►
From YouTube: Bloomington City Council, September 13, 2023
Description
City Council Documents:
https://bloomington.in.gov/council/meetings
A
C
D
E
F
Smith
we
recognize
that
the
city
of
Bloomington
sits
on
native
land,
the
city
as
well
as
City
administrative
buildings
are
on
the
traditional
homelands
of
the
Miami
Delaware
patami
and
shauni
people,
and
we
acknowledge
they
are
past
present
and
future
caretakers
of
this
land.
We
also
acknowledge
that
much
of
the
economic
progress
and
development
in
Indiana
and
specifically
in
Bloomington,
resulted
from
the
unpaid,
labor
and
forced
servitude
of
people
of
color,
specifically
enslaved,
African
labor.
F
We
acknowledge
that
this
land
remains
home
to
and
a
site
of,
gathering
and
healing
for
many
indigenous
and
other
people
of
color,
and
we
commit
to
the
work
necessary
to
create
and
promote
a
more
Equitable
and
just
Bloomington.
We
move
forward
knowing
and
acknowledging
our
Rich
complicated
and
sometimes
painful
past,
so
that
we
can
learn
from
it
and
create
a
true
land
of
opportunity.
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you
and
continuing
with
our
agenda
summation.
We
have
one
set
of
minutes
to
approve
this
evening
from
the
regular
session
on
December
7th
2022.
We
then
will
continue
with
reports,
including
reports
from
Council
Members
reports
from
the
mayor
and
city
offices
reports
from
Council
committees,
and
then
we
will
come
to
our
first
of
two
periods
of
public
comment:
we'll
take
up
appointments
to
boards
and
commissions
and
then
we'll
go
move
into
legislation
for
second
readings
and
resolutions.
We
have
two
items
there.
A
The
first
is
ordinance
2321
to
amend
title
15
of
the
Bloomington
Municipal
Code
entitled
vehicles
and
traffic
regarding
amending
section
15321
to
remove
the
4our
limit
on
all
accessible
spaces.
The
second
item:
there
is
ordinance
2320
to
amend
title
12
of
the
Bloomington
municipal
code
and
title
streets,
sidewalks
and
storm
sewers
regarding
establishing
a
new
section,
12.04.3
entitled
obstructing
the
right
of
way.
A
H
A
I
I,
thank
you
just
a
quick
report
tonight
you
know
I,
don't
I,
don't
remember
what
year
we
did
this,
but
we
put
up
the
no
turn
on
red
signs
in
the
downtown
overlay
and
the
Bloomington
campus
stop
lights
to
make
it
safer
for
everyone
using
the
streets.
Some
people
have
brought
to
my
attention
that,
of
course,
some
folks
don't
pay
attention
to
the
signs
U.
Just
like
turn
right
on
red
anyway,
but
recently
I
have
heard
that
there
are
multiple
people.
I
F
A
K
L
Yes,
I'd
like
to
report
a
disturbing
incident
that
raises
a
number
of
questions.
The
story
has
come
out
today
hour
recently
in
The
Herald
times
about
an
incident
that
happened.
A
year
ago,
a
black
graduate
student
named
Moses
bario
J
Jor
was
leaving
the
srsc
and
I'm
just
going
to
read
several
paragraphs
from
the
her
Times
report.
L
Bario,
who
was
employed
at
IU's
office
of
sexual
violence
prevention
and
at
the
Baner
Community
Center,
had
left
work
and
gone
to
IU's
student
recreation
center
to
work
out
when
he
left
and
drove
to
pay
the
to
pay
to
the
pay
booth
at
the
exit.
The
attendant
wouldn't
take
the
$5
bill,
bario
offered
for
the
$3
parking
fee.
No
cash
accepted
just
cards,
the
attendant
said
they
could
charge
the
fee
to
Bario's
burer
account,
but
it
would
be
1350.
Bario
didn't
want
to
pay.
L
The
10
extra
Vehicles
were
backing
up,
so
the
attendant
raised
the
stop
arm
and
let
bario
through
telling
him
to
have
someone
bring
a
credit
card
to
pay
the
$3
bario
drove
home.
He
figured
the
1350
was
charged
to
his
IU
account.
He
didn't
know
the
parking
attendant
had
called
the
police
later.
The
two
police
officers
from
the
ipd
appeared
at
his
apartment
complex,
and
they
saw
him
in
the
parking
lot
and
the
story
continues.
L
The
two
men
were
standing
on
opposite
sides
of
the
hood
on
a
car
parked
in
the
apartment,
complex
lot,
suddenly
defendant,
Magnus
quickly,
approached
plaintiff
and
grabbed
and
twisted
his
arm.
He
and
another
officer
then
knocked
the
plaintiff.
The
he's
suing
off
balance
it
into
a
car
and
put
handcuffs
on
him.
They
then
took
him
to
jail
and
booked
him
in
I
have
a
number
of
questions
here,
the
least
of
which
are
why
couldn't
I
you
just
have
taken
down
the
driver's
license
plate
and
then
sent
him
a
fine
in
the
mail.
L
L
The
I've
watched
the
video
the
video
has
now
been
released
and
the
officers
make
no
effort
to
explain
why
they're
there,
what
it's
for
the
student
asks
about
it
and
he's
perceived
as
being
unhelpful
and
he's
immediately
manhandled
and
arrested
I'm
still
wrapping
my
head
around
it
I
urge
everyone
to
watch
the
video.
If
you
haven't
already
seen
it
IU
has
released
a
statement
about
it.
L
There's
been
a
settlement,
but
it
calls
into
question
any
number
of
things,
not
the
least
of
which
is
how
how
is
it
happening
here
after
all
this
time
and
what
is
IU
going
to
do
about
it,
Beyond
simply
changing
its
processes.
I.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
I
I
just
want
to
call
everyone's
attention
to
the
incident
from
last
year
and
to
work
towards
preventing
such
things
from
ever
happening
again.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
and
I
have
no
report
this
evening,
so
that
takes
us
to
the
report
from
mayor
and
city
offices.
We
do
not
have
any
this
evening.
Are
there
any
reports
from
Council
committees
seeing
none?
That
brings
us
to
our
first
of
two
periods
of
public
comment,
just
by
way
of
reminder
for
the
public.
This
is
for
P
public
comment
on
it
items
not
on
the
legislative
agenda.
So,
for
example,
when
we
get
to
ordinance
2321
or
2320,
then
you'll
have
an
opportunity
to
comment
on
that
legislation.
So
Mr
Lucas.
A
M
One
hand
raised
at
the
moment
on
zoom
and
if
there
are
other
members
of
the
public
attending
virtually
that
would
like
to
speak.
Please
let
us
let
us
know.
By
raising
your
hand
in
Zoom,
you
can
find
the
raise
hand
button
in
your
control
bar
under
the
reactions,
tab
or
the
more
Tab,
and
if
you
can't
locate
that,
please
send
a
chat
to
the
meeting
host
to.
Let
us
know
you'd
like
to
speak,
see
just
one
one
hand
at
the
moment.
A
A
A
N
N
Monday
I
had
a
vehicle
stolen
out
my
yard
Sunday
night
I
called
blon
police
I
called
blon
police
Monday
morning
when,
when
I
found
out
it
was
G
I
called
him.
They
had
an
officer
up
there
in
15
minutes
had
an
offic
15.
He
my
vehicle
was
going
officer,
Thomas,
blomington,
Poli,
Department,
come
up
here.
Very
professional
I
mean
the
whole
way
and
I
give
him
all
the
information
about
my
vehicle
and
stuff,
and
he
took
took
all
that.
N
He
left
and
I
left
and
I
went
to
I
I
had
an
idea
where
my
vehicle
may
be,
because
it
was
a
kind
of
a
family
affair
right
and
as
I
was
going
to
check
out
where
my
vehicle
I
thought
was.
It
got
stolen
officer.
Thomas
called
me
said:
darl,
we
found
your
vehicle
and
this
was
within
45
minutes
of
me
calling
the
police
about
my
vehicle
being
stolen.
N
L
N
Okay,
that's
ni
case
though,
but
another
thing
too,
you
know
I'm
concerned
about
I,
don't
know
the
whole
story:
I
I'm
kind
of
slow
on
the
story,
because
I'm
busy
all
day
working
on
my
cars
doing
my
stuff
for
therapy,
because
I
live
by
myself
and
I
do
stuff
and
I
I
I
I
get
therapy
by
doing
that
stuff.
But
I
don't
have
a
lot
of
time
to
watch
the
news.
Sometimes
I
do
but
I
caught
a
little
thing.
N
N
Really
paying
women
to
go
to
other
states
to
have
abortions?
Really
that's
evil
I've
got
16
grandbabies
man
I
would
never
think
of
doing
that.
To
my
grandbaby
and
you
know
another
thing
you
know
the
one
thing
I
haven't
ever
heard
about
abortion
is
where's,
the
father
man.
All
you
hear
is
the
woman
I
want
to
abort
my
baby,
well,
where's,
the
guy
at
man,
the
guy
that
helped
conceed.
That
baby.
Does
he
not
have
a
say
in
what
happens
to
that
baby?
They
must
be
cowards.
N
I
haven't
heard
a
single
story
where
a
guy
stood
up,
say:
woman
I,
don't
want
you
to
abort
my
baby.
Why
not
not
even
one
story
I
don't
want
my
baby
aborted,
but
you
know
that
baffles
me.
Why
there's
not
one
guy
says:
hey
I,
don't
want
you
to
abort
my
baby,
but
you
just
don't
hear
that
I
want
to
know
where
that
guy
is.
If,
if
you're
out
there
and
that's
you
you're
you're
you're
a
coward
man,
you
need
to
save
your.
N
Baby
that
upsets
me
man
and
you
know
buddy
if
you
bought
your
baby
in
20
years
when
you're
at
the
beach-
and
you
see
little
babies,
little
kids
running
around
on
the
beach
playing,
you
might
have
a
flashback
say
man
I
wish
I
wouldn't
have
had
I
wish
I
would
have
saved
my
baby.
That
could
have
been
my
baby
out
there.
My
baby
could
have
been
the
person
at
at
the
C's.
N
N
But
the
main
thing
is
where's,
the
guy
at
that
help,
conceive
that
baby
where's
he
at
and
where
is
all
the
churches
in
Bloomington?
Why
are
they
not
behind
me
giving
money
for
women
to
go
to
other
states
to
murder
their
babies?
You
know
and
and
if
you
guys
want
to
give
money
for
that,
you
ought
to
be
made
to
go,
see
a
procedure.
You
ought
to
go
with
that
woman
how's.
That
woman
feel
and
she
goes
across
state
line.
She's
got
that
baby
in
her
she's
carried
baby
across
state
and
she
comes
back
there.
N
O
Thank
you.
I
saw
in
the
paper
recently
that
the
city
is
considering
four
different
parking
lots
downtown
to
put
apartment
buildings
in,
and
one
of
the
ones
I'm
concerned
with,
in
particular,
is
the
one
behind
all
the
restaurants
and
The
Buzz
at
the
corner
of
fourth
in
Washington,
we've
already
gotten
rid
of
by
closing
Kirkwood
accessible
parking
along
Kirkwood.
That
makes
it
easier
for
people
with
mobility
issues
to
park
now
they're
eyeballing
the
parking
lot
behind
the
buzz
Chum,
and
this
is
where
we
park
since
we
can't
park
on
Kirkwood
now.
O
This
is
where
we
park,
so
that
we
don't
have
so
hard
to
walk
those
of
us
who
are
not
able
to
walk
as
easily
as
others.
It's
been
said
that
there
are
a
lot
of
spaces
at
the
parking
garage,
that's
great
if
you
can
get
there
and
back
and
with
it
being
uphill
from
Kirkwood,
where
we
like
to
go
for
events
at
the
buzz
Chum
and
for
restaurants
there.
A
P
P
Think
a
week,
two
weeks,
two
and
a
half
weeks
ago,
yeah
so
I
was
I
was
at
that
pride
parade
and
and
what
was
what
was
kind
of
cool
about
that
Pride
Parade.
You
know
they
closed
off
all
of
Kirkwood
and
I,
get
that
it
might
have
been
hard
to
park.
For
you
know
the
previous
public
commenter,
but
it
was.
It
was
a
great
time
and
it
was
a
great
time
for
my
my
friend
who
sold
Comics
there
and
he
was
wearing
this.
This
big
coat.
P
He
was
able
to
get
shade
and
the
way
that
he
was
able
to
get
shade
was
you
know,
and
if
for
I
mean
everybody
I
think
has
gone
to
Pride
before
they
have
a
bunch
of
booths
and
and
those
booths
where
they'
been
they?
They
have
tents
up
out
outside
and
also
on
Kirkwood
Avenue,
that,
where
you
know
it's
closed
off
during
the
season,
some
people
like
it,
some
people,
don't
what
what
they
use
for
the
streets
that
are
closed
off
is
tents
for
shade.
P
When
people
go
to
restaurants
and
I,
I
think
that's
great,
that
you
know
we
get
some
outdoor,
fresh
air
and
and
then
we
able
to
get
some
shade
as
well.
So
I
guess
what
I'm
wondering
is.
Why
is
it
that
the
not
you
guys
but
the
Board
of
the
the
the
park
Commissioners?
They
voted
to
not
allow
tents
in
I
guess
within
their
jurisdiction
with
within
the
parks
and
it's
sort
of
notor
ious,
because
the
Parks
Board
seems
to
think
that
you
know
they
can
they
can
control
everybody.
P
A
P
A
P
Thanks,
that's
fine,
so
point
of
order.
