Good evening.

I will now call to order the City County Council meeting for Monday, July 6, 2026.

We'll begin the meeting with our prayer and pledge of allegiance led by my father, Reverend Leroy Lewis Jr.

Dad.

Hold applause.

Let us pray.

Gracious God, our heavenly father.

We thank you for allowing us to assemble in this room.

We thank you for those voices that will be heard.

We ask your choice of blessing upon each one of us.

Spirit of living God fall fresh upon this meeting.

Move us and shake us that we might be the children you're calling for in these last evil days.

And we shall be my to give you all glory, honor, and praise in Jesus' name.

Amen.

The flag of the United States of America.

For which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice.

Thanks, Dad.

I was a little nervous.

Dad's Baptist, and if you know Baptists, they like to pray a really long time.

The next item on our agenda is roll call.

There are 24 members present.

Chairman Boots asked to be excused this evening.

The next item on our agenda is introduction of guests and visitors.

Councilor Gibson.

Madam Chair, I wish you uh welcome our former councilman Scott Keller.

Additional introduction, Councilor Brown.

Thank you, Madam President.

I would like to recognize all of the constituents who have come here with their signs proposing a data center moratorium.

Thank you.

Chairwoman McCormick.

Hi, thank you.

I don't know if I missed anybody else appearing in the crowd, but I see our trustee from Pike Township, Annette Johnson.

Well, Chairman Robinson.

Madam President, has anyone acknowledged our former Vice President Zach Adamson yet?

Mr.

Vice President Jack Adamson.

Thank you, Madam President.

My pleasure.

Well now I'm proceed to official communications.

Madam Clerk.

Thank you, Madam President.

Ladies and gentlemen, you are hereby notified that regular meetings of the City County Council, police, fire, and solid waste collection special service district councils will be held in the City County Building in the public assembly room on Monday, July 6, 2026 at 7 o'clock p.m.

The purposes of such meetings being to conduct any and all business that may come properly before regular meetings of the councils.

Sincerely, Maggie A.

Lewis, President City County Council.

Ladies and gentlemen, pursuant to the laws of the state of Indiana, I call to be published in the Court and Commercial Record and in the Indianapolis Star on Friday, June 12th, 2026, a copy of notice of public hearing on proposal numbers 124, 163, 188, and 206, 2026.

Said hearing to be held on Monday, July 6, 2026 at 7 o'clock p.m.

in the public assembly room of the City County Building.

On Friday, June 19th, 2026, a copy of notice of public hearing on proposal number 208, 2026, said hearing to be held on Monday, July 13th, 2026 at 5:30 p.m.

in the public assembly room of the city county building.

Ladies and gentlemen, I have approved with my signature and delivered this day to the clerk of the city county council, Yolanda Winfield, the following ordinances.

Fiscal ordinance numbers 5 through 15, 2026, General Ordinance Numbers 40 and 41, 2026, Special Ordinance numbers 4 through 6, 2026, and Special Resolution Number 13, 2026, Joseph H.

Hawksett, Mayor.

Madam President, this concludes the official communications.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Counselors, for your convenience, there are sugar-free and fat-free cookies in the back.

We're going to be here just a tad bit longer than normal.

So again, feel free to jump up and grab cookies as you so see fit.

The next item on our on our agenda is the adoption of the agenda.

Do I have consent?

We'll proceed to approval of journals for June 1st, 2026.

Do I have consent?

We'll proceed to presentations at petitions, memorials, special resolutions, and council resolutions.

Proposal number two three, introduced by Leader Evans.

I don't know if you're printing off those remarks.

No, I had them in mind, but I'll take the credit.

That would be better for me.

Good evening.

Tonight we recognize one of Indianapolis's most accomplished Native daughters, Janet Flanner.

Born in 1892, she became one of the founding writers of the New Yorker and spent more than 50 years as its celebrated Paris correspondent, earning international acclaim in France's prestigious Legion of Honor.

Did I pronounce that?

I don't know French, sorry.

Thanks to the district theater's production on They Call Me Janet, Indianapolis has the opportunity to rediscover her extraordinary legacy.

It is my honor to present this resolution in recognition of Janet Flanner's remarkable life and contributions.

A special resolution celebrating the life, legacy, and Indianapolis roots of Janet Flanner, internationally acclaimed journalist, author, and cultural correspondent.

Whereas Janet Flanner was born in Indianapolis, Indiana in 1892 and began her writing career in her hometown before embarking on a path that would make her one of the most influential journalists of the 20th century.

And whereas, whereas writing under the pen name Janae, Flanner became one of the founding voices of the New Yorker magazine and served as its Paris correspondence for more than 50 years, helping generations of Americans better understand the culture of politics, literature, and artistic life of Europe.

And whereas through her celebrated letter from Paris Collins, Flanner chronicled major historical events, artistic movements, and cultural figures of the 20th century, establishing herself as one of America's most respected literary journalists.

And before I pass it off, I'll note a butler talking in a district seven resident, FYI.

Whereas, in recognition of her extraordinary contributions to journalism and French cultural life, Flanner was awarded the title of Chevalier of the Legion des Honor.

Wonderful, I don't speak French either.

One of Francis France's highest civilian honors, and whereas Flanner also demonstrated personal courage by living openly within Paris's expo artistic and LGBTQ communities during a period when such freedom was was often unavailable to many Americans, leaving a lasting legacy of authenticity, inclusion, and cultural progress.

And whereas Janet Flanner's Indianapolis remote roots remain an important part of her story and her achievements stand as a reminder of the profound impact that individuals for this city here have had on a national and international culture, cultural, and public life.

And whereas the Flanners family's contributions to Indianapolis extend beyond journalism through the establishment of Flanner House by her father, Dr.

Frank W.

Flanner, creating a lasting legacy of community service, education, and opportunity for generations of Indianapolis residents.

And whereas the District Theater's production of They Call Me Janet offers Indianapolis an opportunity to rediscover and celebrate one of its most accomplished native daughters and her enduring contributions to journalism, literature, and international understanding.

Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City County Council of the City of Indianapolis in Marion County, Indiana.

Section one, the Indianapolis City Council proudly recognizes and celebrates the life, achievements, and enduring legacy of Janet Flanner, whose work elevated the standards of journalism and enriched cultural understanding throughout the world.

Section two, the council commands the district theater and all those involved in the production of They Call Me Janet for preserving and sharing the story of this remarkable Indianapolis native.

Section three, the council encourages residents of Indianapolis to learn more about Janet Flanner's contributions to journalism, literature, culture, and international understanding, and take pride in her enduring connection to the city of Indianapolis.

Section four, a copy of this resolution shall be presented to representatives of the district theater in recognition of their efforts to celebrate and preserve the legacy of Janet Flanner.

I so move.

The motion has been properly moved and seconded.

All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Those opposed, same sign.

The motion carries back to the speaker.

Thank you, Madam President.

At this time, I'd like to invite two former members of the council to share a few remarks.

Representing both side of the aisle, please welcome former council vice president and district theater board member Zach Adamson and former Republican counselor Scott Keller as they join us in celebrating the remarkable legacy of one of Indianapolis's most distinguished native daughters, Janet Flanner.

Thank you, Leader Evans, and thank you to my former colleagues here on the council for recognizing the extraordinary legacy of Janet Flanner.

On behalf of myself, former counselor Scott Keller, the district theater, we are honored that Indianapolis is taking this opportunity to celebrate one of its most remarkable native daughters.

The district theater believes that these that great theater does more than just entertain.

It shines a light on voices that history has too often overlooked or forgotten.

Through new works like They Call Me Janae, and through our incubators for African American and Latino arts communities designed specifically for and by those members of the community.

We strive to tell stories that reflect the full richness of our city.

So thank you for helping to ensure that Janet Flanner's story and so many others continue to be told.

And with that, I will turn it over to Scott Keller.

If you wish more information, you can look at Janet Flanner.com.

Thank you for this honor.

I'll leave you with an observation.

Uh my ancestor Frank Flanner hired Booker T.

Washington to come run Flanner House and managing.

Well, he could not stay downtown in a hotel.

So he stayed with the family at 4061 North Illinois.

And uh what Janet Flanner's favorite perch was on his lap.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And I've got a soccer game to watch.

So good to meet you.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

I think we could interrupt you, the next the next item on our agenda is proposal number one sixty-one, refer to admin and finance committee.

Chairman Muscari.

Thank you, Madam President.

Proposal 161 appoints Mary E.

Allen to equal the equal opportunity advisory board.

Pass out of the committee at 100.

I so move.

The motion has been properly moved and seconded.

Are there comments from counselors?

CNN, proceed to the board for our vote.

Is proposal number 375 refer to public safety and criminal justice committee?

Assistant Chair Allen.

Thank you, Madam President.

Proposal number 375 appoints Evan Sharon to the juvenile detention center advisory board.

Do pass vote 11 and zero.

I so move.

The motion has been properly moved and secondary.

Other comments from counselors.

CNN, proceed to the board for our vote.

The proposal carries 24 to 0.

The next item on our agenda is proposal number 187.

Refer to public safety and criminal justice committee.

Assistant Chair Allen.

Thank you, Madam President.

Proposal number 187, 2026, appoint Alexis Hatcher to the Juvenile detention center advisory board.

Do pass vote 11 to 0.

ISO move.

The motion has been properly moved and seconded.

Other comments from counselors.

CNN, proceed to the board for our vote.

The proposal carries 24 to 0.

The next item on our agenda is introductions of proposals.

Madam Clerk.

Thank you, Madam President.

Proposal number 208 2026, introduced by Counselor Neilson and referred to the Administration and Finance Committee.

Elects to allow certain employees to participate in the public employees retirement fund as administered by the Indiana Public Retirement System.

Proposal number 209 2026, introduced by Counselor Allie Brown and referred to Community Affairs, reappoints Amy Carroll to the Public Art for Neighborhood Selection Committee.

The following proposals will refer to the Metropolitan and Economic Development Committee.

Proposal number 237 2026, introduced by Counselor Jesse Brown, request that the Indianapolis Department of Metropolitan Development eliminates parking minimums within the city of Indianapolis in Marion County.

Proposal number 230 238 2026, introduced by Counselor Lewis, amends chapter 740 through 202-202, 742-109, and Table 743-208-1 of the consolidated zoning and subdivision control ordinance of the Indianapolis-Marion County, Indiana, concerning data center development.

Proposals, the following proposals were referred to the Public Safety and Criminal Justice Committee.

Proposal number 211, 2026, introduced by Councilor Robinson, appoints Elizabeth White to the domestic violent violence fatality review team.

Proposal number 236, 2026, introduced by Council Robinson, appoints Raymond Powell to the Marion County Community Corrections Advisory Board.

The following proposals were referred to the Public Works Committee.

Proposal number two twelve 2026, introduced by Councilor Boots, authorizes high intensity activated crosswalk signal for nickel plate trail crossing on 56th Street, Kessler Boulevard, East Drive, 71st Street, and 75th Street, District 3.

Proposal number 213 2026, introduced by Counselor Ossalie, authorizes intersection controls adjacent to the IU Health Medical Center on 13th Street at Capitol Avenue and Senate Avenue and on 14th Street as Senate Avenue District 12.

Proposal number 214 2026, introduced by Counselor McCormick, authorizes high intensity high intensity activated crosswalk signal for Eagle Creek Trail Crossing at Lynnhurst Drive Bridge District 16.

