Bloomington City Council Meeting - August 17, 2026

The Bloomington City Council met on Monday, August 17, 2026, to discuss the preliminary 2027 tax levy and budget, the Bloomington Center for the Arts strategic plan and operations analysis, and proposed amendments to multifamily performance standards. The meeting included a public comment period and council deliberation on all three items, with no formal votes taken on the discussion items. The agenda was approved unanimously at the start of the meeting.

Consent Calendar

• Approved the meeting agenda (voice vote, unanimous).

Public Comments & Testimony

• Dulce Emerson requested that the budget include funds to make residents of the Newton neighborhood whole for structural damage caused by the community health and wellness center construction, citing up to $50,000 in personal losses.
• David Freeman urged caution on city investments in AI and automatic license plate readers, citing privacy and ecological risks, and opposed using levy funds for such technology.
• Jamie Anthony (District 4) expressed strong opposition to spending on ALPRs (flock cameras), shock gloves, and drones for surveillance; she asked for more precise language in the budget and for public engagement on new technologies.
• Billy Wald questioned why the levy increase could not be zero, challenged the need for fire department expansion (noting many calls are medical), stated the police chief had said staffing is sufficient, and asked for an update on local option sales tax collections.
• Mr. Sebek noted historical city spending has been at least twice the CPI and asked why recent increases were so high; he characterized the capital and debt management fund as a "slush fund" and called for better long-term forecasting.
• John Hoopmacher reported that his city property taxes rose 57% from 2020 to 2026 (compared to ~21% inflation) and argued the city is overspending; he criticized duplication of services (e.g., earned sick and safe time enforcement, smoking regulations, community engagement staff) and called for cuts; he also complained that the city turns off comments on its Facebook page, reducing transparency.

Discussion Items

1. Preliminary Tax Levy and Budget (Item 3.1)

Finance Director Ms. Carlson presented the current working model for the 2027 preliminary tax levy. The city portion is projected between $100.6 million and $101.5 million (a 6.6-7.5% increase), and including HRA and port levies the total is 6.98-7.93%. Key drivers include the fire department transition to full-time staffing, police technology, the community health and wellness center, park master plan, and climate action plan. The city is moving toward a two-year budget cycle. A capital and debt management fund (starting with ~$11.2 million) will be used to reduce levy pressure. Community engagement included four in-person events and a mail-in questionnaire; residents expressed pride but concern about affordability.

Council questions included: Dalessandro asked about bond calls for the Ice Garden and the ongoing operating cost of 78 firefighters; Rivas requested the tax impact on a median-value home; Carter asked for a breakdown of the levy increase by department, median impact, and more detail on public safety technology; Loman raised concerns about inflation, the animal shelter, and staffing costs; Dellessandro urged clearer separation of base operating costs vs. strategic investments and requested costs for items like the quiet rail study; the mayor noted that 85% of the budget goes to core services (police, fire, public works, community development, parks). o council member made a motion to set the levy; the preliminary levy will be set on September 14.

.2. BCA Strategic Plan and Operations Analysis (Item 3.2)

Ian Brecke and consultant Duncan Webb presented a pro forma operating budget for the Bloomington Center for the Arts (BCA). They tested three levels of cost recovery: Level (optimize utilization, minimal impact on resident arts organizations (RAOs)), Level 2 (increase RAO fees and rental rates), and Level 3 (reduce RAO access and increase external rentals). The baseline 2027 cost recovery is 39%; Level 1 reaches 48% by 2032, Level 2 goes to 53%, and Level 3 to 57%. Key findings: Level 1 yields significant improvement with little pain to ROs; Level 3 has greater negative impact on RAOs but only modest added benefit. Staff recommend pursuing Level 1 changes and further refining the RAO agreement structure.

Council feedback: Carter asked about use of net revenue and whether a grant writer would be full- or part-time; Nellessandro asked about RAO sentiment (nervous but engaged) and space optimization specifics; Loman noted staffing levels are similar across scenarios, so the real choice is how much cost to pass to RAOs; Rivas asked about benchmarks (cost recovery slightly below peer buildings); Nelson questioned margins on education programs and the cost-benefit of adding a box office position; Robertson supported exploring broader rental opportunities (not just arts events); the mayor suggested exploring business and event rentals.

.3. Multifamily Performance Standards (Item3.3)

Thomas Ramler Olson presented proposed amendments to multifamily development standards. The first standard is street side setbacks: staff recommend reducing the required setback from 40 feet to 20 feet in RM24 and RM50 districts (RM100 already at 10 feet). Some council members (Nelson, Loman, Rivas) questioned going to 10 or 20 feet; the mayor preferred 20 feet for a buffer. The second standard is storage units: staff recommend eliminating the requirement for one storage unit per dwelling unit (as a burden on developers and often unused), after also considering a reduction to half. Council feedback: Loman supported elimination but with a provision for affordable housing tenants who may rely on storage; Dalessandro asked about tenant demand (anecdotal evidence of empty units); Rivas opposed elimination, favoring a 0.5-per-unit reduction; Nelson favored elimination to let the market decide. The third standard is usable open space: staff recommend lowering the baseline minimum open space per unit and eliminating the bonus structure for private balconies and patios to address equity; they also proposed investigating a proximity credit for developments near existing parks or trails. Council discussion: Carter supported both changes; Dalessandro raised equity concerns about balconies and emphasized safe access to parks; Robertson echoed access concerns; Loman felt the open space issue needs more work; Rivas questioned the lack of analysis on concentration of reduced open space and sustainability; the mayor argued that open space fosters community and should not be reduced, especially near highways.

Key Outcomes

• Agenda approved unanimously.
• Budget and Levy: Council provided extensive feedback; staff will refine the preliminary levy for the September 14 meeting where the maximum 2027 levy will be set. Council requested additional information on median home impact, cost breakdown by department, and fire and police staffing costs.
• BCA Strategic Plan: Council generally supported Level 1 improvements and directed staff to continue refining cost recovery strategies and RAO agreements. Staff will bring a final proposal later in the fall.
• Multifamily Performance Standards: Council gave direction on all three standards:
  • Street side setbacks: Support for reduction to 20 feet; some council members open to 10 feet; staff to consider further analysis.
  • Storage units: Mixed feedback; majority seemed to favor elimination or significant reduction; staff will bring a draft ordinance for further discussion.
  • Usable open space: Council requested more analysis on the proximity-based credit and equity issues; staff will continue work and bring a proposed ordinance later this year. No formal votes were taken on any of the discussion items.

Next meetings: Preliminary levy set on September14; further budget discussions on November16 and December7 and14. BCA and multifamily standards will return later in the fall for ordinance adoption.