I
would
like
you
guys
to
follow
Robert's
Rules
thanks,
so
to
continue
with
my
story.
So
so
I,
I
and
and
I
actually
heard
that
from
a
council
member
I'm
not
going
to
refer
to
you
guys
by
name
because
I
I
don't
think
that's
allowed,
but
but
yeah
I
I
met
some
of
you
guys
at
pride
and
I
and
that's
what
I
heard
is
that
the
Board
of
Park,
Commissioners,
disallowed
tents
on
public
property
and
I.
P
Just
think
that
that
is
a
total
double
standard.
Considering
you
have
a
public
space
in
Kirkwood
Avenue,
where
some
places
are
allowed
to
have
tents
during
the
day
and
other
people
that
I
guess
I
I
mean
you
can
put
two
and
two
together
as
to
why
it
is
that
those
other
people
can't
have
tents
outside
they.
They
can't
have
tents
outside.
P
You
know
we
should
respect
the
process
and
you
know
be
civil
and
all
this
other
stuff.
But
the
irony
of
that
is
that
the
one
time
where
we
got
something
which
was
a
w
winner,
shelter,
you
know
we
we
had
to
march
in
the
mayor's
house,
so
I
would
very
much
like
in
the
year
of
2024.
To
you
know,
just
you
know,
be
productive
and
work
with
people
thanks.
A
A
Q
Q
Okay,
so
I
I
was
able
to
speak
with
the
folks
at
the
Board
of
Public
Works.
Some
of
these
comments
are
a
reprise
of
what
I
had
to
say
to
them,
but
but
not
all
of
them.
I
understand
that.
Excuse
me,
the
money
is
earmarked
and
essentially
spent
I
regret
on
your
behalf
that
you
had
maybe
little
say
in
specifically
how
the
money
would
be
would
be
used
in
terms
of
the
monolith
piece
that
that
has
been
proposed.
Q
It
is
just
very
surprising
that
this
thing
has
been
in
the
works
for
five
years
and
is
said
to
reflect
the
idea
of
lots
of
residents.
I
guess
the
city
staff
certainly
weigh
in,
and
the
Bloomington
Arts
Council
is
said
to
have
weighed
in
there.
11
people,
five
of
them
appointed
by
by
the
city,
council,
members
and
six
appointed
by
the
mayor,
and
that's
still
not
a
lot
of
people
I'm
very
curious
about
what
I,
what
think
is?
Maybe
a
dir
of
public
input.
Q
I
hope
that
there's
a
a
way
to
correct
that,
because
I
suspect
that
there
are
a
lot
of
very,
very
intelligent
people
in
in
Bloomington
and
in
particular
at
the
University
I
know.
There
are
some
internationally
renowned
ornithologists
I've
had
the
pleasure
of
interviewing
them
for
some
of
my
pieces
that
I've
written
I
know
they
would
probably
have
some
things
to
say
that
would
be
of
use
in
terms
of
safety
to
migratory
birds
and
bats,
and
and
such
the
thing
that's
special
about
Miller
showers
is
that
it
attracts
Wildlife.
Q
It's
good
for
invertebrates,
it's
good,
for
you
know
all
the
bugs
and
bees
and
things
and
and
water
fowl,
and
when
you're
attracting
something
on
purpose:
you're,
you're,
creating
what's
called
a
population
Source
and
when
you
attract
something
on
purpose
and
then
put
something
In,
Harm's
Way
put
a
put
a
thing
in
the
way
that
could
end
up
hurting
them
or
killing
them.
That's
actually
a
population
sync,
so
I'm
really
concerned
that
we've
created
a
thing
to
attract
Wildlife
I
mean
that's
not
obviously
its
only
purpose,
but
it
is
a
benefit.
Q
And
now
we've
got
a
4
foot
high,
potentially
light
polluting
bird
disrupting
monolith
in
in
the
middle
of
stuff.
So
I
don't
know
if
that
was
I
I'm,
not
sure.
If
that
it's
been
completely
thought
through
I'm
wondering
I'm
wondering
about
a
lot
of
things.
How
bright
it's
going
to
be,
whether
or
not
it
really
is
going
to
be
dark
sky
compliant.
Q
Why
a
Bloomington
firm,
wasn't
used
why
some
of
bloomington's,
talented
artists,
weren't
involved,
mean
so
many
things
so
I
guess
it's
it's!
It's
frustrating
to
me
with
the
source
of
funds
being
used
and
the
specific
amount
being
under
a
certain
threshold.
I
looked
into
the
law
and
it
doesn't
really
appear
that
there's
any
way
to
remonstrate
or
petition
or
anything.
So
that's
pretty
clever
I.
Q
A
G
G
B
Ordinance
2321
to
amend
title
15
of
the
Bloomington
Municipal
Code,
entitled
tra
vehicles
and
traffic
regarding
amending
section,
15
32150,
to
remove
the
4H
hour
limit
on
all
accessible
spaces.
The
synopsis
is
as
follows.
This
ordinance
approves
changes
to
Bloomington
Municipal
Code,
section
15321
15
in
order
to
include
a
time
limit
on
accessible
parking
spaces
only
in
parking
lots
or
zones
that
impose
time
limits
on
non-accessible
spaces
and
to
remove
time
limits
on
accessible
parking
spaces
in
parking,
lots
or
zones
that
do
not
otherwise
impose
time
limits.
R
Tonight,
welcome
hello,
Audrey,
biringham
assistant,
City
attorney
I.
This
matter
came
to
our
attention.
We
realized
that
limiting
parking
spaces
accessible
parking
spaces
downtown
to
4
hours
in
areas
where
there's
not
otherwise
a
time
limit
for
other
W
for
other
parking
spaces
is
essentially
desperate
treatment,
and
so
this
ordinance
change
is
an
attempt
to
Rectify
that
and
to
bring
code
further
into
compliance
with
the
Ada.
A
M
2321
there
are
members
of
the
public
on
Zoom
that
would
like
to
speak
to
this
item.
Please
use
the
raise
hand
feature
to
let
us
know
you
can
find
that
in
your
control
bar
under
the
reactions,
tab
or
the
more
tab,
you
can
also
send
a
chat
to
the
host
to.
Let
us
know,
you'd
like
to
speak.
I
do
see
one
hand
raised
at
the
moment.
A
O
A
F
F
G
B
K
L
G
G
B
Ordinance
2320
to
amend
title
12
of
the
Bloomington
Municipal
Code,
entitled
streets,
sidewalks
and
storm
sewers
regarding
establishing
a
new
section,
12.04.19
entitled
obstructing
the
right
of
way.
Excuse
me,
the
synopsis
is
as
follows:
ordinance
2320
clarifies
that
placing
obstructions
within
the
Public's
right
of
way
or
otherwise
obstructing
the
Public's
right
of
way
is
impermissible
and
the
ordinance
defines
the
circumstances
under
which
the
right
of
way
is
considered
to
be
obstructed.
S
T
Thank
you,
council
members,
Michael
Rooker,
City
attorney
ordinance
2320
proposes
adding
a
new
section
to
the
municipal
code.
Titled
obstru,
the
RightWay
ordinance
2320,
is
modeled
on
indianapolis's
ordinances
and
comes
to
the
city
council,
On
The,
Board
of
Public
Works,
unanimous
recommendation
in
legal
terms.
The
public
right
of
way
provides
a
right
of
passage
to
all
persons.
Conceptually
public
right
of
way
exists
to
let
all
members
of
the
community
travel
from
one
place
to
another.
T
One
of
the
core
missions
of
local
governments,
like
Bloomington,
going
back
for
centuries
into
the
mids
of
time,
is
to
properly
establish
and
then
responsibly
Steward
the
Public's
right
of
way,
so
that
it
remains
open
and
accessible
for
public
travel.
Earlier
this
year
an
obstruction
was
placed
within
the
city's
RightWay
by
itself.
The
appearance
of
an
obstruction
in
the
RightWay
was
not
remarkable.
Obstructions
aren't
uncommon,
generally.
T
Obstructions
are
managed
and
addressed
through
a
simple
conversation
between
a
staff
member
and
the
person
responsible
for
the
obstruction
staff
may
even
assist
in
identifying
a
possible
solution
to
eliminate
the
obstruction
generally,
the
obstruction
gets
removed,
and
then
life
goes
on
as
normal.
However,
in
this
particular
instance,
the
person
responsible
for
the
obstruction
indicated
that
they
simply
would
not
remove
the
obstruction
and
the
blockage
persisted
for
days.
T
The
public
certainly
noticed
that
left
the
city
in
the
difficult
position
of
either
allowing
the
obstruction
to
persist
or
asking
law
enforcement
to
remove
the
obstruction,
of
course,
because
protecting
the
public
RightWay
is
a
core
Mission.
The
city
tried
to
coordinate
with
law
enforcement,
to
address
the
blockage
the
staff
reached
out
to
law
enforcement
for
help.
However,
law
enforcement
indicated
that
they
could
not
address
right
of
way
obstructions
absent,
a
more
specific
ordinance
defining
when
the
right
of
way
would
be
considered
blocked.
T
The
city
was
specifically
directed
to
indianapolis's
ordinance
for
guidance
on
a
way
to
more
clearly
indicate
to
the
public
when
and
how
the
RightWay
would
be
considered
blocked.
Therefore,
staff
reviewed
indianapolis's
ordinance
and
drafted
and
brought
ordinance
2320
to
the
Board
of
Public
Works
for
consideration
where
it
was
unanimously
recommended
for
approval
by
the
city
council.
That's
the
basic
Genesis
of
ordinance
2320,
but
I
think
we
should
also
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
nuts
and
bolts
ordinance.
2320
defines
the
circumstances
under
which
a
Street,
sidewalk
or
public
RightWay
is
considered,
obstructed.
T
The
ordinance
states
that
a
sidewalk,
Street
or
RightWay
is
obstructed
if
number
one
more
than
half
its
width
is
blocked
at
any
point
number
two,
the
normal
flow
of
pedestrians
or
Vehicles,
is
disrupted
number.
Three
pedestrians
are
compelled
to
step
onto
the
street,
treat
or
otherwise
expose
themselves
to
danger
in
order
to
pass
around
the
blockage
or
number
four
if
it
is
rendered
inaccessible
to
those
protected
by
the
Americans
with
Disabilities
Act.
The
four
criteria
in
ordinance
2320
set
a
reasonable
measure
for
when
the
right
of
way
is
considered,
obstructed.
T
Note
also
that
ordinance,
2320
prioritizes
education.
The
ordinance
requires
the
city
to
give
a
member
of
the
public
an
opportunity
to
adjust
an
obstruction
so
that
it's
compliant
with
ordinance
2320.
As
a
first
step
in
every
single
case,
staff
recommends
that
the
council
pass
ordinance.
2320
I
appreciate
the
council's
consideration
and
I'm
happy
to
address
any
questions
you
may
have
to
the
best
of
my
ability.
J
T
Yeah,
so
certainly
scooters
are
are
covered
by
a
far
more
explicit
regime
and
I
think
the
number
of
conversations
that
have
happened
related
to
Shared
use,
motorized
scooters
are
extensive,
so
we've
taken
a
lot
of
concrete
measures,
just
in
the
last
couple
of
months
to
attempt
to
address
those
you
may
have
noticed
downtown.
There
are
now
68
Corrals
in
place
between
3rd
and
12th
and
and
I
think
Morton
and
Indiana
Street
to
address
the
you
know
to
to
give
a
place
for
scooters
to
be
placed
specifically
that's
safe.
T
This
month
September
we
sent
a
series
of
notices
of
violation
to
each
of
the
scooter
companies
related
to
violations
for
illegally
parked
scooters.
Lime
received
a
notice
of
violation,
totaling
$2,760
bird
totaling,
$2,220
vde
totaling
$8
$170.
We
have
three
temporary
part-time
employees
whose
job
it
is
is
to
go
around
to
identify
scooter
violations
and
to
remedy
them.
I.
T
Think,
just
a
couple
weeks
ago,
during
the
Public
Works
budget
presentation,
director,
Wason
requested
and
I
I
think
it
was
met
with
a
positive
reaction,
the
the
employment
of
two
people
full-time
beginning
in
January
to
address
scooter
violations
so
we're
taking
concrete
measures
on
that
front,
we
wouldn't
look
to
ordinance
23
320
to
set
the
standard
for
when
a
scooter
is
parked
illegally.
We
have
a
far
more
specific
ordinance
that
addresses
that
in
title,
4.
J
Okay,
thank
you.
I
brought
that
up,
because
many
constituents
complain
or
do
you
reports
or
whatever,
and
so
they
don't
know
they
don't
know
2320
from
whatever.
So
that's
what
I
was
asking
for
also,
and
you
gave
us
an
example
of
a
issue
that
I
guess
created
this
or
supports
this
other
than
that
incident.
J
J
T
If
it
were
to
be
passed,
we
would
take
enforcement
action
just
the
same
way
there
as
we
would
downtown
and,
of
course,
that's
going
to
begin
as
a
first
step,
always
with
just
a
simple
conversation,
saying,
look:
you've
got
a
blockage.
There
are
some
rules
about
this.
Let's
talk
about
a
way
that
we
can
address
this
so
that
you
can
be
relocating
this
obstruction
in
a
lawful
way.
Okay,.
F
Me
along
the
lines
of
council
memb
Sim's
questions
the
scooter,
the
measures
that
the
Administration
has
taken
in
order
to
clear
the
right
of
way
of
Park
scooters
occurred
five
years
after
the
scoo
first
appear
of
goingon
and
more
than
well
four
years
U,
since
we
actually
made
legislation
to
regulate
their
parking.
