Common Council Regular Session

Bloomington Common Council-Regular Session Minutes Bloomington City Hall, 401 N. Morton Street, Bloomington, Indiana Wednesday, November 05, 2025, 6:30pm CALL TO ORDER [6:32pm] Council President Stosberg called the meeting to order. 1. ROLL CALL (* indicates participation via Zoom) [6:32pm] Members: Isak Nti Asare At-Large Courtney Daily District 5, Council Parliamentarian Matt Flaherty* At-Large Isabel Piedmont-Smith District 1, Council Vice President Dave Rollo District 4 Kate Rosenbarger* District 2 Andy Ruff* At-Large Hopi Stosberg District 3, Council President Sydney Zulich (absent) District 6 City staff, officials, and guests present: Sofia McDowell Chief Deputy Clerk Lisa Lehner Council Attorney Kari Bennett Deputy Council Attorney Christine Chang Temporary Council Researcher Jane Kupersmith Economic & Sustainable Development, Director Eric Gruelich Planning & Transportation, Development Services Manager 2. AGENDA SUMMATION [6:33pm] Stosberg led a minute of silence for Charlotte Zietlow, who had passed away, and then summarized the agenda. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES [6:37pm] Daily moved and Piedmont-Smith seconded to approve the minutes of September 24, 2025. The motion received a roll call vote of Ayes: 8, Nays: 0, Abstain: 0. 4. REPORTS [6:39pm] 4.1. Councilmembers Rollo expressed appreciation for Charlotte Zietlow, Piedmont-Smith spoke about Zietlow, the suspension of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits of a local mutual aid group, and her upcoming constituent meeting. Asare noted Zietlow’s contributions, Innovation Week, the Commission on Hispanic and Latine Affairs’ holiday gift assistance program, and his letter to the mayor requesting an additional appropriation if SNAP benefits were not funded. Daily spoke about Zietlow’s passing, a letter she wrote about the loss of SNAP benefits, and a joint community conversation hosted by herself, Asare, and County Commissioner Jody Madeira. Flaherty spoke about Zietlow, thanked Daily and Piedmont-Smith for elevating SNAP benefits challenges, and shared information on another assistance program. Meeting Date: November 05, 2025 Stosberg extended the time for councilmember reports until 7:05pm without objection. Rosenbarger reflected on Zietlow and housing. Stosberg stated appreciation for councilmember comments on Zietlow and mentioned her upcoming constituent meeting and an upcoming council deliberation session on housing. 4.2. The Mayor and City Offices There were no reports from the mayor and city offices. 4.3. Council Committees There were no reports from council committees. 4.4. Public Claudia Brink shared concerns about short-term rentals. Steve Volan spoke about Zietlow. Sarah Jane Hughes spoke about food security. 5. APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS [7:12pm] Flaherty moved and Asare seconded to initiate the process for removal for failure to attend three consecutive meetings for Commissioner Jose Fuentes, member of the Commission on Hispanic and Latine Affairs. The motion received a roll call vote of Ayes: 8, Nays: 0, Abstain: 0. 6. LEGISLATION FOR FIRST READINGS [7:13pm] 6.1. Ordinance 2025-41 To Amend Title 20 (Unified Development Ordinance) of The Bloomington Municipal Code – Re: Use Table Amendment- “Single Room Occupancy” Daily moved and Piedmont-Smith seconded that Ordinance 2025-41 be introduced and read by title and synopsis only. The motion received a roll call vote of Ayes: 8, Nays: 0, Abstain: 0. Chief Deputy Clerk Sofia McDowell read the legislation by title and synopsis. 6.2. Ordinance 2025-45 To Fix The Salaries of All Elected City Officials For The City of Bloomington For The Year 2026 Daily moved and Piedmont-Smith seconded that Ordinance 2025-45 be introduced and read by title and synopsis only. The motion received a roll call vote of Ayes: 8, Nays: 0, Abstain: 0. McDowell read the legislation by title and synopsis. 7. LEGISLATION FOR SECOND READINGS AND RESOLUTIONS [7:15pm] 7.1. Ordinance 2025-42 To Amend Title 2 of the Bloomington Municipal Code Entitled “Administration and Personnel” – Re: Amending BMC 2.04.380 (Order of Business at Regular Sessions) Daily moved and Piedmont-Smith seconded that Ordinance 2025-42 be introduced and read by title and synopsis only. The motion received a roll call vote of Ayes: 8, Nays: 0, Abstain: 0. McDowell read the legislation by title and synopsis. 