I know we have a huge amount of cars in the fleet and all types of vehicles. 582 01:08:18,330 --> 01:08:24,346 - Can you speak directly to the ROI? I mean, because the, I mean, we gave sort of one example of a time 583 01:08:24,346 --> 01:08:30,362 - when it would have been useful, but yeah, like how do we, how do the people of Bloomington make their 584 01:08:30,362 --> 01:08:31,070 - money back? 585 01:08:31,266 --> 01:08:37,098 - In this day and age of high fuel prices fuel fuel monitoring. So if you're seeing excessive speeds or 586 01:08:37,098 --> 01:08:42,930 - excessive braking, you're gonna be using higher amounts of fuel You with sanitation in particular you 587 01:08:42,930 --> 01:08:48,876 - some of the programs offer Turn-by-turn route management things like that. So there are definitely some 588 01:08:48,876 --> 01:08:52,478 - areas and I could I could provide other examples if you'd like 589 01:08:52,706 --> 01:09:00,176 - OK, so it's actually more the active routing, like the sort of software part. That's an added benefit 590 01:09:00,176 --> 01:09:07,646 - to the things like Margie talked about from a risk management perspective. Speeds, braking distances, 591 01:09:07,646 --> 01:09:15,483 - rolling stops, all of those sorts of things are also part of packages that are offered as well. So there's 592 01:09:15,483 --> 01:09:18,046 - that risk management side as well. 593 01:09:18,178 --> 01:09:29,089 - OK, so I don't mean to put words in your mouth, but would you say that spending, I think it's $272,000 594 01:09:29,089 --> 01:09:39,893 - will result in greater than or equal to $272,000 of investment? There's a very large range of greater 595 01:09:39,893 --> 01:09:47,838 - than, right? And so I'm just trying to understand here, because, you know, 596 01:09:47,970 --> 01:09:53,707 - Get it. It's like I get I get the values. There's always values, you know, we could do this. There's 597 01:09:53,707 --> 01:09:59,388 - gain points I get it. I'm just trying to say like We're living in a time where we're saying that we 598 01:09:59,388 --> 01:10:05,579 - have to do less with less where we have all these pressures Why is this a thing that we need to be investing 599 01:10:05,579 --> 01:10:11,544 - in now? Yeah, so a couple points here we've been looking at this for several years and over with several 600 01:10:11,544 --> 01:10:17,054 - different vendors and So the cost range here is pretty significant it's it's case by case and so 601 01:10:17,218 --> 01:10:23,985 - The hope is that the two hundred and seventy some thousand dollar expenditure would result in zero accidents 602 01:10:23,985 --> 01:10:30,256 - or result in such a significant reduction that our insurance premiums go down citywide on top of the 603 01:10:30,256 --> 01:10:36,774 - other actual routing type benefits of fuel savings etc. So whether or not in any given year you're going 604 01:10:36,774 --> 01:10:38,078 - to see a two hundred 605 01:10:38,274 --> 01:10:43,761 - over a quarter-million-dollar benefit. But the point is, you see a possibility of a large swing here, 606 01:10:43,761 --> 01:10:49,249 - right? Yes. So that there is a possibility that we actually see long-term savings with this. Is there 607 01:10:49,249 --> 01:10:54,952 - a maintenance cost of having these? So are we locking ourselves in every single year to spending $250,000 608 01:10:54,952 --> 01:11:00,493 - to continue to do this? So there's always going to be some type of subscription. Most all of the firms 609 01:11:00,493 --> 01:11:06,249 - that are offering these types of products are going to have some type of subscription fee into the future, 610 01:11:06,249 --> 01:11:08,240 - but it all, again, all depends on... 611 01:11:08,240 --> 01:11:14,647 - breakdown, so what's the cost? Roughly speaking, I don't need exacts, but I'm just trying to get a sense 612 01:11:14,647 --> 01:11:20,871 - of what proportion of this is buying something new versus what proportion of this is paying for a new 613 01:11:20,871 --> 01:11:27,095 - service. We can follow up. And a follow up question, sorry. Are we covering the whole fleet with this 614 01:11:27,095 --> 01:11:33,441 - amount? Not necessarily. And so let me do this. Let us kind of regroup on our end to try to answer that 615 01:11:33,441 --> 01:11:36,126 - in a more substantial way for you to really 616 01:11:36,418 --> 01:11:42,367 - Like I said different vendors offer different aspects of different programs and such and how they do 617 01:11:42,367 --> 01:11:48,257 - it some are more upfront costs Some are more ongoing. So let us do a little more and we'll get back 618 01:11:48,257 --> 01:11:52,734 - to you. Okay. Thank you so much Any other questions Councilmember Stossberg 619 01:11:53,890 --> 01:12:00,747 - I have a round two hypothetical. So in the incident that you mentioned where you suspected that speed 620 01:12:00,747 --> 01:12:07,536 - might have been an issue, but there was no way for you to, say, prove that with this kind of system, 621 01:12:07,536 --> 01:12:14,326 - then you would be able to prove that. So then you could say, oh, this employee was driving too fast, 622 01:12:14,326 --> 01:12:18,494 - and that's why this happened. What would happen then to that? 623 01:12:18,690 --> 01:12:26,040 - employee potentially and Similarly, I mean does that mean our insurance doesn't cover it does that mean 624 01:12:26,040 --> 01:12:33,319 - some kind of other insurance covers it like is that I Mean, I mean because it's not like this software 625 01:12:33,319 --> 01:12:40,527 - is limiting speed It's still up to the driver to drive safely Let me take a stab at that and I'll let 626 01:12:40,527 --> 01:12:44,414 - Margie answer more of the like legal side of it, but I 627 01:12:44,642 --> 01:12:51,481 - It's gonna monitor that monitor that speed at real time. So if the driver is exceeding the speed limit, 628 01:12:51,481 --> 01:12:58,056 - you can set the parameters for notification it's gonna pop up on your you know with either a verbal 629 01:12:58,056 --> 01:13:04,961 - or Most likely some type of a verbal your speed is over the speed limit. Please slow down type of thing, 630 01:13:04,961 --> 01:13:11,602 - you know, so there are components of the system that in real time inform the driver of what Improper 631 01:13:11,602 --> 01:13:13,246 - driving was taking place 632 01:13:13,346 --> 01:13:18,810 - If you roll through a stop sign with some of these systems, it will let you know right then and there 633 01:13:18,810 --> 01:13:24,327 - you have rolled through a stop sign. It will log that in the system. The supervisor would get a report 634 01:13:24,327 --> 01:13:29,845 - in terms of just from a public works perspective. Again, we're not looking at this from a disciplinary 635 01:13:29,845 --> 01:13:35,362 - perspective. It's more of a record keeping or a tracking mechanism to help us improve driver behaviors 636 01:13:35,362 --> 01:13:39,326 - across the hundreds and hundreds of vehicles we have out there every day. 637 01:13:39,458 --> 01:13:46,211 - You know in terms of looking at it from disciplinary perspective that's not the original intent If an 638 01:13:46,211 --> 01:13:53,295 - extreme if an accident occurred and there were extreme speeds, of course We'd take that into consideration 639 01:13:53,295 --> 01:13:59,982 - through our accident review committee and other things And I can tell you that our insurance company 640 01:13:59,982 --> 01:14:03,358 - is recommending this purchase they think that it's 641 01:14:03,746 --> 01:14:09,508 - One they like the fact that we have a risk management division that's not something that every municipality 642 01:14:09,508 --> 01:14:14,949 - has they have encouraged us to review accidents on a weekly basis which we are doing as Adam said the 643 01:14:14,949 --> 01:14:20,391 - software can alert a driver that they're speeding they may not be you know they may be distracted not 644 01:14:20,391 --> 01:14:25,885 - paying attention it can stop in there that could stop an accident. We are hoping to keep our employees 645 01:14:25,885 --> 01:14:28,126 - safe and keep the public safe and if this 646 01:14:28,226 --> 01:14:34,955 - would prevent an accident it would be well worth the you know two hundred seventy two thousand dollars. 647 01:14:34,955 --> 01:14:41,489 - I think if it prevents an employee or a member of the public from being injured there are costs that 648 01:14:41,489 --> 01:14:48,089 - are not exactly dollar you know a specific dollar amount that you can put on an injury to an employee 649 01:14:48,089 --> 01:14:54,947 - or to a member of the public. I think it's a good idea. I think it's it could result in reduced premiums. 650 01:14:54,947 --> 01:14:57,470 - It could result in reduced. Adam said. 651 01:14:57,602 --> 01:15:04,755 - gasoline costs you know vehicle and damage. So we would be watching and seeing what kind of benefit 652 01:15:04,755 --> 01:15:12,051 - we get on this. It's hard to say right now what the return on investment would be until we get it and 653 01:15:12,051 --> 01:15:19,275 - use it. But I think it's a and again remember that this was 270 two thousand dollars that was in the 654 01:15:19,275 --> 01:15:27,358 - legal services O3 and I transferred it to record masking to transfer it to risk for this. It's not new money but 655 01:15:27,554 --> 01:15:34,166 - You know it's ultimately up to the council whether you want to appropriate this or not. We'd like to 656 01:15:34,166 --> 01:15:41,040 - try it. Our insurance company would like us to try it. We wouldn't probably start by putting it on every 657 01:15:41,040 --> 01:15:47,783 - single vehicle. I think Public Works is really interested in it. We would do utilities. We may not put 658 01:15:47,783 --> 01:15:54,656 - it on police and fire because they already you know have ways to sort of you know for example if they're 659 01:15:54,656 --> 01:15:57,406 - going to a crime scene you know they have 660 01:15:57,666 --> 01:16:04,038 - Dashcam that gets turned on so I mean there we'll look at how we deploy but again, we haven't we haven't 661 01:16:04,038 --> 01:16:10,289 - we've tested some but we haven't picked a vendor yet and And Adam sat through a lot of interviews with 662 01:16:10,289 --> 01:16:16,358 - different companies. So I think he's got a pretty good handle on it Thank you All right. Thank you. 663 01:16:16,358 --> 01:16:22,548 - If there are no other are there any other questions? right, we'll move to public comment then anybody 664 01:16:22,548 --> 01:16:24,126 - in chambers or online and 665 01:16:28,194 --> 01:16:38,965 - OK so moving on any last council member comments. Council member Piedmont Smith and then council member 666 01:16:38,965 --> 01:16:50,254 - Stossberg. Yeah I just think here again like with LPR it's trusting a third party vendor to keep information 667 01:16:50,254 --> 01:16:53,982 - secure and not share it improperly. 668 01:16:54,306 --> 01:17:02,610 - ACLU, at least in one state, has come out in opposition to the telemetric systems and has encouraged 669 01:17:02,610 --> 01:17:10,914 - that employees have an option to opt out of them. It's just another data collection point that could 670 01:17:10,914 --> 01:17:19,218 - be misused. And so I am, of course, in favor of the amendment that I'm bringing. And I hope for your 671 01:17:19,218 --> 01:17:20,862 - support. Thank you. 672 01:17:23,106 --> 01:17:34,193 - Councilman Stossberg was next and then president. Sorry I Appreciate councilmember Piedmont Smith bringing 673 01:17:34,193 --> 01:17:44,763 - this forward. I appreciate her Priority and attention to privacy in the situation. I do disagree with 674 01:17:44,763 --> 01:17:52,638 - her. I do think that This expense Has some potential for improving I'll say 675 01:17:52,770 --> 01:18:00,792 - City driver behavior and I mean I'm sure I'm not the only person who has seen city vehicles speed through 676 01:18:00,792 --> 01:18:08,512 - my neighborhood and roll through stop signs and It is especially frustrating when there's a city logo 677 01:18:08,512 --> 01:18:16,080 - on the side of a vehicle that you're going. Oh my gosh Why are they driving like that? Like I mean, 678 01:18:16,080 --> 01:18:20,318 - come on who's who's had a police officer tailgate them? 679 01:18:20,546 --> 01:18:28,033 - Like not necessarily targeting Bloomington police right but just like in general a police officer tailgum 680 01:18:28,033 --> 01:18:35,167 - or a police officer speed and just be like seriously like your lights aren't on what is the rush and 681 01:18:35,167 --> 01:18:42,230 - it's really frustrating from like a resident point of view to see that kind of behavior and I think 682 01:18:42,230 --> 01:18:49,505 - that this is a way to potentially improve driver safety and as long in my opinion as the employees are 683 01:18:49,505 --> 01:18:50,494 - aware of this 684 01:18:51,234 --> 01:19:01,803 - I think that The privacy issue is is Manageable okay, and that's also coming from you know the perspective 685 01:19:01,803 --> 01:19:12,076 - of somebody who has a lot of familiarity with remote work and there are a lot There's a lot of watching 686 01:19:12,076 --> 01:19:16,126 - happening with some remote work for some 687 01:19:16,418 --> 01:19:23,590 - industries thinking about tech industries where their computers record every single keystroke that they 688 01:19:23,590 --> 01:19:30,762 - do remotely and That you know all of those things are happening, and I think that this is a much milder 689 01:19:30,762 --> 01:19:37,935 - Sort of thing to have this kind of onboard system it also reminds me honestly of several safety related 690 01:19:37,935 --> 01:19:39,038 - systems that my 691 01:19:39,362 --> 01:19:46,470 - fancy new car has that my less fancy old car doesn't have. And we certainly can't afford to upgrade 692 01:19:46,470 --> 01:19:53,648 - all of the cars to have the little alert that goes on when you're too close to the side of the road, 693 01:19:53,648 --> 01:20:00,827 - that little lane thing, right? Or that little, oh, the car in front of you stopped, you better beep, 694 01:20:00,827 --> 01:20:08,574 - beep, beep, start braking. And it sounds like some of these systems have that capability as well in terms of 695 01:20:08,674 --> 01:20:15,314 - Not even necessarily distraction, but sometimes when you're driving, there's a lot of inputs I'm teaching 696 01:20:15,314 --> 01:20:21,577 - a 15 year old to drive right now and there are a lot of things that have to be paid attention to at 697 01:20:21,577 --> 01:20:28,091 - the same time and I think that one of the advantages of technology is that that technology can can help 698 01:20:28,091 --> 01:20:34,355 - us change our focus when we need to so I Will be voting no on this amendment That's a member sorry, 699 01:20:34,355 --> 01:20:36,798 - did you have comment no anybody else I 700 01:20:38,402 --> 01:20:49,178 - All right. Well then I think we're ready to vote on this one. Will clerk please call the roll on Amendment 701 01:20:49,178 --> 01:20:58,644 - 18. Council member Zulek. Yes. Sorry. Yes. Daily. No. Ruff. Yes. Flaherty. Yes. Stasberg. No. 702 01:20:58,644 --> 01:21:05,694 - Piedmont Smith. Yes. Thank you. All right. So that passes six to two. 703 01:21:06,690 --> 01:21:16,445 - Why can't I get my numbers right tonight? I'm not I'm not the math teacher here Okay, that means we 704 01:21:16,445 --> 01:21:26,200 - are actually gonna go ahead move on to amendment 10 who would like to Possibly motion for amendment 705 01:21:26,200 --> 01:21:36,638 - 10. I'd like to introduce amendment 10 Second all right. Thank you. Who would like to talk about it? Sorry 706 01:21:36,738 --> 01:21:49,054 - This is many of us, yes? Yes, okay. This one maybe we can spend a bit more time on. At the top level, this 707 01:21:49,474 --> 01:21:57,048 - Reduces, but I think that that's Maybe let's use a different word holds the housing development fund 708 01:21:57,048 --> 01:22:04,771 - appropriation for programs Until we can have a conversation about exactly how we're going to use this. 709 01:22:04,771 --> 01:22:12,795 - We talked about this in depth During the working session. So I'll just add a few things before I'm passing 710 01:22:12,795 --> 01:22:18,494 - to my colleagues here I Don't think any single one of us on on this body is 711 01:22:18,594 --> 01:22:26,139 - is against, in any form, spending this fund. I've even said out loud I'd be happy for us to spend all 712 01:22:26,139 --> 01:22:32,574 - of the money in this fund if indeed we were doing it to significantly move the needle. 