So
I'm
a
little
concerned
about
that
being
about
the
enforcement
of
that
rule.
T
Sidewalks
sure
you
know
I'm
not
here,
to
try
to
address
which
blockage
should
be
handled
more
aggressively.
That's
certainly
not
something
that's
relevant
here.
The
idea
is
that
that
we
have
to
have
the
mechanisms
in
place
when
we
identify
a
blockage,
whatever
its
source
may
be,
to
address
that
situation.
T
So
you
know
some
of
these
measures
hiring
two
full-time
people
whose
exclusive
job
it
will
be
to
deal
with
scooters
that
are
parked
in
a
place
they're
not
supposed
to
be
parked
in
we're
going
to
see
how
that
works,
and
if
that
helps
address
the
problem,
certainly
installing
Corrals,
it's
a
very
new
thing.
We're
going
to
see
if
that
works,
to
help
address
the
problem
of
scooters.
T
We
also
intend
to
bring
some
measures
to
the
city
council
in
the
coming
months.
I
know
that
that's
something
that's
been
discussed
with
Council
leadership,
I
believe
we
don't
have
a
timeline
for
that
right
now,
but
also
to
talk
about
the
way
that
the
scooter
rules
exist
in
the
city
code.
That's
a
conversation.
That's
happened
with
the
Board
of
Public
Works
as
well.
So,
on
the
scooter
front,
we
are
taking
significant
steps
to
address
it.
F
T
I,
certainly
wouldn't
describe
it
that
way.
It
was
prompted
by
the
discovery
that,
in
the
event,
we
have
somebody
who
puts
a
let's
say
a
table
up
blocking
across
the
right
of
way
and
somebody
who
has
Mobility
problems,
who's
protected
by
theeran
Amer,
an
with
Disabilities
Act,
couldn't
utilize
a
public
facility
like
a
sidewalk.
We
discovered
that
we
would
not
be
able
to
remove
that
obstruction,
that
it
would
be
a
challenge
to
get
that
obstruction
off
the
sidewalk
absent
the
voluntary
assistance
of
the
person
who
created
the
obstruction.
T
So
the
idea
here
is:
we
have
to
have
a
mechanism
in
our
code
in
that
circumstance,
which
is
admittedly
rare,
but
nonetheless
very
possible
and
is
something
we
have
experienced
in
that
circumstance.
We
have
to
have
a
way
to
to
to
make
the
public
RightWay
available
for
the
public
to
use
for
its
intended
purpose,
which
is.
F
T
In
the
last
year,
I
can
speak
only
for
myself.
What
I'm
aware
of
I'm
aware
of
a
single
incident
where
that
happened.
There
may
be
other
incidents
where
it
happened.
That
I'm
not
aware
of,
but
I,
am
aware
of
a
single
incident
where
it
happened.
That,
of
course,
is
quite
concerning.
When
we
discover
we
don't
have
the
tools
to
do
our
core
Mission,
which
is
to
make
sure
that
when
somebody
is,
is
needing
to
to
get
down
the
sidewalk
to
get
where
they're
going,
they
simply
can't
do
it
without
engaging
in
a
dangerous
practice.
T
When
we
discover
something
like
that,
when
it's
related
to
a
core
Mission
like
maintaining
the
public
RightWay,
that's
a
situation
where
we
immediately
look
to
examine
why
we
don't
have
the
mechanisms
in
place.
We
look
at
what
other
communities
have
done,
and
so
we
looked
of
course
right
away
at
what
Indianapolis
had
done
to
address
this
exact
situation,
and
we
we
took
steps
to
mirror
that,
based
on
their
experience.
G
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
Mr
rer.
My
question
is
about
the
Dilemma,
so
I'll
paint
the
dilemma
here.
So
the
regulation
provides
that
a
sidewalk,
Street
or
other
public
right
of
way
will
be
considered
obstructed
under
any
of
the
following
four
scenarios
and
half
the
width
of
the
sidewalk,
Street
or
other
public
right
away
is
blocked
at
any
point.
G
So
I'm
interested
in
that
specifically
because
the
other
point
that
is
made
in
in
this
list
is
that
it
is
rendered
inaccessible
to
people
protected
by
the
by
the
Ada
Americans
with
Disabilities
Act,
which
I
know
we
try
to
facilitate.
As
we
did
tonight.
You
know
the
ability
for
people
with
disabilities
to
be
able
to
use
right
of
way.
G
So,
but-
and
it's
been
brought
up
in
in
the
past-
that
we
have
a
problem
weekly
with
trash
and
recycling
containers
that
block
sidewalks
it,
it
could
be
better
or
worse,
where
I
live,
there's
a
wider
sidewalk,
so
someone
could
theoretically
get
by
with
a
wheelchair
or
Walker,
but
many
sidewalks
are
too
narrow.
So
my
question
to
you
is:
does
Indianapolis
have
a
similar
circumstance
and
and
was
that
a
consideration
and
is
there
anything
we
can
do
to
eliminate
that
conflict
because
it
is
a
real
conflict?
It's
a
regular
conflict.
T
You
know
they
absolutely
there
absolutely
is
right,
so
we
would
have
this
ordinance
could
potentially
serve
as
a
remedy
in
that
situation,
if
it
were,
if
it
were
discovered,
you
can't
quite
hear
me
seems
like
I'm
shouting,
but
thank
you,
council,
member
of
Olan,
certainly
yes,
this
could
potentially
serve
as
a
remedy
for
that
sort
of
violation.
I
didn't
specifically
think
about
waste
receptacles.
You
know,
I
think
we
need
to
talk
about
a
couple
of
things.
T
We
do
our
best
to
address
it
when
we
see
seating
encroachments
from
restaurants,
downtown
that
have
exceeded
what
they've
been
lawfully
permitted
to
to
go
into
in
the
right
of
way
right.
So
when
somebody
applies
for
a
seating
encroachment.
That,
of
course,
is
extremely
carefully
reviewed
to
make
sure
that
the
remaining
space
in
the
right
of
way
is
available
for
the
public
to
use
that
it's
ADA
Compliant
that
it's
compliant
with
width
requirements.
T
When
somebody
exceeds
that,
of
course,
we
immediately
let
them
know,
and
if
they
don't
comply,
we
send
them
a
notice
of
violation.
When
somebody
has
a
a
drain,
pipe,
that's
draining
across
an
alley
or
the
right
of
way
inappropriately.
We
let
them
know
about
that
too,
because
these
are
the
sorts
of
things
that
we
need
to
do
as
a
municipality
to
make
sure
the
right
of
weight
is
open
for
the
public
to
utilize.
If
a
waste
receptacle
is
an
issue,
we
can
deal
with
that
as
well.
T
Now,
I
suspect
that
we
do
have
a
resource
problem
there,
which
is
just
a
reality
for
all
local
government,
which
is
that
you
know
to
the
extent
we
have
enforcement
staff.
They
can
only
do
so
much
and
they
have
to
prioritize
certain
things.
So
when
you
have
a
waste
receptacle
in
a
neighborhood
that
doesn't
have
a
lot
of
travel
on
it,
perhaps
right
a
sidewalk
isn't
widely
utilized
that
simply
isn't
going
to
be
noticed.
We're
not
going
to
get
a
call
about
that.
T
I
Thank
you
very
much.
My
question
is
also
centered
around
trash
and
recycling.
Bins.
I
would
like
to
say
part
of
this
makes
me
very
excited,
because
I
have
been
asking
for
years
that
we
keep
our
sidewalks
clear
of
trash
and
recycling.
Bins
because
has
we've
had
multiple
residents
come
in
and
comment
on
this.
The
council
for
Community
accessibility
has
presented
on
this.
It's
like
hundreds,
if
not
thousands,
of
bins
over
time.
Block
sidewalks
for
people
and
I
mean
Mr
rer.
I
L
T
T
You
may
notice
that
there
are
blockages
that
don't
get
addressed
in
areas
that
are
more
remote
from
downtown
or
farther
away
and
I
think
that's
largely
because
we're
simply
not
aware
of
them
I
did
not
want
want
to
diminish
the
importance
of
making
sure
that
sidewalks
in
every
part
of
Bloomington
are
in
fact
kept
open
for
their
intended
purpose
for
the
public
to
travel
that
we're
protecting
persons
who
have
Mobility
challenges
everywhere
around
town
and
I
think
we
do
absolutely
intend
to
do
that.
It's
just
that.
T
We
get
a
lot
more
attention
in
certain
places
and
we're
more
readily
made
aware
of
obstructions
in
certain
places,
just
because
there
are
more
eyeballs
in
certain
parts
of
town.
So
I
certainly
agree
with
you
that
if
we're
talking
talking
about
enforcing
this
ordinance,
we
should
take
obstructions
seriously
wherever
they
happen.
T
C
T
Cart,
yeah
that
that's
a
great
question.
The
the
first
step
would
be
to
attempt
to
to
reach
out
to
somebody
who
created
the
obstruction
and
have
them
move
it
themselves.
That
would
be
step
one.
So,
in
the
event,
sorry,
no
that's
go
ahead.
So,
in
the
event
we
got
in
touch
with
somebody,
there
was
a
refusal
to
remove
the
obstruction.
That's
the
point
at
which
we
would
want
to
take
action
to
remove
the
obstruction
ourselves.
C
L
Well,
I
I
use
the
word
policy,
not
necessarily
because,
because
it
might
not
necessarily
be
in
code,
but
I
mean
I
recall,
along
with
council
member
Rosenberger
being
approached
by
Dave
toid,
the
director
of
innovation,
to
experiment
with
placement
of
carts
in
a
different
place,
specifically
on
the
street,
against
the
curb
with
a?
U
a
painted
marker,
where
the
where
they
would
put
a
painted
marker
where
the
trash
can
would
go,
but
specifically
to
try
putting
it
on
the
street,
whether
it's
deer
or
de
facto.
L
I'm,
sorry,
but
literally,
that
is
the
only
way
that
I
can
put
my
trash
bins
out.
My
sidewalk
is
maybe
four
feet
wide.
It
would
literally
viol
it's
violation
of
the
Ada
to
put
my
bins
out
the
way
they
do,
but
this
is
how
I've
been
directed
to
do
I've
been
doing
it.
How
most
of
us
have
been
doing
it
for
years.
T
T
I
can't
address
that
with
that
level
of
specificity,
I
would
ex
I
would
think
that
if
you
think
that
continues
to
be
an
issue
that
you
might
reach
out
to
somebody
in
the
sanitation
department,
I
mean
I'm
speaking
to
you
almost
as
an
individual,
now
council
member
volen,
to
figure
out
if
there's
a
better
solution,
I
I,
my
initial
reaction
is
certainly
we
we
should
be
able
to
or
have
to
find
a
workaround
so
that
you're
not
blocking
somebody
from
accessing
the
sidewalk.
When
you
put
your
trash
receptacle
out.
L
I'll
I
appreciate
that
answer.
I'll
only
point
out
that
hundreds
of
residences
in
the
neighborhood
in
the
the
district
I
represent
in
the
neighborhood,
where
I
live,
have
exactly
the
same
problem.
I
have
another
question
briefly
about
the
complaints
received
that
led
to
this
ordinance.
You
said
that
there
was
one
example
of
a
RightWay
obstruction
in
the
past
year.
T
I,
don't
know
a
lot
of
details
about
that
case.
I
know
that
it
was
downtown.
I
know
that
it
was
on
East,
Kirkwood,
Avenue,
I,
don't
know
a
lot
of
details
and,
frankly,
the
details
are
largely
irrelevant.
The
issue
really
was
that
when
we
called
law
enforcement
and
said,
we've
got
to
be
able
to
pick
this.
Whatever
is
in
the
RightWay
up,
move
it
out
of
the
RightWay.
Put
it
where
we.
What
we
do
in
that
circumstance
is
we
store
the
item
for
30
days.
We
notify
the
person
who
had
belongs
to
that.
T
It's
been
stored
and
we
give
them
30,
usually
it's
longer
than
30
days,
but
a
minimum
of
30
days
to
come
and
pick
it
up
and
put
it
somewhere
else.
We
do
that
in
all
kinds
of
different
scenarios
where
we
have
to
pick
up
materials,
but
what
we
discovered
is
that
we
simply
couldn't
even
do
that.
We
simply
had
to
live
with
the
obstruction,
and
that's
that's
really
what
led
to
it?
It's
not
about
the
number
of
complaints
or
the
frequency
of
the
complaints.
It's
that
we
discovered.
A
A
T
Yeah
so
I
think
I'm
going
to
be
trying
to
describe
I
want
to
make
sure
I'm
understanding
the
question
you're
asking:
why
don't
current
regulations
in
title
12?
There
are
various
regulations
that
discuss
the
right
of
way.
Why
isn't
that
satisfactory
to
law
enforcement
and
to
the
prosecutor's
office
that
obstructions
can
be
removed?
Is
that
right.
T
Okay,
my
my
basic
understanding
is
that
there
is
a
preference
that
we
more
specifically
State
when
the
right
of
way
will
be
considered
obstructed
and
when
it
won't,
so
that
members
of
the
public,
public
and
I
guess
as
well
City
staff
who's
Char,
who
are
charged
with
enforcing
the
ordinance
so
that
they
can
understand
when
they
should
consider
the
right
of
way
obstructed.
I
think
you
know
this,
does
that
this
says.
T
A
T
I
think
we'll
probably
sit
down
and
we'll
have
a
meeting
to
see
what
other
options
we
may
have
that
are
available
any
other.