2  Meeting Date: November 05, 2025 Daily moved and Piedmont-Smith seconded to adopt Ordinance 2025-42. Piedmont-Smith presented Ordinance 2025-42. The legislation amended city code so the “Reports” section on the council agenda read “The Mayor, City Clerk, City Offices, and City Boards and Commissions.” Piedmont-Smith moved and Rollo seconded to adopt Amendment 01 to Ordinance 2025-42. Amendment 01 Synopsis: This amendment deletes the words “and City Partnership Entities” to correct an error and adds Attachment A to the ordinance. The motion to adopt Amendment 01 to Ordinance 2025-42 received a roll call vote of Ayes: 8, Nays: 0, Abstain: 0. There was no public comment on the amendment to Ordinance 2025-42. Asare asked why the council meeting agenda was in Bloomington Municipal Code (BMC). Council Attorney Lehner was unsure why but believed it was not necessary. There was no public comment on Ordinance 2025-42 as amended. Asare stated that this section of code should be removed, not amended. Piedmont-Smith said that section was being reviewed by council staff for possible removal and placement in an administrative manual. The motion to adopt Ordinance 2025-42 as amended received a roll call vote of Ayes: 8, Nays: 0, Abstain: 0. 7.2. Resolution 2025-18 To Approve The Naming of The Stadium District in The Area Surrounding Miller-Showers Park Daily moved and Piedmont-Smith seconded that Resolution 2025-18 be introduced and read by title and synopsis only. The motion received a roll call vote of Ayes: 8, Nays: 0, Abstain: 0. McDowell read the legislation by title and synopsis. Daily moved and Piedmont-Smith seconded to adopt Resolution 2025-18. Stosberg passed the gavel to Piedmont-Smith. Stosberg moved and Rollo seconded that Amendment 01 be adopted to Resolution 2025-18. Amendment 01 Synopsis: This amendment replaces Exhibit A. Stosberg and Jane Kupersmith, Economic & Sustainable Development (ESD), Director, presented the amendment. The amendment contained a new, condensed map. The map was modified to highlight commercial businesses and remove residential areas based on community concerns and feedback from city departments. Kupersmith explained the purpose of the proposed stadium district. Daily asked why certain areas were included in the map. Stosberg stated that there were commercial businesses in that area. Kupersmith said it would aid in finding nearby businesses in the district. Tracy Bee, Maple Heights Neighborhood Association, President, asked for a postponement on the vote. Aubrey Williams, Heartwork Brewing, expressed support from small businesses in the proposed district. Joshua Stockton expressed concern about the amendment. Christopher Emge commented support for the amendment. Paul Rousseau commented on the district name and area. 3 Meeting Date: November 05, 2025 Piedmont-Smith asked why student housing was part of the proposed district. Stosberg said that area was zoned as mixed-use student. Asare asked who the district was designed and marketed for and why a map was necessary. Kupersmith said it would appeal to visitors and that using the district name was elective. Stosberg stated that the intent was for local business advertisement and not short-term rentals. Rollo said he would vote yes on the amendment. The motion to adopt Amendment 01 to Resolution 2025-18 received a roll call vote of Ayes: 8, Nays: 0, Abstain: 0. Asare asked about postponing the resolution to provide time for resident feedback. Kupersmith said that the residential areas in the map had been removed based on resident feedback, and the stadium district was an economic strategy to promote businesses. Stosberg spoke about feedback regarding the district naming. Rollo asked whether naming the district would encourage more short-term rentals. Kupersmith did not believe the legislation would do so. The administration was looking at ways to mitigate the rentals, but not taking action to support small businesses would not solve that problem. Rosenbarger asked how the district’s name was determined. Stosberg and Kupersmith explained the process. Rollo asked about signage. Kupersmith said they would hire a consultant. Casey Greene spoke against the resolution. Piedmont-Smith called for a five-minute recess without objection. She called the meeting to order again. Christopher Emge spoke in favor of the resolution. Paul Rousseau spoke about traffic safety in the proposed district. Rosenbarger gave reasons in support of postponing. Rollo stated he would vote no or to