713 01:22:32,930 --> 01:22:38,596 - Throughout this week and the last week ever since proposing this, there's been a lot of outreach, including 714 01:22:38,596 --> 01:22:44,366 - by affected stakeholders. And the question that I've asked every single time when they say it's irresponsible 715 01:22:44,366 --> 01:22:49,717 - to cut this fund is I go, do you think that this fund works the best that it can? And the response is 716 01:22:49,717 --> 01:22:54,963 - always no. So I find it quite fascinating that we have this path dependency where we're like, well, 717 01:22:54,963 --> 01:23:00,366 - we have to fund this thing so that we can keep doing what we're doing. But even the people who benefit 718 01:23:00,366 --> 01:23:01,310 - from it are like, 719 01:23:01,794 --> 01:23:08,549 - This isn't the way we should be using it. And so I think that we should be we we should hold This one 720 01:23:08,549 --> 01:23:15,172 - not not with the objective of holding it throughout the year Just with the objective of us having a 721 01:23:15,172 --> 01:23:22,390 - conversation about how do we best? Use this I also would be totally on board with us I think both councilman 722 01:23:22,390 --> 01:23:26,430 - Piedmont Smith and I and again not to make you uncomfortable 723 01:23:26,498 --> 01:23:32,560 - Sort of you know, I'm just repeating something you have said but both of us have said throughout the 724 01:23:32,560 --> 01:23:38,622 - last three years certainly I have nothing against even deficit spending or using for that matter are 725 01:23:38,622 --> 01:23:45,104 - considerable reserves When it's targeted at something that's an investment and I think that that Affordable 726 01:23:45,104 --> 01:23:51,406 - housing is one such thing and so I would be interested even in exploring opportunities to put more money 727 01:23:51,406 --> 01:23:52,606 - into this fund, etc 728 01:23:52,706 --> 01:23:58,669 - Exploring what's viable to really make this, you know, be able to be something that we can ideally knock 729 01:23:58,669 --> 01:24:04,519 - it out of the park. And concerned that at the moment we basically are doing a sort of first come first 730 01:24:04,519 --> 01:24:10,312 - serve. At least that's how it's been explained to us multiple times. And so this is trying to surface 731 01:24:10,312 --> 01:24:15,991 - a broader conversation. You know, this I think is sort of the way that I'm approaching this one. So 732 01:24:15,991 --> 01:24:22,238 - happy to pass over to Councilmember Piedmont Smith or Councilmember Stossberg who I think also proposed this. 733 01:24:26,370 --> 01:24:35,991 - Yes, I think councilmember Osar I put it well in that Our goal is not to prevent appropriations from 734 01:24:35,991 --> 01:24:45,708 - this fund but to have a conversation with the administration to Talk about our long-term strategy for 735 01:24:45,708 --> 01:24:55,806 - use of this money and How the requests that have come in factor into that strategy to Also recognize that 736 01:24:56,130 --> 01:25:04,704 - I think there's less than $6 million total in this fund. It's a limited amount of money, which I don't 737 01:25:04,704 --> 01:25:13,195 - think is going to be replenished at the rate that we're spending it. And so we really need to be very 738 01:25:13,195 --> 01:25:21,603 - careful as to how it's spent and have a plan in place. And it does, as Council Member Asari said, it 739 01:25:21,603 --> 01:25:23,934 - does not feel like the most 740 01:25:25,602 --> 01:25:34,551 - Strategic use of the fund is currently being implemented since it's a first-come first-serve kind of 741 01:25:34,551 --> 01:25:44,120 - thing so I think we really just want to have a conversation and Come to an understanding about the strategy 742 01:25:44,120 --> 01:25:52,094 - for the best use of this limited money And I think just wanting to address one particular 743 01:25:52,226 --> 01:25:57,797 - that's in the response from the office of the mayor, specifically from hand, I'm sorry, it's that, and 744 01:25:57,797 --> 01:26:03,206 - so saying this for us to hopefully have a conversation, my intention if we are to move forward with 745 01:26:03,206 --> 01:26:08,724 - this is not that every single time they want to go about one of these things and they come back to us 746 01:26:08,724 --> 01:26:14,187 - and say, okay, we have one project, can we use a little bit of this money? But it's rather for us to 747 01:26:14,187 --> 01:26:19,758 - have the conversation once and have it for all, right? Like let's have that conversation, let's decide 748 01:26:19,758 --> 01:26:22,192 - the strategy that we're gonna be using here, 749 01:26:22,192 --> 01:26:32,556 - And then like I said, I'd even be interested in figuring out ways to put more funding in this if relevant 750 01:26:32,556 --> 01:26:42,723 - or interested All right, thank you does anybody from the administration want to speak on this one Kerry 751 01:26:42,723 --> 01:26:44,190 - Thompson mayor 752 01:26:44,930 --> 01:26:52,602 - Think we're more than happy always to have a conversation about how to do things better There is some 753 01:26:52,602 --> 01:27:00,876 - strategy in how this funding is deployed and I think it's different There's a the question that is reportedly 754 01:27:00,876 --> 01:27:08,623 - being asked to people who are receiving the funds is is there a better way to use this or are we doing 755 01:27:08,623 --> 01:27:10,654 - the the best we can do and 756 01:27:11,074 --> 01:27:19,166 - I don't think we're doing the best we can do. We can certainly look at how to do that. That doesn't 757 01:27:19,166 --> 01:27:27,583 - mean we're doing a terrible job either. And so I think our administration's been really open to working 758 01:27:27,583 --> 01:27:35,756 - with council on various things. The challenge with having to come back for appropriations for any of 759 01:27:35,756 --> 01:27:40,126 - this is that if a need comes up or there's a project, 760 01:27:40,834 --> 01:27:48,799 - What happens if this hasn't been decided is that that project becomes the measuring stick for the entire 761 01:27:48,799 --> 01:27:56,460 - fund instead of actually talking about the process. And what we have seen time and again through the 762 01:27:56,460 --> 01:28:04,274 - planning process, through funding processes that work in a case-by-case basis like this is that we end 763 01:28:04,274 --> 01:28:10,494 - up not getting the housing built or we end up increasing the cost of the housing. 764 01:28:11,042 --> 01:28:18,237 - That's not what any of us want. We all want to do better with the money that we have, but adding layers 765 01:28:18,237 --> 01:28:25,224 - and layers of red tape to getting it done doesn't seem like the most practical solution. So I'm just 766 01:28:25,224 --> 01:28:32,765 - wondering if there's a counter proposal for working together in a time-bound way to come up with a strategy, 767 01:28:32,765 --> 01:28:39,614 - leave the money there, so we don't have to go to three council hearings with all of the staff that 768 01:28:40,674 --> 01:28:50,976 - Already are going to a lot of Plant Commission Council and RDC meetings So that we can get them doing 769 01:28:50,976 --> 01:29:01,380 - work rather than going to meetings Thank you any other any questions now Chris gamma lodge a logistics 770 01:29:01,380 --> 01:29:09,662 - question to the controller sure Control with him. Would it be possible to include 771 01:29:09,890 --> 01:29:16,506 - a additional appropriation for a fund like this in the slot that we already have at the end of the year 772 01:29:16,506 --> 01:29:22,932 - for sort of the cleanup appropriation where we do fund transfers and the like. Can we can we do that 773 01:29:22,932 --> 01:29:29,421 - or does it have to wait until the actual calendar year if we were to make an appropriation outside of 774 01:29:29,421 --> 01:29:31,838 - budget time. Yeah the short answer is 775 01:29:32,354 --> 01:29:38,185 - If we did the additional appropriation at the end of this year, it would expire on December 31st. 776 01:29:38,185 --> 01:29:44,374 - Got it. Got it. It's a good idea. OK. OK. So so so so so the earliest if we were on any of these things 777 01:29:44,374 --> 01:29:50,502 - that if we wanted to do an additional appropriation would have to happen at our after our January 15th 778 01:29:50,502 --> 01:29:56,512 - meeting after our after we received our budget order from the DLGF, which would probably be in early 779 01:29:56,512 --> 01:30:02,046 - January. OK. OK. Thank you. So that's that's useful to know. All right. Any other questions? 780 01:30:04,098 --> 01:30:11,766 - None we'll go to public comment Nobody online nobody in chambers, okay, we'll come back to council comment 781 01:30:11,766 --> 01:30:19,147 - Councilmember Stossberg and then councilmember Piedmont Smith and then councilmember. Sorry Thank you. 782 01:30:19,147 --> 01:30:26,456 - So My name was mentioned earlier, but I did not end up being an official sponsor of this which is why 783 01:30:26,456 --> 01:30:31,902 - I did not speak earlier but this was also something that I wanted to do and 784 01:30:33,410 --> 01:30:39,924 - I'm supportive of this amendment I'm supportive of it in a different read for a different reason though 785 01:30:39,924 --> 01:30:46,188 - than what was already expressed What was expressed was this idea of strategy? We need to figure out 786 01:30:46,188 --> 01:30:52,576 - some kind of joint strategy to approach this I'm interested in public transparency and accountability 787 01:30:52,576 --> 01:30:58,840 - and the mayor's memo actually made this even more important to me because it lists several projects 788 01:30:58,840 --> 01:31:02,974 - that requested more than a million dollars in city assistance and 789 01:31:03,394 --> 01:31:11,074 - We have an entire another ordinance from several years ago that says City Council needs to approve expenses 790 01:31:11,074 --> 01:31:18,469 - over a hundred thousand dollars in capital investment and yet we don't want to have Some kind of public 791 01:31:18,469 --> 01:31:25,723 - hearing when the city asks when the city has asked for more than a million dollars in assistance That 792 01:31:25,723 --> 01:31:33,118 - is absurd and to diminish the value of something like that coming before this body is a diminishment of 793 01:31:33,282 --> 01:31:40,740 - this body's importance as the fiscal officer we are the fiscal body of this city and You considered 794 01:31:40,740 --> 01:31:48,346 - us with projects that might be over a million dollars in city assistance to just be layers and layers 795 01:31:48,346 --> 01:31:55,953 - of red tape Earlier in this memo. It's a burden to have to come before City Council and it's not that 796 01:31:55,953 --> 01:32:02,590 - you're just disrespecting the nine of us up here as individuals as elected officials and 797 01:32:03,170 --> 01:32:10,259 - as a body, but it also feels like blatant disrespect to the residents of this city who have taxpayers. 798 01:32:10,259 --> 01:32:17,279 - And it's blatant disrespect when instead of listening to council member comment or to public comment, 799 01:32:17,279 --> 01:32:24,162 - instead you walk out of the room. And for those of you not in this room, Mayor Thompson just walked 800 01:32:24,162 --> 01:32:30,494 - out of the room instead of listening. I consider that blatant disrespect to the fiscal body 801 01:32:30,754 --> 01:32:36,704 - Consider it blatantly disrespectful to the residents of this city who pay taxes, you know to get money 802 01:32:36,704 --> 01:32:42,539 - into this fund There has to be an approval of the affordability Incentives for planning projects for 803 01:32:42,539 --> 01:32:48,431 - large planning projects for them to take advantage of affordability incentives Plan Commission has to 804 01:32:48,431 --> 01:32:49,182 - approve that 805 01:32:49,858 --> 01:32:56,513 - Has to approve these payments in lieu that go into this fund that is a public process And yet no public 806 01:32:56,513 --> 01:33:03,040 - process should be needed for requests more than a million dollars in city assistance that come out of 807 01:33:03,040 --> 01:33:09,631 - this It absolutely should be and as for the timeline issue if these projects take years to potentially 808 01:33:09,631 --> 01:33:16,158 - come Then you know what there is time to come before council and say yeah, so we have this project it 809 01:33:16,322 --> 01:33:22,719 - Might still be somewhere in the middle, but we would like to support it with a million dollars And if 810 01:33:22,719 --> 01:33:29,178 - that project somehow doesn't end up coming to fruition then that will revert back into the fund We can 811 01:33:29,178 --> 01:33:35,889 - have legislation that says that and then it does not lengthen the timeline So this is just full of excuses 812 01:33:35,889 --> 01:33:42,599 - about why they cannot come before City Council why they cannot come before the public and defend expending 813 01:33:42,599 --> 01:33:44,606 - more than a million dollars and 814 01:33:44,802 --> 01:33:55,847 - City assets to various personal projects. Thank you Councilmember Piedmont Smith Well, actually I was 815 01:33:55,847 --> 01:34:07,216 - Also wondering how this corresponds with resolution 2018 no ordinance 2018-10 I don't know the ordinance 816 01:34:07,216 --> 01:34:12,414 - we passed in December of 2018 that said all the 817 01:34:13,602 --> 01:34:21,091 - capital at all expenditures of one hundred thousand dollars or more must be itemized in the budget or 818 01:34:21,091 --> 01:34:28,801 - must come back to the council for approval. And I'm wondering how this blanket approval of three million 819 01:34:28,801 --> 01:34:36,364 - dollars would be following municipal code if in our code it says that such items must be listed in the 820 01:34:36,364 --> 01:34:40,990 - budget. I don't know if attorney Allen has a response to that. 821 01:34:47,618 --> 01:34:55,184 - reviewing the ordinance which I believe is 2018 10. Thank you. I'm happy to respond to it. Just give 822 01:34:55,184 --> 01:34:59,678 - me just a moment just to fully read it and I can thank you. 823 01:35:43,490 --> 01:35:49,470 - My apologies for the delay. Thank you for the moment. Just look at the ordinance. 824 01:35:49,698 --> 01:35:55,113 - 1810 did a few different things. So one of the things that it did is allowed Council to have oversight 825 01:35:55,113 --> 01:36:00,370 - over intrafund transfers that also involved a hundred thousand dollar limit So anytime that there's 826 01:36:00,370 --> 01:36:05,680 - a transfer between category one fund or category three funds Additionally, there was a capital funds 827 01:36:05,680 --> 01:36:10,990 - expenditure of over a hundred thousand dollars that it required review now that it does specify that 828 01:36:10,990 --> 01:36:16,299 - those capital reviews that are over a hundred thousand dollars or anything that's not in the capital 829 01:36:16,299 --> 01:36:19,664 - improvement plan and those relate to direct capital expenditure 830 01:36:19,664 --> 01:36:24,941 - of the city so they wouldn't necessarily relate to potential funding of other organizations or anything 831 01:36:24,941 --> 01:36:30,117 - that's non capital spending. That would be my understanding and if the administration has a different 832 01:36:30,117 --> 01:36:35,192 - different stance I'd be happy to hear that. So I don't think that these these types of expenditures 833 01:36:35,192 --> 01:36:40,317 - out of the housing fund which may go directly to a developer or to another organization qualify as a 834 01:36:40,317 --> 01:36:45,442 - capital expenditure of the city exactly as much as they are like a grant or another services type of 835 01:36:45,442 --> 01:36:48,030 - funding from the city to a different organization. 836 01:36:50,210 --> 01:37:00,673 - Thank you. That said I agree with Councilmember Stossberg that in addition to kind of forcing a conversation 837 01:37:00,673 --> 01:37:10,367 - about the best strategy for the use of these limited funds it would also add a layer of transparency 838 01:37:10,367 --> 01:37:18,718 - for the public to see how the city is using the money that has come in from developers 839 01:37:19,138 --> 01:37:26,761 - And I think that that's an important part of this as well, especially with the dollar amounts that we've 840 01:37:26,761 --> 01:37:34,384 - seen go out of this fund More a sort of question for colleagues about how you envision then so so should 841 01:37:34,384 --> 01:37:40,990 - we Should we should we adopt this amendment? What do you how do you envision that going? I 842 01:37:41,730 --> 01:37:48,943 - Because I because I because I would not want sort of like a lot of like I would that wouldn't be my 843 01:37:48,943 --> 01:37:56,372 - my objective here, right? So I'm just interested sort of if you all have some thought on you know What 844 01:37:56,372 --> 01:38:03,873 - our timeline would be how we would approach it how you know, how do we actually get to a better outcome 845 01:38:03,873 --> 01:38:11,230 - here? I Think that probably there should be legislation similar to that one from 2018 that requires a 846 01:38:11,394 --> 01:38:18,707 - any kind of Private equity assistance over a certain dollar amount to have to come through council and 847 01:38:18,707 --> 01:38:26,092 - I don't know what that dollar amount might be but I mean We give grants all the time and of course Jack 848 01:38:26,092 --> 01:38:32,766 - Hopkins comes through here because it's council money and then there's smaller grants that go 849 01:38:33,026 --> 01:38:39,238 - various places that are within hand right and I certainly would not want to and like ESD has a bunch 850 01:38:39,238 --> 01:38:45,449 - of grants there's climate grants like I don't want to get in the middle of any of those grants right 851 01:38:45,449 --> 01:38:51,907 - because those are small dollar amounts but like over some kind of dollar amount it needs to come through 852 01:38:51,907 --> 01:38:58,303 - council in my opinion and so then that would you know manage that to some degree in terms of my concern 853 01:38:58,303 --> 01:39:00,702 - with transparency and making sure that 854 01:39:01,954 --> 01:39:07,471 - The residents know where this money is going that we know where this money is going that you know five 855 01:39:07,471 --> 01:39:13,202 - years from now somebody is not going to have to comb through records to figure out that oh we supplemented 856 01:39:13,202 --> 01:39:16,094 - union at Crescent to the tune of two million dollars. 857 01:39:17,250 --> 01:39:25,673 - I mean, we shouldn't have to wonder about that. It should be somewhere in the public record. Thank you. 858 01:39:25,673 --> 01:39:33,934 - My thinking, though, is that we can take those actions regardless of what we do with this fund, which 859 01:39:33,934 --> 01:39:37,822 - I think is a needful and separate conversation. 