Proposal number 215 2026, introduced by Counselor Allen, authorizes high intensity activated crosswalk signal at the Grassy Creek Connector at 3500 North German Church Road, District 15.

Proposal number 216 2026, introduced by Counselor Gibson, authorizes a speed limit reduction to 25 miles per hour in the area bounded by Sherman Drive, Emerson Avenue, 30th Street, and 34th Street, District 8.

Proposal number 217, 2026, introduced by Councilor Muscary, authorizes a speed limit reduction to 25 miles per hour in area bounded by Keystone Avenue, Hobart Road, Southern Avenue, and Raymond Street, District 19.

Proposal number 218, 2026, introduced by Counselor Allen, authorizes a speed limit reduction to 25 miles per hour in the Autumn Creek and Autumn Creek East Subdivisions, District 15.

Proposal number 219, 2026, introduced by Counselor Bain, authorizes intersection controls at the intersection of Bonnie Drive and Eddie Lane, District 21.

Proposal number 220, 2026, introduced by Councillor Cahill, authorizes intersection controls at the intersection of Harway Court, Thompson, and Thompson Road, District 23.

Proposal number 221, 2026, introduced by Councillor Jesse Brown, authorizes residential permit parking at 524 and 526 East Ninth Street, District 13.

Madam President, this concludes the introductions.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

The next item on our agenda is special orders priority business.

Proposals number two twenty-four through two thirty-four, twenty twenty six are all rezoning that were certified to the council for approval by the Metropolitan Development Commission.

If no, district counselor wishes to call down any of these proposals for public hearing, they will pass into law.

Seeing none of the proposals will pass into law.

Uh for a public hearing, the decision of the commission will stand as denied.

Seeing no further motion regarding proposal number two thirty-five, twenty twenty-six, the decision of the commission will stand as denied.

We'll now proceed to special orders public hearing.

Before we open the floor to public comments, I would like to call on General Counsel Pierce to review the ground rules for public testimony as adopted by this body.

Ms.

Pierce.

Thank you, Madam President.

As we move to the public comment portion of debate for these proposals, we would like to remind council members and the public of a few ground rules.

In order for everyone to have a fair chance to speak and be heard, it is important that we each observe the following rules.

First, each speaker will be limited to two minutes.

Second, any public comment must reasonably relate to the agenda item under consideration.

Third, speakers who stray from the item under consideration or become unduly repetitious may be asked to move on to their next point or conclude their comments.

Finally, attendees who cause disruption that prevent the council from proceeding through the today's agenda in a reasonably efficient manner will be removed.

Please remember that some types of threatening speech or excitement to violence are not protected by the First Amendment at all.

We will deal with those issues if they come up, but we do not think they will.

Thank you.

Do I have consent to adopt the rules for public testimony?

Thank you.

We'll proceed to proposal number 124, refer to Metropolitan and Economic Development Committee.

Thank you, Madam President.

Proposal number 124 2026 approves an additional appropriation of 42,000 dollars in the 2026 budget of the Marion County Recorders Office.

Uh County Recorders Perpetual Fund to be used for property fraud and veteran honors advertisement.

The proposal passed out of committee by vote of 10 to 0.

Madam President, ISO move.

The motion has been properly moved and seconded.

Are there comments from counselors?

Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak to?

Proposal number 124.

Please state your name in doing so.

Larry Vaughn, please.

I'd just like to congratulate my friend Faith Kimbrough for her services she's doing in the recorder's office from uh stamping out the fraud that's going on here in Marion County, the actual title fraud that's going on.

And uh I just uh know that she's a beloved politician right now, and uh I think she's qualified for other offices.

But uh I just like to thank her for a program that she's initiated in our office where she's dealing with the uh title fraud that's going on because the recorder is really a job that's uh really consequential for anybody that owns property here in Marion County.

So Faith Kimbrew, she's a politician just like Myla Erbridge, who have really done her job and stuck to uh to the guidelines of her job.

So thanks a lot, Faith.

You're just fine.

Additional comments, seeing that we proceed to the board for our vote.

Leader Evans.

The proposal carries 24 to zero.

The next item on our agenda is proposal number one sixty three, refer to admin and finance.

Chairman Miscarry.

Thank you, Madam President.

Proposal 163 approves an additional appropriation, totally 19 million, 488,400 to 2026 budgets of various city county departments and agencies and various city county funds from additional supplemented income and tax revenue.

Pass out of the committee 110.

The motion has been properly moved and seconded.

Are there comments from counselors?

Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak to proposal number 163?

You know, I wouldn't say anything about this with the loose description on where these uh funds are actually going to be gone.

You know that they're appropriated for certain things, but they don't always end up at that destination.

So it's just questionable when we have uh people that are appropriating funds, and uh it's just a loose uh uh description of where the funds are actually gone and the shape that this city's in right now.

Uh I think that's a bad policy to have.

I mean, and that's mostly because we don't have commissioners over our uh three largest budget items, which is uh DPW, uh this public safety, and also uh I forgot what else it is, but in any case, it's a loose description.

Additional comments from the audience.

CNN proceed to the board for our votes.

Oh, I apologize.

Okay, Madam President, council members.

My name is Tyler Mitchell.

I live on the south side, and uh happy birthday to the United States.

I went through proposal 163, so my neighbors don't have to.

Some of the funding in the proposal goes to roads and infrastructure, which is great, but millions more go to programs with broad descriptions like quality of life, housing initiatives, beautification, youth engagement, and other projects that deserve far more public scrutiny before taxpayers are asked to fund them.

Take the homeowner repair program as one example.

It is already funded with 3.6 million dollars in CDBG federal funding.

Proposal 163 would add another $500,000 in local taxpayer dollars, helping your neighbor is a virtue, compelling your neighbors to pay to help others through taxation is not every need requires a government solution.

Indianapolis has one of the largest church communities in the Midwest.

Churches and voluntary association groups have long helped people in need, and I don't understand why we are forgetting their ability to do so.

Now, if DPW's numbers are correct, that same $500,000 could mill approximately seven lanes of roadway.

That's enough to repave northbound Emerson Avenue from Southeastern Avenue all the way to 46th Street.

I'm mentioning roads because shortly you will vote to increase my will tax by 400%.

If we're truly facing a road funding crisis, then every available dollar should be directed there before expanding spending elsewhere.

I recognize that the state's road funding formula needs to work better for us, and I did not come here to dispute that by the way.

But the way the city continues to spend taxpayer dollars is not going to strengthen our case when we ask the state to do more for us.

Taxpayers work hard for every dollar they earn.

They expect the city government to provide just the essential services, and um I'll conclude with this.

The city council keeps expanding government into areas beyond its core responsibilities when working families have to tighten their budget.

They expect the same thing to come from the council and prioritize.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am.

Additional comments from the audience, CNN.

Who said sorry, Council Hart?

I'm looking this way.

Yes, sir.

You may make a few comments.

Yep, please.

Uh, so you know, I I got a couple thoughts here.

Um, I mean, what the gentleman did make a pretty good point about um the correlation between the the tax proposal that we have coming up, and I think I just want to make sure he's shed light on that.

Um, and one of the things that I, you know, is going through this process.

I usually spend a lot more time on the spring fiscal than I did this year.

Um I did send some things over um through the office, but I just want to at least verbally acknowledge um some of the things that I've heard constituents ask me for that I think are very prudent or things that I've seen uh that need to even have attention in the city that I don't think the city has brought us this year.

Um there's an issue that we have with duplicative data storage or even triplicative data storage across uh the city enterprise, in which we are overpaying for data storage in a lot of our public safeties, and it's causing both redundancies as well as efficiency issues when trying to share that information between agencies.

Um ISA has done and does have information to to run a pilot on this and have looked into it.

So we wouldn't be starting from scratch.

So just something for this body to be aware of when, you know, I know there are some additional funds that were parked because of this, whether we get into that or not, but ideas for the future, um, as well as police recruitment.

This was something that I've you know had a lot of conversations with the chief of police, um, our office as well.

Um we we have to you know get some more focus on that.

I know we're we're working on the vehicles um with this as well, but um down in Fort Worth they did some really really cool innovative ideas that was able to net them 3,400 new police applications as soon as they had a new police chief.

We have very similar activities going on, and um it wasn't costing a ton of money.

Additional things that I think could be beneficial to us as a council, our constituent management software, where you know we don't have that.

I'm using an Excel spreadsheet to manage things inside and uh and then trying to share them with uh my liaison, who I imagine has probably 25 of those.

Um, and then the last thing, which is very important, which is tox drops across this city.

We have got to come up with a solution on that where we I lost mine two years ago.

Some of these other counselors are the same size town as me, and we lost it.

Um, and these are these are things that impact daily lives efficiencies, the quality of life for people, um, environmentals, all of these fall within these buckets.

Um, you know, I I bring them up, but I just want to make sure to do it publicly so we can hear about it, talk about it.

Um, these are important to me, important to the community, and I think Indianapolis wants to see more of this, so um, with that I yield my time, Madam President.

Thank you.

Uh Assistant email.

Nilson.

Thank you.

Thank you, President Lewis.

Uh, appreciate the opportunity to provide a little more uh color to the the spring uh part of the spring fiscal, which is just the supplemental distribution.

As we were working on this, uh we were at a time when um the the governor made the decision uh to suspend the gas tax.

At that time, we were looking at about a 400,000 a month loss to the city.

Um that when that was extended a second time, it was even more robust, and that extended to about 3.4 million a month.

And so in those conversations, we worked with the administration to uh there's a big priority of the council to fence off a large appropriation of the supplemental of just a little over 15 million dollars to be able to backfill the current 2026 capital plan.

The governor has since announced that he's gonna be pushing um uh state finance board to reimburse uh the city city for any lost gas tax revenues.

Um I'm hopeful that that goes through, but I just want to, as we are having a conversation about fiscal uh discipline and and ensuring we're putting money towards roads, we we fence off almost 50% of this supplemental in order to prepare for just that.

So we'll as we go into the budget, we'll be looking to appropriate those for hopefully some other uh one-time spends, but just want the public to be aware that um that we that we were taking precautionary measures.

We have better news now, but nothing is set in stone.

So thank you, Madam President.

Thank you.

Additional comments, Councillor Brown.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um I appreciate the thoughtful commentary from constituents, and just wanted to kind of make the case for why I think the homeowner repair fund in particular is a very good use of taxpayer dollars.

Um I agree wholeheartedly with Counselor Hart in describing the need for tax drop programs.

And the reason for that is because if you don't do that kind of preventative uh payment from the government, what happens is people just dump toxic chemicals and then it costs far, far more to end up cleaning up later.

And I think the same can be true if we could spend $500,000 and keep people in their homes to prevent them from becoming homeless, which is where a lot of folks would go otherwise.

Think about how expensive emergency services calls are when dealing with our homelessness situation.

Uh, I think this is actually uh a situation where an ounce of prevention is more important than a pound of care, and it just saves taxpayers in the long run.

So I encourage all colleagues to vote yes to this.

Additional comments.

We're proceed to the board for a vote.

The proposal carries 24 to zero.

The next item item on our agenda is proposal number one eighty-eight, refer to public safety and criminal justice committee.

Assistant Chair Alan.

Thank you, Madam President.

Proposal number 188, 2026 approves an additional appropriation totally 875,000 in the 226th budget of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department for the purpose of funding the final payment of the IMPD's 2021 vehicle financing agreement.

Do pass 11 to 0 vote.

ISO move.