Any
of
the
other
options
that
we
might
utilize
just
aren't
as
as
efficient
I'm
going
to
be
very
direct
about
that.
You
know
going
to
court
to
attempt
to
get
a
court
order
is
not
is
just
not
going
to
be
a
quick
process.
That's
going
to
be
difficult,
it's
going
to
be
fraught
with
the
same
issues.
T
A
C
Don't
recall
the
exact
specifics
of
how
that
got
resolved.
But
I
do
recall
that
ultimately,
folks
had
their
belongings
taken
some
stored
for
a
period
of
time.
I
think
ultimately
thrown
away
in
many
cases
and
of
course,
folks
eventually
asked
to
leave
under
under
threat
of
arrest.
But
what?
What
enabled
us
legally
to
remove
obstructions
from
the
right
of
way
in
that
scenario,
since
we
didn't
have
that
on
code.
T
You
know
I'm
I'm,
gonna
I,
think
you
have
me
at
a
disadvantage:
council
member
flarity,
I'm
I'm,
aware
of
what
you're
speaking
about
the
incidents
of
2020
when
there
were
some
activities
in
Seminary,
Park
and
I
think
there
was
another
incident
as
well
where
there
were
some
encampments
that
were
removed
under
City
policy.
I'm,
not
sure
how
that
interacted,
how
that
how
the
right
of
way
was
involved
in
that,
if
it
was
I,
just
don't
know
so,
I
I
can't
speak
to
that.
T
C
So
you're
saying
under
current
city
code
or
just
current
I,
don't
know
statutory
guidance
as
well,
I,
suppose
or
or
other
other
legal,
relevant,
legally
relevant
Provisions.
In
all
cases,
there
is
simply
nothing
unless
otherwise
regulated,
there's
nothing.
The
city
can
do
to
short
of
getting
a
court
order
to
remove
property
or
or
obstructions
from
the
right
of
way.
Is
that
right.
T
There
are
so
we
should
talk
about
conceptually.
There
are
lots
of
different
aspects
of
of
the
right
of
way.
So
what
we're
talking
about
right
now
are
obstructions,
so
these
These
are
generally
something
we
would
think
of
as
like
a
temporary
obstruction
or
a
non-permanent
obstruction
right.
We're
also
required,
or
we
do
thoroughly
regulate
commerce
within
the
right
of
way
right.
You
can't
set
up
a
food
truck
without
getting
a
permit.
T
T
Somebody
sets
up
a
table,
a
ping
pong
table
something
like
that:
completely
blocks
the
public
right
away,
so
that
the
public
can't
use
it,
and
we
really
need
to
address
the
situation
and
immediately,
which
is
somewhat
different
than
some
of
the
other
circumstances
we
might
encounter
where
somebody
puts
a
drain
pipe
for,
for
example,
into
the
public
right
of
way,
and
it's
not
as
immediate
of
a
situation
or
somebody
exceeds
the
the
limits
of
their
seating
encroachment.
For
example,.
I
You,
okay,
I,
want
to
just
talk
about
enforcement
again
and
just
hypotheticals
about
okay
about
requiring,
like
you
can
clear
the
right
of
way
immediately.
So
if
we're
talking
about
a
trash
bin-
and
you
ask
someone
to
move
it,
they
don't
you
can
move
it,
but
so
that's
what
maybe,
what
you
do
with
a
trash
bin
I
guess
not
notify
someone.
T
I
Yes,
I
mean
I'm,
just
seeing
a
very
big
difference
between
something
like
the
enforcement
of
a
trash
bin
versus
a
person
where
part
I
think
in
the
penalty
section
of
our
code.
It
says
someone
would
be
notified
of
a
violation
but
I
I
guess
I,
don't
understand
how
you
would
also
like
mail,
a
letter
to
a
person
without
a.
T
E
T
So
you
know
this
is
one
of
those
things.
Discretion
ultimately
rests
with
the
enforcement
official.
This
is
one
of
those
those
basic
sort
of
things
where
you
have
a
certain
amount
of
prosecutorial
discretion.
Of
course,
any
Municipal
violation.
That's
sent
requires
a
notification
in
the
violation
itself
of
how
you
can
appeal
that
violation
and,
and
then
there
of
course,
has
to
be
an
appeals
process.
Otherwise
it's
not
appropriate.
So
some
appeals
go
to
administrative
bodies.
Some
go
directly
to
the
Monroe
County
Circuit
Court.
T
It
depends
on
what
regime
is
set
out
in
local
codes,
so,
for
example,
we
do
sometimes
have
to
issue
notices
of
violation
or
various
Municipal
orders
to
people
who
do
not
have
addresses
the
typical
mechanism,
for
that
is
to
Simply
notify
law
enforcement,
that
there
is
a
notice
of
violation,
that's
outstanding,
to
provide
them
with
a
copy
and
if
they
happen
to
encounter
or
know
where
to
locate
a
person
to
serve
that
notice
of
violation.
That's
how
they
do
it.
U
J
Is
and
I
think
many
people
brought
up
trash
containers
and
you
mention
a
food
truck
without
a
license
or
improperly
parked.
I
mentioned
scooters
early
and
obviously
we're
talking
in
many
RightWay
issues,
unhoused
people
with
whatever
blocking
those
sorts
of
things
in
looking
at
this
ordinance.
Obviously
I
mean
it.
J
It
gives
you
well
I'm,
ask
a
question,
but
I
got
to
tell
you:
I
am
concerned
about
enforcement
and
US
criminal
or
giving
the
appearance
of
criminalizing
that
behavior
and
and
when
chamber
and
again
I,
don't
want
to
speak
for
the
Chamber
of
Commerce
I.
Don't
want
to
speak
for
DBI
or
any
other
entity,
but
when
they
come
up
here
and
and
give
comment,
public
comment
about
keeping
right
away,
clean,
I,
don't
think
they're
talking
about
trash
cans,
I,
don't
think
they're
talking
about
scooters.
J
So
that's
my
concern.
If
we
send,
if
there's
a
violation
and
that's
one
reason
why
I
support
it,
bringing
our
community
service
staff
and
our
social
workers,
those
are
the
type
of
things
that
can
be
addressed
with
them
without
law
enforcement
and
it's
pretty
clear
that
we
give
them
the
right
to
move
it.
The
obstruction.
If
they
don't,
we
can
move
the
obstruction.
The
city
has
the
ability
to
pursue
arrest
for
trespassing.
J
You
see
how
specific
that
is,
and
that's
what
concerns
me
we're
not
going
to
do
that
with
my
neighbors,
with
the
trash
being
there
I
mean
we're
we're
just
not
going
to
do
that.
So
I
guess!
That's
that's
my
real
concern,
so
one
of
my
colleagues
would
normally
say
what
say
you
but
I'm
I'm
not
going
to
do
that,
and
but
I
got
to
turn
this
into
a
question
or
I'll
get
admonished
enforcement
in
that
particular
case.
J
D
T
Yeah
I
can
do
my
best
to
address
all
of
that.
I
I,
don't
know
I'll,
do
my
there's
a
lot
there,
so
the
the
first
thing
you
said
is
sort
of.
There
is
a
concern,
potentially
that
it
feels
like
by
saying,
if
you
put
an
obstruction
in
the
right
of
way,
we'd
like
to
have
a
mechanism
to
no
longer
have
that
right
of
way
obstruction
be
that
this
is
considered
to
be
somehow
criminalizing
status.
It's
not
at
all
what
this
is
intended
to
do.
Nothing
like
that.
T
That's
that's
goal.
Number
one
so
I
just
want
to
be
completely
clear
about
that
sort
of
the
second
half
of
that
was
what's
the
likelihood
of
an
arrest
for
Criminal
Trespass
in
the
situation,
I
I
cannot
speak
for
law
enforcement
or
for
the
prosecutor's
office.
The
city
has
we
have
no
interest
whatsoever
in
putting
somebody
in
handcuffs.
That's
a
totally
that's
useless.
It's
not
a
useful
thing.
What
we
want
to
be
able
to
do
is
take
Whatever
item
is
Prov
preventing
a
person
from
moving
down
the
sidewalk
and
get
it
out
of
the
sidewalk.
T
That's
the
goal
here
and
when
we
discovered
we
didn't
have
a
mechanism
for
doing
that.
That's
when
we
looked
around
to
see
what
other
cities
were
doing
to
ensure
that
they
had
a
mechanism
for
that,
and
that's
that's
why
we
modeled
this
on
what
Indianapolis
does
to
to
protect
the
use
of
the
RightWay.
J
Okay,
as
part
of
that
model,
providing
or
or
giving
individuals,
let's
talk
individuals
here,
access
to,
let's
say
we're
having
a
mental
Health,
ISS
episode
or
some
substance
episode.
So
what
happens
in?
Do
we
anticipate
happening
in
that
particular
case
and
and
again
I've
mentioned
the
social
workers
and
the
community
service
staff.
But
you
see
what
I'm
saying
and
a
lot
of
this
I
think
may
be
unintended
consequences,
but
will
definitely
lead
to
arrest
as
I
see
and
and
that's
just
what
we're
speaking
I
think
there's
some
other
things.
J
T
T
If
you
want
sort
of
to
revisit
the
city's
general
policies
on
persons
who
are
experiencing
homelessness,
what
resources
are
available
in
the
community
for
persons
who
are
experiencing
homelessness,
I
I
I
will
tell
you
I'm
I'm
sad
to
admit
that
I
am
probably
not
the
person
you
want
to
talk
to
about
that.
There
are
a
dozen
people
or
more
here
at
City
Hall,
who
are
far
more
familiar
with
and
and
able
to
tell
you
what
res
resources
are
available
and
how
we
would
address
situations
particular
situations
on
a
case-by,
Case
basis.
T
I
know
that
we
have
a
standing
weekly
meeting
with
various
community
service
providers.
It's
not
a
meeting
that
I
am
personally
in
to
talk
about
the
sorts
of
issues
that
they
are
seeing
from
members
of
the
of
the
unhoused
community
and
to
try
to
work
with
them
to
address
those
issues
as
they
come
up.
T
J
T
T
I
think
that's
another
aspect
of
the
ordinance
that
should
be
taken
into
account
that
the
ordinance
not
only
provides
a
guide
on
when
the
right
of
way
is
considered
obstructed,
but
it
also
provides
guidance
on
when
the
right
of
way
isn't
considered
obstructed
when
you
are
lawfully
located
in
the
right
of
way
when
when
we
can't
take
action
against
you
and
don't
want
to
frankly
have
no
interest
in
it.
So
so
and
I
think
in
some
sense.
T
We
do
not
have
any
corollary
to
the
Indianapolis
Maran
county
code.
We
do
not
have
a
chapter,
that's
titled
protections
for
the
homeless
or
if
we
do
I'm
not
aware
of
it
and
I
will
say
I'm
this
time.
I
can't
say
there
are
a
dozen
people
other
than
me
in
City
Hall,
who,
who
are
more
aware
of
the
municipal
code.
G
T
T
But
if
somebody
notices
that
there
appears
to
be
something
in
the
right
way
that
shouldn't
be
there
there's
a
conversation-
and
you
know
the
the
conversation
becomes
clear
through
the
conversation
that
yeah
I'm
not
going
to
be
moving
this
and
I'm
not
going
to
move
it
I'm
not
going
to
move
this
table
out
of
the
way
or
this
whatever
it
might
be,
for
the
next
10
12
hours.
That's
going
to
be
storage
at
that
point,.
G
Okay,
well,
let
me
give
a
hypothetical
then
so
I'm
on
the
sidewalk
and
I'm
there
for
hours,
but
I'm,
not
I'm,
not
blocking
half
the
sidewalk
is
open,
so
I'm
in
compliance
and
I
have
personal
belongings.
Is
that
storage,
or
is
that
or
does
storage
consist
of
leaving
my
belongings
there
to
retrieve
later?
What
what?
What
is?
Could
you
elucidate
that.
T
It's
it's
going
to
be
really
difficult
to
imagine
hypotheticals
like
that,
and
it's
really
going
to
depend
on
a
case-by
casee
situation.
Obviously,
if
you
have
a
very
di
Minimus
small
amount
of
materials
that
we're
talking
about,
that's
not
going
to
implicate
anything
if
it's
a
more
significant
amount
of
materials.
Obviously
you
know
that's
something
that
somebody
might
ask
you
about
so
so
the
amount
of
personal
belongings
that
are
present
may
may
be
relevant
the
size
of
something
you
put.
G
It
doesn't
say
that
it
just
says
it
it
it.
It
addresses
half
the
WID
width
of
the
sidewalk,
so
it
seems
you're
in
compliance
if
you're
not
blocking
That
Sidewalk.
Now
it
doesn't
say
anything
about
the
volume
of
belongings
that
I
have
I
could
have
a
backpack.
I
could
have
a
tent
a
backpack
groceries.
I,
don't
know
you
know
what
I
need
some
guidance
in
terms
of
what
storage
consists
of
both
temporally
and
and
if
it
is
volume,
then
could
you
bring
us
into
some
sort
of
understanding
of
what
that
volume
consists
of.
T
So
I'm
sorry
I,
think
I
was
sort
of
answering
answering
your
question
from
a
hypothetical
enforcement
perspective
more
than
from
a
what
is
a
technical
violation
of
the
statute
and
we're
going
to
just
go
back
and
look
at
the
four
criteria
in
in
that
circumstance,
regardless
of
the
volume
of
the
item,
that's
blocking
the
right
of
way,
if
it's
blocking
more
than
half
of
it,
if
we're
noticing
that
pedestrians
are
backing
up
or
bicyclists
can't
get
through.