860 01:39:37,954 --> 01:39:43,523 - a strategy component of saying, hey, we want to withdraw this fund to have further conversations. Now, 861 01:39:43,523 --> 01:39:49,147 - I fully appreciate your point though, because I think your point would be, and correct me if I'm wrong, 862 01:39:49,147 --> 01:39:50,174 - is that you're not 863 01:39:50,338 --> 01:40:00,521 - comfortable releasing the funds until we've taken that action of oversight. Am I correct? Okay. Whereas 864 01:40:00,521 --> 01:40:10,997 - my argument is that, and I don't think these are in dichotomy, but I really want us to have a conversation 865 01:40:10,997 --> 01:40:16,382 - about how are we going to really employ this to get it 866 01:40:16,546 --> 01:40:26,721 - to a higher level, a better, I'm trying to bias myself away from using the word outcome. But how are 867 01:40:26,721 --> 01:40:37,299 - we going to get to a better end result for residents? So how might we contribute to that part that isn't 868 01:40:37,299 --> 01:40:46,366 - a worse outcome? Well, what I heard the mayor say was that they have a big plan of intent 869 01:40:46,626 --> 01:40:52,194 - You could say not sure that they've necessarily shared it with counsel. So, you know, I mean if that's 870 01:40:52,194 --> 01:40:57,763 - what you're asking in terms of that kind of larger conversation of what should this money be used for? 871 01:40:57,763 --> 01:41:03,439 - Is that what you're asking? Are you asking? Yeah, I guess I guess to make sure that this doesn't because 872 01:41:03,439 --> 01:41:07,710 - I mean there's there's a fail state here where we withhold this money and then 873 01:41:07,874 --> 01:41:14,532 - do nothing about this until we basically are like, hey, it's in your court. You engage with us now, 874 01:41:14,532 --> 01:41:21,324 - right? And then we make it very difficult to engage with us. And you know what I'm saying? That would 875 01:41:21,324 --> 01:41:28,248 - be like the worst, maybe a worse outcome than the outcome we're discussing, whereas the pain point that 876 01:41:28,248 --> 01:41:34,174 - you've identified, we can act on regardless. And so that's, right? Well, to my end, I'm, 877 01:41:37,602 --> 01:41:45,738 - I mean, to some degree, I'm willing to say trust that, you know, just thinking about this project list 878 01:41:45,738 --> 01:41:53,794 - that got included in the memo, one, two, three, four, five, there's five different project lists. I'm 879 01:41:53,794 --> 01:42:01,693 - pretty happy to trust the hands department when they say, okay, we wanna fund two of these, they're 880 01:42:01,693 --> 01:42:02,878 - the best ones. 881 01:42:03,586 --> 01:42:08,750 - They're the best ones for the overall state. It's going to total this much amount of money. And for 882 01:42:08,750 --> 01:42:14,275 - them to come with that appropriation with what's the project about, what's it going to do for Bloomington, 883 01:42:14,275 --> 01:42:19,542 - why they chose this as the best one, that's the discussion that I want to make sure we have before we 884 01:42:19,542 --> 01:42:24,706 - appropriate the money. And that is a different discussion, I think, than what you and Councilmember 885 01:42:24,706 --> 01:42:30,127 - Piedmont-Smith were saying in terms of being able to have eyes on and being involved in the conversation 886 01:42:30,127 --> 01:42:32,606 - of actually choosing the two that are the best. 887 01:42:32,706 --> 01:42:39,290 - I'm fine with trusting staff and the professionals in that field to choose which two are the best. But 888 01:42:39,290 --> 01:42:46,257 - then I want them to come and defend, to explain their choice, defend their choice, allow us to ask questions 889 01:42:46,257 --> 01:42:52,713 - about their choice, allow the public to see and be involved in all of those conversations, hopefully 890 01:42:52,713 --> 01:42:59,169 - without eye rolling happening by any of us. And then for us to be able to make that decision. That's 891 01:42:59,169 --> 01:43:01,982 - public transparency. That's accountability. 892 01:43:02,626 --> 01:43:08,628 - That's doing that's that's making these big decisions about millions of dollars In front of everybody, 893 01:43:08,628 --> 01:43:14,920 - which is what we're supposed to do, right? So so then wondering because your original I think your original 894 01:43:14,920 --> 01:43:20,747 - amendment Wasn't as wasn't holding the whole fun back. I think you if I'm remembering correctly was 895 01:43:20,747 --> 01:43:25,758 - it? Yo, yo, okay. Sorry. Sorry was comfortable appearance with so just thinking about 896 01:43:25,890 --> 01:43:31,411 - You know if the if cutting the difference here is that you is that you appropriate a million dollars 897 01:43:31,411 --> 01:43:37,151 - or something like that rather than three and no I I sent a message to the hand department asking because 898 01:43:37,151 --> 01:43:42,673 - last year when they when we appropriated money from this account for them one of the things that was 899 01:43:42,673 --> 01:43:48,413 - mentioned was kind of the the potential that they were using some of that fund for smaller grant amounts 900 01:43:48,413 --> 01:43:54,590 - that might end up being more personal like I mean it's one thing to discuss a million dollar appropriation for a 901 01:43:54,754 --> 01:44:01,120 - Corporation, you know a development company to build 216 multifamily units, right? It's another thing 902 01:44:01,120 --> 01:44:07,423 - to discuss, you know Individuals getting some sort of rental assistance like that that does not need 903 01:44:07,423 --> 01:44:13,789 - to be public So, you know if they want to come and say like hey we have this this program XYZ that we 904 01:44:13,789 --> 01:44:20,155 - want to give rental assistance we want to do this that and the other thing which is kind of what they 905 01:44:20,155 --> 01:44:21,278 - did last year and 906 01:44:21,346 --> 01:44:27,054 - With the money from this program. I'm good with that kind of proposal too in terms of using this money 907 01:44:27,054 --> 01:44:32,763 - to more directly You know fund those sorts of things I know that we you know, we have various the hand 908 01:44:32,763 --> 01:44:38,471 - department does various grant kind of stuff But I did not get any response to that email Asking if any 909 01:44:38,471 --> 01:44:44,014 - of this money was being reserved for any of those programs at all because I was open to leaving any 910 01:44:44,014 --> 01:44:50,110 - money in here that was going to be devoted to those sorts of programs but but since I didn't get a response I 911 01:44:50,434 --> 01:44:56,974 - Just had to assume. All right, none of it's being used for that. So just cut the whole thing 912 01:44:56,974 --> 01:45:04,006 - Okay Councilmember Piedmont Smith Well, just to also address councilmember Asari's question I think 913 01:45:04,006 --> 01:45:11,319 - that before the end of this calendar year, we should have a discussion with the administration and with 914 01:45:11,319 --> 01:45:16,382 - hand about use of this fund I don't think you know we can prejudge from 915 01:45:17,538 --> 01:45:24,899 - the format or the outcome of that discussion but I think it needs to be had and I think it needs to 916 01:45:24,899 --> 01:45:32,259 - be had soon. So I would say you know by mid December let's let's have that discussion so that if we 917 01:45:32,259 --> 01:45:39,767 - come to some agreement and appropriation can be sought in January. All right. Any. OK. I think we are 918 01:45:39,767 --> 01:45:45,214 - ready to council member Flaherty just briefly. I support this and support 919 01:45:45,634 --> 01:45:52,376 - Aligned substantively with what most of what I've heard. I think for me the strongest motivating factor 920 01:45:52,376 --> 01:45:59,247 - is Kind of over a certain level or threshold. I think a public process and accountability the opportunity 921 01:45:59,247 --> 01:46:05,924 - for questions, etc is Worth the trade-offs that involves. Thanks All right, thank you and I think with 922 01:46:05,924 --> 01:46:12,990 - that we're ready to take a vote on amendment Number ten will clerk, please call the roll councilmember Asari 923 01:46:15,938 --> 01:46:27,194 - Yes. Daily. No. Ruff. Yes. Flaherty. Yes. Stasberg. Yes. Piedmont Smith. Yes. Zulek. Yes. Thank you. 924 01:46:27,194 --> 01:46:38,560 - All right. That passes six to one. And I believe the next amendment I closed it out. Are we moving on 925 01:46:38,560 --> 01:46:42,238 - to 11. Oh sorry. My place. Okay. 926 01:46:46,626 --> 01:46:54,255 - I'm not going to advance number 11. I can make a comment about 11 and why I'm not advancing it. Just 927 01:46:54,255 --> 01:47:01,808 - had very good conversations with Director Tim Street about sort of this printing budget, which they 928 01:47:01,808 --> 01:47:09,588 - agree it's a lot, but it's sort of the best method they have right now to engage with the public. One, 929 01:47:09,588 --> 01:47:10,494 - two, three. 930 01:47:10,690 --> 01:47:19,416 - OK. And they are piloting throughout this year already. And as you saw in the response, what it might 931 01:47:19,416 --> 01:47:28,227 - look like to lower costs there. I think that this surfaced sort of the right type of conversation. And 932 01:47:28,227 --> 01:47:36,781 - so I'm happy to not move this one forward. But if somebody else would like to, I'm happy to second. 933 01:47:36,781 --> 01:47:39,262 - But yeah. OK. OK. Thank you. 934 01:47:40,162 --> 01:47:49,245 - Amendment number 12. I think there's a motion to recess. Is that did I hear correctly? No, I wasn't 935 01:47:49,245 --> 01:47:58,783 - making a motion. I was responding to a face. Oh, okay I think I'm the next one I moved that we introduce 936 01:47:58,783 --> 01:48:01,054 - some amendment 12 Second 937 01:48:01,858 --> 01:48:09,832 - This one much like the last one holds the two million five hundred placeholder for the parking meter 938 01:48:09,832 --> 01:48:18,517 - fund again same same idea. Oh Okay, we're still fine same Same idea here is that I mean we haven't identified 939 01:48:18,517 --> 01:48:22,622 - exactly what we want to do how we want to do it and 940 01:48:22,754 --> 01:48:30,363 - I think the important thing to note though about the parking meter fund is that it would be possible 941 01:48:30,363 --> 01:48:37,822 - to look at this one through the lens of us just, you know, withholding money that must be spent on 942 01:48:38,210 --> 01:48:45,114 - the thing that is planned for it here, but there are a lot of different things that we're able to spend 943 01:48:45,114 --> 01:48:52,151 - this fund on. So this is actually sort of like a choice here, and so I think it would be good to continue 944 01:48:52,151 --> 01:48:59,454 - to have that engaged conversation about what we plan to do, how we plan on implementing it, but obviously I'm 945 01:48:59,842 --> 01:49:05,880 - Generally supportive of implementing what came out of the parking of the parking plan or parking study 946 01:49:05,880 --> 01:49:11,918 - or whatever it was And also to be consistent with why I said before I think that we should fund things 947 01:49:11,918 --> 01:49:17,956 - after we've studied them But I just think that it's still sort of a placeholder. So until we have some 948 01:49:17,956 --> 01:49:23,349 - clarity come back to them All right, thank you any questions on oh I'm sorry. Yes. Does any 949 01:49:23,349 --> 01:49:25,342 - of the co-sponsors want to speak? 950 01:49:25,794 --> 01:49:34,456 - Yeah, I just want to say that this also falls under public transparency for me that There's not a specific 951 01:49:34,456 --> 01:49:39,070 - vendor right now identified. There's not even a specific 952 01:49:39,202 --> 01:49:45,187 - You know, there's a lot of questions about like meters versus not meters individual meters versus group 953 01:49:45,187 --> 01:49:50,941 - meters like like there's a lot of questions like that and so I think that it's useful to be have to 954 01:49:50,941 --> 01:49:56,695 - come back to counsel for that appropriation when those decisions have actually been made and I know 955 01:49:56,695 --> 01:50:02,507 - it's one of those things like yeah, you can have another information session, but there are a lot of 956 01:50:02,507 --> 01:50:03,198 - meetings on 957 01:50:03,458 --> 01:50:10,222 - There are a lot of meetings in this city. There's a lot of different groups that have a lot of different 958 01:50:10,222 --> 01:50:16,857 - meetings and there are some people that just follow council or just follow one thing or another thing. 959 01:50:16,857 --> 01:50:23,298 - And I think that especially with large expenditures and we are the fiscal body we should be able to 960 01:50:23,298 --> 01:50:29,804 - be a body that people like oh city's gonna spend millions of dollars on something. Let's see what it 961 01:50:29,804 --> 01:50:32,574 - is. So that's why I wanted to wanted to to 962 01:50:33,314 --> 01:50:41,236 - Reduce this line so that then the additional appropriation would have to be sought after. Thank you 963 01:50:41,236 --> 01:50:49,237 - Councilmember Piedmont Smith Yeah, I second what my two co-sponsors said and I also want to add that 964 01:50:49,237 --> 01:50:57,238 - one of the recommendations of the Walker parking study is to use automatic license plate readers for 965 01:50:57,238 --> 01:51:01,278 - parking enforcement, which I think comes with some 966 01:51:02,146 --> 01:51:08,737 - privacy concerns and surveillance concerns. And so I think that definitely should come back to council. 967 01:51:08,737 --> 01:51:15,075 - So that's just an added reason for this amendment. All right. Thank you. Anybody have any questions 968 01:51:15,075 --> 01:51:21,603 - for the sponsors or for the administration. Would the administration like to comment on this amendment 969 01:51:21,603 --> 01:51:28,257 - or no. OK. So any questions then I see no questions. OK. We'll go to public comment. Anybody in chambers 970 01:51:28,257 --> 01:51:31,870 - or online. Nobody online. I see no movement in chambers. 971 01:51:32,002 --> 01:51:40,386 - We'll come back here for comment. Any council member comments before we move to a vote on Amendment 972 01:51:40,386 --> 01:51:48,938 - 12 and no. All right. So with that will the clerk please call the roll on Amendment 12. And thank you 973 01:51:48,938 --> 01:51:57,322 - all very much for being so speedy on this one. Council member Daley. Oh yes. Ruff yes clarity. Yes. 974 01:51:57,322 --> 01:52:01,598 - Sasberg yes. Piedmont Smith yes. Zulek yes. Sorry. 975 01:52:02,210 --> 01:52:10,314 - Yes Passes unanimously. Thank you Councilmember Zulik, do you have any thoughts on amendment 13? I will 976 01:52:10,314 --> 01:52:18,262 - not be introducing it. Thank you. Okay. Thank you very much Councilmember Piedmont Smith, do you have 977 01:52:18,262 --> 01:52:26,211 - any thoughts on amendment 14? Yes, thank you No, we did not we've not officially discussed it because 978 01:52:26,211 --> 01:52:31,198 - it I'd like to move amendment 14 the revised amendment 14 which 979 01:52:31,778 --> 01:52:39,770 - Attorney Alan, can you please put that on the screen? Yeah, amendment 1 to amendment 14 First we have 980 01:52:39,770 --> 01:52:47,919 - can we just move do it and we just move this as amendment 14 revised Yeah, I was just trying to provide 981 01:52:47,919 --> 01:52:55,911 - some transparency since it was included in the packet if you'd like to call it revised I mean as long 982 01:52:55,911 --> 01:53:00,926 - as we're pointing out what the revisions are and how it changed 983 01:53:02,402 --> 01:53:09,334 - Okay if you could please display it I will point out what the revision was and I second a second. 984 01:53:09,334 --> 01:53:16,831 - Thank you. All right. Council member Pete Smith. So this this amendment reduces the office of the mayor's 985 01:53:16,831 --> 01:53:24,116 - budget by ten thousand dollars which was reserved to implement branding initiatives and the correction 986 01:53:24,116 --> 01:53:30,270 - between what was in the packet and what is on the screen currently is that the account 987 01:53:30,946 --> 01:53:38,578 - The correct account is five three nine nine zero It's called technically it's called account even though 988 01:53:38,578 --> 01:53:45,846 - we know it as line item Just to be extra confusing But yes that number five three nine nine zero is 989 01:53:45,846 --> 01:53:53,259 - the correct number and the previous number five three one seven zero is incorrect So that's just been 990 01:53:53,259 --> 01:53:56,094 - corrected in the text of the amendment 991 01:53:57,282 --> 01:54:04,874 - And I'm bringing forward this amendment because I feel like the whole branding initiative was kind of 992 01:54:04,874 --> 01:54:11,275 - a waste of time and I don't want to throw good money after bad. Thank you. All right. 993 01:54:11,275 --> 01:54:19,314 - Thank you. Councilmember Piedmont Smith. Any questions on Amendment 14 is revised. All right. No questions. 994 01:54:19,314 --> 01:54:25,566 - We will move on to public comment. Anybody in chambers or online would like to make 995 01:54:25,826 --> 01:54:33,219 - public comment nobody online has Volunteered a question. Nobody in chambers is moving. We'll come back 996 01:54:33,219 --> 01:54:40,612 - here any council comments before we move to a vote Councilmember, sorry, I'm happy to support this and 997 01:54:40,612 --> 01:54:47,862 - and not move forward with the one that's I think we should just do this one All right, thank you any 998 01:54:47,862 --> 01:54:55,614 - other comments All right, I don't see any other comments so will clerk please call the roll on amendment 14 999 01:54:56,322 --> 01:55:06,159 - Councilmember Ruff. Yes Flaherty Stasberg. Yes, Piedmont Smith. Yes, Zulek. Yes, sorry. Yes, Bailey. 1000 01:55:06,159 --> 01:55:16,190 - Yes, 14 passes unanimously. Thank you everybody Councilmember Piedmont Smith. Do you have any thoughts 1001 01:55:16,190 --> 01:55:25,150 - on amendment 15? Sure, I move amendment 15 to Appropriation Ordinance 20 2602. Sorry second 1002 01:55:25,986 --> 01:55:33,364 - All right. Thank you very much. This amendment reduces the Department of Economic and Sustainability's 1003 01:55:33,364 --> 01:55:40,814 - budget in the amount related to the grade nine salary and benefits of the transportation demand manager 1004 01:55:40,814 --> 01:55:47,977 - position. So this is a position that is currently not filled and when it was filled for a few years 1005 01:55:47,977 --> 01:55:54,782 - it didn't seem to accomplish very much. So I send in the interest of tightening belts I think. 1006 01:55:55,586 --> 01:56:03,887 - We can do without it. Thank you All right, thanks very much any questions Councilmember Stossberg and 1007 01:56:03,887 --> 01:56:12,026 - then councilmember Flaherty have there been similar reductions from the other category one expenses 1008 01:56:12,026 --> 01:56:20,409 - for this position like insurance and FICA and perf and all of those sorts of things or was it just the 1009 01:56:20,409 --> 01:56:24,478 - salary that was taken off and Does category three 1010 01:56:24,770 --> 01:56:32,891 - allow those other or sorry does number three allow those other things to be changed. What's the I believe 1011 01:56:32,891 --> 01:56:40,859 - so. Yes I believe that's why number three was added by our wise counsel Mr. Allen. Yeah that's correct. 