The motion has been properly moved and seconded.

Other comments from counselors, counselor Brown.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, gonna make some very politically contentious and unpopular comments here, but this proposal would give almost $900,000 additional in taxpayer funding for police vehicles.

And we had some uh great commentary in committee that I was able to review that mentioned that the main one main reason for this is because apparently car manufacturers are not producing pursuit-rated sedans anymore.

And so the Durango SUV is about the most affordable police vehicle that we can purchase right now.

And you know, here's where I'll sound a little bit more like a conservative than I normally do.

When only government entities are purchasing from car companies, and we just automatically will spend more money and just pay for a more expensive vehicle.

What incentive are we giving to car manufacturers to actually produce the police sedans that we that they used to?

As long as we just keep showing the market that we will pay any cost and there's no uh bounds around any police spending, I don't see how that will ever end.

And so, in the context of 4% budget cuts for almost every other department, in the context of a situation where we're 300 officers down, but but are still funding to the tune of 17, 43 officers, even though we we know we're not gonna hire those officers in the short term, in the context of an over 100 percent raise for first year officers in the last eight years.

I don't see how we could continue to keep throwing money at the police department.

Um, you know, some officers could use a bike, some officers could walk around on foot.

Um morale is important.

I think that being around constituents and not always behind the wheel of an SUV separated from them is a good way of increasing uh police relationships with the community, and so I I just can't vote for this in good conscience.

Um, you know, want our officers to be safe, want them to have all the equipment they need.

Um, how many of us remember I'm only 40 years old, but every movie from the 80s and 90s showed two police officers sitting in a vehicle together.

When you watch anybody being pulled over, do they ever just send one police cruiser?

No.

For officer safety, we'll send multiple police cruisers.

So we have multiple vehicles going to the side uh the same scene of a crime or investigation.

To me, it's a no-brainer that we need to be saving money, we need to be treating our taxpayers with respect, and so I urge my colleagues to vote no.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Chairman Perkins.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, I I do want to say thank you to assistant chair for the conversation that we had in uh committee uh regarding this particular issue.

Um, and while I am reluctantly supportive tonight, um we have asked both in committee and in direct conversation in our caucus uh for IMPD to provide us some clarity around their budgetary needs as we are entering into the budget season.

Um my concern continues to be IMPD occupies um as an entity of the largest percentage in the overall city budget.

Um it seems to me uh that there's a consistent request whenever there's a fiscal from IMPD for something additional, and we don't have a clear uh picture of the scope and need from the department uh and what that means for us as we are going in the budget process.

We will start the public budget process next month.

Um, and what we what I have requested, and I think some of my colleagues have joined me along that is to say to IMPD, we need a full picture of your needs and requests as we're going into this fiscal year.

Um, and so I just want to call on the leadership of IMPD along with uh as well as the administration uh to make sure that you're providing that to the council as we're engaging in this conversation.

Um, again, I'm reluctantly supportive tonight.

Um we want our police department to know that um we want the best for our city, uh, but we also need to be fiscally responsible.

And this keeps coming up from our police department.

And so we just want to share that.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Counselor Hart.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to say I've got no reluctance on this.

Very proud of support men and women in blue of the city of Indianapolis.

There's a few more details that were left out of this.

One of the reasons that this is coming from in front of us today is essentially these are on a leasing model that they're they're paying off a lease so they can go renew and get the new vehicles.

One of the problems behind that is that the bond rates now are higher than what they were originally.

So it's more expensive to borrow money to go buy the vehicles to then pay them off over years.

One of the things that we've learned even from the fire department over this years is that it is more fiscally responsible to essentially use the leasing model because we don't pay all the deferred maintenance.

If we don't do this, we're gonna end up with more costs in paying maintenance on vehicles.

We've learned that uh certain vehicles aren't as reliable and effectively as if they're they're wrecked, then that's it, they're told whereas older vehicles that they had the ability to be repaired.

Um we're not in that position anymore, and we need to keep these vehicles in a newer position, but we also have to keep um a certain number of them.

We learned that evening, um, essentially to make sure that we had a stock for when vehicles were getting repaired, vehicles were getting prepared for that rotation.

So I I think that this is the I mean, fiscally responsible uh responsible thing to do.

Uh, I think it is um both from the finance point but also from the part of trying to make sure that we're showing our officers that we do care about their needs and that this is um this is their office, right?

Um I do think that um we are gonna have to have this conversation again because that was made clear in committee.

Um my only change to this is that we need to do the full thing, not just a piece of it.

So I do expect to see it again in the in the fall, but hopefully that gets us trued up for our um adequate rotation.

But this is a a good thing, and this will help us uh in the long run.

Thank you.

Additional comments.

Yep, counselor Cahill.

Thank you, Madam President.

I I did want to address the uh the comment about uh IMPD coming to the council with these types of requests.

This was in the request and was not fulfilled in the budget last year, so I'm happy to see that it's in a benefiscal that we are now funding this.

But this was brought to our attention.

They in fact they wanted 1.5 million for new vehicles last year, and it didn't make the budget.

So I do think they have come to us and through the administration and simply not gotten everything they wanted despite some of the claims here.

Thank you.

Additional comments from counselors.

Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak to proposal number 188?

Please state your name.

All right, my name's William Bowler.

Uh uh District 8.

Been having medical issues, so I'll just if I'm kind of stuttering, it's all right.

Um, I had somebody somebody hit my mailbox the other day, called the police, they drove right by my house, didn't stop.

They came three hours later and said, hey, we don't know what to do about it, but we'll go check.

I was on video chasing after the guy that hit my mailbox, so I got I didn't get any records from that.

This more I mean, we've all seen in the city how many people are running red lights today.

Today, I watched someone run a red light while a police officer was right in the front line at the light and did not pull them over.

So I don't know why the police are being extortionary when they're supposed to be protecting us, especially when this city is saying we need money, we need all this data centers to come in and give us more money, and then meanwhile, they're asking for more like what what what's the purpose of this?

Like, I don't see why we need to give them more money when they already take up so much of our budget as is.

If we're talking about being fiscally responsible, I think we need to start there and start cutting the budget.

Larry Vaughn, please.

Sure.

Why does the uh IMPD not have their appropriated funds in the hands of a commissioner?

Because as long as I've been coming down there, it's always been that way.

When the money is appropriated in this room and taken from the citizens at gunpoint, then the mayor of Indianapolis gets to decide where it goes.

So as long as we're sitting in this room having sham arguments about appropriations that have left this uh realm and are in the coffers of the mayor right now, you're gonna do nothing.

And I know some of you think it's funny, you think it's a laugh, but the people who elected you are also looking at you.

This has been for many years a problem ever since we got the TIFF districts and so forth, where the uh commissioners were displaced from from DPW, from public safety, and also from I keep forgetting the third leg.

Somebody can remind me, but in any case, when we sit in this room, everything these people do, you people at home.

Everything they do is a gunpoint.

Because if you don't want to go ahead and lines of Mr.

Vaughn, they will uh you will definitely uh be meet with the point of a gun.

You certainly will.

Yeah, thank you.

Additional comments from the audience, CNM proceed to the board for our votes.

The proposal carries 23 to 1.

The next item on our agenda is proposal number 159.

Leader Evans.

Thank you, Madam President.

On June 3rd, 2026 at the MDC's regular schedule meeting, the commission acknowledged the withdrawal of rezoning case 2025-ZON-126.

Because the case no longer exists, there is no need for a public hearing.

If there are no questions or comments from my fellow counselors, I recommend that we by consent acknowledge the withdrawal of rezoning case 2025-ZON-126 proposal number 159.

Do I have consent?

Proposal number 159 2026 has been withdrawn.

Proposal number 206.

Proposal number 206 2026 is a rezoning certified for denial by the Metropolitan Development Commission on June 1st, 2026.

Rezoning case 2025, zone 084 is located at 401 South Keystone Avenue in Perry Township, Council District 19.

The rezoning proposal is to rezone to rezone acres 1.075 from C4 district to CS district to provide all three to provide for all C3 uses and automobile fueling stations section 151 through 79 of the code clearly outlines the process for public hearings for rezoning cases certified by the Metropolitan Development Commission.

All counselors should have received a copy of those guidelines and their meeting packets and will adhere closely to those guidelines and time limits.

Councilman Scary, whose district it whose district the rezoning is located, call for the matter for a hearing at our June 1st meeting.

I have it advised by our general counsel that the preliminary hearing has been held and no compromise or agreement has been reached.

As pursuant to our rules, I will call for Councilman Scary for opening comments.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, as an elected council member of District 19, I've requested the zoning of property of my district located at 4001 South Keystone and Perry Township to be now zone C3 to be amended to C4 and allow the sale of a gasoline in that location.

Um I received numerous requests from the residents uh on that side of the street.

People heading um east, it's easier to get into this place and they actually sell convenient food.

Um the site was purchased uh purchased by the current owner, and it was a total mess, and he totally uh tore the building down because of all the trash and started over with a new building.

Um at each hearing uh appeals at committee that the owner asked for to build the defense around the property at one time.

Mr.

Sandwich of owner AM LECC property uh worked with me and the zoning appeals board to totally rehab the site from and to tear it down and build the new building.

He spent a million dollars on the property.

He has operated the convenience store for about a year, but it can't support itself without gas.

And with that, I've give my time to Mr.

Hahn.

Thank you, Councillor Muscary.

I will now call the petitioner to state their case.

Please keep in mind that you have 20 minutes total for your presentation, regardless of how many speakers participate.

You may choose not to use the full 20 minutes or save a portion of it for the rebuttal.

Our clerk will keep track of the time, and a buzzer will sound when your time is up.

If you do not use a portion of your time, our clerk will record the amount you have remaining for your rebuttal.

If they if you finish before the buzzer, the clerk will advise you of the remaining time.

Mr.

Hahn.

Thank you very much, Madam President, and City Council members.

Appreciate the opportunity to be here.

My name for the record is Gregory Hahn.

Uh I'm with Bose McKinney and Evans.

I also have Madison Rosello here with me uh tonight.

Uh also I have the uh uh one of the members of Amon LLC, uh Suckwinder Singh.

He goes by Sunny, and uh he owns 49% of uh AMAN amon and his wife owns 51%.

Um we are here as legal counsel uh pursuant to 151-79 of the revised code of the consolidated city county special procedures for rezoning uh ordinances, and which comes under IC 36-7-4-608 to change the current restrictions to sell gas at the its location at 4001 South Keystone, and it's about 1.07 acres.

Uh Mr.

Singh has been in this business for quite a while.

Uh his story is uh I think I have to talk about him and what he's accomplished since he's the one driving the ship on this project.

Um he came to immigrated to the United States with basically nothing.

Uh he was originally from the northern area of India called Punjab.

Um very very poor area of India.

Uh he worked in New York City as a taxi driver, and then in uh 2004, he arrived in Indianapolis and leased a gas station to support his wife, Pripple, and their family.

From those humble beginnings, they worked tirelessly to create opportunities for their family, following the American dream.

Over the past 20 years, they have dedicated their company to building and operating successful businesses with particular expertise in the gas station and convenience store industry.

Today they oversee more than a hundred properties throughout the Midwest, including approximately 30 stations located in the Indianapolis area.

Sonny has uh and his wife have three children.

Uh one's in uh med school, one's a doctor, and the other is a law student.

Uh Sunny's family develops uh developments provide more than just uh fuel and convenience items.