That's
the
sort
of
thing.
T
That's
immediately
we're
going
to
we're
going
to
have
a
conversation
about
how
we
might
be
able
to
adjust
your
your
situation
in
the
right
of
way,
the
items
in
the
right
of
way
way
and
and
in
a
way
that
doesn't
create
that
issue
anymore.
I
do
also
want
to
be
clear
and
I,
don't
think
you
were
suggesting
this,
but
maybe
just
for
everybody
we're
not
talking
about
a
person.
This
is
not
a
loitering
statute.
We
don't
have
a
loitering
statute.
We
have
no
interest
in
a
loitering
statute.
T
The
history
behind
or
excuse
me
ordinance
the
history
behind
loitering
ordinances
right
as
as
sort
of
a
pretextual
mechanism
to
to
harass
certain
community
members.
It's
really
not
anything.
We've
ever
been
interested
in
and
we've
never
had
loitering
ordinance
to
my
knowledge.
So
we're
not
talking
about
human
beings
being
in
the
right
of
way.
We're
talking
about
physical
items.
K
Don't
necessarily
want
law
enforcement
to
have
to
get
drawn
into
this,
because
this
opens
up
a
whole
new
can
of
worms.
But
it
seems
to
me
in
your
opening
presentation.
You
were
saying
that
it
is
not
our
intent
to
arrest
we're
not
trying
to
throw
people
in
jail.
We
want
to
educate
people
that
you've
blocked
a
passageway
so
that
the
rest
of
the
public
can't
use
it.
Would
you
please
move
and
if
they're
not
responding
to
that
polite
request,
to
remove
the
blockage
from
the
public
right
away?
K
There
needs
to
be
some
mechanism,
or
some
law,
or
some
ordinance
to
be
able
to
address
that,
but
I,
don't
think
we're
being
we're
clear
on
how
that's
going
to
be
addressed
and
I.
Think
members
of
the
public
that
have
communicated
with
us
about
this
as
well
as
some
of
the
good
questions
from
my
colleagues
were
not
quite
sure,
is.
Is
it
possible
for
us
to
do
more
work
on
this
before
comes
back,
or
maybe
involve
more
people
to
answer
some
of
these
questions
that
that
you're,
it's
not
in
your
wheelhouse
to
answer?
K
T
We
always
encourage
curiosity
interactions,
good
ideas,
so,
to
the
extent
the
council
has
amendments
they
want
to
they
want
to
consider
discuss.
Certainly,
we
would
encourage
the
proposal
of
of
those
sorts
of
items.
We
always
do.
Council,
member
Samberg,
so
I
think
there's,
of
course
lots
of
wisdom
in
that.
T
If
you
want
to
have
a
further
understanding
from
additional
City
staff
about
their
thoughts
on
the
ordinance,
I
certainly
would
encourage
probably
Council
leadership,
to
talk
to
talk
at
their
regular
meetings
with
the
mayor's
office
about
sort
of
individuals.
They
might
be
interested
in
asking
questions
to
whether
that's
in
written
form,
offline
or
sort
of
in
a
presentation,
so
certainly
I
would
encourage
those
sorts
of
things.
Absolutely.
If
that's
the
question.
K
Kind
of
clarify
My,
my
what
I'm
trying
to
get
at
is.
It
seems
like,
if
some
probably
nine
times
out
of
10.
If
someone
is
asked
to
remove
an
obstruction
from
a
public
right,
they
will
oh,
my
bad
I'm.
So
sorry,
yes,
I
I'll,
move
it.
This
seems
to
be
based
on
an
incident
where
someone
refused
you
couldn't
get
them
to
move.
They
just
sat
there
and
wouldn't
respond
and
for
whatever
reason
could
be
a
mental
illness.
K
It
could
be
any
number
of
things
and
that's
when
you
would
call
in
a
social
service
agency
that
maybe
had
a
relationship
with
that
person
to
help
persuade
that
person
to
move
or
help
them
with
storage
or
whatever
is
needed
to
have
a
Humane
outcome
to
that
one
out
of
10
that
refuses
to
move
their
their
personal
belongings
out
of
a
RightWay.
So
that's
why
I'm
saying?
T
T
I
I
appreciate
that
comment.
The
only
thing
I
would
say
is
there
are
always
going
to
be
those
rare
and
I.
Think
nine
out
of
10
is
probably
too
low.
I
think
it's
probably
49
out
of
50
99
out
of
100,
but
there
are
always
going
to
be
those
really
unfortunate
and
nobody
likes
doing
this.
This
is
this
is
the
worst
moment
when
you
discover
that
you
really
do
have
to
use
the
authority
that
you've
been
given
to
make
sure
you
can
keep
a
sidewalk
open
for
somebody
with
a
wheelchair
to
pass
over
it.
T
We
never
want
to
use
the
most
extreme
measure,
but
there
are
those
rare
occasions
where
we
simply
have
to
do
it.
We
never
want
to
send
a
fine
letter
to
somebody.
We
always
try
to
educate
first,
but
sometimes
you
just
are
going
to
have
people
who
who,
for
whatever
reason,
are
going
to
continue
to
insist
on
a
situation
where
you
have
to
use
the
strongest
measures
so.
L
L
What
is
it
again,
their
personal
property
or
their
obstructions
that
they're
camping
with
and
they
the
requirement
to
keep
that
sidewalk
open
with
Jersey
berries
and
the
like
is
simply
not
complied
with,
and
the
city
just
doesn't
bother,
and
this
particular
member
of
the
public
has
has
interrogated
the
engineering
department,
the
public
works
department.
Why
isn't
this
being
done?
L
T
So
I
I
would
probably
describe
things
a
little
bit
differently
than
that.
So
so
when,
and
maybe
we
should
go
back
from
my
perspective
of
a
couple
of
steps
and
then,
if
you
feel
free
to
interject
at
any
point
when
so
when
somebody
is
doing
a
construction
project
and
they're
going
to
utilize
part
of
the
Public's
right
of
way
or
they're,
going
to
excavate
part
of
the
Public's
right
of
way.
T
As
part
of
that
construction
project,
we
have
a
pretty
wellb
built
out
system
in
the
municipal
code
and
in
the
engineering
department
for
how
you
request
a
permit
in
that
situation.
One
of
the
things
that's
of
course
required
is
a
maintenance
of
traffic
plan,
which
is
something
that
that
you
submit
when
you
request
a
permit
that
describes
how
the
right
of
way
is
going
to
be
maintained
for
pedestrians
for
Vehicles,
while
you're
using
part
of
the
right
of
way,
often
times
that's.
T
The
word
negotiated
would
be
wrong,
but
there
is
a
back
and
forth
exchange
between
Municipal
officials
and
a
company
about
what
that's
going
to
look
like
and
then,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
it's
the
company's
responsibility
for
appropriately
implementing
that
plan.
If
you,
if
you
want
me
to
tell
you
that
every
company
always
follows
the
plan
to
a
te
in
every
case,
I
absolutely
am
not
going
to
tell
you
that
we
have
discovered
violations.
We've
sent
notices
of
violations.
T
There
are
certainly
sometimes
we
don't
notice
violations
again,
because
there
are
limitations
on
what
we
can
notice
and
what
we
can
enforce.
But
in
circumstances
like
that,
there
is
absolutely
a
system
for
making
sure
that
roads
and
sidewalks
remain
open
for
the
public
to
use
despite
construction
activity
happening
and
if,
if
we
are
noticing
situations
where
that's
inadequate,
where
a
company
isn't
living
up
to
its
end
of
the
bargain,
we
do
want
to
know
about
that.
So
we
can
hold
them
to
what
they're
supposed
to
do.
L
It
makes
me
question
why
we're
spending
this
much
time
on
a
single
case,
something
that
came
up
because
of
a
single
case
when
you
say
99
times
out
of
100
people
just
move
the
obstruction
much
more
temporary
than
this
I
mean.
This
is
a
a
matter
of
administrative
priorities.
In
other
words,
give
me
confidence
that
the
admin
Administration
will
as
enthusiastically
enforce
traffic
plans
submitted
by
construction
companies
as
they
will.
This
Can
the
police,
not
also
police,
that.
T
Law,
the
the
police
don't
get
involved
in
maintenance
of
traffic
plans.
That's
what
happens
in
that
circumstance
is
a
is
a
letter
is
sent
to
the
company
with
a
fine
attached
to
it,
usually
a
hefty
fine,
and
if
you've
been,
you
can
go
back.
I
mean
we've
seen
these
fines
get
issued.
We've
seen
them
appeal
to
the
Board
of
Public
Works.
So
this
is
something
that
we
do.
That
staff
does
not
on
an
irregular
basis.
T
When
there
is
a
violation
like
this,
we
will
go
ahead
and
send
letters
for
violations
by
companies
when
they
utilize
the
right
of
way
inappropriately
in
lots
of
different
circumstances,
so
I
I,
guess
I
would
I'm
not
sure
what
you're
looking
for
in
terms
of
a
commitment
but
I
I
might
just
disagree
with
you
on
some
level.
Council
member
volan
about
our
sincerity,
in
terms
of
making
sure
that
the
right
of
way
is
appropriately
maintained.
L
I
mean
I'm
not
saying
the
ad
Administration
is
insincere,
I'm,
simply
saying
that
they're
inconsistent
and
this
this,
whereas
Clause
says
entities
frustrating
impeding
and
are
excluding
the
general
public
from
using
the
right
of
way.
How
is
it
materially
different
because
they
applied
for
a
permit
that
they
failed
to
live
up?
To
I
mean
the
enforcement
mechanism
is
not
as
immediate
as
what
you're
recommending
here.
T
L
A
M
Yes,
if
there
are
members
of
the
public
that
would
like
to
speak
to
this
item
joining
us
via
Zoom,
please
indicate
your
desire
to
speak
by
using
the
raise
hand
feature
you
can
find
that
under
your
control
bar
by
clicking
on
the
reactions,
tab
or
the
more
Tab,
and
if
you
can't
locate
that
please
send
the
meeting
host
a
chat.
I
see
one
hand
raised
on
Zoom.
A
Okay,
one
now
two
all
right:
let's
plan
on
two
minutes
per
speaker,
we
have
a
lot
of
people
that
we
want
to
give
a
chance
to
tonight.
So
if
you
would,
if
you're
in
Chambers,
if
you
want
to
approach
and
start
queuing
up
at
the
podium,
I
would
appreciate
that
and
if
you
would,
let's
start
here
in
Chambers,
if
you
would
please
introduce
yourself
share
your
name
for
the
record
and
then
you'll
have
two
minutes.
V
All
right
evening,
my
name
is
Paulie
paracone
been
in
Bloomington
about
10
years,
so
I
like
many,
are
I'm
sensitive
to
the
need
for
unfettered
access
to
all
of
our
public
spaces.
It's
important
to
remember
that
public
critical
component
of
what
defines
public
is
that
it
is
non-exclusionary
and
I
think
that
this
legislation,
as
it
is
written,
is
in
fact
exclusionary.
I
think
it
fails
to
provide
adequate
enforcement
measures
and
clearly
Define
them.
V
It
opens
up
additional
policing
of
already
vulnerable
people,
without
necessarily
giving
them
an
opportunity
to
access
local
resources.
I
think
the
legislation,
as
is,
is
shortsighted
to
the
Nuance
of
the
issue
at
hand.
I
think
the
issue
is
legitimate
and
I
think
it
Bears
some
amount
of
response,
but
I
think
that
that
the
there
are
resources
out
there
from
cities
doing
a
better
job
than
Indianapolis
frankly,
and
we
as
a
city
ought
to
study
those
resources
and
create
create
a
more
informed
potential
solution
to
the
issue.
V
W
Good
evening
this
is
T
tiisha
Copic
I'm,
with
downtown
Bloomington
Inc,
we're
in
favor
of
this
ordinance
and
appreciate
the
city
bringing
it
Forward.
We've
got
a
very
active
downtown
and
it's
important
to
keep
paths
open
for
walkability
of
all
ages
and
Ada
accessibility,
popup
at
structions
on
sidewalks
can
get
out
of
control
pretty
quickly
and
affect
the
balance
of
multiple
uses
in
the
downtown
area.
W
You
know,
there's
a
whole
group
of
people
trying
to
keep
things
clean
and
picked
up,
and
you
know
frankly,
it
gets
very
frustrating
and
a
little
bit
overwhelming
and
it
so
anyway,
all
of
us
kind
of
working
together
for
a
clean
and
safe
and
maintained
downtown
is,
is
very
important
and
and
appreciate
your
consideration
of
this
ordinance.
Thank
you.
X
Hi,
my
name
is
Tim
DWI
I
urge
Council
to
vote
against
this
ordinance
as
written
I'm
very
concerned,
as
somebody
who
is
downtown
every
day
of
the
week
that
the
motivation
for
this
is
really
about
stemming
the
aesthetic
issues
of
homelessness.
Some
of
the
commentary
from
the
public
and
and
frankly
harmful
things,
I
hear
just
walking
down
the
street.
People
complaining
about
unhoused
people
being
in
public
space
is
very
concerning
and
I
I
think
that
is
a
pretty
clear
focus
of
where
the
enforcement
of
this
ordinance
would
go.
X
X
That
have
become
far
too
common
I
think
that
is
a
very
extreme
but
a
tragic
example
of
what
happens
when
we
have
a
public
focus
on
pushing
people
experiencing
homeless,
out
of
sight
and
out
of
mind
and
I'm
very
concerned
that
this
kind
of
legislation
furthers
that
goal
to
just
push
people
out
of
space.
