►
From YouTube: April 27, 2015 - City Council Work Session
Description
April 27, 2015 - City Council Work Session
http://www.cityblm.org
View meeting documentation:
http://www.cityblm.org/index.aspx?page=17&recordid=3624
Music by www.RoyaltyFreeKings.com
A
C
A
E
Chapter
thirty-seven
article
1,
section,
29
connection
with
the
sewers
within
the
city,
payment
of
prorated
costs
whenever
sewers
are
or
have
been
built
within
the
city
and
adjacent
to
Venice
benefited
property,
it
that
does
not
pay
a
share
of
the
original
cost.
At
the
time
of
installation
of
the
sewer,
then
this
adjacent
benefited
property
will
be
required
just
to
pay
the
city.
It's
prorated
share
of
the
cost.
At
the
time
of
connection
to
the
sewer,
it
does
not
say
defer,
it
does
not
say
reduce,
and
it
does
not
say
to
waive.
E
Chapter
16
article
2,
section
36
a
I'm
going
to
paraphrase
this,
because
it's
rather
long
any
fees
that
are
due
and
are
not
paid
within
60
days
will
incur
a
third
a
ten
percent
interest
per
month.
But
the
city
manager
can
waive
the
interest
now
the
principal
just
interest
and
I'm
going
to
refer
to
that
letter.
Apparently,
the
former
city
manager
chose
not
to
abide
by
these
ordinances
because
he
will
allow
you
to
pay
the
tap
on
fees
for
the
digits
aboard
the
subdivision
on
a
per
lot
basis.
E
That's
all
it's
us,
but
doesn't
say
when
or
how
and
then
also
online.
I
did
email
a
link
to
the
city
website
about
the
serve
consultants
that
gave
a
report
to
you
back
in
2010,
and
it
has
a
lot
of
very
good
information.
But
specifically
I'm
going
to
reference
the
page
13
through
16,
which
refers
to
the
recommendations
for
the
city,
the
city.
E
Does
the
city
does
not,
but
should
collect
fees
in
advance,
sewer
fees
and
street
feasts
currently,
which
is
2010
when
the
report
was
written,
is
the
existing
rate
payers
are
subsidizing
new
development
and
they
recommend
it
to
change
the
fee
schedule?
The
city
has.
Another
point
was
that
the
city
has
taken
on
most
of
the
fiscal
risk
or
financial
risk
associated
with
funding
the
infrastructure
versus
the
developer,
which
I
know
that
to
be
true.
Personally,
this
puts
a
lot
of
fiscal
stress
on
the
city's
infrastructure
and
maintenance
needs
when
looking.
E
A
F
You
very
much
your
honor
I
think
you've
already
seen
these
slides
I
have
a
just
four
of
them:
I'll
go
through
them
briefly
about
five
minutes
to
get
us
all
on
the
same
sheet
of
music.
As
you
all
know,
I've
been
talking
with
the
Colombian
housing
authority
for
the
last
several
weeks
to
see
if
we
can
work
out
some
kind
of
an
arrangement
with
them,
and
what
we'll
do
is
we'll
summarize
that
for
you
here.
F
First
thing
I
want
to
do
is
we've
shown
where
this
location
is,
and
it's
a
three
acre
lot
there
in
the
southwest
corner
of
the
city
and
I've
got
a
blow-up
of
that.
That
I'll
show
you
here's
what
the
piece
of
property
originally
looked
like
and
some
time
ago
it
was
divided
into
a
three
three
parcels,
because
the
the
CH
a
had
wanted
to
sell
this,
because
it
was
no
longer
of
use
to
them
and
they
subdivided
it.
F
So
what
we
did
was
we
looked
at
the
possibility
of
paying
a
less
amount
and
I
will
show
you
that
the
total
that
we
were
proposing
was
eighty
thousand
seven
hundred
or
so,
and
they
have
come
back
to
us
and
asked
us
to
reduce
that
by
and
pay
half
of
that,
and
they
wanted
to
do
that.
So
that
they
could
proceed
on
with
the
with
what
they
hope
would
be
a
sale
and
I'll
show
you
how
we
got
to
the
80,000,
and
that
is
we
said
well.
F
What
we
could
do
to
help
them
out
and
still
keep
in
accordance
with
the
ordinances
was
to
consider
it.
One
subdivision
if
we
did
at
one
instead
of
three
Lots
just
one
lot
and
what
we
did
with
that.
Then
the
sewer
and
water
tap
on
fees
would
be
seven.
Eight
hundred
plus
the
street
tap
on
fees,
which
is
the
largest
amount.
So
on
the
chart
on
the
right,
it
shows
what
the
tap
on
fees
would
be
for
each
one
of
those
roads.