They create jobs, tax revenue, increase commercial activity, and provide essential goods and services to the local communities.

What he's been able to do is he goes into these sites, a lot of them are like this site, were totally devastated, and the whole area is pretty devastated.

Uh, and he's able to go in, put in uh gas station, convenience stores, and then build from that and bring in other uh businesses, and it's exactly what he's trying to do here.

Uh so they also provide uh and contribute to local charities and support local activities, not only here in the Indianapolis area, but all throughout the state of Indiana.

Um, they now seek approval for the project at 4001 South Keystone Avenue to continue that same kind of work by investing in the local community and contributing long-term value to the surrounding area.

Uh ironically, Sonny and his family have a long relationship to this area, and that's why he's he's there.

Uh they were long-term residents of the south side of Indianapolis and resided on South Keystone, uh, just a few blocks away from where this uh site is.

So they've seen everything that's happened in the community down there.

Um their daughters graduated from Roncali High School, and his first gas station that he owned is on South Thompson Thompson Road.

So they've been very vested in this area and want to take it forward.

Now, just a little going back to what's transpired in this, and I could spend all day doing that.

Um they bought the property in 2002.

It had been abandoned since 2017.

It was owned by a uh gas uh company in Muncie, and they just basically let it go and abandon it.

Uh when I first went down there to see the property and for him to talk to me, and we met with uh counselor Muscari.

Uh it was nothing but trash, uh, heaps of trash.

People were just dumping stuff there all the time.

The buildings were uninhabited, in fact, they're being used by vagrants, drug dealing, and uh Councilor Muscary received numerous complaints about the site and what what they should what could they do about it.

And uh Sonny and his company stepped up, they bought the property, and then they tried to go in and get uh the permission to sell gas.

Now, there was a there was a agreement signed by the previous owner to do about everything he wanted to do there except sell gas because they had worked to deal with the property next door to bring in a 21st Amendment liquor store, and so that had been excluded when at the time he bought the property, and he knew that.

But he wanted to try to go forward and remedy this situation and see if he could make it work, and then there's enough property down there, he could do many other things.

Uh unfortunately, nobody else has ever approached him and nothing else has ever happened yet, because you got to have gas uh fueling at this station to make to make it work.

Um so three different times we have been before the uh planning commission, and three different times we have been denied uh because they keep saying, well, there's no need for another gas station, uh, which totally isn't accurate.

If you go around and talk to the neighbors like we did, and I'll go into that in more detail in a minute.

Every one of the neighborhood uh presidents and people are surrounding that area, which a lot of them are elderly, uh are begging for uh gas to come in there so they don't have to try to cross Keystone all the time, which is a really really uh dangerous uh place to cross.

Uh you've got Keystone, and then you've got uh Hannah and Walker coming in there.

So uh and each time the board, the zoning board would say, Well, if you do this, then we'll try to help you the next time around.

Well, they uh the first thing was to build a fence.

We we built a fence all the way around this property, uh almost one point uh one acres and cleaned it all up, got all the got rid of all the trash, tore the building down to get rid of all the things that were going on on the site.

We came back in and were denied again, except this time they said, Well, why don't you look at putting a convenience store by itself without gas and see if that works?

And uh Sonny uh turned to me and said, I've never seen that work ever.

But he said, let me think about it.

So we told the board he didn't think he wanted to do that, and then a few months later, he decided to go forward because he really wanted to clean this area up, and he did build a convenience store.

You'll there's pictures in your uh uh materials of what the property looked like before and then after.

So there is a convenience store at that site.

The bad part about it is is that it won't support uh convenience store alone is uh not profitable, so he's gonna have to he's subsidizing the store, excuse me, just to keep it open.

So then the next time we went in uh was this this last time in March of 26th, and we had uh done everything they asked us to do.

We told them about the fact that he was operating the convenience store, and we lost again.

Um at all three hearings, uh Counselor Muscari was there.

He explained to them a lot of things I'm saying to you, uh, told him it was extremely important for him and his district uh to get this so they could provide and sell gas and make this work.

Now, the other interesting thing that happened is that the only remonstrators who showed up at any of this zoning board appeals weren't people just that live around there at all, they were uh owners of five other gas stations that are in the area.

They're the only ones that ever showed up for to remonstrate, and the only reason they were showing up is because they didn't want the competition because Sony has a reputation of running a very good business, very clean buildings, etc.

And they don't they didn't want that, and they tried to say, Well, there's already all these gas stations, and there's no need for another one.

Well, in the meantime, uh these guys are building gas stations all around uh south side of Indianapolis.

Uh and it's two two families basically, and they've got the ones that are right there close to this site are a uh CIDCO and a British petroleum, and and then they also supposedly have interest in the liquor store that's next door.

Uh in addition, they have stations at Brookville Road, 3401 West 10th Street, 5460 East 21st Street, 5796 West Morris Street, and 5252 West Troy Avenue.

So obviously for them to say that there's no need for additional gas stations is just not correct.

Um what we see is that the competitors down there aren't really interested in uh district 19 or anything else down there, they're just there to run the gas stations they have.

They do nothing for the community.

Uh if you if you if you were to see them, the stations are run down, uh, the quality of things they serve is very meager.

Um, whereas at this convenience store, there they have fresh eggs, meat, uh, milk, and a lot of other products that the people in that area need and can't get to without trying to cross Keystone.

So, we believe that uh the competition down there would be uh very good for the 19th district because everybody's gonna have to up their game uh and charge uh fair gas prices.

They're not gonna have a monopoly, basically.

So the next thing I wanted to address is exhibit seven and the monstrators' filings that show they had a hundred and ninety signatories on their petition and opposing Amman.

Well, we uh went through those signatures and found that many of them had the same handwriting.

Hardly any of them had an address listed, and we found out almost half of them, the phone numbers that were listed uh weren't legitimate.

They were non-existent, and then the ones that we did talk to about 10 of them said they didn't even, except for two people, they didn't even remember ever signing a petition, and they were for the gas station for a convenience store uh on Keystone, the one that we're talking about getting gas so they could uh continue to stay in business.

Um in fact, one lady that we talked to, uh Jessica Swarat said she wants a gas pump to be built at the convenience store.

She lives closely by, and having to cross the street at such a busy intersection is inconvenient and dangerous.

There's also a mental health facility nearby, and those folks have to do the same thing.

These are all people that live east of Keystone and that's where there's a big there's a big residential area back there she's worried about the patients who would have to cross the street she can walk to the convenience store and back to your house within 10 minutes and she likes it how it is all in one stop shop and it makes it very convenient to her.

Now that's a person they had listed that signed a petition against putting gas at this location and we found that with a number of people in fact 42.63 percent uh had phone numbers that didn't even work so uh I would say that those that the those petitioners shouldn't have any relevance at all today and some of them were even upset that they were it was representations that they had signed it uh we on the other hand got a hundred and eight signatures all from the neighbors around the neighborhood and uh we filed those and all of them have the names addresses phone numbers and all of them were very supportive and and several of those were the presidents of neighborhood associations back there now next we saw a uh letter from McCanna which uh Miss Burton is has sent every time but uh we have never had any contact with her we've contacted her uh the neighborhood associations have contacted her there was no meeting nothing and she basically just sent the same letter she has sent the last three times uh because we wanted to explain to her that the whole situation had changed give her the benefit of the doubt from 2022 uh and we also had a traffic study that we wanted to show her that shows that there's no uh uh increase in traffic traffic is heavy down there no question about it so it wasn't going to add any more traffic uh to the area so I I would uh close with telling you that uh I you know I bel we the city had a plan and in that plan is a municipal plan and they didn't want any more gas stations well there's new gas stations going up everywhere law law I mean you name it they're going up every place and here's a place that can really use it and it helps develop a piece of property that's sat empty for almost 10 years uh and all they want to do is be able to compete with the other with the other stores and that's what our you know that's what our somebody said congratulations to the United States for 250th anniversary and that's what we're built on is capitalism and the and the ability to compete and compete fairly so uh we believe that the uh this is a very positive uh fight to bring in uh equal competition and it'll help uh cancel uh District 19 and um councilman miscarries already established that and has been down there many times to see all the things I'm talking about that have taken place so thank you thank you Mr.

Hahn I will now call on the remonstrators to state their case again remember that you have 20 minutes total for your presentation regardless of how many speakers participate you may choose not to use the full 20 minutes or save a portion for it a portion of it for your rebuttal once again our clerk will keep track of the time and a buzzer will sound when your time is up the clock just a second oh madam clerk, are we ready?

We're ready.

Okay, very good.

Thank you.

My name is Greg Zubek.

Members of the city county council, it's uh a pleasure to be here and to talk to you about this case.

I'm an attorney with offices at Woodham and Zubek at 10475 Cross Point Boulevard Indianapolis, Indiana.

I represent the Keystone Food mark, which operates a B BP fueling station and convenience store located at 3950 South Keystone, which is located Caddy Corner from the subject property.

My client has been in the operation of its business on since the subject property, currently owned by Amon LLC, was rezoned in 2017.

Uh saying what uses could not be made.

Before I get into the specifics of this, I'll say there are two sides to every pancake, no matter how thin it is, and I'm going to give you the other side in this case, I hope.

Prior to 2016, the subject property was zoned C3, and in 2016, a petition was filed to rezone it to C4 by the then property owner.

The rezoning was granted, but with a list of commitments that prohibited a variety of certain uses, a whole laundry list of things.

My client at that time, long before Amman came along in this matter, my client was one of the entities that was involved in those matters in 2016 before the Metropolitan Development Commission when all of these commitments were generated.

And one of the commitments stated that the following uses as defined by the zoning ordinance for Marion County, Indiana shall be prohibited as permitted uses.

One was automobile fueling station.

This property was not zoned for an automobile fueling station.

It was rezoned to C4 with a commitment that it would not be used for an automobile fueling station.

On that basis, my client did not remonstrate.

There was settlement back in 2016.

Those commitments were recorded in 2017.

So my client was there long before that and was involved in what was happening at this location.

This is our seventh hearing on this matter.

Seventh hearing.

We had all kinds of signatures from people that didn't want it.

I've heard Mr.

Mr.

Kahn talk about some of those signatures in the most recent hearing.

They had no support in that hearing from anybody that appeared before Judy before the hearing examiner.

I think that representative or a commission councilman, I'll skip it right here.

Councilman Mascari uh had been indicated to be in favor of this along with uh Councilman Dilk.

But in 2002, uh the hearing examiner denied uh denied made a negative recommendation.

It went in front of the full Metropolitan Development Commission in 2002 to remove this.

Staff was against it.

Staff said, staff said that this is not a proper use at this location.

You have, I hope, a copy of the staff report, which is substantial, and it's basically been the same report uh three times in 2022, 2024, and 2026, saying that this is not an appropriate use.

Um cannah, which council's critical of, sounds to me, the the um Marion County Alliance of Neighborhood Associations Inc.

by its president wrote a letter in 2022 saying that that zoning didn't provide for it, the comp plan didn't provide for it.

You know, the comp plan is not some ancient document.

That was done in 2016, 2017, approved by the Metropolitan Development Commission and approved by the council.

And what does the comp plan say about this?

It's not supposed to be uh C4 uses, and I'll get into that typology as to what's proposed.

So McCannna wrote a letter, and I I I guess I thought that McCannna uh has its uh as the may as the whole Marion County uh alliance, the the umbrella group uh had some understanding of what could and should be built, and staff wrote a uh a report that said that the property should not be rezoned.