Everyone
has
a
right
to
the
public
space,
even
those
experiencing
homelessness,
and
we
should
do
a
much
better
job
of
seeking
to
provide
them
resources
rather
than
this
punishment
system,
should
they
occupy
too
much
of
the
space.
Y
Minutes
good
evening,
my
name
is
Jen
Pearl
and
I'm.
The
president
of
the
Bloomington
Economic
Development
Corporation
I,
wanted
to
speak
in
support
for
this
legislation
as
public
rights
of
way.
Safety
and
accessibility
are
important.
At
the
same
time.
This
should
be,
in
addition
to
other
resources
that
we
support
in
our
community
for
individuals
that
are
facing
challenges,
whether
they're,
unhoused
or
have
mental
health
or
substance
abuse
challenges.
Y
I've
spoken
earlier
at
other
meetings
about
the
economic
Vitality
project,
which
is
an
initiative
to
support
vibrancy
across
our
community,
such
that
is
a
great
Community
for
everyone.
Other
aspects
of
the
initiative
provides
support
for
Housing
Development
employment,
growth
with
wraparound
services
to
ensure
individuals
can
access
communities
opportunities,
but
importantly,
it
also
means
support
for
health
and
social
services
to
ensure
things
like
homelessness
are
rare,
brief
and
non-re
repeating.
So
we
support
this
legislation,
but
also
support
a
holistic
approach
to
ensuring
a
Vibrant
Community
for
everyone.
A
E
So
I'm
Nick
Angelos
I'm
a
member
of
help
ourselves
Mutual
Aid,
a
community-
based
organization
that
serves
the
UNH
housee
community
at
Seminary
Park
three
times
a
week,
and
we
hold
bi-weekly
meetings
with
the
on
house
community.
In
our
last
meeting
we
talked
to
several
members
who
are
like
respected
in
the
community,
and
we
ask
them
their
thoughts
about
the
recent
tent
band
and
also
continued
bands.
They
themselves
realize
that
there
is
a
problem.
They
think
that
we
have
a
problem
in
Bloomington.
E
Everybody
knows
we
have
a
problem
with
addressing
the
needs
of
our
unhoused
community
and
what
I
would
like
to
see
is
more
a
solution,
oriented
approach
to
this,
because
at
the
moment
this
ordinance
really
seems
like
procrastination
of
the
problem.
I'm
a
former
student
I
know
what
procrastination
looks
like
one
possible
solution.
E
Measure
that
has
been
addressed
by
members
of
the
community
is
that
if
they
realize
that
having
their
tents
in
a
park
would
prohibit
the
whole
Bloomington
Comm
Community
from
appreciating
a
public
park
like
if
families
would
not
feel
comfortable
going
there,
they
realize
that
is
a
problem.
They
suggested.
Why
don't?
We
have
a
separate
public
space
for
members
of
the
UN
house
Community
to
set
up
their
tents.
We
have
plenty
of
vacant
Lots
in
town.
We
have
plenty
of
resources
to
make
this
happen.
E
A
Z
Please
I
sure
I'm
also
of
help
ourselves,
and
can
you
state
your
full
name,
please
I'm
I'm,
also
a
m
of
help
ourselves.
First
have
to
start
with
in
your
acknowledgements
you
committed
to
the
work
necessary
for
a
more
effable.
Isn't
this
bill
a
little
bit
counterproductive
to
this
commitment?
I
would
like
to
urge
you
to
vote
against
this
as
it
is.
Why
is
this
regulating
trash?
Can
scooters
tables
and
people?
People
are
not
trash
cans?
Z
Can
most
members
of
the
community
would
in
regular
circumstances
not
not
be
arrested
for
being
in
a
community
park,
and
I
would
also
like
to
take
this
moment
to
the
first
person
from
house
talked
about
about
how
I
would
like
to
also
advocate
for
a
more
solution,
oriented
approach.
I
now
would
like
to
continue
to
my
second
point
about
how
one
of
the
arguments
that
was
a
lot
this
Phil
was
that
this
is
necessary
to
protect
people
with
disabilities.
Z
If
this
is
such
a
priority,
why
was
one
of
the
first
complaints
we
heard
at
this
meeting
about
lack
of
accessible
parking?
Why
are
lot
of
the
sidewalks
here
that
are
trying
to
be
unobstructed,
not
accessible
to
people
with
disabilities?
So
many
people
who
are
unhoused
have
disabilities.
It
feels
like
this
is
a
weak
stego
to
defend
the
bill.
That
was
big
on
a
single
event.
That's
all
I
have
to
say.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
for
your.
A
AA
Minutes
hi
so
I'm
Al,
my
name
is
abov
kataru
I'm,
also
from
helpers
SS
Bloomington
I
just
want
to
say
that
we
should
be
very
keen
and
not
falling
into
the
Trap,
that
the
initial
proposer
has
said,
which
is
that
it's
basically
a
problem
where
there's
stuff
on
the
sidewalk,
and
we
just
need
to
move
it,
there's
stuff
on
the
right
way
and
we
need
to
move
it.
It's
that
simple
of
an
issue
but
I
can
also
provide
as
simple
of
a
solution,
which
is
that
there
are
unhoused
people.
AA
We
should
just
give
them
houses
right.
So
it's
a
very,
very
one-dimensional
kind
of
perspective
that
the
initial
proposer
has
set
before
us
and
it
lacks
much
nuance
and,
as
the
initial
proposer
has
said,
themselves,
they're
more
focused
on
tables,
ping,
pong
tables
and
a
lot
of
other
various
objects
rather
than
people.
While
this
is
as
council,
member
pedmont,
Smith
and
council
member
Sims
have
stated
is
very
much
a
problem
about
housing
and
targeting
the
unhoused
community
other
than
that.
AA
A
AB
Minutes,
hi
everyone,
my
name
is
Kamal
Pana
I'm,
also
with
help
ourselves.
Bloomington.
Sorry,
there's
a
lot
of
us,
but
my
comment
mostly
talks
about
how,
in
this
bill
there's
there's
a
lot
of
hypocrisy
and-
and
it's
very
concerning
and
I
mean
we've.
We've
talked
a
lot
already
about
how
this
bill
targets.
The
unhoused
community
and
we've
also
talked
about
how
you
know
other
sort
of
bodies.
AB
Agents
in
the
city
can,
you
know,
obstruct
public
right
of
way
with
you
know
impunity
with
much
less
repercussion
I
mean
you
know
like,
as
we've
talked
about
like
construction
companies,
apartment
companies
or
real
estate
companies.
They
can
set
up
and
and
and
and
occupy
sidewalks
for
months
at
a
time
and
sure
I
mean
if
they
overstep
their
permit.
They
get
a
fine,
but
I
mean
the
response
in
this
bill.
AB
Just
think
that's
not
right,
and
so
you
know,
I
really
think,
as
as
with
previous
speakers
have
talked
about,
we
need
to
focus
on
a
Solutions
based
approach
rather
than
a
punitive
approach
to
the
unhoused
community.
You
know
we
need
affordable
or
Free
Housing.
We
need
public
places
where
unhoused
people
are
not
criminalized
where
they
can
restore
their
belongings
and
not
have
them
at
risk
of
being
appropriated
by
the
city.
Yeah.
That's
all
I
have
to
say
I
I
urge
a
no
vote
on
this
Bill.
Thank
you.
AC
My
name
is
Josh
monag
I
want
to
speak
in
opposition
of
the
his
resolution.
Last
month,
the
Bloomington
Board
of
parks
Commissioners
unanimously
planned
unhoused
people
from
camping
in
public
parks.
Now
this
resolution
is
wanting
to
ban
them
from
sidewalk
streets
and
rideways.
That
does
nothing
to
mitigate
the
problem.
This
is
just
perpetuating
the
situation
instead
of
doing
something
to
curb
the
unhoused
population
and
help
them
get
back
on
their
feet.
Instead,
this
resolution
decides
to
make
their
lives
more
difficult.
AC
H
Chambers
good
evening,
Madam
president,
this
is
Christopher
eni
from
the
greater
Bloomington
Chamber
of
Commerce.
This
is
a
very
complex
issue
and
I
think
we
we
want
the
accessibility
to
be
addressed,
but
I
think
this
at
this
time
needs
to
be
tabled.
We
need
to
come
together
with
some
solutions
that
I
think
are
going
to
work
for
all
parties.
I,
just
don't
think
after
hearing
the
discourse
tonight
that
we're
there
yet
so
my
recommendation
would
be
to
table
the
manner
and
we
come
up
with
it
at
another
time.
A
S
Okay,
welcome
hi.
My
name
is
Sydney
zulik.
Thank
you
all
for
being
here
a
lot
of
really
great
discussion.
I've
heard
from
both
council
members
on
zoom
and
in
person
I
believe
that
as
a
city,
we
really
should
be
focusing
on
two
things
when
it
comes
to
the
homelessness
population
and
that's
reduction
of
harm
and
preservation
of
dignity,
and
this
bill
does
neither
of
those
things
so
I
am
politely
requesting
that
you
vote
no.
On
this
bill.
I
did
hear
some
discussion
about
how
this
ordinance
does
not
necessarily
Target
people.
S
Unfortunately,
the
stuff
that
house
people
experiencing
homelessness
carry
with
them
is
always
with
them,
because
they
don't
have
anywhere
to
store
their
things,
and
so
because
of
that
it,
this
ordinance
indiscriminately
targets
people
people
experiencing
homelessness
because
where
they
go,
their
stuff
goes,
and
so
it's
really
not
fair
to
say
that
this
bill
doesn't
Target
people,
because
it
definitely
does,
except
it
targets
exclusively
people
who
are
experiencing
houselessness.
This
is
not.
This
is
not
just
something
that
is
going
to
be
trash
cans
or
scooters,
and
it's
honestly
kind
of
insulting
that.
S
That's
what
we're
talking
about
when
these
are
people,
and
they
have
a
very
small
limitation
of
stuff
that
they're
allowed
to
carry
with
them.
Every
single
one
of
us
has
way
more
than
one
shopping,
cart.
I
could
probably
fill
up.
Seven
and
I
know
that
everyone
in
this
room
probably
feels
very
similarly
so
I
just
encourage
you
to
vote
with
compassion
and
remember
that
people
experiencing
homelessness
are
also
your
constituents.
Thank
you.
AD
AD
I
would
like
to
see
Solutions
a
solution
based
resolution
as
well.
Well,
I'm
still
thinking
that
Bloomington,
even
though
I
know
there's
a
lot
of
things
behind
it.
That
would
need
to
happen
a
sanctioned
homeless
encampment
that
would
have
24-hour
security,
strict
rules,
because
I
think
that's
needed
for
people
to
remain
safe
from
themelves,
as
well
as
towards
others
in
that
encampment,
as
well
as
access
to
Social
Services.
AD
AD
C
Thank
you
Mr
rer
yeah.
This
is
for
you,
I
I.
Just
did
want
to
follow
up
on
on
one
of
the
questions.
I
asked
earlier
reading
now
from
a
Herold
dimes
headline
from
January
10th
2021
sometime
today,
any
remaining
tents
and
other
personal
belongings
of
people
experiencing
homelessness,
who
have
been
living
in
and
around
Seminary
Park
will
be
hauled
away.
The
city
posted
a
sign
in
the
park
last
week
warning
people
staying
in
the
park.
They
must
find
another
place
to
stay.
C
A
city
ordinance
prohibits
overnight
camping
and
the
presence
of
people
in
City
Parks
from
11:00
p.m.
to
5:00
a.m.
daily.
In
addition,
the
sign
says
that
honor
about
January,
11th
and
I'm,
quoting
now
quote
honor
about
January,
11th,
2021,
any
and
all
personal
property
remaining
in
the
public
rights
of
way
along
South,
College,
Avenue
and
South
Walnut
Street
must
be
removed.
End
quote:
it
advises
people
to
find
another
place
to
live
and
lists
local
overnight
shelters
and
social
service
agencies
that
provide
resources
for
the
homeless.
C
So
just
bringing
us
up
to
speed
on
I
believe
what
the
action
the
city
took
and
the
specific
words
they
used
with.
With
regard
to
removing
property
from
the
public
right
of
way
in
the
past
and
wondering
what
responses
to
that
VV
our
conversation
earlier
was
a
court
order
obtained
for
that.
Are
you?
Are
you
aware.
T
I
I
would
first
start
by
saying
I'm
extremely
impressed
with
your
memory
council
member
flarity
and
the
details
that
you
remembered
that
incident
with
no
court
order
was
obtained.
In
that
case,
I
can
say
that
affirmatively
what
has
changed
in
the
interim
since
the
what
you've
just
read
about
what
happened
and
I
think
you
said
in
July
of
2021,
January
2021
and
this
past
summer.
I
can't
tell
you
that
so
I
cannot
shed
light
on
that.
C
I
T
I
T
Yes,
we
have
talked
about
that
extensively,
so
we
have
a
policy
like
a
lot
of
municipalities
about
what
we
do
when
we
clear
an
encampment
like
a
situation
that
council
member
flare
just
talked
about.
There
are
requirements
about
posting
notice,
at
least
72
hours
in
advance,
so
people
are
well
aware
of
when
it's
going
to
happen.
T
We
require
that
we
ascertain
that
there
are
absolutely
beds
available
in
local
shelters
for
the
number
of
persons
who
are
located
in
a
particular
encampment,
so
they
have
an
Alterna
place
to
go
when
the
encampment
is
no
longer
up,
and
we
also
have
a
policy
on
their
belongings,
which
is
that
we
will
store
any
belongings
for
at
a
minimum
of
30
days
in
a
safe
and
secure
location
where
they
can
be
retrieved.
