Bloomington City Council Public Safety Deliberation Session - September 10, 2026\n\nThe Bloomington City Council held the first of two public deliberation sessions on public safety on September 10, 2026, starting at approximately 6:53 PM UTC in Council Chambers. The session was facilitated by Wyatt Lawson of the Community Justice and Mediation Center (CJAM). Councilmembers introduced the goal: to gather community experiences on public safety as a first step toward developing a public safety plan. No decisions were made; the focus was on listening and understanding. Approximately nine council members attended, with two participating via Zoom.\n\n### Public Comments & Testimony\n- Group Six (reported by Councilmember Sydney Zulik): Participants emphasized that familiarity, understanding, and predictability increase feelings of safety. Physical aspects like good lighting and the ability to protect oneself were important. The community-building work of the Bloomington Police Department was praised.\n- Group Eight (reported by Clerk Nicole Bolden): Themes included identity, community, and belonging. Safety must include everyone, especially marginalized groups such as women, people experiencing homelessness, immigrants, Hispanic/Latino, Black, and LGBTQ+ communities. Limited coordination across city departments and community groups was seen as weakening safety. Accountability and intentional council efforts were stressed.\n- Group Three (reported by Councilmember Hopi Stasberg): Feeling safe was linked to familiarity, sense of community, and visible resources (e.g., little free pantries). Feeling unsafe was tied to being alone, negative interactions, unstable individuals, erratic drivers, and uncertainty. Guns were mentioned on both sides—some felt safer carrying, others less safe. Homelessness was linked to both concern for erratic behavior and concern for the safety of unhoused individuals. Positive news stories contributed to safety, while negative news contributed to fear.\n- Group Four (reported by a city official): Participants were motivated by recent shootings and concern for public spaces. Some felt safer with cameras; others noted racial disparities (e.g., Black residents make up 4% of Bloomington's population but 20% of jail residents). Concerns included guns in public, the need for community policing, and the distinction between actual safety and perception of safety. Positive stories (e.g., needle exchange reducing needle finds) were also highlighted.\n- Group Two (reported by Mayor Kerry Carey): Feeling welcome and a sense of belonging enhanced safety. Infrastructure like lighting and campus blue lights was important. Being alone made people feel unsafe. The news (both real and fake) contributed to fear, as did misreporting about out-of-town criminals. Guns and large crowds were also mentioned as sources of unsafety.\n- Online Group (reported by an online participant): Confidence in institutions (911, helplines) and transparency between city and county were key. Safety was categorized as safety from being hit by cars and safety from crime. Infrastructure separating transportation modes improved safety. The group noted that perceptions of safety vary widely. Some distinguished between public safety and public welfare.\n- Group One (reported by Councilmember Courtney Daly): Community and predictability were central themes. Gun violence and open carry created unpredictability and anxiety. Messaging from IU alerts and news contributed to anxiety. The group called for a shared definition of public safety, better positive messaging, and efforts to bridge safety bubbles between different communities.\n\n### Discussion Items\n- Councilmember Piedmont Smith and Councilmember Stasberg introduced the session, explaining that it was about experiences, not decisions. They referenced the city's vague "enhanced public safety" goal and the desire to create a public safety plan similar to the comprehensive plan.\n- Wyatt Lawson from CJAM presented community agreements: speak from experience, listen to understand, make room for one another, disagree with curiosity, respect confidentiality, and prioritize understanding before problem-solving.\n- After breakout groups, each group reported back. Facilitators noted emerging themes of familiarity, predictability, belonging, and differences regarding guns and surveillance.\n\n### Key Outcomes\n- No formal votes or decisions were made.\n- Participants completed a survey (paper or online) to provide additional input.\n- A second public safety deliberation session will be held on Wednesday, October 21, 2026, at 6:30 PM in Council Chambers, focusing on community priorities and solutions.\n- The session adjourned early, approximately 10 minutes ahead of schedule.