Let me go back to the purchase in, you know, this was vacant and it was in bad shape.

And in in 19, I'm sorry, in 2022, Amman LLC bought the subject property for 199,999.

You should have that sales report, whether you've looked at it or not.

I don't know, I don't think there's any dispute about it.

It was in bad shape.

It was purchased and it had an assessed value at that time of 188,500 per the disclosure document that was signed by Sukwinder Singh for uh Amon LLC.

Uh and the address given for that entity, Amon LLC, was 13150 Ditch Road, Carmel, Indiana, which turns out to be the residence of Sukwinder Singh, and his wife Pritt Paul Cower, which Carmel Residence has shown to be 3.91 acres with an assessed value of 3.65 million dollars.

They did well.

This couple did well.

A lot of gas stations through a lot of places.

They bought this proper, this property was purchased, this property was purchased with knowledge that there was a commitment, and this the first petition in 2022 was filed four months after it was purchased for $199,000.

Hardly the ink was dry on the sales disclosure document.

The hearing examiner at one of the hearings, I've been at all six hearings.

The hearing examiner at one of the hearings asked, Mr.

Sukwinder Singh, were you aware that there was this commitment on the property when you bought it?

When Amman bought it, and the answer was yes.

So we have a savvy businessman who bought this property, knowing that that commitment was there.

I've been at this for 49 years, it'll be 50 in October.

People don't buy commercial property with if they have if they have certain contingencies that have to be met.

And this wasn't that way.

After the hearing examiner declined to make a positive recommendation, we had a full hearing in front of the Metropolitan Development Commission, and the Metropolitan Development Commission in 2022 did not give relief from the commitment that there should not be a gas station on here.

On the basis that it wasn't zoned for it, the comprehensive plans certainly didn't call for it.

And as a matter of fact, the comprehensive plan, which I expect you all are familiar with, provides that there's not even to be a uh an auto fueling facility in the in the in the in the uh comprehensive plan for this property.

So they're they're way outside the comp plan.

Can I see, Yolanda?

Can I see that map?

Uh, can you put that up there, please?

I don't know whether you all have seen all the exhibits or not.

There are several gas stations in this area.

As a matter of fact, there are five.

There were five at the time that this, there's there's, and I don't know if you can see on the map.

Can you turn it so that you can show all the different gas stations between between the interchange at Keystone Avenue?

Can you turn it spin it a little bit?

Uh between the interchange at Keystone Avenue and this property at 4000 South Keystone, there are five gas stations, one of which is owned by JUGAD, LLC or Inc., a principal of which is Mr.

Sukwinder Singh and Pritt Paul Carr is the resident agent at 13150 Carmel, Indiana, one of their other gas stations.

So they've got one seven-tenths of a mile.

Within seven-tenths of a mile of this station, there are five other of this location.

There are five other gas stations.

And there, and I might add that in 2026, you rezoned after a hearing in front of the Metropolitan Development Commission, another parcel that is that is in this 0.7-acre stretch to C4, which would allow for yet another gas station.

And plans were even filed with the Metropolitan Development Commission for that other gas station.

So there are lots of gas stations in here.

So we then have we have this uh attempt to to take out the modification in 2022.

We come back and try the same thing in 2024.

Same thing.

In 2023, the uh the financial reports of representative of Councilman Mascarry and Councilman Dilk show 1,100 contribution to their campaigns or their funds from Sucwinder Singh, 1100 each.

And then in 2024, when we come back for the second time, we have we have a letter of support that Councilman Mascarry has written saying that they ought to get gas.

By that time, in 2024, there is a convenience store built, and it is nice.

I can tell you, it is nice.

Brick looks good, council's told you about the pictures, it looks really good.

No gas station.

Sequinder Singh comes to the hearing in 2024 before the Metropolitan Development Commission and is asked by one of the commissioners.

If you don't get this reason, if you don't get this relief from this commitment prohibiting you from selling gas, are you going to open it?

And he says, I'm not going to open it.

We can play the tape if you need to.

It's part of the packet that we've that we've submitted to you.

And if you want to see the tape, we can play it.

But he said, I'm not going to open it.

He loses in front of the MDC.

The MDC says we're not going to give you relief.

Staff says you shouldn't have relief.

It's not suitable.

There's adjacent uh residential here.

It doesn't fit with a gas station.

That's a high-intensity use.

They lose, they fail to get a positive uh result in that case.

Now we come back in 2024.

And here we are again, and now we have, because they couldn't take that appeal to you or to anybody else because modification of the commitment is not uh appealable.

So they come back and file a CS rezoning.

They want to have commercial special use.

And guess what the special use is on this property?

A gas station.

So now we're back for the fifth time on a gas station in front of the metropolitan, in front of the hearing examiner, who once again rules that there shouldn't be a gas station at this location.

Recommend recommendation of denial, and then we go to the full Metropolitan Development Commission earlier this year.

Council's there, I'm there, the parties are there.

And again, the Metropolitan Development Commission rules that the property should not be rezoned for a gas station.

Every one of these times, in every one of these cases, the staff has written a report that is basically the same saying this doesn't belong here.

The comprehensive plan doesn't contemplate it.

The zoning doesn't contemplate it, a gas station doesn't belong at this location.

We don't need another gas station.

And that's what McCannna said.

That's what my client negotiated for way back in 2022.

In this map, you'll see that there are five other gas stations.

We've just had a rezoning that would allow for a sixth, and now they want to have another gas station.

Let me say, when the when Amon bought this property, a man who who headed up by Mr.

Sequinder Singh, and in the original hearing, he said, he said, I don't want to get this wrong.

I'm on LLC owns and operates a total of 40 filling stations in convenience stores in the Indianapolis metro area.

No complaints or violations from local, state, or federal government has been in business many years.

Well, that's true, he's been very successful.

I don't know about the complaints, because in this case, we've got a lot of complaints.

We've got zoning violations since this since this convenience store opened in 2024.

We've got we've got violations from the Marion County Health Department, which you have in the packet that was given to you, and I can go through the specifics of them if you want.

Time is limited here.

And so I'm not sure there's been such good vetting of the operations that are conducted by Amon LLC or other or related entities.

And to say that there haven't been violations at this location since it opened in 2024 is not right.

There have been violations, and it's in your packet, and we can we can go through them specifically if you want.

Signage violations.

There's somebody by the name of Mahar LLC that's also cited as a violator in 2025 and 2026 after this store is opened in your packet.

Mahar LLC or Inc.

Mahar is apparently an operator, I guess a tenant.

There's reference in the report from the business and neighborhood services department and the inspector, that Mahar is a tenant, and there are violations of zoning ordinances, signage, and then the Marion County Health Department apparently got a bounce check from Mahar LLC for its license.

I don't even know that it's licensed.

My point of all this is while council wants to make uh Mr.

Sequinder Singh or Amon LLC uh just uh just an absolute avatar of performance.

I'm telling you that at this station, if you look at the documents that we've submitted, the owner of this property may not be the operator, maybe Mahar LLC is in fact the operator or the tenant.

There have been several violations at this location.

So, you know, that that doesn't reflect well upon an extension of the of the other uh use that that uh council is asking for here.

I'm gonna say, in conclusion, it is appreciated that zoning is a legislative function made by the body politic, and that is you.

However, the record in this case does not support the rezoning to allow this property to have a fueling station.

With all due respect to the counselors who have supported the calling up of this matter and with recognition of the relationship of Sequindersing of 13150 Ditch Road in Carmel as a supporter of them, and with the recognition of the new convenience store at the site being an improvement over previous structures of the site, there is nothing substantive to support this rezoning.

Amon bought the property for almost 200,000 in 2022, built a permitted convenience store, was well aware of the commitments thereon, received the benefit of its bargain, got exactly what it bargained for, and then decided to go ahead.

I thought I heard counsel say maybe a hundred locations, a hundred businesses, and went ahead and built this convenience store without gas, and now comes in now for the seventh time after six denials by the hearing examiner and the MDC seeking a gas station.

I want to talk a little bit about the um the staff report before I run out of time.

The staff report provided, in part, the request would rezone the site to CS to provide for C3 uses in an automobile fueling station.

The CS district is designed to permit within a single zoning district multi-use commercial complexes or land use combinations of commercial and non-commercial uses or single-use commercial projects.

Then the staff report goes on to say the special commercial district is that is established for the following purposes.

One, to encourage a more creative approach in land planning, superior site and structural design and development.

Two, to provide for a use of land with a highly functional use, three, to assure compatibility with land uses, both within CS and adjacent areas.

Four, to permit special consideration of property with outstanding features, including but not limited to historical, architectural or social significance.

Five, to provide maximum adaptability and flexibility in zoning and development controls to meet the changing and diverse needs of metropolitan area.

Here's what staff concludes.

In 2026, staff believes that the development of this site with a gasoline station does not align with any of the above purposes that the ordinance outlines for the CS district.

It has already zoned C4, which permits 59 primary land uses and an additional specific use, I'm sorry, land uses, and 26 accessory uses.

Furthermore, many of those land use land categories identify additional specific uses within the category.

In staff's opinion, this site has many permitted uses that would serve the surrounding neighborhood and support the plan.

The other thing I want to talk about is the comp plan.

Staff believes that the convenience store is an improvement of the site that had fallen into disrepair and supports the plan recommendation of village mixed use.

However, further development of the site for an automobile fueling station would increase the commercial intensity and encroachments that would be detrimental to the surrounding land uses by introducing increased traffic, noise, lighting, trash into the area.

Council talked about a traffic study.

There is no traffic study.

I haven't seen a traffic study.

There was no traffic study.

There were some traffic counts that were put in.

A traffic study, as you I'm sure know, is something that either DMD can request or an individual can voluntarily do.

That was not done in this case.

There are going to be more stops in and out of the station if there are going to be gas there.

There's residential dwelling zoning, as the staff reports points out to the east, D3, single family dwelling zoning.

So now we're going to put in that he wants to put in a gas station that's going to operate 24-7 next to dwelling three.

Incompatible use, and the comp plan says it shouldn't shouldn't be used here.

The last thing I want to talk about in the comp plan is the specifics of the village mixed use typology, which is what this is.

No fueling stations.

So the comp plan expressly calls us out.

Based upon this, we respectfully request that the com that the council go along with the past six recommendations from the MDC and its hearing examiner and not allow a fueling station.

Thank you for your time.

Happy to take any questions.

If you have submitted a letter or email or signed a petition for either side, or if you are a neighborhood resident who has already been represented by a chosen spokesperson, your comments will have to be included in the remaining time allotted for rebuttal.

Comments from anyone whose interest has not been covered by either side are limited to two minutes per individual, and once again our clerk will be setting the timers so that you will know when your time is up.

Please be respectful of the time and conclude your comments when you hear the butt buzzer.

We'll begin by checking in with Madam Clerk for any names or of individuals who have signed up to get public testimony on this matter.

Madam Clerk.

Thank you.

Okay.

Hello, my name is Jacob Morales.

I live in District 13, 46201.

I am here to remonstrate against the gas station.

In fact, you'll you'll probably find me remonstrating against any gas station.

I believe that there are way too many gas stations here in Marion County.

In fact, there's not just five in the area, there are two within 1,000 feet of this current location.

Um I also would like to make a quick correction to something that the petitioner said.

He said that uh one that by bringing in this gas station that uh it will attract new businesses, right?

It's going to bring more people to the area, uh, more shopping, more businesses.