postpone. Flaherty said that he would vote no or to postpone due to the process, zoning, and lack of neighborhood outreach. Daily was in favor of postponing. Asare said that residents needed to be included more in the process. Stosberg iterated that focus was on family-friendly businesses and not bars. She wanted to pass the legislation. Piedmont-Smith expressed displeasure with the lack of outreach to nearby neighborhoods and was concerned with safety. She agreed with Flaherty and would vote no. Ruff stated the legislation had potential but he would not vote yes in its current state. Rosenbarger asked Lehner about postponing versus voting down the legislation. Lehner explained the differences. Stosberg responded to zoning concerns from Flaherty and Piedmont-Smith. Flaherty expressed support for the idea but said it needed corrections. Rosenbarger moved and Rollo seconded to postpone Resolution 2025-18 as amended indefinitely. Stosberg stated she would vote no on postponing. The motion received a roll call vote of Ayes: 7, Nays: 1 (Stosberg), Abstain: 0. Piedmont-Smith passed the gavel back to Stosberg. 7.3. Ordinance 2025-32 To Amend Title 20 (Unified Development Ordinance) of The Bloomington Municipal Code – Re: Use Table Amendment – “Urban Agriculture, Commercial” Daily moved and Piedmont-Smith seconded that Ordinance 2025-32 be introduced and read by title and synopsis only. The motion received a roll call vote of Ayes: 8, Nays: 0, Abstain: 0. McDowell read the legislation by title and synopsis. Daily moved and Piedmont-Smith seconded to adopt Ordinance 2025-32 as amended. Stosberg stated that the ordinance had previously been amended and gave information on process. Eric Gruelich, Planning & Transportation (P&T), Development Services Manager, presented the legislation. The legislation was introduced and discussed at the previous meeting on October 22, 2025. It made changes to the zoning code to promote urban agriculture, allowed specific use restrictions for outdoor education, and 4  Meeting Date: November 05, 2025 would be a conditional use that required approval from the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) in residential areas. It would be allowed by right in mixed-use districts. There were no changes from the staff perspective since it was last presented to the council. Piedmont-Smith asked the difference between commercial and non-commercial urban agriculture and if setbacks had changed. Gruelich said that the main difference was that commercial urban agriculture could sell year-round while non-commercial was limited to 180 days a year. The setbacks had not changed, but there was an increase in allowed height of greenhouses and hoop houses. Rollo asked about code violation inspections and the difference between the current and proposed changes. Gruelich said staff inspected violations. The class size and height of structures were the main changes, based on public feedback. Asare asked about BZA processes and enforcement for non-compliance. Gruelich explained the criteria for conditional user approvals. The BZA had never revoked a conditional use or variance, and P&T handled enforcement frequently. Piedmont-Smith asked about spot zoning and about property owner interest. Gruelich stated this legislation was not spot zoning as the changes apply to every property in the city, and multiple property owners had expressed interest in these allowances. Kathy Berry expressed opposition to the legislation and stated it was not needed. Jeff Stake stated opposition to the legislation due to property value concerns. Nancy Goswami expressed support for urban residential farming. Constance Glenn stated traffic, safety, and neighborhood desirability reasons in opposition. Ellee Spier urged the council to think of future generations and to support the legislation. James Glenn expressed opposition to the legislation and the process. Glenn Gass asked councilmembers to support immediate neighbors to the Spiers and vote no. Sarah Jane Hughes stated opposition to the legislation and that it was not ready. Jami Scholl, Commission on Sustainability, Commissioner, stated ideas for improvements on the legislation. Paul Rousseau expressed agreement with Scholl’s comments and thoughts on global warming. Matthew Austin urged councilmembers to vote yes for the legislation and gave reasons why. Joshua Stockton expressed support for the legislation and concern about global warming. Penny Austin expressed