1012 01:56:40,859 --> 01:56:47,294 - So in discussions with the controller Mr. Kim can speak to this as well. Those are. 1013 01:56:47,906 --> 01:56:54,118 - Very specific line items for the benefits of each employee and we didn't know what those totals were 1014 01:56:54,118 --> 01:57:00,392 - So that's exactly what section 3 does is allow the controller to adjust appropriately So that if this 1015 01:57:00,392 --> 01:57:06,604 - position is removed all those will be reduced accordingly is my understanding Yes, and I'd just like 1016 01:57:06,604 --> 01:57:13,000 - to confirm that we will reduce all the appropriate benefit lines if you vote to eliminate this position 1017 01:57:13,000 --> 01:57:14,046 - Great. Thank you 1018 01:57:17,218 --> 01:57:24,150 - Question. Oh, yes councilmember Flaherty. Yeah, just curious. I'm in Any follow-up you had with the 1019 01:57:24,150 --> 01:57:31,291 - administration or just your own thinking? Is it just that this money will then go? Back to the general 1020 01:57:31,291 --> 01:57:38,570 - fund and just reduce the overall expenditure. Did you consider options for how the money could be better 1021 01:57:38,570 --> 01:57:45,502 - spent for similar purposes? Thank you for asking Yes, I personally would like to see the money used 1022 01:57:46,626 --> 01:57:55,617 - Better implement our climate action plan particularly in the realm of food security and our local food 1023 01:57:55,617 --> 01:58:04,347 - system However, I this is not a venue where I can dictate that but that was my idea and that's what 1024 01:58:04,347 --> 01:58:13,251 - I've talked with director Cooper Smith about So we'll see Thanks any other questions for amendment 15 1025 01:58:13,251 --> 01:58:15,870 - Okay, no questions that I see 1026 01:58:16,418 --> 01:58:22,972 - Any public comment here either in chambers or online? Nobody online, but I do see somebody making their 1027 01:58:22,972 --> 01:58:27,006 - way to the podium. Thank you very much. You have three minutes. 1028 01:58:27,362 --> 01:58:32,786 - I'm not gonna need all three minutes. My name is Iris Bowl again. I just think it's interesting that 1029 01:58:32,786 --> 01:58:38,157 - this position is being cut I think it's out of convenience and not in the spirit of actually trying 1030 01:58:38,157 --> 01:58:43,688 - to understand how transportation modes could be better utilized around town our east-west corridor for 1031 01:58:43,688 --> 01:58:49,220 - bicyclists and scooters is terrible and I just generally think that this role offered a lot of promise 1032 01:58:49,220 --> 01:58:49,918 - and a lot of 1033 01:58:50,114 --> 01:58:56,463 - A lot of effort went into making it it's very hard to create jobs at the city And I think it's a shame 1034 01:58:56,463 --> 01:59:03,060 - that out of a matter of convenience because the position is not filled that for example The Transportation 1035 01:59:03,060 --> 01:59:09,286 - Commission is not being given an opportunity to talk about this particular item. Thank you Thank you 1036 01:59:09,286 --> 01:59:15,450 - very much last check for anybody online looking to make comment Nope, I don't see anybody else here 1037 01:59:15,450 --> 01:59:16,190 - in chambers 1038 01:59:16,930 --> 01:59:24,663 - So we'll come back here for council comment. Any last comments before we move to a vote on this council 1039 01:59:24,663 --> 01:59:32,173 - member sorry does raise an interesting thought that we hadn't at least I hadn't considered but maybe 1040 01:59:32,173 --> 01:59:39,906 - both a question for attorney Allen and controller. Kim is it possible to essentially like I mean defund 1041 01:59:39,906 --> 01:59:40,798 - a position. 1042 01:59:41,410 --> 01:59:47,574 - keep the position as a line that could be revived so that you don't have to go through the whole process 1043 01:59:47,574 --> 01:59:53,620 - of creating a new position? Because I mean, it is a good point that it, you know, I don't know if it's 1044 01:59:53,620 --> 01:59:59,314 - like very hard, except for the fact you have to like talk to us, but you know, but you're right. 1045 01:59:59,314 --> 02:00:05,302 - So yeah, so what are your? Absolutely. You can keep the position alive. You can keep it in the salary 1046 02:00:05,302 --> 02:00:09,822 - ordinance. It still exists in the system. You could fund it at a later time. 1047 02:00:10,178 --> 02:00:16,373 - Right. So OK. That's interesting. So I hadn't thought about that with with position so we could so but 1048 02:00:16,373 --> 02:00:22,448 - that would look like us defunding it in the salary ordinance and not defunding it in this ordinance. 1049 02:00:22,448 --> 02:00:28,523 - It's actually the reverse would be true. Okay. Defunding in this ordinance and then there is a later 1050 02:00:28,523 --> 02:00:34,537 - amendment for the salary ordinance specific for this position and then that would just would not be 1051 02:00:34,537 --> 02:00:39,710 - passed. So it would remain in the salary ordinance but there'd be no funding in this. 1052 02:00:39,938 --> 02:00:48,959 - Interesting Thanks, I support this amendment I appreciate our member the public and Engineering department 1053 02:00:48,959 --> 02:00:57,559 - who commented I would not characterize this as a cut of convenience because it's unfilled. I actually 1054 02:00:57,559 --> 02:01:05,822 - do think it's a position that was never really Supported or empowered to thrive in particular the 1055 02:01:06,050 --> 02:01:12,766 - primary lever of transportation and management, or one of the primary levers is parking pricing. That's 1056 02:01:12,766 --> 02:01:19,289 - not something that was ever authorized for this position to lead policy on. It's genesis, I was part 1057 02:01:19,289 --> 02:01:25,876 - of that, not as a member of the council, but as a member of the public, engaging quite a lot with the 1058 02:01:25,876 --> 02:01:32,592 - city's $50 million of appropriations for parking garages, with an eye to trying to manage demand better 1059 02:01:32,592 --> 02:01:34,142 - before building bigger. 1060 02:01:34,274 --> 02:01:40,437 - at a higher cost, of course. So it was a bit of a concession that I mentioned previously when we talked 1061 02:01:40,437 --> 02:01:46,482 - about this, a bit of a, I don't know what the word I'm looking for is, I don't know, like not helpful 1062 02:01:46,482 --> 02:01:52,645 - because the position was created after we overbuilt supply. So you really needed to manage demand first 1063 02:01:52,645 --> 02:01:58,689 - before we overbuilt supply. In any case, the position did exist and did some good things for a while, 1064 02:01:58,689 --> 02:02:03,134 - but I just don't think it's actually really achieved the vision of what we 1065 02:02:03,234 --> 02:02:08,452 - You know had in mind there and so I would support spending the money on Similar things to accomplish 1066 02:02:08,452 --> 02:02:13,826 - more in our transportation system consistent with our current city goals and efforts I think that could 1067 02:02:13,826 --> 02:02:18,992 - be through a position. I did ask questions about that through our you know council question process 1068 02:02:18,992 --> 02:02:24,159 - Probably that would be a planning position though could maybe an engineering position. I don't know 1069 02:02:24,159 --> 02:02:29,429 - I think it could also be expenditures, you know, notably we had 10 or 11 applicants this year for the 1070 02:02:29,429 --> 02:02:31,134 - neighborhood traffic calming and 1071 02:02:31,362 --> 02:02:37,389 - I think we fund that at a $50,000 level which is adequate for one project a year. This is a this is 1072 02:02:37,389 --> 02:02:43,416 - consistent year-over-year as well. We have many Residents looking to make looking to address unsafe 1073 02:02:43,416 --> 02:02:49,504 - conditions in their streets that generally support mode shift By by creating the safe conditions for 1074 02:02:49,504 --> 02:02:56,254 - for using modes other than vehicles for transportation So that would be another consideration we could you know 1075 02:02:57,506 --> 02:03:02,823 - triple the amount of that funding and actually fund several of our neighborhood projects, maybe make 1076 02:03:02,823 --> 02:03:08,193 - a dent more over time rather than having the same people come over and over going through the process 1077 02:03:08,193 --> 02:03:13,721 - of contacting council members to get their letters of support, all these things that they do in a really 1078 02:03:13,721 --> 02:03:19,302 - well-designed process. But when it's one in 10 that get funded, clearly we're not meeting the need there. 1079 02:03:19,302 --> 02:03:23,198 - So I would really like to see this amount of cost savings get reallocated 1080 02:03:23,394 --> 02:03:30,785 - In a similar for a similar set of goals and I think again that could be personnel that could be You 1081 02:03:30,785 --> 02:03:38,324 - know programs and capital Those are my two cents. Thanks Thank you councilmember Stossberg, I'm gonna 1082 02:03:38,324 --> 02:03:45,789 - very simply say I agree with him And I pointed at councilmember Flaherty for those who can't see me. 1083 02:03:45,789 --> 02:03:52,958 - Thanks Short and sweet. Thank you. Anybody else with comment? All right, so we will move to vote 1084 02:03:54,018 --> 02:04:03,876 - Walton I was gonna call you councilmember Bolden clerk Bolden. Would you please call the roll? 1085 02:04:03,876 --> 02:04:14,357 - Thank you. Yes councilmember Flaherty. Yes Stasburg. Yes Yes Yes, sorry, yes Yes, yes Thank you that 1086 02:04:14,357 --> 02:04:20,894 - passes unanimously Okay, that was amendment 15 I know we had a 1087 02:04:21,538 --> 02:04:29,176 - Some additional in our packets. Do we have a 16? Yes, I'm I would like to introduce amendment 16. Okay. 1088 02:04:29,176 --> 02:04:36,666 - Thank you Do I have a second for amendment 16 second super thank you. Can you please talk to us about 1089 02:04:36,666 --> 02:04:44,304 - it? Okay This one and if you'll forgive me I'd like to take just a little bit of time and talking about 1090 02:04:44,304 --> 02:04:46,654 - really the approach behind this 1091 02:04:47,618 --> 02:04:54,466 - I think it's very clear and worth repeating again and again that our that both SEA one and our local 1092 02:04:54,466 --> 02:05:01,382 - economic conditions do not support the current trajectory of the city's operating budget. We'll stop. 1093 02:05:01,382 --> 02:05:08,636 - I think the proposed general budget spends approximately five point four million dollars for seven million 1094 02:05:08,636 --> 02:05:12,094 - dollars more than projected revenue. We know this. 1095 02:05:12,226 --> 02:05:20,962 - And we also know that we have considerable reserves, which I think that we've spent several years opining 1096 02:05:20,962 --> 02:05:29,450 - on but Reserves do not make recurring operating deficits sustainable. And so if we use reserves to pay 1097 02:05:29,450 --> 02:05:30,686 - recurring cost 1098 02:05:30,786 --> 02:05:37,088 - Those costs return year after year and the revenue does not. And so eventually those reserves are going 1099 02:05:37,088 --> 02:05:43,269 - to be smaller and the structural problem will remain. So deficit spending as I've said multiple times 1100 02:05:43,269 --> 02:05:49,511 - I think is justifiable when we're making a deliberate investment with a clear return. That return does 1101 02:05:49,511 --> 02:05:56,056 - not have to be financial. It may be things like safer streets stronger infrastructure more housing reducing 1102 02:05:56,056 --> 02:05:59,934 - homelessness better public health lower future costs et cetera. 1103 02:06:00,482 --> 02:06:06,887 - I think, and again, I'm trying to bias myself away from using the language that I think has grown tired 1104 02:06:06,887 --> 02:06:13,108 - because I've said it too much and easy then to say that I'm just being theoretical. But I think that 1105 02:06:13,108 --> 02:06:16,126 - we should be able to say what results we expect. 1106 02:06:16,226 --> 02:06:22,857 - From our spending we should know the baseline the target the responsible official and how we're going 1107 02:06:22,857 --> 02:06:29,619 - to determine whether that investment worked And so to me this sort of proposed deficit is not presented 1108 02:06:29,619 --> 02:06:36,185 - as a defined investment strategy And if you all remember you won't because you know, we say a lot of 1109 02:06:36,185 --> 02:06:38,526 - things and from this from this dais 1110 02:06:38,626 --> 02:06:46,114 - But last year when I voted for the budget, I said that I'm voting for this budget, however, I do not 1111 02:06:46,114 --> 02:06:53,676 - think that we should be spending money this way. I said, I don't think that you deficit spend without 1112 02:06:53,676 --> 02:07:01,089 - a clear idea about investment, with a clear investment strategy. And so to me, again, and generally 1113 02:07:01,089 --> 02:07:05,982 - in our budget and despite sort of our efforts here, I still think 1114 02:07:06,082 --> 02:07:12,246 - That we're in that type of situation and so this matters to me a lot because we have I think is all 1115 02:07:12,246 --> 02:07:18,780 - of us share a lot of unmet needs and in the city and We need infrastructure and investment and affordable 1116 02:07:18,780 --> 02:07:25,067 - housing and effective public safety and parks and transit and climate action and cetera, etc, etc And 1117 02:07:25,067 --> 02:07:31,231 - if we want to invest in those priorities, we have to examine our existing commitments with the same 1118 02:07:31,231 --> 02:07:33,758 - seriousness we apply to new requests now 1119 02:07:34,242 --> 02:07:42,647 - All of this I arrive at amendment 16 through and also what the public commenters noted how difficult 1120 02:07:42,647 --> 02:07:48,638 - it is for us as a council to be nitpicking at things within the budget. 1121 02:07:49,346 --> 02:07:55,174 - I noticed while writing all of these amendments, and those of you who wrote them, I mean, we had this 1122 02:07:55,174 --> 02:08:01,059 - conversation on the amendment you just did, how difficult it even was to pinpoint, okay, this account, 1123 02:08:01,059 --> 02:08:06,886 - actually this line, adding up things together. And as I was working on my multitude of amendments, it 1124 02:08:06,886 --> 02:08:12,600 - sort of occurred to me that I'm like, this is quite fascinating. I am sitting here as an individual 1125 02:08:12,600 --> 02:08:18,942 - person with the sole support of a half-time person, and I get 40 people responding back to me in the response, 1126 02:08:19,170 --> 02:08:25,890 - of whether or not what I've proposed is appropriate, responsible, whether I identified the right accounts, 1127 02:08:25,890 --> 02:08:32,296 - whether yada yada yada. So it makes very clear that our job, right, is not to redesign departments or 1128 02:08:32,296 --> 02:08:39,079 - choose individual employees from the dais. You know, we don't manage the daily work. We don't have complete 1129 02:08:39,079 --> 02:08:45,422 - knowledge of every workload, dependency, legal obligation, you know, et cetera. And nor should we, I 1130 02:08:45,422 --> 02:08:47,934 - think very clearly. I think we are not, 1131 02:08:48,066 --> 02:08:54,449 - You know, I mean as I've said throughout tonight like we're not the executive branch and so our role 1132 02:08:54,449 --> 02:09:00,831 - though However, very clearly I think as councilmember Flaherty has said time and time again Our role 1133 02:09:00,831 --> 02:09:07,277 - is to establish the fiscal boundaries and public priorities So with that said this amendment asks the 1134 02:09:07,277 --> 02:09:13,470 - administration to do that work within those boundaries it recommends that the reductions and I've 1135 02:09:13,570 --> 02:09:21,090 - put here reductions of $2.5 million that they actually focus on long-term savings and in places where 1136 02:09:21,090 --> 02:09:28,979 - ideally that reduction wouldn't cause sort of unacceptable harm. I think it recommends that the reductions 1137 02:09:28,979 --> 02:09:36,351 - focus on recurring long-term savings, recommends that the departments share responsibility in rough 1138 02:09:36,351 --> 02:09:43,134 - proportion to the share of general fund spending, but I think that's just a recommendation. 1139 02:09:44,002 --> 02:09:50,500 - To put this sort of in perspective, I think a $2.5 million reduction in addition to a handful of the 1140 02:09:50,500 --> 02:09:57,320 - smaller reductions that we made will put our deficit at about $2.97 million. And with the sort of vacancy 1141 02:09:57,320 --> 02:10:03,753 - rates and underspending and the padding, et cetera, will do fairly well to bring us into a close to 1142 02:10:03,753 --> 02:10:10,316 - balanced budget. And so to me, this is not about cutting the budget for the sake of cutting. It's not 1143 02:10:10,316 --> 02:10:13,790 - an argument that government should always be smaller. 1144 02:10:13,858 --> 02:10:22,221 - I think that a city can spend less and still spend badly. And I think we can also spend more and materially 1145 02:10:22,221 --> 02:10:30,351 - improve people's lives. And so to me, fundamentally, the question is what our spending is accomplishing. 1146 02:10:30,351 --> 02:10:37,784 - And trying our best to ask these questions, I think, has been very, very difficult. And anyway, 1147 02:10:37,784 --> 02:10:43,824 - so with that, I'm asking us as the fiscal body to sort of force some choices. 1148 02:10:43,824 --> 02:10:53,241 - And I think I'll end I'll end there I asked for your support on amendment 16 Thank you any questions 1149 02:10:53,241 --> 02:11:02,752 - for councilmember sorry councilmember Stasberg Well, I have two questions and neither of them are for 1150 02:11:02,752 --> 02:11:04,990 - councilmember. Sorry. I 1151 02:11:05,154 --> 02:11:11,270 - One of them is definitely for Controller McKim, if I could ask that one first. And so I know that I've 1152 02:11:11,270 --> 02:11:17,684 - discussed this with Controller McKim before, and I know I discussed this, or I asked this question multiple 1153 02:11:17,684 --> 02:11:23,800 - times of Controller McClellan before that, and I wish that I could have prepped you for this question, 1154 02:11:23,800 --> 02:11:29,917 - because you might have appreciated that. But the question is, what is the best practice for the amount 1155 02:11:29,917 --> 02:11:34,430 - of reserves to have, and how do our reserves compare to that best practice? 