That sounds great.

Uh, and then he goes to contradict himself by saying that oh, the the traffic study, there will be no more traffic.

Actually, it's gonna be exactly the same.

So, which is it?

Uh, and then he goes on to talk about capitalism and how despite selling you know great goods, fresh foods, fresh meats.

Uh sounds like a bodega, uh, he will not be able to survive, but they will not be able to survive in business.

And uh gee, I I wonder why uh bodegas thrive on on having really any housing, and and I'm going to just hold this up for people in the audience just to kind of see what the intersection looks like.

Uh does this look like uh what some counselors may describe as a smart city as uh as some place where people can go to support their local businesses so that small bodegas like this can stay in business.

Uh it I don't think so.

Uh, this is just going to be another case of one gas station caddy quarter to another.

Maybe eventually, if we're lucky, we'll get a uh used tire shop.

Um, who knows?

Uh, but but with that said, I just like to wrap up way too many gas stations.

Please, please, please urge the MDC to either enact a moratorium, especially especially along public transit routes.

These routes are designed for buses.

We should not be adding more cars into the mix.

Which I honestly he mentioned safety as well, right?

What uh that people are afraid to cross the street in their vehicles or on foot.

Uh anyway, thank you so much for your time.

Thank you.

Are there any, is there anyone else in the audience that wishes to speak to uh this zoning case?

Please state your name.

Hi, my name is Randy Berryman.

Um, I would like to ask if it's normal for a president for a McCannna to write a letter numerous times on the exact same thing.

I would also like to draw attention that we've had more time hearing about a gas station than we have the entire time public speaking about data centers in ND.

Additional comments.

At this time, we'll ask the petitioner that you can uh use the remaining of your time for uh any other additional comments or rebuttal.

Madam Clerk, how much time is remaining?

Mr.

Han, four minutes, ten seconds.

Thank you.

Um one thing of interest I would tell you that uh in the last hearing there were three votes uh permanent votes and four negatives, and the three votes I think are interesting because one was John Dillon, uh who's the uh chairman of the zoning appeals board, the other one is uh Brandon Hurgott, who as many of you know was head of the Department of Public Works, and Bridget Robinson.

Those three people voted yes to allow.

Uh, and I think those three people probably have as much knowledge as anybody about zoning and what's needed and not needed.

Um the other thing is I am uh I don't know what to say about the comment uh about councilman Muscari and uh getting political donations.

Uh 19 or 2023 uh was an election year where he had a an opponent uh and many of us in this room actually uh attended fundraisers on his behalf.

Uh and I and I take that uh I can't even believe somebody would bring that up in a public term.

I guess it just tells you something about the people involved.

Um again, when you look at the people that voted for this, and obviously he didn't bring one thing up about all the petitions they filed the 190 petitions, not one word about those all being almost all phony that were presented as evidence in the last couple hearings.

And we finally decided to start making phone calls because we were getting phone calls from some people saying, hey, I never signed any petition, and plus I'm for this.

And he made the best.

His best argument he made was for uh Shanette is that all these people who live on the east side of this are older people, St.

Laudemer, very elderly on pensions, et cetera.

And they're the ones that signed the 1808 uh petitions for us to allow gas so they would have be able to go go there and get food and not have the convention not have the uh store close.

So uh yeah, Mr.

Singh uh is a very good businessman, and he was trying and is trying to do something positive for this area where he lived for many years.

Uh and that and you know we keep talking about we're gonna bring in all the you can bring in all these other businesses.

You know how many businesses have contacted our office or Mr.

Singh about wanting to come in there?

Zero.

Zero since 2017.

Not one.

And they keep saying, Well, you can put a you can put a uh uh two-story uh apartments in there.

Well, if if you knew the site, there that's impossible.

Uh so this is a tough site, and and we've got a a gentleman who's willing, he's already spent over a million dollars to try to make it work, and he's willing to go forward and do that with gas.

But if he doesn't get gas, I'm not sure what'll happen.

So, thank you very much.

You want me to take questions now?

Thank you, Mr.

Hahn.

Thank you both for your presentation this evening.

At this time, any counselor who wishes to speak will be allotted two minutes for each question and for debate regarding this zoning case.

P please be advised that you will be limited to two minutes in order to be respectful of the published process um and everyone else's time.

Additional comments, Counselor Anna.

This is just a simple question.

Uh uh Chairman Mascari, but basically, uh you as a district counselor believe that uh gas service at this location would benefit your constituents.

Yes, absolutely.

You know, uh recently at Walmart uh family center closed.

Actually, uh east of this is the Hannah Commons, it houses 60 homeless folks that uh they need to go to get food, and they've been going to this also.

Um the Walmart Center is going to reopen it in the end of the month, I believe.

But um I think it's just a gas war.

Simple as that.

The only remote remonstrators we have is the other gas station.

It's kind of silly.

Additional comments, Councillor Cahill.

Thank you, Madam President.

This uh this property is immediately across the street from the council boundary.

So uh councillor Muscari has the uh east side of Keystone, I have the west.

And in fact, just to the south of here, I actually have both sides of the street in Rosedale Hills.

Uh I have heard for as long as this has been going on.

I have heard from uh in particular Rosedale Hills, but I've heard from some people in University Heights that are both adjacent neighborhoods, that they are in favor of this, that the it it really didn't get discussed here, but the property across the street that's in my district is an almost completely abandoned strip mall.

Uh, as a result, we have a lot of crime occurring there, and uh to your point there is additional housing being built in my district uh that the uh residents are senior citizens that have expressed an interest in uh going uh to this new location as well.

And I can say that I've worked much of my career in the convenience store industry, and the reality is this is a suburban environment, and making a non-gas convenience store is it's just almost impossible.

Uh there was one in your district uh at Southport and 31.

It just closed a couple weeks ago, and I I never knew how they were gonna make it without gas, and they didn't.

And so the the neighbors have communicated to me uh repeatedly that they are supportive of this because it is some kind of development to your comment.

There isn't any other interest.

I wish there was uh because I'd love for something to be built on my side of the street, but this is the best thing that has come along, and so I'm I'm certainly gonna support it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Additional comments, counselors.

Counselor Brown.

Thank you, Madam President.

I want to try to be brief and respect everybody's time.

I know it's already getting late.

I I first wanted to call out just how ridiculous it is to pretend like money wouldn't be given to politicians to get a political outcome.

I think that's just flatly um absurd on its face.

Especially when what happened was not $1,100 was given to just Counselor Muscary, it was given also the same amount to Councillor Dilk.

And it's a rare person who lives in Carmel, Indiana, who feels so strongly about Indianapolis politics that they want to both help a Republican and a Democrat win on the south side of town.

It's probably not being motivated by their sincerely held beliefs.

It's probably being motivated by who they think could scratch their back a little bit later.

That doesn't seem like a ridiculous thing to state.

It seems like Occam's razor suggests it.

Um as Mr.

Hahn mentioned, uh, there are many other people in the room.

Uh, you know, Mr.

Han gave $500 to uh Councilor Muscari that same year.

You know, so you're right.

There are a lot of people who get engaged in this type of business.

I don't think that makes it right, and that I don't think that means we shouldn't be questioning it.

I don't know if this is true.

I believe I might be the counselor who lives closest to a gas station.

I'm 1.5 blocks.

I'm not sure if anybody has me beat.

Whenever police are called into my neighborhood, it's to the gas station that's a block and a half from my house.

Whenever people uh leave their rolling papers, whenever people leave their drug paraphernalia when shootings happen, it's at the gas station near to my house.

Uh you heard one of my constituents speak up earlier about what I've heard consistently, which is we do not need any more gas stations in the city.

And most constituents feel that way.

Most people don't want to live near a gas station, which is why Mr.

Singh doesn't live near a gas station.

He lives up in Carmel, not here in Indianapolis, close to the six gas station zoned sites that we're talking about.

Finally, I just want to point out that this room, at least this half of the room, is filled with people who have been participating in hearing examiner hearings and full uh hearings in front of the MDC, and they've had very, very little ability to hold developers accountable.

Very little ability.

The one thing they can do is with commitments, and right now we're watching a developer just wanting to throw commitments in the trash for business sense.

What message are we sending in terms of corruption and in terms of accountability?

If we vote for this tonight, please vote no.

Thank you, Councilor.

Additional comments from counselors.

Additional comments from counselors.

Thank you, Madam President.

You know, I just want to touch on one thing.

In 2010 or 11, when I ran the first time, I took zero dollars from anyone.

I've I played the game, raised three thousand dollars on my own.

I put in it.

I took no money from no one, and I won.

So here and or there, campaign money.

Many people have taken thousands of dollars here to get this job.

But, um, like I said before, the only remonstrator we have is another gas station.

Uh Madam President, I like to for the reason I've already stated I to move.

The city council overturned the Metropolitan Development Commission's decision regarding proposal number 206, 2026, rezoning case 2025 zone-84, thereby approving the petition.

I so move.

The motion has been properly moved and seconded.

According to the state law, a three-fifth majority vote, which is 15 votes, is required to overturn any zoning decision certified to the council by the Metropolitan Development Commission.

Any vote less than 15 shall be declared indecisive, and the proposal shall take effect pursuant to IC 36-7-4-608, based on Councilor Muscary's motion.

A yay vote will be a vote to overturn the MDC's decision and approve the petition, thereby thereby passing it into law.

A nay vote will be a vote to uphold the MDC's decision to deny the petition.

We'll now go to the board for our vote.

Well now proceed to special orders unfinished business.

Proposal number one sixty two referred to admin and finance committee chairman miscarriage there we go.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam uh president.

Proposal one sixty two modifies the several ordinances related to the human resource division of employee compensation and leave for the city and county employees.

Pass out of committee.

It's in zero, ISO move the motion's been properly moved and secondary are there comments from counselors CNN proceed to the board for our vote the proposal carries 24 to zero the next item on our agenda is proposal number one twenty seven refer to Metropolitan and Economic Development Committee Chairman Osley thank you madam president proposal number one twenty seven twenty twenty six call for the council to accept for the record the 2026 submission for the 2025 calendar year of the tax increment finance uh TIF district uh financial report pursuant to IC 36-7- uh one five uh point one-thirty six uh point three the Metropolitan and economic development committee reviewed and accepted this report on June the 8th a copy of which is included in the minutes of the committee hearing and submitted to the clerk for inclusion in the council's journal of proceedings no further action is required of the council thank you thank you mr chairman the next item on our agenda is proposal number one sixty four refer to metropolitan and economic development committee chairman osley thank you madam president with consent I would like to take proposal numbers 165 through 177 and 179 through 1860 we need to do uh 164 first forgive me no worries proposal number one six four approves the statement of benefits for Zima International Inc.

an applicant for tax abatement for property located in an economic revitalization area defined by IC uh 36-7 uh-15 point one-26 the proposal failed to pass out of committee by votes of five to five and madam president I so move uh counselor Hart madam chair uh or madam president um as stated um by the chair the motion was made to send proposal number one sixty four twenty twenty six to the full council with the due pass recommendation that did not pass it it was a five to five result um and since that time I just want to give some context um one lesson I learned never take vacation on a Monday uh so um so I wasn't uh able to make the committee that evening to to give this explanation but um this is uh a part of a massive redevelopment on the the east side of Indianapolis so historically there was a a Ford um Vistion um site that used to have 6,000 employees on the east side of Indianapolis that shut down in 2011 and then years later uh a developer uh Louth came in and started cleaning up that site they divided it into four quadrants um this uh is a uh statement of benefits for the Northeast quadrant for an organization that is a manufacturing facility um what's really cool to talk about this the site and what Louth has been able to do and bring in folks um like this is the amount of jobs they're they're bringing back to the east side it's not as impactful um as what once was with uh Ford that's a a very tough bench to hit they had six thousand employees at that time but um when when Louth originally came in that they're gonna be around two fifty three hundred they're now closer to a thousand at the the full build out of this entire site so it's actually an amazing thing and this job or this this development itself is around three hundred and fifty of that and those are manufacturing jobs which are those things we don't see very often and um so I'm I'm very supportive of this proposal because it is helping out the residents and on these side and it's helping out the the things that we need to do and um redevelop some of these old brownfield sites.