The
least
expensive
would
be
the
one
to
the
north
fox
creek.
F
So
then,
if
we
consider
that
one
subdivision
with
one
road
connection
at
42,000,
we
would
then
add
that
42,000
to
the
sewer
and
water
tap
on
fees
of
37,
which
is
how
he
got
to
about
80,000
and
some
change
and
what
they
did
to
come
back
to
us
and
say
they
would
like
to
request,
however,
that
they
only
pay
half
of
that
which
was
the
40,000.
We
calculated
these
numbers
as
a
least
possible
way
that
we
could
get
the
smallest
amount
of
money
and
still
be
in
accordance
with
the
law.
F
The
ordinances
that
we
have
and
staff
doesn't
have
any
authority
to
go
below
that,
but,
of
course,
they
would
like
to
come
back
and
request
of
you
that
they
would
pay.
Half
of
that
here
is
where
the
piece
of
property
is
located,
and
there
is
good
good
logic
on
on
both
sides
of
them.
You
can
see
the
property
and,
if
we
reduce
the
fee,
it
means
then
that
the
city
is
getting
less
money
back
for
the
infrastructure
that
we
put
in.
F
Of
course,
that's
long
since
been
paid,
but
what
happens
is
it
means
we
have
have
less
money
in
our
coffers
to
to
do
future
development
and
to
put
in
infrastructure
for
other
lots
similarly
situated.
On
the
other
hand,
the
current
site
doesn't
produce
any
tax
revenue
for
us,
and
so,
if
we
do
do
the
fee
reduction,
it
does
spur
development
because
they
would
like
to
put
a
facility
in
there
sell
it
and
someone
put
a
facility
in
there,
which
means
jobs
and
increase
in
tax
revenue,
so
they're
their
arguments
on
both
sides.
F
D
Question
about
the
forty
thousand
dollar
option
that
you
mentioned
now,
if,
if,
if
we
look
at
it
from
the
standpoint
that
you're
talking
from
the
the
11
road
particular
and
so
on,
I
mean
I,
realize
you've
kind
of
you
know
changed
the
layout
or
arrangement
of
the
tap
on
does.
Is
that
then,
according
to
ordinance?
Yes,.
D
F
D
D
C
C
C
Is
is
the?
Is
there
any?
Why
is
there
any
condition
in
here
that,
as
part
of
anything
that
the
council
might
do
that
that
the
petition
to
take
that
back
to
one
lot
that
that
be
contingent
on
you
know
us
approving
or
not
approving
whatever
we
do
here
tonight?
In
other
words,
is
the
repetition
to
take
that
back
to
a
single
tract
of
land?
Is
that
contingent
on
on
this
case
or
this
petition
here?
Yes,.
F
C
So
so,
then,
just
to
follow
up
on
what
Judy
asked
them
to
stay
within
the
ordinance
requires
and
again
I
understand
the
methodology.
You
usually
looked
at
the
three
individual
Lots
and
the
access
the
tap
on
for
each
one
of
those
took
the
least
expensive
one
which
is
Fox,
Creek
right
and
so
the
80,000,
or
that
approximate
79,000
and
change
or
whatever
then
stays
within
the
ordinance
as
written.
Is
that
correct
at.
F
G
G
Really,
if
we're,
if
we're
defining
exactly
what
we're
talking
about
here,
this
the
owner
is
not
a
developer.
It's
a
private
owner,
a
private
entity
that
happens
to
be
a
fraternal
organization,
a
private
club,
okay
that
originally
bought
the
property.
It's
my
understanding
some
20
years
ago,
with
the
intent
of
building
their
own
facility
at
that
location,
correct
over
time
that
change
they
built
another
facility
in
town,
a
little
bit
more
central,
okay
and
so
they're,
just
trying
to
divest
themselves
of
the
property,
that's
correct,
and
so
we're
really
not
dealing
with
a
developer.
G
G
Okay,
because
we
have
a
private
owner
that
we're
dealing
with
it
could
be.
Anyone
literally
could
have
owned
that
property
for
the
20
years,
a
private,
individual,
a
private
family,
a
farmer,
somebody
that
intended
to
build
a
business
but
then
didn't
in
and
has
a
business
elsewhere.
This
is
not
a
for-profit
type
of
operation
as
I
understand
it
they're
actually
in
their
proposal,
taking
quite
a
loss
from
the
original
from
the
original
plan,
the
original
investment
and,
and
so
that
kind
of
changes.
Things
here,
I
think
as
well.
G
A
F
G
H
So,
if
you're
looking
at
a
$80,000
abatement
or
a
waiver
of
fees,
perhaps
the
agreement
with
set
would
require
the
Knights
of
Columbus
within
three
years
to
have
that
property
developed.