1156 02:11:36,642 --> 02:11:48,580 - I will say that literally this morning I added, I wrote a section for our financial policies manual 1157 02:11:48,580 --> 02:11:51,326 - on financial reserves. 1158 02:11:51,618 --> 02:11:59,205 - But I have not yet gotten to the point of actually calculating the correct percentage, the correct amount. 1159 02:11:59,205 --> 02:12:06,580 - So yeah, I'm just not there yet. We'll probably have, it is definitely a best practice to have a policy 1160 02:12:06,580 --> 02:12:14,380 - on reserves, on level of reserves. And we will definitely have one by the end of the year. But unfortunately, 1161 02:12:14,380 --> 02:12:19,486 - I just don't, I don't have that information yet. I will say that as we, 1162 02:12:19,746 --> 02:12:26,974 - As we provided in the budget book the the reserves are definitely substantial And you know certainly 1163 02:12:26,974 --> 02:12:34,131 - would accommodate The small deficit that we've already that we've already proposed and which you've 1164 02:12:34,131 --> 02:12:41,430 - actually already trimmed down tonight also but that the it's enough to accommodate that if we were to 1165 02:12:41,430 --> 02:12:49,374 - even see a deficit which there's a good chance that we would not actually see by the end of the year a deficit 1166 02:12:49,538 --> 02:12:57,822 - That so I'm sorry. I I tend to like to use that when I was at the county I would use 30% as a as just 1167 02:12:57,822 --> 02:13:06,024 - kind of a rough best practice but And we're certainly above that well above that How far above that? 1168 02:13:06,024 --> 02:13:14,470 - I mean I think last time I asked this question of Jessica McClellan and it and it's been I mean clearly 1169 02:13:14,470 --> 02:13:16,094 - a while it at least 1170 02:13:16,322 --> 02:13:22,089 - Maybe a year maybe since last budget time and I think our reserves were about 50 percent Is that about 1171 02:13:22,089 --> 02:13:27,744 - that that sounds about right? I mean there's an it should be in the packet It's actually if we go to 1172 02:13:27,744 --> 02:13:33,847 - the 4b the statement 4b and just look at the operating budget As a percentage of the budget or the operating 1173 02:13:33,847 --> 02:13:39,614 - balance as a percentage of the budget we can calculate that out Okay, thank you. Um, I'll save my next 1174 02:13:39,614 --> 02:13:42,302 - question unless you all want me to do it now. I 1175 02:13:48,578 --> 02:13:57,104 - Sorry, I was gonna ask if there were any other questions. Yes, I was moving on to other first round 1176 02:13:57,104 --> 02:14:06,483 - questions. Sorry. I appreciate the help. Councilmember Piedmont-Smith. Yes. I want to ask the administration, 1177 02:14:06,483 --> 02:14:15,179 - whoever wants to answer, how feasible is it for you all to come up with these cuts in the by the debt 1178 02:14:15,179 --> 02:14:18,334 - and still meet the deadline? I mean, 1179 02:14:19,074 --> 02:14:27,991 - Since it's not it's not just up to the controller right it'll have to be a discussion is it is it feasible 1180 02:14:27,991 --> 02:14:36,407 - to even do that and still meet the budget deadline. I can let the controller answer with the details 1181 02:14:36,407 --> 02:14:44,741 - but I want to. Two point five million dollars is significant. I want to acknowledge first that with 1182 02:14:44,741 --> 02:14:48,574 - the you know this is the last year that we're 1183 02:14:48,834 --> 02:14:57,207 - paying the Bloomington Transit subsidy and combined Combining that with our share of the election funding. 1184 02:14:57,207 --> 02:15:05,345 - We're pretty much even spent I mean even budget so we'll probably be Even spend by the end of the year. 1185 02:15:05,345 --> 02:15:13,326 - So I want to acknowledge that publicly again and Reducing two point five million dollars. I know it's 1186 02:15:13,326 --> 02:15:17,630 - been suggested in writing and elsewhere that we reduce 1187 02:15:17,954 --> 02:15:29,232 - staffing I Want to be very clear that I am serious about running Incredibly efficient government and 1188 02:15:29,232 --> 02:15:40,398 - a fair government and My team has put in a lot of work to get the morale around City Hall higher we 1189 02:15:40,398 --> 02:15:45,758 - just won best places to work in Bloomington and 1190 02:15:46,978 --> 02:15:57,091 - That was a milestone that I can assure you we would not have reached without a lot of very intentional 1191 02:15:57,091 --> 02:16:07,302 - work. And just the conversation in the documents and in these hearings, even if one's direct department 1192 02:16:07,302 --> 02:16:15,550 - was not addressed, there is now fear in every department. Are they coming after us? 1193 02:16:17,058 --> 02:16:24,795 - So, I am open, and in fact, we already had intended, guided by some of our professional services, to 1194 02:16:24,795 --> 02:16:32,610 - start looking at how to do some realignment. Now that doesn't mean cutting positions necessarily, and 1195 02:16:32,610 --> 02:16:40,883 - I don't even know that there's gonna be cost savings. But we do have departments that are doing overlapping 1196 02:16:40,883 --> 02:16:44,254 - work, we have departments that are too big, 1197 02:16:44,802 --> 02:16:52,362 - various other things that are happening, and I mean too big in terms of they're doing too many things 1198 02:16:52,362 --> 02:17:00,218 - all under one umbrella, not that we have too many people in them. Asking us to cut 2.5 million especially 1199 02:17:00,218 --> 02:17:08,223 - from staffing at this point would mean that we would go into the year with, we would have to make decisions 1200 02:17:08,223 --> 02:17:11,262 - that haven't been thought out, honestly. 1201 02:17:11,426 --> 02:17:21,302 - and I can say that it would cause harm to our city services a Restructuring of any kind causes a lot 1202 02:17:21,302 --> 02:17:31,276 - of fear in staff Even when the outcomes can be better for everyone so it's just it's a anxiety ridden 1203 02:17:31,276 --> 02:17:37,534 - process and I wouldn't want to do it in a matter of a month and 1204 02:17:38,338 --> 02:17:46,267 - We would have to have cuts made so that we didn't have positions in place by January 1st that I mean 1205 02:17:46,267 --> 02:17:54,196 - If the appropriations not there that that is what we'd be asking for. This is at least six months of 1206 02:17:54,196 --> 02:18:02,281 - work to do that so That's my comment on the high level. I want to make another comment that is related 1207 02:18:02,281 --> 02:18:07,070 - but you know the structure of council meetings are such that 1208 02:18:07,394 --> 02:18:17,483 - We can't always have a response. I did leave the room during Council Member Stossberg's comments. We 1209 02:18:17,483 --> 02:18:27,473 - have gotten to a point that the cabinet and other staff and even members of the public expect to be 1210 02:18:27,473 --> 02:18:33,566 - demeaned when we come to this podium. That's not acceptable. 1211 02:18:36,226 --> 02:18:45,003 - There's not a structure that people can respond. I told myself that I was gonna let our cabinet know 1212 02:18:45,003 --> 02:18:53,867 - that when they're called names or when somebody is speaking down to them in a demeaning way anywhere, 1213 02:18:53,867 --> 02:19:02,557 - if they're not in a position to say something, they can leave. And I was reminded that if we leave, 1214 02:19:02,557 --> 02:19:05,598 - we don't get the city's work done. 1215 02:19:07,490 --> 02:19:17,666 - So the highest priority for me isn't really budget related. The highest priority for me is how we work 1216 02:19:17,666 --> 02:19:28,237 - together. And I have been told by members of our staff, by members of your staff, that it can be a hostile 1217 02:19:28,237 --> 02:19:36,734 - work environment. That's not a city I wanna be part of. And I think we can do better. 1218 02:19:37,474 --> 02:19:45,836 - So, as we move forward through the budget process, I know that we have work to do on how we outline 1219 02:19:45,836 --> 02:19:54,868 - outcomes. I know we have a president of our country that speaks to his staff and the public in unacceptable 1220 02:19:54,868 --> 02:20:03,398 - ways. I want us to do better in Bloomington. And I want us to have a respectful discourse that honors 1221 02:20:03,398 --> 02:20:06,910 - people's dignity, even if we don't agree. 1222 02:20:07,458 --> 02:20:21,976 - So I'll let controller McKim address the details of what a 2.5 million dollar cut might look like and 1223 02:20:21,976 --> 02:20:29,662 - how we What what complications that causes? Thank you 1224 02:20:30,178 --> 02:20:36,948 - Of course, I don't have the ability to set these priorities. I've just run running calculations, but 1225 02:20:36,948 --> 02:20:39,294 - I did take the 2.5 million dollars 1226 02:20:39,426 --> 02:20:47,698 - And as the amendment indicated that it should be allocated roughly according to the proportion that 1227 02:20:47,698 --> 02:20:56,384 - that department has in the general fund budget, I just calculated it exactly, so exactly proportionally, 1228 02:20:56,384 --> 02:21:04,656 - just to see how that would come out. And what that would look like is a cut of 765,000 from police, 1229 02:21:04,656 --> 02:21:08,958 - 718,000 from the fire department, 183,000 from ITS, 1230 02:21:09,058 --> 02:21:18,963 - 137,000 from public works 120,000 from planning Da da da da. I mean, I don't need to read them all 33,000 1231 02:21:18,963 --> 02:21:28,307 - from the council budget 56,000 from facilities maintenance, etc. So those are really large cuts and 1232 02:21:28,307 --> 02:21:37,278 - definitely not cuts that we would be capable of producing within a week and implementing within 1233 02:21:37,826 --> 02:21:47,076 - Couple of months as the mayor just indicated but at least I think that gives you some idea of the kind 1234 02:21:47,076 --> 02:21:55,608 - of magnitude Of what those cuts would look like if they were out allocate proportionally Thank 1235 02:21:55,608 --> 02:22:04,588 - you councilmember, sorry, thank you so much both for for all of the comments, I think the We're not 1236 02:22:04,588 --> 02:22:06,654 - addressing the the the 1237 02:22:06,914 --> 02:22:14,074 - core of it, which is whether our current spending under our current circumstances is sustainable. And 1238 02:22:14,074 --> 02:22:21,164 - so let me just ask that directly. Is the way that we're currently spending sustainable? I believe in 1239 02:22:21,164 --> 02:22:28,325 - this budget we brought ourselves down to a sustainable level. So we could just continue with a budget 1240 02:22:28,325 --> 02:22:32,958 - like this? Especially if we did not continue with the BT funding. 1241 02:22:33,058 --> 02:22:39,359 - After this year or found some other funding source of which through the must process there is actually 1242 02:22:39,359 --> 02:22:45,721 - other another Kind of path to getting BT fund and even with Edie lit going away, right? Okay, what what 1243 02:22:45,721 --> 02:22:52,022 - replaces Edie lit in that in that sense? Then the the the six million that we're spending on Edie lit. 1244 02:22:52,022 --> 02:22:58,384 - Where does that come from in the future? Specifically for BT or just overall for you know, just overall 1245 02:22:58,384 --> 02:23:02,238 - because the because the BT is one one portion of it all of the 1246 02:23:02,466 --> 02:23:08,494 - all of the LITs will get, the different LITs, the ED LIT, the certified shares, and the public safety 1247 02:23:08,494 --> 02:23:14,699 - LIT, will all get collapsed into one municipal services LIT if the county council decides to adopt them. 1248 02:23:14,699 --> 02:23:20,727 - So there's still, yeah, there's still a lot of, the county council could decide to adopt a much lower 1249 02:23:20,727 --> 02:23:26,933 - amount, and we would have to make some pretty dramatic cuts. So no, there's absolutely, there are plenty 1250 02:23:26,933 --> 02:23:31,838 - of things that could happen that would make us have to adopt fairly dramatic cuts. 1251 02:23:32,322 --> 02:23:41,034 - Thank you Thank you any other questions Councilmember Flaherty, I'm curious for the sponsors perspective 1252 02:23:41,034 --> 02:23:49,746 - on the opportunity of Eliminating general fund Support for for sanitation services, which I've generally 1253 02:23:49,746 --> 02:23:58,043 - held the view should be covered by The rates that the folks receiving that service pay this came to 1254 02:23:58,043 --> 02:24:01,694 - the fiscal committee a couple weeks ago and 1255 02:24:01,826 --> 02:24:11,710 - and I believe after many years of talking about the the administration and public works carbon is planning 1256 02:24:11,710 --> 02:24:21,503 - to bring a Proposal to phase that over three years. I think it is like 1.6 million in this year's budget. 1257 02:24:21,503 --> 02:24:27,230 - Oh Did we yeah, thank you. Thank you. Yeah Yes, I guess I'm I 1258 02:24:27,842 --> 02:24:34,327 - The magnitude we're talking about, even with the full elimination of phase period of time, it's like 1259 02:24:34,327 --> 02:24:40,812 - $4 a month for the smallest cart size and maybe $11 a month for the largest. This is in a context in 1260 02:24:40,812 --> 02:24:47,747 - which we already have well below market rate service for sanitation. And not to make light of what somebody 1261 02:24:47,747 --> 02:24:54,232 - on a fixed income might feel for another $11 a month, but we do also have an integrated billing with 1262 02:24:54,232 --> 02:24:56,094 - CBU, which serves everybody. 1263 02:24:56,226 --> 02:25:03,814 - And you know specific assistance programs identified people that do struggle with with paying their 1264 02:25:03,814 --> 02:25:11,553 - bills and so I Said at the fiscal committee meeting. I was comfortable with phasing that you know All 1265 02:25:11,553 --> 02:25:19,748 - at once basically and I'm curious for your perspective on That as an option to meet this proposed reduction 1266 02:25:19,748 --> 02:25:26,046 - in part No, I think that that's that I think it would make a lot of sense you know 1267 02:25:26,562 --> 02:25:32,525 - I think we also could explore like whether it's rates or whether it just makes sense for the city not 1268 02:25:32,525 --> 02:25:38,722 - to be collecting at all. Somebody privatizing it is also something worth exploring. I would fall probably 1269 02:25:38,722 --> 02:25:44,510 - more on the rate side than the other. But again I think it is a conversation that we have to have. 1270 02:25:45,058 --> 02:25:50,441 - alongside a lot of these other conversations, right? And so, you know, I don't think that, I mean, that 1271 02:25:50,441 --> 02:25:55,668 - is one way, I guess, that you could get very close to the sort of target figure that I've said here. 1272 02:25:55,668 --> 02:26:00,895 - I'd also be happy to reduce this number to think of something that makes more sense. I struggled for 1273 02:26:00,895 --> 02:26:06,433 - quite a while to think, like, what really is it? And then based on the other amendments that I was putting 1274 02:26:06,433 --> 02:26:09,694 - forward that I didn't put forward, I was like, okay, you know, 1275 02:26:10,370 --> 02:26:18,257 - this is roughly where I was at. But yeah, I think that that is a conversation that we have to have amongst 1276 02:26:18,257 --> 02:26:25,701 - many other conversations about where we're spending money. Now, I have to trail what I'm saying here 1277 02:26:25,701 --> 02:26:33,441 - with what I said at the beginning of the budget process and really going back to last year is that every 1278 02:26:33,441 --> 02:26:40,222 - single time we propose almost anything, if we say we want to open Kirkwood for pedestrians, 1279 02:26:40,354 --> 02:26:46,721 - the retort is, we can't afford it. If we say we want some new, no matter what it is, and then we act 1280 02:26:46,721 --> 02:26:53,214 - like each of those things is like some shiny, oh, that's like a fun, unnecessary thing. But it's like, 1281 02:26:53,214 --> 02:26:59,581 - no, it's actually just a choice that we're making with other things, but we never surface what we're 1282 02:26:59,581 --> 02:27:06,011 - making the choice with. And so even now, we're saying, look, there's no way we could cut anymore from 1283 02:27:06,011 --> 02:27:10,046 - this budget. We're at zero. But even, there's a bunch of things 1284 02:27:10,210 --> 02:27:16,801 - When we said we'll we'll cut this with people said, okay, we could cut it a little bit more, right? 1285 02:27:16,801 --> 02:27:23,657 - so so I just and and if if we had moved in the direction that That of actually creating a budget system 1286 02:27:23,657 --> 02:27:30,248 - that would allow this type of dialogue This wouldn't be a hard wouldn't be as hard of a discussion, 1287 02:27:30,248 --> 02:27:36,510 - right? So so that's what we need to surface here as well. So Thank you councilmember Stossberg 1288 02:27:37,666 --> 02:27:44,733 - I just want as a follow-up on that to note that the Sanitation subsidy is actually coming out of Edie 1289 02:27:44,733 --> 02:27:51,939 - lit this year not out of the general fund and this amendment actually cuts the general fund which means 1290 02:27:51,939 --> 02:27:59,006 - that if that million dollars was part of that there would have to be a whole lot of gymnastics behind 1291 02:27:59,006 --> 02:28:06,142 - the scene to cut things out of the general fund and then and then reality sounds like a mess to me and 1292 02:28:08,450 --> 02:28:14,223 - Yes, but I think just to highlight though what councilman Flaherty said, you know phased approach, 1293 02:28:14,223 --> 02:28:20,287 - you know, you don't it would make more sense and I think the same if we're looking at You know any type 1294 02:28:20,287 --> 02:28:26,293 - of restructuring I get it a phased approach I talked about for example, you know funding things at six 1295 02:28:26,293 --> 02:28:32,299 - months or nine months, right? So that so that we force those conversations about Restructuring I think 1296 02:28:32,299 --> 02:28:37,022 - is also a possibility of ways to to look at some of this too Any other questions 1297 02:28:38,594 --> 02:28:46,996 - on to public comment anybody in chambers or online would if you would like to make comment on amendment 1298 02:28:46,996 --> 02:28:55,318 - 17 are you sure it's 16 16 I lied great we have a public comment or online you can unmute yourself and 1299 02:28:55,318 --> 02:29:03,801 - please state your name and you have three minutes you hear me yes okay Kevin Keough I'm speaking tonight 1300 02:29:03,801 --> 02:29:05,982 - in support of amendment 16 1301 02:29:06,466 --> 02:29:12,698 - Targeting 2.5 million in cuts signals necessary structural fiscal discipline as the city prepares for 1302 02:29:12,698 --> 02:29:19,113 - flattening property taxes and shifting state income tax allocations. At the same time, I want to address 1303 02:29:19,113 --> 02:29:25,405 - three key observations from tonight's meeting. The comments from the city employee about staff morale, 1304 02:29:25,405 --> 02:29:31,332 - the council members concerned about open reviews adding red tape, and the glaring lack of public 1305 02:29:31,332 --> 02:29:33,470 - participation in the room tonight. 