Now
we
have
discovered
and
I
think
either
you
or
council
member
flare
mentioned
this.
T
T
I
T
I
T
F
Smith
yes
and
I
apologize.
This
is
a
a
follow-up
question
on
something
I
heard.
You
say,
as
I
was
walking
out
the
room
to
use
the
bathroom
so
sorry
about
that,
if
I
did
not
get
the
full
context,
but
did
I
hear
you
say
that
that
the
policy
of
the
city
of
Bloomington
is
to
not
clear
an
encampment
unless
there's
space
in
shelters,
locally.
T
And
again,
I
I
should
be
clear.
I
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
clear,
I'm
sorry,
sometimes
a
lot
of
there
are
encampments
that
happen
on
public
property
which
are
within
the
city's
purview.
So
something
like
like
Seminary
Park.
There
are
also
lots
of
incidents
where
there
are
encampments
that
happen
on
private
property.
We
don't
have
jurisdiction
over
what
happens
with
evictions
at
those
encampments
and
I
cannot
speak
to
how
private
property
owners,
what
steps
they
take
when
they
address
a
situation
on
their
own
private
property.
If
that
makes
sense,.
F
Yes,
absolutely
I
have
in
front
of
me
the
police
general
order
about
homeless
encampments,
and
it
says
that
they
will
ascertain
how
many
beds
are
available,
but
it
does
not
say
that
they
will
not
clear
an
encampment
based
on
not
having
number
a
sufficient
number
of
beds
available.
Now
that
was
given
to
me
in
the
summer
of
2021.
Do
you
know
if
that
has.
T
Changed
I
would
want
to
take
a
look
at
that
policy
and
compare
it
with
the
current
version
of
the
city's
policy
on
the
subject
to
verify
it.
I
don't
know
that
we're
going
to
be
able
to
do
that
in
the
the
moments
that
we
have
here.
I
cannot
say
for
sure
council
member,
Pont
Smith,
but
I
can
certainly
look
into
that.
T
T
Getting
all
the
way
to
where
we
would
consider
something
to
be
a
trespass
and
have
having
to
deal
with
it
in
a
more
severe
way
is,
is
absolutely
never
the
goal
here.
So,
to
the
extent
we
have
flexibility
to
give
people
an
opportunity
to
rectify
a
situation
on
their
own
I.
Think
that's
a
feature
not
a.
G
M
C
So
I
don't
think
this
is
honestly
Well
Suited
for
just
tabling
or
postponing
and
bringing
back
with
a
few
clarifications.
You
know
in
a
in
a
few
weeks
time
so
for
that
reason,
I'd
actually
just
prefer
to
vote
it
down.
I
think
the
conversation
earlier
tonight
highlighted
some
important
problems
with
respect
to
like
disperate
treatment
of
situations
and
people.
You
know
whose
belongings
or
property
is
in
the
the
right
of
way.
C
We've
known
about
system
systemic
problems
for
years
with
with
trash
bins
and
some
of
what
we
were
highlighting
tonight
is
that
we've
known
about
this
and
done
nothing
more
or
less,
and
that
really
flies
in
the
face
of
everything
in
the
memo
from
City
staff,
as
well
as
what
we
heard
from
Mr
Rooker
tonight.
Comments
like
our
core
mission
is
maintaining
the
public
right
of
way.
We
immediately
look
to
examine
why
we
don't
have
mechanisms
in
place
to
do
so.
C
C
You
know,
I
I,
think
it's
also
concerning
to
me
actually
this.
What
emerged
tonight
about
what
happened
in
in
late
December
of
2020
and
early
January
of
2021,
it
seems
like
the
city
probably
bit
acted
unlawfully
in
removing
people's
property
from
the
public
right
of
way
when
it
may
not
have
had
authority
to
do
so.
C
That's
that's
in
addition
to
risks
about,
or
concerns
about,
constitutionality
of,
of
telling
folks
to
to
leave
public
space
when
there
was
evidence
that
all
beds
were
filled,
or
rather
that
the
number
of
folks
in
the
community
at
that
time
exceeded
the
number
of
beds
available
on
shelters,
I,
think
what
we
need
instead
and
what
I
could
support.
You
know
accompanying
something
like
this
is
something
more
in
the
vein
of
indianapolis's
Article
5
protections
for
the
homeless.
C
I,
specifically
I
think
we
need
safe
parking
spaces
for
people
experiencing
homelessness,
who
are
able
to
shelter
in
their
cars
with
access
to
bathrooms,
trash
and
basic
security
and
safety,
ideally
a
place
to
store
their
belongings.
We
also
need
safe
outdoor
spaces
for
those
who
are
Sheltering
in
tents,
either,
because
they're
uncomfortable
unwilling
to
go
to
a
shelter
that
is
a
facility
or
perhaps
they've
been
kicked
out
for
a
short
period
of
time
from
that
shelter,
which
happens
often
or
perhaps
there
simply
isn't
enough
space.
C
So
we
need
those
safe
spaces
again
with
bathroom
trash
and
basic
security
safety.
For
folks,
you
know
people
in
vulner,
vulnerable
situations
like
that
are
often
the
most
likely
to
be
victims
of
of
harm,
and
that's
why
it's
very
important
not
to
do
things
like
this
that
simply
force
them
into
the
margins
where
they're
unseen.
We
had
comments
from
Mr,
DWI
and
others
earlier
about
that
exact
phenomenon.
C
There
are
lots
of
other
cities
around
the
country
leading
in
various
ways
around
this,
including
our
our
peers
up
in
Indianapolis,
but
there
are
many
other
examples
too.
Earlier
tonight,
council
member
Pont
Smith
mentioned
that
three
of
us
were
at
a
a
local
progress
national
convening
last
weekend,
and
we
heard
from
some
of
those
cities
about
what
they're
doing
and
that
we
could
do
as
well.
C
So
I
think
we
really
need
all
of
that
and
also
reminder
ordinance.
2106
in
early
2021
was
in
fact
trying
to
do
a
lot
of
this.
It
didn't
ultimately
pass
at
that
time,
but
I
I
think
it's
what
we
need
to
move
towards
and
I
think
there
again.
There
are
more
examples
and
more
evidence
and
more
support
from
from
around
the
country.
At
this
point,
so
that's
what
I
think
we
need
and
I
don't
think
that
can
be
done
in
the
context
of
this
ordinance.
C
F
Smith,
where
do
I
start
I
am
in
in
opposition
to
this
ordinance?
I
will
vote
against
it.
I
also,
don't
think
it
can
be
saved
in
any
reasonable
amount
of
time,
because
just
the
the
premise
of
it
is
something
I
do
not
support
I
think
we
should
be
investing
in
solutions
to
the
homelessness
situation
we
have
done.
The
city
has
been
contributing
to
the
heading
home
plan,
which
is
great,
but
what
we've
been
less
good
at
is
addressing
more
immediate
needs
of
people
who
are
unhoused.
F
The
heading
home
plan
hopefully,
will
give
us
a
solution.
You
know
in
five
or
10
years,
more
housing,
of
course,
is
key,
but
that
doesn't
happen
overnight
and
in
the
meantime,
we
have
people
who
are
struggling
to
stay
alive
on
our
streets
in
our
public
rways
in
our
parks,
and
this
ordinance
as
council
member
FL
noted
is,
is
not
about
ADA
accessibility.
If
our
administration
were
truly
concerned
about
ADA
accessibility,
we
would
have
addressed
scooters
parking
and
blocking
sidewalks
much
more
quickly
and
not
just
downtown.
F
Absence
of
ramps
in
heavily
traveled
pedestrian
areas,
things
like
this
and
all
all
of
those
which
I
have
supported
and
which
we
need
to
continue
pursuing,
which
actually
help
make
our
community
more
accessible.
But
this
ordinance
is
not
about
accessibility.
This
ordinance
is
about
having
the
legal
and
law
enforcement
tools
to
use
against
people
who
are
unhoused,
who
don't
have
any
other
place
to
keep
their
belongings,
except
with
them,
and
they
are
in
public.
F
I
Rosenberg,
thank
you.
I
already
mentioned
that
I
would
be
fine
voting
no
on
this
tonight.
I
agree
with
the
council
members
who
have
spoken
that
I
don't
think
this
is
reparable
from
where
it
is
right
now,
I
think
the
work
we
did
with
2106.
We
would
need
to
do
something
similar
again
now
I
mean
the
question
we
asked
there.
I
A
lot
was
if
we
aren't
allowing
people
to
sleep
in
parks,
where
do
they
sleep
and
that's
definitely
not
addressed
here
if
we
are
also
taking
away
public
right
of
way,
so
some
of
us
did
just
come
from
a
conference
that
addressed
a
little
bit.
Some
ideas
around
helping
the
unhoused
and,
as
Michelle
mentioned,
potentially
having
a
safe
space
and
cities,
are
doing
that
safe
grounds
and
safe
parking
for
people
without
homes,
potentially
offering
tents
up
for
folks
to
have
there.
I
K
I
will
be
supporting
any
motion
to
table
and
that's
In
fairness
and
respect
to
the
administration.
I
think
they've
heard
many
things
tonight.
They've
heard
valid
questions,
they've
heard
valid
concerns,
I
think,
there's
much
more
to
be
worked
on
before
this
could
be
seriously
considered
again
and
I
would
like
to
give
them
the
opportunity.
There
are
clearly
issues
that
they
would
like
to
have
addressed,
or
they
wouldn't
be
bringing
this
forward
in
a
in
what
I
consider
to
be
a
a
bit
of
a
half-baked
ordinance.
K
We
need
to
work
on
the
mechanisms
and
I
will
respectfully
disagree
with
my
colleagues
who
want
to
make
any
kind
of
accusation
that
this
is
all
about:
law
enforcement
and,
being
that's
not
what
I
heard
in
the
presentation
from
our
our
our
our
attorney
and
so
with
respect
to
the
communities
working
for
Solutions.
I
would
like
to
give
the
administration
an
opportunity
to
take
this
back,
consider
it
more
and
to
perhaps
bring
it
forward
with
more
details.
That
would
assure
the
public
that
this
is
a
Humane
effort.
K
L
Volan
I
can
attest
to
the
scooter,
Corrals
I
regularly
use
the
sitdown
scooters
and
downtown.
Now
the
scooter
will
not
allow
me
to
end
my
ride
without
parking
in
a
Corral,
so
we
in
fact
have
reserved
a
new
set
of
public
space
just
to
accommodate
rental
motor
vehicles,
which
appeared
in
the
right
of
way.
Five
years
ago,
I
think
my
colleagues
and
I
have
been
talking
about
scooters
and
garbage
cans
to
highlight
the
tragedy
that
we
give
those
obstructions
to
facto
sanction,
but
we
don't
allow
for
human
beings
who
have
no
recourse.
L
The
same
sanction,
I'm
teaching
from
a
text
by
an
author
named
Larry
gon,
who
talks
about
mechanisms
that
trigger
public
policy,
the
scope,
the
intensity,
the
duration
of
the
problem
and
the
resources
required
to
solve
the
problem.
So,
let's
take
the
scope.
How
widespread
is
the
problem?
Homelessness
certainly
is
widespread,
but
obstruction
of
sidewalks
by
the
homeless
is
almost
non-existent.
We
had
the
intensity
of
the
problem.
How
Troublesome
is
it?
L
How
long
will
it
last
we've
heard
that
maybe
after
10
or
12
hours,
it's
an
issue
that
they
they
need
to
move
along
and
yet
again
in
Elm,
Heights
I
regularly
see
trash
cans
left
out
well
after,
even
though
the
city
code
says
you
have
to
take
them
in
the
same
day
that
you
put
them
out,
they're
regularly
lift
out
two
three
days
often
all
week.
People
are
not
consistent
and
they're,
not
that's
not
consistently
enforced.
Finally
resources.
How
much
will
it
cost
to
solve
the
problem?
L
I
mean
this
ordinance
is
trying
to
reduce
the
administration's
cost
to
enforce
the
problem.
We've
heard
that
it
we
might
have
to
send
to
get
to
get
court
orders
in
order
to
to
to
move
certain
people
out
of
the
right
of
way
and
that
they
could
go
to
Great
length
to
Force
things
now,
but
they
would
also
be
doing
it
at
Great
cost
to
those
people
whose
belongings
would
be
removed
and
they'd
be
doing
it
at
Great
cost.
L
L
The
city
requires
bins
to
be
placed
on
the
sidewalk,
creating
the
very
Ada
issues
that
they
claim
to
be
trying
to
resolve
when
Mr
Rooker
suggests
that
it's
up
to
the
council
to
allocate
spending
I'm
afraid,
that's
not
correct.
The
administration
determines
spending.
The
council
has
very
primitive
tools
for
affecting
spending
we
can
cut,
but
not
increase.
We
have
basically
nuclear
options
to
change
the
budget.
Everything
else
we
have
to
persuade
the
administration
to
change
their
fiscal
priorities.
L
L
This
is
also
not
adequately
defined
the
first,
whereas
Clause
of
the
ordinance
says
that
the
city
quote
has
the
power
and
responsibility
to
act
as
a
conscientious
and
diligent
Steward
of
the
Public's
right
of
way.
Unquote.
It
is
reasonable
to
assume
that
the
law
should
be
enforced
evenly
and
that,
therefore,
the
city
would
stand
by
to
remove
all
that
construction
equipment
and
F
fing
blocking
the
sidewalk
as
soon
as
it's
out
of
compliance,
and
they
should
be
diligent
in
keeping
an
eye
on
the
permit
to
make
sure
that
it's
enforced.