From my understanding you know watching back uh the video and and just going through some points that I wish I could have been there to explain is uh the the commitments of benefits and where this is impactful for and so you know that's it's split into two buckets of where those dollars are going one bucket is the Pennsy Trail.

So this site uh essentially sits on top of right below the Penzy Trail.

90% of the dollars go towards the Pennsy Trail, towards improvements and and infrastructure there.

And then there's $10,000 that I asked be uh sent to the Cumberland CDC.

And why that is because earlier with this same site with the Thunderbird site, we appropriated $50,000 to the Cumberland CDC to help with a design plan and market analysis study on the Washington Square Mall.

So you've all probably heard me talk a million times about how the Washington Squares Mall is in my district.

We've got to do something about it.

And so since March of this year, we've been doing a redevelopment plan on that mall with uh partners from Louth as the sponsors, Lisc, the Far East Side Community Council, myself, Cumberland, Schmidt Associates is the architect firm on it.

And then ULI approached me and said, Hey, we would love to be a part of this.

And we have this thing that's called a TAP program, in which they bring in experts in the field and do a two-day study.

And recently, the Grassy Creek Trail was opened up just north of my district, and that is slated to held head straight down to the Pennsy Trail eventually over the years.

And what the ULI and what we've been talking about is how can we actually create a bridge over Washington Street and show what that development would look like, the cost of that development, to have plans ready through ULI, and that's what that $10,000 is intended for from this.

This makes that possible with the community impact uh payment.

Majority of it stays right there on the trail that exists.

Uh, but we do want to try and do some future planning uh to help make that site more attractive that I've been spending so much time on.

So uh madam president, that's the details here, and and as a result, I believe that the concerns expressed at the committee meeting by my fellow counselors have been addressed.

Um I've talked to uh the assistant minority uh leader since then and explained a lot of this in a whole lot more detail, as I'll say for the evening at a time.

Um so I therefore move for adoption of the proposal 164 2026.

Councilor Hart, can I stop you before you make your motion?

Mr.

Chairman, can you withdraw your original motion?

Sorry, Counselor.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um I'm happy to withdraw.

Thank you.

So therefore, I move for adoption of proposal number 164 2026.

Uh be happy to answer any questions.

Um anybody has.

The motion been properly moved and seconded comments from counselor assistant ML.

Thank you, Madam President and colleagues.

Um, I appreciate uh the conversation tonight.

We had a robust conversation in MEDC about the specific property.

I think it's a amazing development.

Um I think it emphasizes specifically at the Thunderbird site that we're we're seeing a lot of positive development going there and not really having the challenges to develop that site that kind of exists in another industrial area.

So I'm glad that that's being recognized.

Um had really good conversations with the developer and the company.

You know, one of the one of the concerns that I had was um, why this is a great development for this site.

We want to make sure that the benefits that are being generated at these sites are seen in the neighborhoods where uh the development is actually happening, and so I think we're able to achieve that goal, but I think as we look to the future, we just need to continue to be mindful, obviously, respecting counselor discretion, but also just continuing to collaborate and work on that.

I do appreciate Councillor Hart for the conversation in doing that.

So I'll be supporting uh the proposal 164 this evening and ask my colleagues to do the same.

Thank you.

Additional comments regarding proposal 164.

CNM proceed to the board for our vote.

The proposal carries 24 to zero.

The next item on our agenda is proposal number one sixty five.

Chairman Osley.

Thank you, Madam President.

With consent, I would not now like to take proposal numbers 165 to 177 and 179 through 186 together.

Please proceed.

Is everyone sure about that?

Right.

Okay.

Proposal number 165 approves a pilot for a project entitled Rebuilding the Village, located at 5935 West 56th Street.

Proposal number 166 approves a pilot for project entitled Laurelwood Apartments in Rowney Terrace, located at 3340 Teakwood Drive, 1455 South Bancroft Street, and 1327 Riley Place.

Proposal number 167 approves a pilot for project entitled Hannah Commons Phase 2, located at 2880 East Hannah Avenue.

Proposal number 168 2026 approves a pilot for project entitled the Holcomb.

Located at 1545 Van Buren Street.

Proposal number 169 approves a pilot for project entitled Emerson Place Apartments, located at 2110, Emerson Knoll Place.

Proposal number 17 170, approves a pilot for project entitled Hopeside Senior Housing, located at 1915 and 2005, East 25th Street.

Proposal number 171 approves a pilot for project entitled Twin Hills and Blackburn Terrace, located at 2210 East 36th Street, 3091 Baltimore Avenue, and 3038 Hillside Avenue.

Proposal number 172 approves a pilot for project entitled Judah Senior Village located at 3969 Meadows Drive.

Proposal number 173 approves a pilot for project entitled Life Village, located at 3219 Orchard Avenue and 1927, 1946 and 1950, East 32nd Street.

Proposal number 174 approves a pilot for project entitled Ritz on Illinois, located at 3404, 3432, 3434, 3438, and 3444, North Illinois Street.

Proposal number 175 approves a pilot for project entitled the Drake Apartments, located at 3060, North Meridian Street.

Proposal number 176 approves a pilot for project entitled Beachwood Gardens and Hawthorne Place, located at 2915, North Graham Avenue and 5244 East East 32nd Street.

Proposal number 177 approves a pilot for project entitled Cornerstone Apartments located at 3802 and 3810 North Franklin Road.

Proposal number 179 approves a pilot for project entitled Grassy Creek Commons, located at 3601 North Midhoffer Road.

Proposal number 180 approves a pilot for project entitled Union at Astor, located at 1437, 1530 1533 Salsi Street, 1422 through 1528 Astor Street and 219 Cohen Street.

Proposal number 181 approves a pilot for project entitled Bakery Living, located at 1331 East Washington Street.

Proposal number 182 approves a pilot for project entitled Sherman Lofts, located at 3737 East Washington Street.

Proposal number 183, 2026 approves a pilot for project entitled Washington and State located at 1701.

I'm sorry, 1702 and 1726 East Washington Street.

1216 and 20 North Walcott Street and 15 North Senate Avenue.

Proposal number 184 approves a pilot for project entitled M22 South, located at 17 West 22nd Street.

Proposal number 185 approves a pilot for a project entitled 16 Park Apartments located at 1621 North Park.

1061 and 1604 Broadway Street and 546 East 17th Street and proposal number 186, which approves a pilot for a project entitled Damien Center PSH, located at 1438 East Washington Street.

The proposals passed out of committee by votes of 10 to 0.

Madam President, I so move.

The motion's been properly moved and seconded.

Are there comments from counselors?

CNM will proceed to the board for our vote.

The proposal carry proposals carried 24 to 0.

The next item on our agenda is proposal number 189, refer to public safety and criminal justice committee.

Assistant Chair Allen.

Thank you, Madam President.

Proposal number 189, 2026, amends section 381 103 of the code to require the curfew ordinance on anyone 17 years of age and below do pass as a man as a mandate out of committee seven to four.

So move.

The motion has been properly moved and seconded.

Are there comments from counselors?

Counselor Hart.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

This is a proposal that was given to me by the public.

They raised awareness after we had our first vote on the public safety curfew hours and essentially just bringing it back.

And they brought to my attention that 17-year-olds were included.

And so I went and I looked at the at the ordinance and sure it was it was true, right?

They were not included.

And so as I got to looking and doing more research, one of the things that I discovered is that the first homicide victim of the year was a juvenile aged 17 past curfew hours.

And you know, I thought the argument that was was given to me is that, you know, a very good one that juveniles at the age of 17 are still juveniles, right?

The point of this proposal, even with the public safety hours or any group of curfew hours, given that isn't to uh just start going and taking kids off the street.

Uh we heard a lot of I think good arguments that evening, um, one of which from was the the chief of beliefs telling us how just by proposing this and having the conversation, and maybe there's one or two or more conversations that happen that evening at home would be a positive thing.

Um so even if we get that minimum and accomplish that tonight, that's a good thing.

Um, but it's also about uh the protections that are already afforded to um you know juveniles that are doing the right thing, right?

Folks that are going to work, doing activities, um, this doesn't apply to them, right?

Uh, this is effectively giving the tools to the officers and making sure that um we are we're we're giving them uh that ability to um have that level of accountability.

Where I still think we have uh work to do is on proposals that we still have tabled here.

Um I don't think this is gonna solve the problem of crime in Indianapolis by itself.

Uh I think there's um a big accountability problem in a lot of different areas.

I think parental accountability is one of those.

Um, and I think the biggest opportunity we have with this is if there are juveniles that end up uh being picked up by the police and they are brought together with their parent, that there is a serious conversation that happens at the time that they're they're united, and I think that's the most powerful thing that could come out of this passing.

Um we've got to look at this as an opportunity where uh we just came off a weekend of the fourth of July, Beach Grove, just south of my district, juvenile shooting guns, right?

I mean, I'm not here to have a debate on gun, but I'm we're here to have a debate on on curfew, and we are having a lack of um accountability for those kids and those parents, and this is one step that will at a minimum at least connect those two uh in that given opportunity.

So with that, madam president, I yield my time.

Additional comments from counselors, counselor brown.

Thank you, Madam President.

I just want to repeat some of my comments from the last time we talked about curfew.

What we're dealing with here is political theater.

Uh, as the counselor just mentioned, we're not talking about guns here tonight.

We're talking about curfew.

And yet, as soon as these kids turn 18, they're able to carry ridiculous levels of weaponry around openly on our streets thanks to our state supermajority.

I'm in favor of the second amendment.

Uh, I'm a pacifist personally, but think that people should have the right to bear arms.

But when we arbitrarily choose someone's birthday as the time when all of a sudden they just have all the rights in the world suddenly available to them, I don't think that sets our kids up for success.

I don't think that sets parents up for success.

Um one proposal is gonna solve every problem in the world.

I get that, but when you know I'm looking at constituents of mine who've sat here for hours to make sure that there's someone looking in our eyes who works with children, who works with the youth, um, who has told us and has testified before when we did have public comment that this is not the way to go, this is not going to help.

I think someone has to listen to that and speak up.

So I urge everyone to vote now.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilor Roberts.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, I just wanted to kind of explain my thought process.

We're giving this a lot of thought.

I do plan on voting for it for a few reasons.

First and foremost, um, this is just yet another tool I think we need to be empowering IMPD with to keep our city safe.

Because for all this, really, it is for the safety of the kids.

Obviously, we do not want anybody um, you know, uh, in an unsafe situation downtown where there could be um potential youth with guns, and I think you know, you highlighted it.

Well, if we could be enforcing different things, it would be different conversation, but the reality is it's not the the uh the things were empowered by the state house to actually change.