1306 02:29:33,986 --> 02:29:40,277 - When you look at a handful of public comments offered on a multi-million dollar budget, it's clear the 1307 02:29:40,277 --> 02:29:46,873 - public is largely checked out. This is not because citizens do not care about local taxes or city services, 1308 02:29:46,873 --> 02:29:53,408 - but because an opaque budget presentation. It's very hard to understand the budget, and to make meaningful 1309 02:29:53,408 --> 02:29:59,577 - engagement, it's almost impossible. Public meetings, public comment, and fiscal transparency are not 1310 02:29:59,577 --> 02:30:03,486 - red tape. They are fundamental pillars of the local government. 1311 02:30:04,194 --> 02:30:10,821 - I also urge, as I have in the past, the long-term solution is adopting formal government financial officers 1312 02:30:10,821 --> 02:30:17,449 - association presentation standards. These are the best practice. It's important to emphasize that preparing 1313 02:30:17,449 --> 02:30:23,094 - a GFOA compliant budget document is fundamentally the responsibility of the administration, 1314 02:30:23,094 --> 02:30:29,783 - not the council. The executive branch builds and presents the budget, the council's roles, policy direction, 1315 02:30:29,783 --> 02:30:33,342 - and oversight. Look at communities like Fishers, Indiana, 1316 02:30:33,506 --> 02:30:40,580 - where the administration produces a modern GFOA budget document that bridges the gap between municipal 1317 02:30:40,580 --> 02:30:47,860 - finance and the public. Bloomington can, and should, they can do even better. At the core, GFOA standards 1318 02:30:47,860 --> 02:30:55,003 - are specifically designed to demystify complex municipal budgets. They translate thousand lines of line 1319 02:30:55,003 --> 02:31:02,558 - items into clear strategic goals, program-based outcomes, and multi-year financial forecasts into the future. 1320 02:31:02,882 --> 02:31:09,472 - When the administration delivers a budget built on these standards, it provides true accessible transparency 1321 02:31:09,472 --> 02:31:15,881 - without administrative friction, enabling strategic belt tightening that protects core services, respects 1322 02:31:15,881 --> 02:31:22,047 - city employees, and actively re-engages the public. I support Amendment 16 as an essential first step 1323 02:31:22,047 --> 02:31:28,637 - towards spending discipline, and I urge the council to direct the administration to adopt the GFOA budgeting 1324 02:31:28,637 --> 02:31:30,814 - standard to give our city a clearer 1325 02:31:31,010 --> 02:31:36,606 - more accessible budget process moving forward. Thank you. Thank you very much. Anybody else would like 1326 02:31:36,606 --> 02:31:42,093 - to make public comment? I see somebody in chambers approaching the podium. Thank you. You have three 1327 02:31:42,093 --> 02:31:47,525 - minutes. I didn't want to make three comments tonight. My name is Iris Bull again. I think that the 1328 02:31:47,525 --> 02:31:53,012 - number of people in the room is not representative of being checked out. I think it's representative 1329 02:31:53,012 --> 02:31:55,294 - of the government working to some degree. 1330 02:31:55,458 --> 02:32:01,666 - People show up when infrastructure breaks down. I think that proposing cuts without having a clear plan 1331 02:32:01,666 --> 02:32:07,934 - for where they're specifically going to come from and which steps you specifically want to fire, I think 1332 02:32:07,934 --> 02:32:14,143 - it's reckless. And I think it's unnecessary. This is like a manufactured hostage situation. If it feels 1333 02:32:14,143 --> 02:32:20,232 - like the only way to have a conversation, it's creating a conversation that no one wants to have with 1334 02:32:20,232 --> 02:32:25,246 - you. That's just not how you talk to adults with any modicum of respect. That's it. 1335 02:32:27,394 --> 02:32:42,946 - Thank you very much. Any other public commenters. We do have another one online. Awesome. You can unmute 1336 02:32:42,946 --> 02:32:53,758 - yourself and you have three minutes. Thank you. Yeah. Hello. Do we have. 1337 02:32:55,330 --> 02:33:03,572 - Okay, I think you're still muted. Can you unmute yourself and you have three minutes? I hear him. Oh, 1338 02:33:03,572 --> 02:33:11,734 - hi. Go ahead. Yeah, you must still have me on. This is Kevin. I know Eric's raised his hand. Somehow 1339 02:33:11,734 --> 02:33:20,461 - he hasn't been officially. All righty. Thanks, Mr. Keogh. Eric says he's unmuted, so it has to be something 1340 02:33:20,461 --> 02:33:23,774 - technical and working in the background. 1341 02:33:24,450 --> 02:33:32,753 - You might want to attend to that. Well, OK. If it's not working, do you want to try maybe putting your 1342 02:33:32,753 --> 02:33:40,815 - comments in the chat, and we can read them for you? I'm sorry, I don't know what the- Participation 1343 02:33:40,815 --> 02:33:44,926 - indicator is muted or not, because- Oh, you're on. 1344 02:33:45,282 --> 02:33:52,241 - You're on. Hello. Hi. We can hear you. Awesome. Thank you. So that was a problem. That was a problem 1345 02:33:52,241 --> 02:33:59,201 - on your end. I did not change anything. Good evening. My name's Eric Ost. And I want to echo many of 1346 02:33:59,201 --> 02:34:06,436 - the things that folks have said tonight. I appreciate that there is a good degree of importance in these 1347 02:34:06,436 --> 02:34:10,846 - conversations. How we spend money not only reflects priorities, 1348 02:34:11,010 --> 02:34:19,744 - But to some extent, priorities are opinions. But it also enables government to work. And I think that 1349 02:34:19,744 --> 02:34:28,221 - using adversarial language or taking an adversarial position, as I've heard some comments tonight, 1350 02:34:28,221 --> 02:34:37,383 - is not, I mean, sure, we can feel different ways. But anyway, to more of the part of the matter, I support 1351 02:34:37,383 --> 02:34:40,894 - incenting and prioritizing conversation. 1352 02:34:42,434 --> 02:34:52,606 - The council is the fiscal body. It oversees how things are spent. And it's important for the executive 1353 02:34:52,606 --> 02:35:02,679 - branch to engage with the legislative branch. I know that people are busy, but that's part of the way 1354 02:35:02,679 --> 02:35:09,790 - government is structured. And it's a necessary element. So I do support 1355 02:35:10,146 --> 02:35:18,468 - To the degree that the legislative branch can incent and prioritize greater degree of conversation about 1356 02:35:18,468 --> 02:35:26,552 - expenditures, you need to use those tools. I spent the day today looking at data and I wanna bring to 1357 02:35:26,552 --> 02:35:34,636 - the floor a concern I've raised many times over the years is that we seem to be stepping backwards in 1358 02:35:34,636 --> 02:35:39,550 - terms of transparency. Public records are no longer published 1359 02:35:39,714 --> 02:35:46,783 - released public records are no longer published for the members general members of the community to 1360 02:35:46,783 --> 02:35:53,852 - see accident data which used to be published is now withheld intentionally withheld under a premise 1361 02:35:53,852 --> 02:36:01,274 - and hypothesis that I believe does not stand. So I asked the legislative branch to be attentive to these 1362 02:36:01,274 --> 02:36:08,414 - things and to the extent that you need to pass revisions to the Bloomington municipal code to direct 1363 02:36:08,514 --> 02:36:16,250 - the executive branch to do certain things in certain ways, I suggest and request that you do so. So 1364 02:36:16,250 --> 02:36:24,528 - here is to collaboration and a better future. Thank you. Thank you very much. Any other commenters online? 1365 02:36:24,528 --> 02:36:32,496 - No. Okay. Thanks for everybody to everybody who commented tonight. Any council comments before we move 1366 02:36:32,496 --> 02:36:34,430 - to vote on amendment 16? 1367 02:36:36,322 --> 02:36:42,632 - Councilmember Stossberg and then councilmember Piedmont Smith Thank you, I'm not in support of this 1368 02:36:42,632 --> 02:36:49,447 - amendment The two well the second question that I didn't ask I didn't ask it because councilmember Piedmont 1369 02:36:49,447 --> 02:36:56,199 - Smith asked it or Essentially asked the same thing which was about how much time it would take to actually 1370 02:36:56,199 --> 02:37:02,572 - make these changes First off in terms of spending down our reserves. We've been trying to spend down 1371 02:37:02,572 --> 02:37:03,582 - reserves like I 1372 02:37:03,810 --> 02:37:10,081 - for three years everything that I heard in all of the Fiscal related meetings that I was in was we have 1373 02:37:10,081 --> 02:37:16,111 - more reserves than we actually need and we're trying to spend down reserves and when you When I was 1374 02:37:16,111 --> 02:37:22,262 - looking back and I didn't do it in preparation for this meeting But you know, I've done it relatively 1375 02:37:22,262 --> 02:37:27,870 - recently when I was looking back at actual expenditures for past years and whether or not we 1376 02:37:28,098 --> 02:37:36,218 - actually deficit spent there were at least a couple years where we didn't and then our reserves actually 1377 02:37:36,218 --> 02:37:44,492 - grew when we were trying to reduce them and I Think that it's responsible governance to have some reserves 1378 02:37:44,492 --> 02:37:52,225 - to have some money in our pocket just in case but we don't need to have so much money in our pocket 1379 02:37:52,225 --> 02:37:56,478 - just in case that we are withholding city services and 1380 02:37:57,058 --> 02:38:03,563 - I think that Additional cuts would be doing that in terms of this kind of broad-based thing, but also 1381 02:38:03,563 --> 02:38:10,324 - this Well, actually mostly I guess this like broad-based thing. It's I Don't think that that is necessary 1382 02:38:10,324 --> 02:38:16,893 - this year. I appreciate the argument that we have to think about tightening our belts Well, everything 1383 02:38:16,893 --> 02:38:23,271 - I've heard about preparation for this budget is that we have already tightened our belts is that we 1384 02:38:23,271 --> 02:38:25,822 - left things many things pretty flat and 1385 02:38:27,042 --> 02:38:34,047 - So that we could prepare for this future where our revenues are a little bit less certain and then the 1386 02:38:34,047 --> 02:38:41,120 - other reason why I'm voting no is that the time and feasibility I Absolutely agree with everything that 1387 02:38:41,120 --> 02:38:48,057 - the mayor said is that what they would have to do to make this happen in the next one two Three weeks 1388 02:38:48,057 --> 02:38:54,654 - at the most would not be well thought out would not be a good long-term plan and would be really 1389 02:38:54,754 --> 02:39:01,174 - Challenging on staff because it's not as though the controller himself can just make all these cuts 1390 02:39:01,174 --> 02:39:07,979 - It would take every single department head and half of every department head staff to be able to identify 1391 02:39:07,979 --> 02:39:14,463 - Those kinds of numbers and that I think that that's unnecessary to put our staff through that in the 1392 02:39:14,463 --> 02:39:21,269 - next one to three weeks So I will not be supporting this amendment. Thank you Thank you, so councilmember 1393 02:39:21,269 --> 02:39:24,286 - Piedmont Smith and then councilmember Flaherty 1394 02:39:26,370 --> 02:39:35,643 - Well I will just agree with everything councilmember Stossberg said and suggest that an amendment such 1395 02:39:35,643 --> 02:39:43,385 - as this or an idea such as this really should have come a lot earlier in the process. 1396 02:39:43,385 --> 02:39:52,477 - Thank you. Councilmember thank you. This is really interesting. I very much appreciate councilmember 1397 02:39:52,477 --> 02:39:55,358 - sorry for bringing this and the 1398 02:39:55,938 --> 02:40:02,192 - Thoughts you shared behind it You're right that you know through your experience this budget process 1399 02:40:02,192 --> 02:40:08,569 - you're noting that that it's it's very difficult for council members to understand Specific line items 1400 02:40:08,569 --> 02:40:14,884 - and things to cut there might be things we identify but it's it the administration ready is in a much 1401 02:40:14,884 --> 02:40:21,200 - better position on that front We're also hearing and I think I get it and I agree to some extent that 1402 02:40:21,200 --> 02:40:25,534 - you know the current time frames available are simply impractical and 1403 02:40:25,858 --> 02:40:31,701 - But let's run the counter hypothetical. So you come six months ago to say, I want to see 2.5 million 1404 02:40:31,701 --> 02:40:37,603 - reduced from the plan that isn't yet produced. And they say, that's meaningless. We're going to bring 1405 02:40:37,603 --> 02:40:43,388 - you the budget that we think is the right one for the city. We're essentially being told there's no 1406 02:40:43,388 --> 02:40:49,231 - right time for the council to weigh in on something like this. And it is a matter of trade-offs. And 1407 02:40:49,231 --> 02:40:55,422 - when we talk about council priorities and things, we want to see improvement on things like, I don't know, 1408 02:40:55,906 --> 02:41:00,759 - Utter failure to clear pedestrian infrastructure of snow and ice for the safety and accessibility of 1409 02:41:00,759 --> 02:41:05,708 - our residents that was noted in the council You know set of priorities and we didn't actually make any 1410 02:41:05,708 --> 02:41:10,560 - meaningful improvements in this budget proposal on that on that priority front I Guess we could have 1411 02:41:10,560 --> 02:41:15,509 - said, you know in August. Hey, this is like quickly like this isn't good enough and we need to see you 1412 02:41:15,509 --> 02:41:20,458 - know a $500,000 plan to do better like meaningfully better on that front and you need to cut that from 1413 02:41:20,458 --> 02:41:24,638 - somewhere else to make a budget neutral That's not an amendment yet. It's just an idea 1414 02:41:24,930 --> 02:41:31,900 - And so therefore, it's not binding and the likely outcome is actually gonna be like, well no, we don't 1415 02:41:31,900 --> 02:41:38,668 - think that's the right thing. All I'm getting at is that like, I don't know, I think I'm in support 1416 02:41:38,668 --> 02:41:45,503 - of this amendment. And I recognize its limitations and its challenges and problems. But the opposite 1417 02:41:45,503 --> 02:41:52,338 - conclusion to me is essentially conceding that our hands are tied on doing anything meaningful about 1418 02:41:52,338 --> 02:41:53,150 - the budget. 1419 02:41:53,250 --> 02:42:00,526 - You know ever and I you know, I Don't I don't think that's an acceptable outcome or conclusion either. 1420 02:42:00,526 --> 02:42:07,731 - So again, I recognize this isn't a optimal by any means Even so I think there are ways to go about it 1421 02:42:07,731 --> 02:42:15,218 - and do it that actually don't have to involve cutting staff necessarily and or if they do involve cutting 1422 02:42:15,218 --> 02:42:22,494 - staff It might force conversations around optimal staffing that you know again shouldn't be rushed but 1423 02:42:22,914 --> 02:42:31,357 - Conversations we need to have so I think I'll vote for it. Thank you Thank you any other comments from 1424 02:42:31,357 --> 02:42:39,636 - council before we move to a vote on amendment 16 councilmember Ruff Councilmember sorry doesn't need 1425 02:42:39,636 --> 02:42:47,998 - me defending him. So that's not what I'm doing here when I say this but There was a comment made that 1426 02:42:47,998 --> 02:42:52,670 - this was reckless and When councilmember was sorry began 1427 02:42:53,250 --> 02:42:59,712 - Presented the amendments and open the amendment is there any cotton it's open in comment explained it 1428 02:42:59,712 --> 02:43:06,047 - the thoughtful a very thoughtful approach which is well if we're going to say Council members don't 1429 02:43:06,047 --> 02:43:12,446 - really have the staff help the expertise the experience to make specific decisions about budget cuts 1430 02:43:12,446 --> 02:43:19,351 - and all these technical all these areas Well, but yet we're the fiscal body with the ultimate responsibility 1431 02:43:19,351 --> 02:43:21,822 - for the physical decision. Well that's 1432 02:43:22,210 --> 02:43:29,684 - Totally logical and rational and thoughtful approach to then say okay those with the expertise and the 1433 02:43:29,684 --> 02:43:37,521 - time and the staffing and the full-time jobs to do it Present us with something that reaches that addresses 1434 02:43:37,521 --> 02:43:44,923 - our concern or in this case councilmembers So far specific concern a proposal about a budget that was 1435 02:43:44,923 --> 02:43:51,454 - not sustainable. That's totally logical. There's nothing reckless about that approach and 1436 02:43:53,026 --> 02:44:02,902 - But I will say privatization I saw that come up at one point that would come up of city work city jobs 1437 02:44:02,902 --> 02:44:12,778 - is generally always going to be a non-starter for me as savings tend to come in the form of worse jobs 1438 02:44:12,778 --> 02:44:22,654 - and benefits and wages and working conditions and quality of services delivered. But finally you know. 1439 02:44:22,946 --> 02:44:33,153 - One of the public speakers said something about priorities or just opinions. And yeah there's a certain 1440 02:44:33,153 --> 02:44:43,557 - legitimacy to that. If I say the subsidy the subsidy to sanitation is a totally different kind of subsidy 1441 02:44:43,557 --> 02:44:51,998 - than the subsidy to bicyclists of which I am one of eight hundred thousand dollar and 1442 02:44:52,578 --> 02:45:01,519 - You know curb sets of bump outs and curbs and etc. To me those are entirely different one in the case 1443 02:45:01,519 --> 02:45:10,547 - of the sanitation services subsidy. If you take that away it's made up in the form of almost just call 1444 02:45:10,547 --> 02:45:19,838 - it a tax as it's as the cost is picked up by those who received that fundamental service which is most of 1445 02:45:20,258 --> 02:45:32,219 - significant majority probably of the citizens as opposed to some expenditures which address or go towards 1446 02:45:32,219 --> 02:45:44,180 - supporting a much smaller slice of the community in terms of users. So I don't think that all, I strongly 1447 02:45:44,180 --> 02:45:49,822 - disagree. While I acknowledge that priorities are 1448 02:45:49,986 --> 02:45:59,547 - to a certain extent opinions I think we could get majority agreement from citizens about what is more 1449 02:45:59,547 --> 02:46:09,577 - or less a fundamental basic city service that will is simply lifted onto their pushed onto their shoulders 1450 02:46:09,577 --> 02:46:19,326 - when a subsidy like sanitation fee is reduced or removed or shifted compared to some other expenditures 1451 02:46:19,682 --> 02:46:28,317 - which are much more of a choice. Anyway thanks for giving me a moment to to just say what I had to say. 1452 02:46:28,317 --> 02:46:36,952 - I know I haven't said much tonight but I've been thinking through everything very carefully. Thank you. 1453 02:46:36,952 --> 02:46:43,678 - Any last comments before we move to vote for amendment 16. Council member sorry. 