L
L
We
can
send
it
to
where
whenever
we
like,
but
there
is
no
shame
in
the
or
in
the
administration,
having
brought
an
ordinance
and
there's
no
shame
the
council
turning
it
down
and
asking
them
to
go
back
to
the
drawing
board.
This
ordinance
is
exactly
two
pages
long
for
something
as
important
as
it
is.
It
seems
to
I
mean
Council
sanberg
said
Half
Baked,
that's
the
that's
the
best
way
to
describe
this.
It's
barely
baked
as
far
as
I'm
concerned.
This
is
an
opportunity.
L
I
mean
if,
if
they're
going
to
push
this,
it's
an
opportunity
for
us
to
reexamine
enforcement
of
the
placement
of
garbage
cans.
The
placement
of
of
sidewalks
of
the
and
I
mean
we've
like
we
already
have
with
scooters,
but
there's
just
no
good
reason
to
keep
this
poorly
developed
ordinance
alive.
We
should
simply
turn
it
down
and
ask
them
to
come
back
with
a
new
ordinance
that
takes
everything
that
we've
talked
about
tonight.
This
conversation
has
been
good.
L
J
Thank
you
first
thing:
I
want
to
say
is
that
ordinance
2106
has
been
mentioned
a
couple
times
and
I
see
absolutely
no
value
other
than
some
of
the
the
items
within
that
that
we
talked
about,
but
I
see
no
value
in
going
back
to
that
as
part
of
this
legislation
and
if
I
was
to
vote
tonight,
I'd
vote.
No.
If
so,
if
we're
going
to
vote
tonight,
I
will
not
support
this.
J
However,
I
can
support
a
postponement
because
I
think
this
is
an
opportunity
and
I
think
a
lot
of
you
folks
out
here.
I,
don't
know
if
you
followers
or
not
I'm
more
of
a
let's.
Let's
is
there
something
in
the
middle
I
mean
that's
kind
of
more
like
I
am
and
I,
don't
think,
we've
done
that
and
I
think
there's
an
opportunity
to
do
that.
You
know
I
I
truly
truly
do
earlier.
J
In
my
comments,
I
mentioned
bedc
Bloomington
Economic
Development
Corporation,
the
chamber,
Monroe
County
Bloomington
chamber
of
commer
commers
I'm,
going
to
make
sure
I
get
those
right,
DBI,
downtown,
Bloomington,
Incorporated
and
I
I
hope.
No
one
misinterpreted
that
I
think
they
were
wrong.
In
fact,
these
are
very
legitimate
issues
with
regard
to
obstructing
obstruction
of
public
rideways,
very
legit
and
I
support.
J
J
These
are
just
facts
that
I'm
talking
about
here,
I've
heard
a
lot
about
solution,
based
outcomes
and
again
no
disrespect
of
people,
but
that's
easy
to
say,
but
I've
not
heard
one
outcome
that
is
solution
based
that
was
offered
I
mean
that's
just
all
I'm
saying
my
colleagues
here
I
mean-
and
this
is
this
Council
last
four
years-
we've
all
talked
about
this-
we've
involved
other
community
entities
and
yet
we're
still
here
this
evening.
Talking
about
this,
there
are
some
fundamental
differences.
J
Okay
and
until
we
can
all
kind
of
get
together
take
into
some
things
into
account
that
we
can
and
kind
of
just
discard
the
crap
that
we
can.
You
know
but
I
think
there's
an
opportunity
for
the
community
to
work
for
this
last
couple.
Things
I
do
want
to
say
as
a
comment.
I
do
not
think
in
fact,
I'm
pretty
darn
sure
that
this
was
not
an
intention
for
Bloomington
Police
Department
to
have
a
mechanism
to
harass
or
otherwise
criminalize
our
unhoused
population.
I
know
a
lot
of
these
officers.
J
J
That
does
that
make
sense,
I
think
I,
don't
think
they
will,
but
it
can.
It
will
allow
that
I
was
at
a
peaceful
protest
on
Monroe
County
Courthouse
up
on
the
grass
any
you
all
been
there.
Okay,
it
was
getting
time
the
the
the
protest
was
over,
they
said:
hey,
you
guys
need
to
leave
well
we're
still
protesting.
This
is
County
property.
These
are
the
County
Sheriff's,
oh
no,
you
got
to
leave.
Where
do
we
go
go
down
to
the
sidewalk?
That's
what
we
were
told
go
to
the
sidewalk.
Now,
what?
J
If
we
pass
this
ordinance
I'm
in
a
peaceful
protest,
they
say:
go
to
the
sidewalk.
What
are
me
and
my
fellow
protesters,
fellow
activists,
fellow
constituents?
What
are
we
faced
with
see?
It's
the
unintended
parts
of
this?
That
really
really
trouble
me
I've
gotten
some
comments
from
other
folks
throughout
the
city.
It
even
goes
farther
than
what
we're
going
tonight.
J
It
even
say
this
is
a
mechanism
to
harass
black
people
to
harass
poor
people
to
harass
anybody,
that's
different
than
you
know,
others.
We
didn't
really
talk
about
that
tonight,
but
it's
probably
just
as
legitimate
as
everything
else.
As
part
of
the
discussion,
so
that's
my
comment
tonight:
I've
known
council,
member
of
Sandberg
for
a
long
time,
we've
used
this
term
half-baked,
are
not
fully
baked
on
a
couple
different
occasions
and
I
have
to
agree
that
that
fits
the
bill
this
evening
as
well.
So
thank
you.
G
G
It
isn't
fully
baked
or
whatever
the
metaphor
you
want
to
use
and
the
the
motion
of
table
was
to
supply
some
clarity
which
Cil
member
Sims
just
referred
to
for
potential
amending,
there's
various
amendments
that
could
be
offered
they're
for
consistency,
because
we
have
examples
of
blocking
of
sidewalks
and
and
R
of
ways
and
and
so
forth
of
various
kinds.
So
but
I'm
not
so
quick
to
dismiss
the
positive
impact
for
accessibility,
I,
I
I,
it
refers
to
it
there
I
I'm,
very
concerned
about
ADA
compliance.
G
I,
don't
think
we're
doing
it
very
well,
in
fact,
I
think
we're
going
backwards.
I
think
pedestrians
are
undervalued
relative
to
vehicular
traffic
and
I,
don't
mean
just
cars,
I
mean
bicycles,
too,
I
think
that
we've
removed
crosswalks
and
stop
signs,
and
we
put
bicycles
on
sidewalks,
which
then
was
utilized
by
scooter.
Companies
gave
them
the
latitude
to
to
have
scooters
on
sidewalks
and
then
thus
Rose
the
arose.
G
The
problem
of
obstruction
that
we
now
we're
trying
to
solve
so
I
think
that
this
ordinance
could
have
been
a
means
to
really
start
unpacking
some
of
that,
but
there
we
are
so
I
will
just
be
passing
tonight.
Perhaps
we'll
have
an
opportunity
in
the
future
to
address
this
in
a
in
a
more
holistic
way
and
one
that
is
obviously
attending
to
the
problems
of
everybody,
all
all
shareholders
stakeholders.
Thank
you.
E
A
Okay,
I'll
just
finish
up,
then.
My
thinking
on
this
exists
at
two
levels.
Actually,
first
of
all,
I'm
struck
by
the
several
times
that
Mr
worker
had
to
say
you
know
there
are
about
a
dozen
people
who
are
more
equipped
to
comment
on
that
particular
question
than
I
am
and
I
think
I.
Think
he's
right.
No,
no,
shame
there.
A
For
that
reason,
my
first
preference
would
be
to
actually
table
this
and
do
some
more
work
on
it
and
make
sure
it
accomplishes
what
we
hope
it
accomplishes
and
doesn't
accomplish
what
we
don't
want
it
to
accomplish.
That
would
be
my
first
choice
again.
I
understand
that
a
motion
to
table
is
not
forthcoming,
so
that
takes
me
to
my
second
school
of
thought.
A
So
I
I
don't
accept
the
assertion
that
the
city
is
heartless
and
simply
not
doing
anything
productive
in
that
regard.
I
think
that
the
tension
exists
because
at
the
at
the
same
time
we
are
advocating
for
a
long-term
solution-based
approach.
We
also
have
real-time
challenges
to
deal
with
and
that's
how
I
take
this
particular
ordinance.
I
I
take
it
as
as
an
attempt
to
respond
to
some
realtime
challenges
that
we
encounter
with
public
obstruction
of
the
right
of
way.
A
A
If
we
were
to
vote
on
it
again,
my
first
would
be
to
table
this
and
come
back
to
it
after
doing
some
more
refinements,
but
again
in
this
in
given
the
need
to
both
advocate
for
long-term
Solutions
and
respond
to
real-time
challenges.
That
would
be
my
initial
reaction
to
this.
So
if
there
are
no
further
comments,
I'm
going
to
invite
council
member
flarey.
C
Thanks
I
do
have
a
little
bit
of
followup.
Thank
you,
sort
of
prompted
by
by
Council
memb
Camper's
comments
just
now,
which
I
I
agree
that
some
of
the
events
of
the
last
few
years,
in
particular,
have
moved
the
city
more
actively
into
the
space
of
pursuing
Solutions,
but
I
think
you
really
hit
on
the
Crux
of
it,
which
is,
and
so
did
con
Pont
Smith
frankly
earlier
that
they're
long-term
Solutions
they're,
slow,
moving
the
goal
of
heading
home
is
to
keep
homelessness
brief,
rare
and
non-re.
C
Repeating
it's
not
to
answer
the
question
when
there's
no
shelter
bed
for
someone:
where
can
they
legally
sleep
tonight
it
doesn't
answer
that
question.
Nor
does
it
answer
the
question:
where
can
you
keep
your
belonging
ings
during
the
day?
You
know,
if
you
don't
have
shelter,
where
can
you
go
to
the
bathroom?
Where
can
you
throw
away
trash?
You
know
easily?
C
You
know
with
all
respect
to
council
member
Sims,
you
know
I'm
going
to
bring
up
ordinance
216
again,
and
one
of
the
criticisms
at
that
time
was
that
these
weren't
Solutions
and
I
didn't
have
the
language
actually
the
vocabulary
for
it.
They
they
are
they're
interim
Solutions,
they're,
interim
temporary
solutions
dealing
with
the
pragmatic
tragedy
of
that
we
face
in
our
cities
of
folks
having
not
in
the
basic
minimum
of
of
you,
know,
Safety
and
Security.
C
C
More
broadly
they've
been
opponents
of
of
the
interm
solutions
that
are
needed
to
deal
with
the
pragmatic
realities
we
Face
when,
when
we
have
tried
to
bring
those
into
the
into
the
conversation
in
the
past,
so
I'll
just
reiterate
that
things
like
safe,
designated,
safe
spaces,
sanitation
bathrooms
for
folks
experiencing
homelessness
are
very
much
needed.
As
part
of
this,
it's
essential
it's
a
requirement
for
me
to
be
able
to
support
something
like
this
ordinance
and
it's
what
I
would
like
and
hope
for
the
focus
to
be.
C
J
A
L
A
No
my
count.
Thank
you.
My
count
is
25
251.
Thank
you.
So
that
motion
fails
that
takes
us
to
legislation
for
first
readings
and
there
are
none
there.
That
brings
us
to
our
second
of
two
periods
of
public
comment
for
items
not
on
the
agenda,
not
on
our
legislative
agenda
this
evening,
Mr
Lucas.
Could
you
please
extend
our
invitation
on
Zoom?
Is
there
anyone
in
Chambers
who
would
like
to
offer
public
comment
for
items
not
on
the
agenda?
I
see
one
Mr
Lucas
go
ahead.
M
A
H
It's
my
hope
to
see
that
committee
really
make
a
diligent
effort
to
meet
enough
time
to
get
those
recommendations
and
and
to
give
the
next
Council
a
chance
to
really
make
make
this
make
this
an
easier
process
for
the
council.
It's
a
lot
of
work
for
staff.
It's
a
lot
of
work
for
Council
and
I.
Think
we
can
do
a
better
job,
and
this
was
the
opportunity
to
do
it
and
I
feel
like
it's.
It's
not
there
yet
and
we
are
nearing
the
end
of
the
year
and
after
that
I.
H
A
M
A
M
There
are
two
ordinances
likely
to
come
forward
for
first
reading,
one
related
to
the
Hopewell
development
and
a
vacation
of
right
of
way
request
for
first
reading.
Second
ordinance
will
be
a
title
15
amendment
related
to
stop
locations
along
the
seven
line,
so
those
items
are
are
scheduled
to
be
introduced
for
first
reading.
Beyond
that,
there's
a
report
scheduled
from
the
Bloomington
Arts
commission
and
also
may
be
an
opportunity
for
the
council
to
conduct
a
review
of
the
Caps
commission,
as
called
for
by
ordinance
2020,
which
established
that
commission.
L
If
it's
not
particularly
controversial,
perhaps
we
might
entertain
unanimous
consent
to
hear
it
in
one
night
so
that
we
can
hear
it
that
night
in
order
to
because
I
I'm
already
anticipating
the
Log
Jam
of
legislation,
that'll
happen
by
the
end
of
the
year,
so
just
thinking
out
loud
is
not
something
we
have
to
decide
right
now,
but
I
was
looking
to
see
if
we
needed
to
have
the
meeting.
After
all,
it
sounds
like
we
do.
Thank
you.