That
would
create
a
fair
market
value
of
the
property
of
six
million
dollars.
The
city
would
get
26
thousand
dollars.
You
know
that's
kind
of
what's
been
thrown
out
there
now
the
city
to
get
twenty
six
thousand
dollars
in
taxes
a
year,
we'd
recoup
that
money
within
three
years.
But
the
thought
is,
since
this
is
being
sold
by
by
a
private
person.
H
The
agreement
would
not
be
with
the
developer
once
the
Knights
of
Columbus
sells
this
property,
they
washed
their
hands
of
it.
They
walk
away.
The
city
has
no
control
over
what
ultimately
is
done
with
that
property,
so
they
might
be
talking
about
a
great
development
happening
now,
but
once
that
property
is
sold,
we
have
no
control
over
that.
So,
from
a
standpoint
of
caution,
I
think
we
need
to
look
at
having
some
sort
of
an
agreement
with
the
property
owner,
so
we
can
make
sure
that
it
is
developed.
How
we've
been
telling.
H
H
We're
not
you
know,
we
abated
the
fees
on
the
understanding
that
it
was
going
to
be
sold
for
for
some
development
to
you
know
for
some
economic
reason
and
then
we're
left
kind
of
with
be
properties
mb1
where
nothing's
going
on
on
it.
So
the
thought
was
if
you're
going
to
you
know,
do
this
and
you
want
to
make
sure
that
it's
actually
going
to
be
developed
in
that
manner
that
we
need.
C
Yeah
Jeff,
and
just
to
echo
your
point
it
so
why
that's
important
is
that
that
the
gym
in
the
engineering
department
and
Public
Works
will
look
at
potentially
an
assisted
living
facility
and
they'll.
Look
at
a
certain
amount
of
traffic
generation
per
se
would
be
in
and
out
of
a
facility
like
that.
If,
on
the
other
hand,
if
that
gets
scrapped,
you
know
your
fault,
my
fault
nobody's
fault,
but
it
falls
through
and
then
something
else
is
brought
back
inconsistent
with
be
one
zoning
that
would
generate
a
tremendous
amount
of
additional
traffic.
C
F
And
I
I
think
you
raise
a
good
point,
because
there
are
two
issues
that
this
waving
would
be
conditioned
upon
this
sale,
if
later
on,
this
goes
falls
through
and
something
up
comes
up
later.
We
would
have
to
come
back
to
you
again.
It
doesn't
mean
that
the
waving
of
these
tap
on
fees
is
forever
associated
with
these
properties
and
from
a
public
works
point
of
view.
We
have
some
concern
about
the
issue
of
waiving
the
fees.
F
A
Other
questions,
no,
my
understanding
was
that
we
would
have
the
Knights
of
Columbus
present
at
the
regular
meeting,
but
we
have.
We
do
have
about
10
minutes
and
we
may
have
a
tighter
regular
meeting.
So
I'd
be
curious
here
at
they
have
to
say:
okay
Jeff,
do
we
have
any?
We
need
a
motion
to
suspend
the
rules
or
a
weave.
A
A
D
A
I
It's
me
mirror
dan
was
going
to
present
at
the
regular
meeting
dan
Dineen
or
attorney
tom
whalen
1522
west
chestnut
I
think
you've
got
all
the
facts.
You've
had
them
presented
to
you,
I
know,
staff
has
got
them
all
to
you.
I
think
the
best
thing
I
could
do
is
answer
questions,
but
just
a
brief
overview.
You
know
we
acquired
this
property.
I
The
reason
it
was
subdivided
is
we
did
have
an
offer
for
one
corner
of
it,
so
we
were
told
we
had
to
subdivide
it.
If
we
just
wanted
to
sell
one
corner,
we
didn't.
We
didn't
know
that
that
was
going
to
cause
a
big
problem
later
on.
We
thought
that
the
former
grand
Knight
thought
that
they
had
a
sale
and
that's
the
reason
they
subdivide
it.
We
are
not
developers
or
just
a
fraternal
organization
trying
to
make
it.
I
We
have
a
mortgage
on
our
property,
1706
done
a
large
mortgage
which
we're
trying
to
pay
down,
and
if
we've
decided
that
the
call
it's
costing
us
mowing
it
in
the
taxes
every
year
is
costing
us
thousands
of
dollars,
and
it
has
not.
The
property
has
not
escalated
it
all.
What
we
need
to
do
is
we
need
to
cut
our
strings,
cut
our
losses
and
that's
where
we
came
up
with
the
40,000.
I
We
could
live
with
40,000
and
but
what
we
made
off
the
sale
or
we
got
off
to
sale
against
our
mortgage
and
we
could
afford
to
pay
our
mortgage.