1454 02:46:44,130 --> 02:46:50,500 - I just piggyback on just the last part of Councilmember Ruff's comments there. You know and again if 1455 02:46:50,500 --> 02:46:57,122 - you know if we think about this process I think one of the positive externalities of us this year trying 1456 02:46:57,122 --> 02:47:03,554 - to be as involved as possible and looking into all of these issues of budgets that has surfaced a lot 1457 02:47:03,554 --> 02:47:06,014 - of very interesting conversations that 1458 02:47:06,850 --> 02:47:13,848 - hopefully continue sort of throughout. Echoing what Councilmember Flaherty so eloquently said, the reality, 1459 02:47:13,848 --> 02:47:20,911 - I think it's easy to frame this as though we're sort of like today waking up and being like, let's transform 1460 02:47:20,911 --> 02:47:27,585 - the budget or something. The reality is that we've been fairly consistent in saying most of the things 1461 02:47:27,585 --> 02:47:34,194 - that we've said throughout this time for the last several years. And also, I don't think that this is 1462 02:47:34,194 --> 02:47:35,166 - something that 1463 02:47:35,778 --> 02:47:43,682 - is in any way adversarial or you know like nobody has to be wrong in order for us to do better. And 1464 02:47:43,682 --> 02:47:52,297 - so so but going back to what Councilmember Ruff said to tie sort of my approach and thinking here completely 1465 02:47:52,297 --> 02:48:00,202 - together the conversations that we have to have continually are how do we do best by the people who 1466 02:48:00,202 --> 02:48:01,150 - fund all of 1467 02:48:01,282 --> 02:48:07,613 - of these activities and who are the beneficiaries of all of these activities and how do we do that in 1468 02:48:07,613 --> 02:48:14,069 - the most equitable way but how do we do it in a way that's deserving of them and and that's what drives 1469 02:48:14,069 --> 02:48:20,648 - all of these conversations and I think it's really easy for us and we've seen it you know we start having 1470 02:48:20,648 --> 02:48:27,041 - conversations about you know whether it's our own salaries or whether it's positions that exist in the 1471 02:48:27,041 --> 02:48:31,262 - city and and we start looking internally as though this city exists 1472 02:48:31,586 --> 02:48:39,006 - for us right like it exists for the people who are employed here but we all are here to serve the 1473 02:48:39,074 --> 02:48:45,231 - people of this city in the best way possible. That's the guiding point. Again, when I said, for example, 1474 02:48:45,231 --> 02:48:51,389 - talking about sanitation, it's just a conversation that we should have. How do we give the best possible 1475 02:48:51,389 --> 02:48:57,488 - service to the people of the city? I wasn't making any deeper value statements about my political views 1476 02:48:57,488 --> 02:49:03,352 - or anything, but I'm just saying that is what should drive so many of our conversations, and I hope 1477 02:49:03,352 --> 02:49:09,040 - that we can continue to do so. I really appreciate all my colleagues. I think we do keep that at 1478 02:49:09,040 --> 02:49:16,706 - for a front of our minds, even though our format sometimes make it seem like that's not the case, if 1479 02:49:16,706 --> 02:49:24,751 - that makes sense, right? Because our format is of necessity sort of, I don't know, episodic and sometimes 1480 02:49:24,751 --> 02:49:32,569 - tense. But anyways, with that, I will be voting for this. Let's see how it goes. All right. Thank you. 1481 02:49:32,569 --> 02:49:37,502 - And with that, can, Clerk, please call the roll on Amendment 16. 1482 02:49:38,594 --> 02:49:53,086 - Councilmember Stossberg no Edmont Smith no Zulik No, I'm sorry. Yes, daily. No rough No Clarity yes 1483 02:49:53,086 --> 02:50:08,158 - All right, that amendment fails two to five Thank you. All right. I'm assuming there is an amendment on 1484 02:50:08,322 --> 02:50:17,988 - 17 somewhere since we had an amendment 18. I can't find it There is no amendment 17 Super Okay, fantastic. 1485 02:50:17,988 --> 02:50:27,292 - So we are done with all the amendments. No, we are not Are there any other amendments that I've missed 1486 02:50:27,292 --> 02:50:36,958 - Councilmember Stossberg, I think for the sake of Order I'm gonna move to take amendment 5 off the table. I 1487 02:50:38,018 --> 02:50:44,675 - Okay, so I'm doing that for the point of order because I think that we need to dispose of it in one 1488 02:50:44,675 --> 02:50:51,400 - way or another whether we vote on it or Because we we passed councilmember Piedmont Smith's that was 1489 02:50:51,400 --> 02:50:58,190 - similar or whether the original mover of said amendment Re-withdraw it right I had that we were gonna 1490 02:50:58,190 --> 02:51:04,848 - come back to it take a recess and possibly rewrite it Okay, so we are not doing that. So I have the 1491 02:51:04,848 --> 02:51:06,046 - second the motion 1492 02:51:06,178 --> 02:51:12,795 - Okay, super. Thank you. So we need to vote on that now so to withdraw Amendment five since it had been 1493 02:51:12,795 --> 02:51:18,898 - brought up we didn't know well Whoever sponsored whoever moved at the first time which I think 1494 02:51:18,898 --> 02:51:25,708 - was councilmember Sorry could withdraw it or we could just vote on it and vote it down. I withdraw motion 1495 02:51:25,708 --> 02:51:30,398 - amendment Five great, but we still need to vote on it. No to withdraw. I 1496 02:51:32,546 --> 02:51:38,980 - You actually could just let it die if you want you don't you don't even have to address it at this point 1497 02:51:38,980 --> 02:51:45,231 - Okay, I withdraw my motion to withdraw just Amendment five is dead Thank you. Okay, so that's it with 1498 02:51:45,231 --> 02:51:49,214 - amendments. Then we are done. We're ready to move on to the full 1499 02:51:49,730 --> 02:51:59,164 - Appropriation ordinance 2026-02 and I'm gonna pass this back over to president. Sorry a point of information 1500 02:51:59,164 --> 02:52:08,251 - here Controller you had said that you would you didn't want us to vote on it if we make amendments today 1501 02:52:08,251 --> 02:52:17,339 - Do you still hold that view? Yes, we will need to but what I would ask is that you continue this meeting 1502 02:52:17,339 --> 02:52:19,070 - to the the 14th and 1503 02:52:19,202 --> 02:52:27,957 - This will give us the opportunity to take all of the the amendments that you have passed to enter them 1504 02:52:27,957 --> 02:52:36,711 - into our financial system and then enter them into Gateway and to produce a final form for which you'd 1505 02:52:36,711 --> 02:52:45,296 - be able to vote on on at the next meeting Any motions, yep, I move to I motion to move appropriation 1506 02:52:45,296 --> 02:52:47,166 - ordinance 2026-02 and 1507 02:52:47,490 --> 02:52:54,360 - to our next regular session of October 14th. Second. Motion and second any discussion. Council member 1508 02:52:54,360 --> 02:53:01,095 - Stossberg. I'm just wondering if it's worth having any final comments on this tonight or whether we 1509 02:53:01,095 --> 02:53:08,167 - should just save final comments on all of this for next week. I'm just kind of thinking about the length 1510 02:53:08,167 --> 02:53:12,478 - of next week's meeting. Does anybody have any thoughts on that. 1511 02:53:12,770 --> 02:53:20,994 - I'm happy to have final comments right now. Anybody would let's do final comments right now anyone comments 1512 02:53:20,994 --> 02:53:28,761 - start with customer Sasper I'll just say that that I I appreciate that we've I'll say spent more time 1513 02:53:28,761 --> 02:53:36,603 - talking about the budget this year I think then we have the last two years combined because I do think 1514 02:53:36,603 --> 02:53:40,030 - that that's important to do I I do I think I 1515 02:53:40,450 --> 02:53:48,940 - Echo our public commenters one of our public commenters mentions that Some of this was maybe not the 1516 02:53:48,940 --> 02:53:57,430 - best way to bring it up and not the best way to initiate a conversation about certain things and I I 1517 02:53:57,430 --> 02:54:06,088 - agree with that in some respects that it Was not necessarily adversarial but I think that it puts city 1518 02:54:06,088 --> 02:54:08,862 - staff in a really weird spot and 1519 02:54:09,378 --> 02:54:18,651 - to have us talking about them in the way, like on paper, in the way that the amendments happen, right? 1520 02:54:18,651 --> 02:54:28,104 - Is it saying, well, we're just putting it all on paper. And if we want to tone police me, which I really 1521 02:54:28,104 --> 02:54:37,107 - don't appreciate in general, and generally speaking, I think is really inappropriate, then we could 1522 02:54:37,107 --> 02:54:39,358 - say a lot about the tone 1523 02:54:39,618 --> 02:54:48,991 - Some memos and some things that get written, you know, and it's like oh, well, okay Let's let's just 1524 02:54:48,991 --> 02:54:58,363 - consider that right now and I think that That happens across the board and I Guess that's all I have 1525 02:54:58,363 --> 02:55:07,550 - to say about it as it doesn't have to be adversarial. It's not necessarily adversarial but there's 1526 02:55:07,842 --> 02:55:15,508 - tone that happens on paper, just like there's tone that happens when people speak, and sometimes tone 1527 02:55:15,508 --> 02:55:23,174 - means one thing, and sometimes tone means another thing, but to express frustration from this dais is 1528 02:55:23,174 --> 02:55:30,915 - not inappropriate. And in fact, I had a constituent ask me about a week and a half, two weeks ago, how 1529 02:55:30,915 --> 02:55:34,974 - do you even stay calm up there? So whatever she sees, 1530 02:55:35,618 --> 02:55:42,257 - She's like, wow, she actually does stay calm in the face of all this. Am I passionate about some things? 1531 02:55:42,257 --> 02:55:48,833 - Yeah, I sure am. And one of the things that I'm passionate about was one of the other things our public 1532 02:55:48,833 --> 02:55:55,219 - commenter said, which is transparency. And if you notice, nearly everything that I voted for tonight 1533 02:55:55,219 --> 02:56:02,174 - in terms of amendments was about transparency. It was about putting our residents first in this whole process 1534 02:56:02,370 --> 02:56:10,264 - As councilmember Asari said remembering that we all work for them not just the seven plus two that are 1535 02:56:10,264 --> 02:56:17,928 - absent up here and The other elected officials in the room, but every single city staffer works for 1536 02:56:17,928 --> 02:56:25,746 - the residents and I think our city staff generally do a really great job doing their jobs and working 1537 02:56:25,746 --> 02:56:29,118 - for the residents and figuring that out and 1538 02:56:29,282 --> 02:56:37,665 - Serving them in the ways that they need to be served at all different levels. And so once again, I'm 1539 02:56:37,665 --> 02:56:46,214 - going to apologize to staff who felt like their jobs were uncertain Because that is never the way that 1540 02:56:46,214 --> 02:56:54,514 - our staff should end up feeling Especially during this kind of time. So thank you very much Sharing 1541 02:56:54,514 --> 02:56:57,502 - again, I'm sorry Any other comments 1542 02:56:59,202 --> 02:57:04,816 - Councilmember flirty. Thank you I've appreciated the discussion we've had tonight Unfortunately, I am 1543 02:57:04,816 --> 02:57:10,376 - NOT available for next week's meeting so I won't be here to take a vote on the civil city budget But 1544 02:57:10,376 --> 02:57:15,880 - that'll be ill material I think because my vote would have been no and I will talk about that for a 1545 02:57:15,880 --> 02:57:21,439 - moment now I also voted no on the civil city budget last year and mean for that to be interpreted as 1546 02:57:21,439 --> 02:57:27,329 - just broad dissatisfaction with mayor Thompson's administration and how she's leading the city's executive 1547 02:57:27,329 --> 02:57:27,934 - branch and 1548 02:57:28,226 --> 02:57:33,682 - My lack of buy-in and some of her priorities and some in some cases how she directs her staff to spend 1549 02:57:33,682 --> 02:57:38,979 - their time and the city's money There are some specific issues that I think of as like foundational 1550 02:57:38,979 --> 02:57:44,382 - problems in in the executive branch governance right now that I I would like like into something like 1551 02:57:44,382 --> 02:57:49,997 - a floor or a threshold of good governance that I need to see met in order to give me the basic confidence 1552 02:57:49,997 --> 02:57:52,222 - to support a budget request like this and 1553 02:57:52,674 --> 02:57:57,824 - And at a certain point when we've raised these foundational issues and they've not been addressed or 1554 02:57:57,824 --> 02:58:03,026 - the administration refuses to address them, the budget is one of only a few accountability mechanisms 1555 02:58:03,026 --> 02:58:08,329 - we have depending on the item. Sometimes legal action is another accountability mechanism. None of them 1556 02:58:08,329 --> 02:58:13,632 - are ideal. They're clunky accountability mechanisms. They nevertheless are that. And I did have remarks 1557 02:58:13,632 --> 02:58:19,190 - written up for some of the specific issues and instances which I could get into. I'm not sure how productive 1558 02:58:19,190 --> 02:58:22,046 - that is or the appetite for that right now. So I won't. 1559 02:58:22,146 --> 02:58:30,340 - unless unless you really want to hear but All right I'll try not to believe I'll try to belabor it too 1560 02:58:30,340 --> 02:58:38,613 - much. No, I mean I'm quite serious about this and it isn't and I don't mean it by any way of disrespect 1561 02:58:38,613 --> 02:58:46,728 - to the mayor and anybody on their staff, but I've been quite upset and concerned about what I believe 1562 02:58:46,728 --> 02:58:48,478 - is the violation of a 1563 02:58:48,674 --> 02:58:54,417 - some of our local laws, so specifically Bloomington Municipal Code 15.08.040, which allows the city 1564 02:58:54,417 --> 02:59:00,562 - engineer to make temporary experimental or emergency traffic regulations. Those regulations aren't allowed 1565 02:59:00,562 --> 02:59:06,535 - to extend past 180 days by the letter of city code, yet the administration has chosen to largely forego 1566 02:59:06,535 --> 02:59:12,336 - updating Title 15 in order to issue repeated orders for the same thing over and over. I think it's a 1567 02:59:12,336 --> 02:59:18,366 - clear violation of the law. It's been raised repeatedly with, I would say, increasing urgency and still, 1568 02:59:18,690 --> 02:59:25,831 - and including in the budget context by me, and still explicitly asked if they'll stop violating this 1569 02:59:25,831 --> 02:59:33,184 - law in 2027, they don't agree to do so. To me, that's a rule of law issue that goes beyond the specific 1570 02:59:33,184 --> 02:59:40,466 - code provision in question. Again, this is one accountability mechanism, one of three that I can think 1571 02:59:40,466 --> 02:59:46,334 - of for this issue, and it's a floor for me. It's a minimum expectation. Second, on 1572 02:59:46,594 --> 02:59:53,997 - You know, I mentioned snow removal earlier. To me, that was a real failing. One of the things that is 1573 02:59:53,997 --> 03:00:01,400 - a top priority for me is the safety and accessibility of our public infrastructure for all residents. 1574 03:00:01,400 --> 03:00:08,803 - Snow is tricky. I don't feel like there was a meaningful effort to improve that issue in this budget. 1575 03:00:08,803 --> 03:00:14,174 - And I'm especially dissatisfied with the enforcement efforts of the city. 1576 03:00:14,402 --> 03:00:19,872 - You know a really striking example of this is the college square property the city's redevelopment Commission 1577 03:00:19,872 --> 03:00:24,994 - owns in our major snow events the last two years at least That property has been in violation The hand 1578 03:00:24,994 --> 03:00:30,067 - director has said it was the responsibility of the construction manager Weddle Brothers construction. 1579 03:00:30,067 --> 03:00:35,089 - I just find that wholly inadequate It was in violation for two weeks. We were the property owner the 1580 03:00:35,089 --> 03:00:40,112 - city government You tell me we can't get our contractor to do to fix the thing I think their overall 1581 03:00:40,112 --> 03:00:44,190 - approach to issuing warnings before fines is fundamentally misplaced and does not 1582 03:00:44,354 --> 03:00:50,570 - The enforcement as a tool to get compliance on that front is just fundamentally failing, and I'm not 1583 03:00:50,570 --> 03:00:56,970 - seeing the serious recognition of that problem. And it is legitimately a safety life and death problem. 