What was discussed at the March 8th Council meeting?

Bloomington’s regularly scheduled council meetings occur on the first three Wednesdays of every month, and the one I attended on March 8th covered a few different topics relating to the city. Following roll call and the agenda overview, the meeting began with the city’s utilities director, Vic Kelson, proposing a move of the current Utilities Service Center to a larger, and more accommodatable location for the organization’s needs. This move would see the current Center moving from Miller Dr to the former Winston Thomas Wastewater Treatment Plant site, which was previously a wastewater treatment facility. Kelson presented the need for this proposed move by emphasizing the fact that the City of Bloomington Utilities, or CBU has been located in its current location for over 50 years, stating that it has been “outgrown” and needs to be relocated to “prepare for another 50 years of successful operation”. Kelson further explained that the current location lacks the required space for the program’s current infrastructure, and that the building is “at the end of its useful life”. This statement was substantial, because Kelson explained that this relocation wasn’t just a move for the sake of moving, but that the organization required an upgrade for the efficiency of its duties, and that the current location has been used to its fullest potential. Kelson’s entire proposal was concisely presented, and the move had clearly been thought out, as location, budget, and other general feasibility data and research was presented during the proposal. Following Kelson’s proposal, the city council members asked questions about different aspects of a move like this. Some members were supportive and positively inquisitive about this relocation project, while others seemed to show objection towards the move. Towards the end of the questionnaire, one council member asked the lingering question of how much money it would take for a relocation like this to be completed, to which Kelson replied, “around $38 million”.

After the proposal and discussion of the CBU facility relocation, the meeting pivoted to a discussion that was tangible for a larger span of Bloomington residents; scooter violations. This discussion was also lead by Vic Kelson, and assisted by Adam Wason, Director of Public Works. Beginning the presentation, Kelson explains that temporary city staff had been collecting data on scooter violations from October to December of 2022 for around 25 hours per week, finding a total of 605 violations. These violations were further broken down by location, scooter service, and violation type. After presenting these findings to the Council, the members critiqued and questioned the accuracy of the study, one even countering with something to the effect of, “In one short walk on campus I was able to count 30 misplaced scooters, there’s no way only 605 were found over three months”. The Council immediately came off a bit hostile towards Kelson and Wason, overtly frustrated with the situation at hand, even blaming the pair for the city’s unsolved problem. There was a general feeling of confused discontent throughout the Council over why this problem hadn’t already been handled. Various funding and regulation questions were prompted to end the scooter discussion, but the overarching theme coming from Kelson and Wason’s replies was that the scooter violation issue is a multi-faceted problem that will require action from different city organizations to rectify.

Thoughts from a First-Time Attendee

As someone who’s never attended a city council meeting, or even anything similar, my time viewing the Bloomington City Council meeting was enjoyable and informative from the perspective of a Bloomington resident. I attended this meeting via Zoom and from the very beginning, I felt I was able to get a pretty good sense of the city hall’s atmosphere as well as the level of professionalism coming from the speakers and Council members. Each member’s introduction during roll call was relatively casual, one member even mentioning a play she went to earlier during the week. Initially, the meeting’s mood was positive and not too serious. After initial introductions, when the main content of the meeting began, the atmosphere became more serious, and felt more arranged, with speaker time limits, and everyone addressing each other by their professional titles. One part that surprised me was during the questionnaire following the CBU relocation presentation. The varying sentiments towards the move amongst Council members was interesting to me because of the mixed feelings of pushback and support. As a resident, it seems like upgrading a key part of the city’s maintenance infrastructure would be a no-brainer, or at least towards the top of the city’s funding priorities, but from the perspective of the Council members, making a move like this can take away funding from other vital programs, as well as cause problems during the transition for the city. Hearing the rebuttals from Kelson and Wason was also interesting because it seemed like they had already thought of the questions they were asked, and had an answer prepared, at least when being asked about the relocation. Continuing into the scooter discussion, I felt like there was a noticeable shift to impatience from the Council, not only towards the presenters, but over the meeting itself. After the presentation over the city’s study from above, the Council’s questions came across abrasive, and I personally felt like Kelson was a bit uncomfortable about some of the questions being asked, because some of them seemed targeted towards him. Despite the possible discomfort, Kelson did handle the Council’s questions well with confidence and great points about where the question should truly be directed. After watching this section of the meeting, I felt as though this scooter issue is a problem that could be solved in a “smart” way using locational, time, and total usage data to create multiple hub locations for users to drop off their scooters without interfering with sidewalks, parking lots, or other places that scooters shouldn’t be found.

Takeaways

While this meeting wasn’t addressing issues that directly affect me, I was still able to gain perspective to the way a city views its issues, as well as the way various city organizations propose improvements to their programs. I also felt like watching meetings like this regularly is good for any resident, because the information discussed directly pertains to what is happening around you in your city. Prior to this meeting, I had no experience with local governance, and this meeting was a great way to ease into following what is going on in the place I live, and I’d like to make it a point to attend these types of meeting now, and wherever I end up in the future.