We
have
just
like
a
lot
of
other
businesses
and
the
city
of
Bloomington.
We
realize
that
everybody
is
in
the
same
same
boat
when
it
comes
to
dollars
and
cents
we
have
just
recently.
We
have
started
to
pay
our
bills,
but
we
haven't
been
able
to
for
years
another,
and
it
has
nothing
to
do
with
the
city.
I
Sometimes
we
get
a
grand
night
to
stay
for
two
years,
but
usually
it's
a
year,
maybe
two
and
over
the
20
years
we've
had
several
different
grand
Knights
and
they've
always
come
to
this
problem
and
said:
what
are
we
going
to
do
at
the
land?
We,
you
know
we
had
to
build
our
building,
not
that
we
had
to
the
members
voted
to
build
our
building
where
it
is
now.
I
What
are
we
going
to
do
with
the
land,
so
the
new
officers
come
in,
they
get
a
generated
to
to
get
a
sale
going
and
by
the
time
their
term
is
up
and
all
the
deal
is
falling
through
or
they
don't
have
the
time
to
spend
on
it.
So
we
really
need
to
sell
this
property
and
we
hope
this
development
goes
in
and
we
hope
that
the
city
would
would
be
able
to
help
us
with
that
and
anything.
J
I
want
to
take
two
minutes
and
address
conflict
of
interest.
Maybe
people
are
tired
of
hearing
about
conflict
of
interest,
but
two
reasons:
we've
had
a
lot
of
discussion
last
six
months
about
conflict
of
interest.
Maybe
more
importantly,
we
talked
about
conflict
of
interest
in
my
relationship
to
the
Knights
of
Columbus,
15
or
20
years
ago,
sitting
in
this
chamber,
when
we
had
the
sale
of
the
property
center
street
and
I
was
asked
what
my
involvement
was
and
my
involvement
then
was
the
same
as
it
is
now
I'm
a
dues-paying
member.
J
I
don't
think
I've
ever
been
to
a
meeting
to
my
recollection.
I've,
never
been
officer
and
I've
never
had
any
decision-making
authority
and
I
don't
make
light
of
this
discussion,
because
some
people
just
don't
want
to
talk
much
about
it,
but
I
think
it's
important.
We
talked
about
it
publicly
here,
15
or
20
years
ago,
and
unless
the
Knights
of
Columbus
members
would
say,
I've
said
something
wrong.
J
That
I
want
to
make
sure
that
I
intend
to
vote
on
this
I
intend
to
participate
unless
there's
a
consensus
on
the
council
that
they
feel
that
I've
got
some
kind
of
conflict
by
being
a
dues-paying
member.
So
I'll
leave
it
at
that.
Unless
somebody
wants
talk
about
it
now,
but
we
got
to
clear
the
air
on
it.
Ok,
so
it
doesn't
become
a
lingering
issue.
I.
C
C
The
assisted
living
facility
that
would
have
to
be-
wouldn't
it
I,
guess
it
wouldn't
it
have
to
be
that
would
have
to
be
licensed
by
the
state
of
Illinois.
Is
that
correct,
oh
I'm,
sure,
yes,
and
and
is
there
any
guarantee
that
I
mean
it?
Has
that
approval
prior
that
put
that
that
application
process
started
I
would.
I
C
C
J
A
H
Mean
it
could
the
the
city
code
and
I'll
look
up
the
specific
provisions,
but
talks
about
having
a,
I
believe,
a
substantial
interest
that
you
cannot
render
a
fair
and
impartial
decision
so
that
becomes
somewhat
complicated
to
interpret.
I
think
it
then
falls
on
the
specific
council
member
in
this
case,
specifically
alderman
freuen,
where
he
has
to
you
know.
H
H
A
G
Right,
you
know
if
we
compared
that
to
my
involvement.
This
was
the
Boy
Scouts
that
we're
talking
about
I,
really
don't
have
a
voting
say
in
what
the
district
or
the
council
does
on
a
day
to
day
or
a
yearly
basis.
Although
I
have
a
rather
I
guess
you
could
call
it
high
office
I,
don't
really
manage
anything,
but
I
do
you
know,
get
to
get
to
weigh
in
and
give
them
my
opinion
in
terms
of
what
should
be
done
when
and
where
probably
much
like
mr.
G
A
Again,
so
I
think
it
wants
a
Bing
up
to
the
individual
okay.
Thank
you
very
much
else.
Is
there
a
motion
to
adjourn
moved
by
all
the
men?
Black?
Is
there
a
second
second
by
all
the
woman
Schmidt,
all
in
favor
signify
by
saying
aye
we're
adjourned
and
we're
going
to
start
our
other
meeting
in
about
a
minute
thanks.