1584 03:00:56,970 --> 03:01:03,370 - It forces people into the dangerous streets under dangerous street conditions. And probably the biggest 1585 03:01:03,370 --> 03:01:09,586 - public safety issue in our city is the deaths and severe injuries on our streets. Which brings me to 1586 03:01:09,586 --> 03:01:14,078 - the last issue, which is about follow-through on commitments and funding 1587 03:01:14,242 --> 03:01:20,007 - previously made to the council. In particular, I've been quite disappointed that what we negotiated 1588 03:01:20,007 --> 03:01:25,946 - during the 2024 budget cycle in the form of a bond ordinance was the Indiana Avenue Safety Improvement 1589 03:01:25,946 --> 03:01:31,827 - Project. That was part of an extensive budget negotiation. And over the past several years, staff has 1590 03:01:31,827 --> 03:01:37,362 - had a lot of wide-ranging public engagement on that project. They developed a design that would 1591 03:01:37,362 --> 03:01:43,646 - unquestionably increase safety for vulnerable street users. However, a few individuals at Indiana University 1592 03:01:43,778 --> 03:01:48,937 - Oppose the project and prefer to car centric design that would largely replicate existing conditions 1593 03:01:48,937 --> 03:01:54,199 - that are again objectively unsafe documented where we had residents die and be severely injured That's 1594 03:01:54,199 --> 03:01:59,307 - based on prior primarily closed-door meetings staff ultimately end up recommending a subpar concept 1595 03:01:59,307 --> 03:02:04,467 - to the Transportation Commission Which the Commission unanimously rejected is inconsistent with city 1596 03:02:04,467 --> 03:02:09,677 - code and the goals of the safe streets for all action plan We directed staff to bring back a proposal 1597 03:02:09,677 --> 03:02:13,662 - consistent with city code consistent with the the goals of the city and staff 1598 03:02:13,954 --> 03:02:19,257 - just went radio silent, didn't tell us anything about it, didn't bring anything back or say anything 1599 03:02:19,257 --> 03:02:24,717 - for six months until I asked about it, at which point they said they're not gonna pursue it, and hadn't 1600 03:02:24,717 --> 03:02:30,282 - even talked to IU following the commission's vote, hadn't even talked to IU, but they're not gonna pursue 1601 03:02:30,282 --> 03:02:35,532 - the project anymore with a sort of hand-wavy answer about, oh, it's gonna be incorporated into this 1602 03:02:35,532 --> 03:02:40,887 - downtown kind of transportation study. That whole process on so many levels is just, again, a failure 1603 03:02:40,887 --> 03:02:42,462 - of governance, in my opinion, 1604 03:02:42,594 --> 03:02:48,067 - It's a failure to follow through on the commitments made to council. And at that time, I asked what 1605 03:02:48,067 --> 03:02:53,649 - happens if conditions change. We were assured by the controller that the administration would come to 1606 03:02:53,649 --> 03:02:59,286 - the council to work together to figure out what to do. That's not what has happened. Additionally, the 1607 03:02:59,286 --> 03:03:04,759 - fact that because we can't get buy-in from a stakeholder or two who are deemed to be more important 1608 03:03:04,759 --> 03:03:10,560 - than everyone else, we can't move forward on the project is just fundamentally unacceptable to me. Again, 1609 03:03:10,560 --> 03:03:11,326 - it's a floor. 1610 03:03:11,426 --> 03:03:17,611 - of what I expect of government. These things are all tied to the budget. They're tied to the appropriations 1611 03:03:17,611 --> 03:03:23,797 - we're making. And again, when you're left with minimal recourse on accountability, I'm choosing to exercise 1612 03:03:23,797 --> 03:03:29,066 - my vote here as a signal of accountability. So those are three specific things that I think 1613 03:03:29,066 --> 03:03:34,793 - are representative of broader categories of things that I am dissatisfied with this administration. 1614 03:03:34,793 --> 03:03:41,150 - And you can probably expect the same from me next year if we don't see market improvement across those things. 1615 03:03:41,378 --> 03:03:48,060 - What my vote would be next week. Thank you again. No disrespect. It's my perspective I do appreciate 1616 03:03:48,060 --> 03:03:55,138 - that the many good things the staff are doing There's lots that I agree with the things that my colleagues 1617 03:03:55,138 --> 03:04:01,886 - are bringing to through the budget process tonight that I supported I appreciate that effort as well. 1618 03:04:01,886 --> 03:04:08,567 - So, thank you Councilman Flaherty any other comments Okay, and with that I think the motion is still 1619 03:04:08,567 --> 03:04:09,758 - on the table so I 1620 03:04:10,210 --> 03:04:17,260 - I forget what it was to table. That's a procedural thing to move. Yeah, that's a procedural thing. We 1621 03:04:17,260 --> 03:04:24,171 - can do voice vote. Yes. Okay. Fantastic. All those in favor then of moving this to our next regular 1622 03:04:24,171 --> 03:04:31,082 - session on October 14th, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right. Thank you so much. That will be read 1623 03:04:31,082 --> 03:04:37,994 - on October. I mean, that will be next read on October 14th. Thank you all very much. Let's move on. 1624 03:04:37,994 --> 03:04:39,998 - Are there any other motions? 1625 03:04:40,130 --> 03:04:49,573 - I move that ordinance 2026-25 be introduced and read by the clerk by title and synopsis only second 1626 03:04:49,573 --> 03:04:59,678 - motion and second all those in favor say aye Any opposed? All right. Will the clerk please read? Ordinance 1627 03:04:59,678 --> 03:05:05,438 - 2026-25 and ordinance fixing the salaries of officers of the 1628 03:05:05,602 --> 03:05:12,304 - the police and fire departments for the city of Bloomington Indiana for the year 20 27. The synopsis 1629 03:05:12,304 --> 03:05:19,073 - is as follows. This ordinance sets the minimum and maximum salary rates for all sworn fire and police 1630 03:05:19,073 --> 03:05:26,174 - personnel for the 20 for that for the year 20 27 in accordance with council approved collective bargaining 1631 03:05:26,174 --> 03:05:32,478 - agreements. Thank you very much. I move that ordinance 20 26 25 be adopted. Second. Wonderful. 1632 03:05:32,578 --> 03:05:40,734 - Anyone to present on this? I guess we've already talked about it, but any additions to this one Councilmember 1633 03:05:40,734 --> 03:05:48,149 - Stasberg, I would like to move amendment one to ordinance 20 26 25. Okay So I think though director 1634 03:05:48,149 --> 03:05:55,118 - paycheck was gonna say a few words. So is that okay? Can we? Did you want to speak before no, 1635 03:05:55,118 --> 03:06:02,014 - thank you. Sure paycheck resources director. I'll answer any questions. Okay. Yeah Fantastic 1636 03:06:02,274 --> 03:06:09,659 - Amendment one take it away Amendment one just add some clarifying language in a couple of places Under 1637 03:06:09,659 --> 03:06:16,901 - training it clarifies the 100 hours per 20 hours of training The language aligns with the collective 1638 03:06:16,901 --> 03:06:24,429 - bargaining agreement and then the clothing allotment adds a per year after that which is like the intent 1639 03:06:24,429 --> 03:06:29,950 - and is what is there and the per year was just absent that's all it does and 1640 03:06:31,554 --> 03:06:40,014 - Wonderful. Any comments or questions on this one? Seeing none, we'll go to public comment on Amendment 1641 03:06:40,014 --> 03:06:48,474 - 1. Would anybody like to comment on Amendment 1? Anyone online? Fantastic. Coming back to council, any 1642 03:06:48,474 --> 03:06:56,852 - final comments on Amendment 1? Thank you for your work, Councilmember Stosberg. Will the clerk please 1643 03:06:56,852 --> 03:07:01,534 - call the roll? Councilmember Piedmont-Smith? Yes. Zulek? 1644 03:07:01,634 --> 03:07:10,728 - Yes. Sorry. Yes. Daily. Yes. Rough. Yes. Flaherty. Yes. Stasburg. Yes. Excellent. That passes. We're 1645 03:07:10,728 --> 03:07:19,912 - now on the ordinance as amended. Any other motions. All right. Seeing none any questions. Seeing none 1646 03:07:19,912 --> 03:07:29,726 - we'll go to public comment as anyone would anyone like to make public comment on this portion of the budget. 1647 03:07:32,002 --> 03:07:41,074 - Anyone online seeing none. We'll come back to counsel any final comments All right, will the clerk please 1648 03:07:41,074 --> 03:07:49,975 - call the roll on ordinance 2026 25 Councilmember Zulek. Yes. Sorry. Yes. Daily. Yes rough. Yes clarity. 1649 03:07:49,975 --> 03:07:59,646 - Yes Stasburg. Yes Piedmont Smith. Yes Thank you. Thank you very much. That carries. Are there any other motions? 1650 03:08:01,698 --> 03:08:08,895 - I move that ordinance twenty twenty six dash twenty six be read by the clerk by title and synopsis only 1651 03:08:08,895 --> 03:08:16,231 - second motion in a second any discussion all those in favor say aye aye any opposed will the clerk please 1652 03:08:16,231 --> 03:08:23,429 - read Ordinance twenty twenty six dash twenty six in ordinance to fix the salaries of appointed officers 1653 03:08:23,429 --> 03:08:27,166 - down union and AFSCME employees for all the cities of 1654 03:08:27,586 --> 03:08:33,581 - For all the departments of the city of Bloomington Monroe County Indiana for the year twenty twenty 1655 03:08:33,581 --> 03:08:39,636 - seven the synopsis is as follows ordinance twenty twenty six dash twenty six sets the maximum twenty 1656 03:08:39,636 --> 03:08:45,751 - twenty seven salary for all appointed officers non-union and AFSCME employees for all the departments 1657 03:08:45,751 --> 03:08:51,746 - of the city of Bloomington Indiana. Thank you so much. I move that ordinance twenty twenty six dash 1658 03:08:51,746 --> 03:08:56,542 - twenty six be adopted. Second. All right. Are there any amendments any motions. 1659 03:08:57,890 --> 03:09:07,344 - Councilmember Piedmont Smith I move amendment 1 to ordinance 20 26-26 Second amendment 1 is on the table. 1660 03:09:07,344 --> 03:09:16,798 - Go for it this amendment Revises section 1 of the ordinance to eliminate the vacant transportation demand 1661 03:09:16,798 --> 03:09:25,182 - manager position from the ESD department Any questions for the sponsor Councilmember Stasberg 1662 03:09:25,378 --> 03:09:32,367 - Earlier in the evening. There was a discussion about the idea of Defunding it but keeping it in here 1663 03:09:32,367 --> 03:09:39,426 - so that then it would be like easier to recreate later if we ever wanted to What are your thoughts on 1664 03:09:39,426 --> 03:09:46,484 - that? My thoughts on that are that If we have this position, it should not be an ESD So I would still 1665 03:09:46,484 --> 03:09:52,574 - take it out of the ordinance and if we want to revisit transportation demand management 1666 03:09:53,314 --> 03:10:00,507 - It should probably be in the Department of Planning and Transportation. Thank you. Thank you very much. 1667 03:10:00,507 --> 03:10:07,423 - Any other questions or comments. Seeing none we'll move now to time of public comment. Would anyone 1668 03:10:07,423 --> 03:10:14,616 - like to make a public comment on this amendment. Anyone online. Seeing none we'll come back to counsel. 1669 03:10:14,616 --> 03:10:18,558 - Any final comments. Thank you very much. Will the clerk. 1670 03:10:18,786 --> 03:10:25,401 - Councilmember Stasberg sorry, it went so fast I agree with councilmember Piedmont Smith that that eliminating 1671 03:10:25,401 --> 03:10:31,655 - it from ESD is the right thing to do Because I don't think it ever should have been an ESD in the first 1672 03:10:31,655 --> 03:10:37,970 - place. It should have been somewhere else and I think that I really appreciated councilmember Flaherty's 1673 03:10:37,970 --> 03:10:44,344 - comments on other Planning transportation related things that this money could be potentially reallocated 1674 03:10:44,344 --> 03:10:48,734 - for though. I also appreciate the idea of reallocating that money toward 1675 03:10:49,026 --> 03:10:55,746 - implementation of our climate action plan which are two things that may be sort of related but also 1676 03:10:55,746 --> 03:11:02,600 - maybe aren't so I hope that there is a broader conversation about that in the next several months and 1677 03:11:02,600 --> 03:11:09,589 - also understanding that that that's a hundred and some thousand dollars that is no longer in our budget 1678 03:11:09,589 --> 03:11:16,443 - that could potentially be reallocated at some point in 2027 for some additional project. Thank you so 1679 03:11:16,443 --> 03:11:18,526 - very much. Any other comments? 1680 03:11:19,010 --> 03:11:29,091 - Seeing none. Will the clerk please call the roll on this amendment? Councilmember sorry. Yes Daily. 1681 03:11:29,091 --> 03:11:39,373 - Yes, rough. Yes 30. Yes, Stasburg. Yes, Piedmont Smith. Yes, Zulek. Yes, that amendment carries Let's 1682 03:11:39,373 --> 03:11:46,430 - go back to ordinance 20 26 26 nice as amended any Any other questions 1683 03:11:51,362 --> 03:12:06,112 - I don't think so. No. Yeah. OK. I can talk about this amendment. I think that we and maybe. So my intention 1684 03:12:06,112 --> 03:12:20,862 - here was that our our our incoming attorney based on how we we have room in our budget and salary to adjust 1685 03:12:21,122 --> 03:12:27,300 - the other position. And so this was the attempt to do that now. This is not the right place to do this, 1686 03:12:27,300 --> 03:12:33,715 - nor the right mechanism to do this. I think we would have to take different type of action in collaboration 1687 03:12:33,715 --> 03:12:39,774 - with HR. So I'm not going to introduce it, if that's OK. But I think it's a broader conversation that 1688 03:12:39,774 --> 03:12:45,714 - we should have, as I've been saying. Sort of the refrain for today speaks a lot, I guess. But yeah, 1689 03:12:45,714 --> 03:12:48,446 - so something for us to revisit is sort of the 1690 03:12:49,090 --> 03:12:58,244 - That's second our second Lord position. Okay, so any other motions amendments questions Seeing none. 1691 03:12:58,244 --> 03:13:07,852 - We'll go to public comment on ordinance 2026 2026 26 Anyone online seeing then we'll come back to council 1692 03:13:07,852 --> 03:13:17,278 - any final comments or No, well the clerk, please call the roll. Oh councilman Sasberg. No, go ahead. Oh 1693 03:13:17,474 --> 03:13:25,455 - It's fine. I was just gonna thank our staff again. That's all because this is like the ordinance that 1694 03:13:25,455 --> 03:13:33,592 - actually sets their salaries for 2026 So thank you our staff for all the work that they do. Thanks Will 1695 03:13:33,592 --> 03:13:41,729 - the clerk please call the roll councilmember Daley Yes, rough. Yes Flaherty. Yes Stasburg. Yes Piedmont 1696 03:13:41,729 --> 03:13:44,702 - Smith. Yes, Zulek. Yes. Sorry. Yes. I 1697 03:13:45,314 --> 03:13:55,825 - Thank you that carries and yay any other motions Yeah I move that Ordinance 20 26-28 be introduced and 1698 03:13:55,825 --> 03:14:06,439 - read by the clerk by title and synopsis only second There's a motion to second any discussion All those 1699 03:14:06,439 --> 03:14:12,766 - in favor say aye aye any opposed will the clerk please read I 1700 03:14:17,730 --> 03:14:25,974 - Ordinance 2026-28 in an ordinance to fix the salaries of appointed deputies and employees of the Bloomington 1701 03:14:25,974 --> 03:14:33,537 - City Clerk for the city of Bloomington Monroe County, Indiana for the year 2027. The synopsis is as 1702 03:14:33,537 --> 03:14:41,630 - follows. This salary ordinance establishes the 2027 maximum salaries for Bloomington City Clerk employees. 1703 03:14:41,630 --> 03:14:42,462 - Thank you. 1704 03:14:42,882 --> 03:14:51,090 - Any motion I move that ordinance twenty twenty six dash twenty eight be adopted second. All right. Clerk 1705 03:14:51,090 --> 03:14:59,142 - would you like to say anything. I am here to answer any questions and record your votes. Council would 1706 03:14:59,142 --> 03:15:07,193 - you like to ask any questions. Council member Stasberg is that in turn hourly rate based on the living 1707 03:15:07,193 --> 03:15:11,102 - wage ordinance. Yes. Thanks. Any other questions. 1708 03:15:13,122 --> 03:15:21,252 - Seeing none any motions Seeing none. We'll go to public comment. Is there anyone who wishes to comment 1709 03:15:21,252 --> 03:15:29,540 - on the clerks? I mean originates 20 26 28 Anyone online coming back to council any final comments, maybe 1710 03:15:29,540 --> 03:15:37,434 - your last chance I'd be remiss if I thanked all of the city staff and didn't specifically thank the 1711 03:15:37,434 --> 03:15:43,038 - clerk staff as well because the clerk staff do a tremendous amount for 1712 03:15:43,202 --> 03:15:50,847 - City and keeping all of our meetings in order and all of those things. So thank you to those staff members 1713 03:15:50,847 --> 03:15:58,421 - as well Because I'm in the in the sort of vibe of losing battles another conversation that I've continued 1714 03:15:58,421 --> 03:16:05,851 - to have throughout the year is the importance of us really thinking about both the structure of council 1715 03:16:05,851 --> 03:16:11,710 - staff and the structure of the clerk staff, I think that there's ways that we can 1716 03:16:11,906 --> 03:16:22,069 - really harmonize and bring better outcomes to all of this. I hope one day that we will all join together 1717 03:16:22,069 --> 03:16:30,974 - in this wonderful, glorious paradise. Okay, with that, will the clerk please call the roll. 1718 03:16:31,938 --> 03:16:42,199 - I mean I have much broader things that you know, you know, you wouldn't like them Okay councilmember 1719 03:16:42,199 --> 03:16:52,358 - rough Thank you Flaherty, yes Stasburg. Yes, Piedmont Smith. Yes, Azulik. Yes. I'm sorry. Yes daily 1720 03:16:52,358 --> 03:16:57,438 - Yes, thank you all very much. All right now we're 1721 03:17:02,082 --> 03:17:09,243 - or any well wishes. Well, I hope you all get home safely and whatnot. Have a wonderful evening. This 1722 03:17:09,243 --> 03:17:10,590 - is adjourned. Bow.