support for the legislation and agricultural education. Rollo asked about accessory structure regulation, property and employee allowances, incremental updates, and whether the changes were motivated by the proposal initiated by the Spiers family. Gruelich said the hoop house/greenhouse height was changed to align with existing accessory structures, that three employees maximum would be allowed, and the employee and customer allowances had already been reduced from the initial proposal and would be determined on a ratio to lot size. While there was a user- specific situation, the Climate Action Plan and Comprehensive Plan encouraged enabling more food-centered use. These were small increases as a starting point for discussion. While Piedmont-Smith asked about setbacks. Stosberg and Gruelich explained that the setbacks were adjusted for agricultural stands. Daily asked about tax impacts. Gruelich stated Monroe County handled tax assessments. Asare asked if the primary intent of the legislation was to clarify the educational activity component of urban agriculture, why it would not be regulated through existing provisions, and if the legislation affected food sovereignty. He asked why urban agriculture and farm stands would be a conditional use and not allowed by right. Gruelich confirmed the educational component and year-round sales were the biggest changes; defining them as a use allowed for specific limitations, and provided uniform, fair treatment, and enabled food sovereignty. Gruelich stated they took a conservative approach to avoid subjectivity, but the council could choose to allow those changes by right. 5 Meeting Date: November 05, 2025 Flaherty spoke about urban agriculture as presented in the Comprehensive Plan and Climate Action Plan. The focus had been misplaced as the main changes were on education and sales, not on urban agriculture itself. The legislation was tailored to one particular need but should be broader. He did not support the ordinance. Rollo expressed support for harmonious agriculture, but the proposal was contentious and he would vote no. Asare expressed concern with the policy design and that it did not advance food security goals. The ordinance was ultimately about teaching outdoors, and growing and selling food on one’s property was already allowed. Rosenbarger agreed with other councilmember comments and stated considerations on taxation and classes. Piedmont-Smith said it was a tough decision but she would vote yes because of the climate crisis. Stosberg stated that every homeowner was notified about the changes as required by state law, and the Plan Commission had held multiple public hearings, and the process had been in the works for a year and a half. Most public engagement came from those who lived around one specific property, and even if the legislation passed, that property and any others would still need to go through the BZA conditional use process. She did not feel satisfied with why Planning made process decisions and had concerns with lack of enforcement consequences, the possibility of multiple classes every day and with conditional uses and the BZA. The motion to adopt Ordinance 2025-32 as amended received a roll call vote of Ayes: 1 (Piedmont-Smith), Nays: 7, Abstain: 0. FAILED Clerk’s Note: Ordinance 2025-32 was amended during the regular session on October 22, 2025 8. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT [10:46pm] Jamie Scholl thanked those who worked on food security issues. Jeff Stake thanked the council for listening to his earlier comment. 9. COUNCIL SCHEDULE [10:47pm] Stosberg reviewed the upcoming council schedule. 10. ADJOURNMENT [10:48pm] Stosberg adjourned the meeting. 04 day APPROVED by the Common Council of the City of Bloomington, Monroe County, Indiana, upon this _______ of March ___________________________________________, 2026. APPROVE: ATTEST: _______________________________________________ ___________________________________________________ Isak Nti Asare, COUNCIL PRESIDENT City Clerk Nicole Bolden Clerk’s Note: The above memorandum summarizes the motions passed and issues discussed rather than providing a verbatim account of every word spoken. Bloomington City Council meetings can be watched on the following websites:  Community Action Television Services (CATS) – https://catvstv.net  YouTube – https://youtube.com/@citybloomington Background materials and packets are available at https://bloomington.in.gov/council 6