Um, and I also think one point that I've been thinking about a lot is how complex our current curfew laws are.

They are different for people under 14, they're for people that are 15 and 16, they're different for 17, and then 18 plus obviously, they're different for weekdays and weekends, and if somebody came up to me and asked me to explain the intricacies of the days of the week and ages, I cannot give them a real answer, let alone I'm sure an officer, let alone a child as trying to figure it out.

So to me, again, I trust IMPD officers will have some level of um situational understanding of of the youth and they're not trying to enforce it in a bad way.

But I do think this is a step, and I do give credit for people that have worked on this because I did change my mind on it from last year after really considering the intricacies of the law.

Thank you.

Thank you, Counselor.

Additional comments.

Uh Counselor Bain.

Thank you, Madam President.

Just want to thank uh Councilor Hart for his leadership on this issue and appreciate the bipartisan nature in which this passed out of committee.

It's certainly not my place to speak on behalf of the IMPD chief, but I think she spoke very eloquently about the tough situations uh our IMPD officers are facing, and believe this will be um nothing more than a strong tool and their toolbox uh when they come to addressing the um severe issues that we face in our city.

So look forward to supporting this tonight.

Thank you.

Additional comments, counselor Allen, thank you, madam president.

Um, pretty much everyone knows my stance on this about adding 17-year-olds back in.

When we say that we're using a tool, this is one tool that does not show that is actually data that actually works or our system that actually works, and that's the reason why I'm so against it.

While I do believe in accountability, I am in support of IMPD.

I do believe this is a community effort, and we're gonna continue to find ourselves here in the same place and uh come the fall, come next year, and we're gonna be having this same discussion because we haven't came up with something that actually works.

So if we want to do something, we have to make sure that we make if we're gonna talk about something and say we're gonna use tools, we have to make sure that we're having conversation and making the right investment into something that actually works.

And this is one right now that does not work, and I encourage my colleagues to not support this uh proposal.

Thank you.

Additional comments.

Seeing that we'll proceed to the board for our vote.

The proposal fails nine to fifteen.

The next item on our agenda is proposal number one ninety, refer to public safety and criminal justice committee.

Assistant chair Allen, madam chair, thank you, madam president.

Proposal number one ninety two thousand and twenty six directs the city county to require changes to the Office of Public Health and Safety after the audit completed by the Office of Audit and Performance.

Do pass says amended motion to divide question one through four, passed out of committee six to five, and failed question number five, vote four to seven, which failed.

I also move uh Madam President.

Uh yeah, Madam President.

I've um I've got a motion on my desk, and there is just a motion made.

Uh Madam Council, she's already made the motion and I read the minutes as as it's already separated.

Do we still need to do a motion to separate it since you the way she read it?

It'll go.

Is it okay?

I think you still need to do a motion to say, to separate it again to divide it, yes.

Oh okay, okay.

Councillor Hart.

Thank you, madam.

Uh Madam President, at the Public Safety Criminal Justice Committee on June 10th, 2026, the committee voted to divide the question with regard to proposal 190 2026.

I'd like to again move to divide the question regarding proposal 190 2026 into two separate votes as follows.

Question one, which approves sections one through four, proposal uh number one ninety twenty twenty-six, and question two, which approves section five of proposal number one ninety-2026.

Um Madam President, the reason that we we divided this question is after debate in committee.

Um there was uh there was there was support for holding or having uh the impacts on OPHS of coming back and having uh additional reporting requirements and things of that nature of sections one through four, which is what that accomplished.

Uh, and then section two was uh a punitive portion that I had written into the proposal that would withholding funding if they did not do any of the sections one through four.

Um, and that's why these uh two questions were divided uh to have sections uh one through four for question one and section question two for section five.

Um so that's why I decided to move uh to divide this question, Madam President.

So the motion properly moved and seconded to divide the questions comments regarding the motion on the floor.

Counselor Brown.

Thank you, Madam President.

Sorry, I know I'm talking a lot tonight.

Um I'm fine with the motion to divide the question.

This makes sense.

I just wanted to take this opportunity to point out you know, sections one through four, I think um received a fair amount of support, and I think it's calling for extra accountability and calling to make sure the ethical rules and standards are followed.

You know, I think that makes sense, even if OPHS is doing great work, which I think they mostly are.

I just wanted to point out the difference between how we're treating this department and how we're treating, for example, you know, the relationship with American structure point that Mira Indy and Indy Star highlighted and how much of DPW's funding is going to character three to enrich people who then turn around and give large donations to the mayor.

Um we just had the public hearing a few minutes ago that centered uh one central question was campaign contributions and how those impact policy.

I just find it really noteworthy that we're very concerned about ethical issues when it's just employees of the enterprise who are perhaps you know not using their best judgment rather than the mayor of our city.

I would support the motion to divide the question and would support uh sections one through four, but I think that we are showing ourselves to be hypocrites if we don't take a stand on the larger ethical issues at play in our city.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Additional comments regarding the motion on the floor to separate the question.

Okay, we'll proceed to the board for our vote.

Select the green button to indicate that you want to divide the question.

The motion fails nine to fourteen.

I'm sorry.

Yeah, here we go.

Sorry, the motion fails 10 to 14.

Additional comments regarding proposal number 190.

CNN, proceed to the board for our vote.

Oh, sorry, madam clerk said one second.

I apologize.

The proposal fails six to eighteen.

Madam President.

On uh proposal one eighty-nine, I accidentally voted yes.

I won't I wanted to vote no.

You state that yes, thank you.

Madam Clerk said we will get that change.

The next item on our agenda is proposal number one ninety-one.

Refer to public works committee, madam.

Thank you, Madam President.

Proposal number one ninety-one 2026, which authorizes the city acting through the Metropolitan Thoroughfare District of Marion County, a special taxing district existing pursuant to IC 36 9 6.5 to issue refer refunding bonds bonds in an amount to not exceed 121 million, 15,000 dollars to refund any portion of the district's outstanding Indy Roads Metropolitan Thoroughfare District Refunding Bonds Series 2020 B and approves and authorizes other actions in respect there too.

Councilor Gibson moved, seconded by Councilor Boots to send proposal 191 2026 to the full council with the due pass recommendation.

The motion carried by a vote of 10 to 0.

Madam President, I so move.

The motion has been probably moved and second.

Are there comments from counselors?

CNN proceed to the board for our vote.

The proposal carries 24 to 0.

The last item on our agenda is proposal number 192, refer refer to rules of public policy committee.

Thank you, Madam President.

Proposal number 192 revises the chapter revises chapter 121 of the code to amend the county's excise and wheel taxes and establish a new division, state and local road funding.

That proposal passed out of the rules and public policy committee by votes of 73 and Madam President, ISO move.

Thank you, Madam President, members of the council and the public.

This has been a robust process.

The council took this proposal to four different locations in and around our city where constituents leaders and counselors have been able to engage in thoughtful discussions about how we fully recognize a generational $50 million annual infrastructure investment for our city.

This funding was made available in 2025 through House and Rolled Act 1461.

After years of hard work by many in this room and in this building, appealing to state leaders on the need to provide fairness in how the Capitol City receives road funding and recognizing that no level of government is doing enough.

Earlier this year, Senate Rule Act 179 made several changes to the eligibility and timeline for the 50 million that created the present reality.

To receive the investment, the city must progressively contribute additional new revenue toward infrastructure.

Next year we need to find $50 million to receive $50 million, rising to $100 million for $50 million beginning in 2031 and after.

The provision is all or nothing.

And there are no mulligans.

The first year we cannot match the funds, we are no longer eligible in the future.

There's also a very important deadline, and that's the end of this calendar year, December 31st.

This is when we must communicate to the state that we have the funding and identify where the funding is coming from.

As we discussed at length in our form of community meetings, our options are limited.

There was thorough discussion on several potential new revenue sources.

Marijuana, a commuter tax, vehicle miles traveled modeled, a convention tax for roads.

All of these are not legal in the state.

The state would need to legalize and create a taxing structure for local governments.

Our plan recognizes that growth alone cannot solve this problem but should be part of the equation.

And while we can set specific income and property tax rates, the parameters of those rates are also set by the state.

And for both revenue sources, we would either need to raise them or take away revenue from other taxi units like the library, towns like Beach Grove, Speedway, and Southport.

We also discussed budget cuts, which we may need to turn to eventually if we are unsuccessful with this proposal.

But let me be perfectly clear.

That's not fiscal discipline.

It's shifting the cost elsewhere.

This is not to say that we do not need to sharpen our pencils and be more critical of spending.

Senate enrolled act one is forcing us to do just that to the tune of $50 million last year.

We are already doing the work.

But the idea that there's this annual amount of $50, $70, $100 million annually laying around that doesn't include cutting from basic services and core operations is untrue, period.

And like many other communities around our state, and in this moment, we are being forced to rely more on income taxes and user fees like the wheel tax and the SERT tax to meet basic operations for our city.

So this leads us to the proposal before the council this evening, raising an existing user fee that must be used exclusively for infrastructure.

It ensures the heaviest vehicles pay as much as legally possible and provides predictable sustainable funding next year and every year after.

As we have discussed publicly for hours, so I won't fully rehash, proposal 192 is part of a five-year-plus council plan to ensure that the city can leverage the state's investment by 2031, more than 200 million dollars annually in new and permanent infrastructure funding in the budget.

And it's not just a city of Indianapolis that benefits, so do 15 excluded cities and included towns.

Some examples, Beach Grove will receive an additional 1.22 million.

Speedway, 1.09 million.

In closing, I fully recognize and appreciate the weight of the vote this evening.

I don't want to dismiss it, and it does not mean we have to like the challenge in front of us and the pain of picking from a set of suboptimal options, but choosing to do nothing or choosing to kick the can down the road again won't solve our city's infrastructure challenges.

I fear if we kick the can one more time, it may very well disintegrate.

For all the progress we have made on this issue for the past decade, we have not received reached sustainability because people in our positions in the past over decades have found convenient arguments that quote now is not the time.

Without a permanent budgetary solution to satisfy the $50 million state contribution, we cannot say we have the funds available.

We just cannot.

That may be a tough reality for some to fully grasp or accept, but it doesn't make it any less true.

So when faced with the reality, what will we do?

Let's find it in ourselves to do the right thing to face reality and lead the city.

With that, colleagues asked for your vote this evening.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Councilor Nielsen.

Counselor Cahill.

And counselors, I'm gonna ask you, give me a little bit of grace.

I know everybody probably wants an opportunity to speak.

I promise to get to you, Counselor Cahill.

Thank you, Madam President.

Uh I just I want to rebut a few things.

Uh the Counselor Nielsen said because, and I think these are just uh truly differences of how to approach the uh the problem.

I mean, we it I certainly believe that we absolutely should uh increase the funding.

We we've argued for that for years.

Uh I argued in budget hearings last year that the mayor said that we would have no problem coming up with the 50 million, and I actually said, then why don't we come up with it in 2026, which we heard last year.

Uh I think that much, possibly even all of the needed 50 million can come from organic tax growth without even actually cutting.

Because I agree with uh Councilor Nielsen that if you purely went after a cut and used the 2026 budget, that's one thing.

But I think that we have the ability through organic tax growth.

Everybody, when people get raises, we get 2.02% of that every year, and we can use those funds.

I also have a uh I heard the uh the comment about the excluded cities and included towns.

I have one of each in my district, and I reached out to uh each of them, and they chose to not uh request the money.

They don't, in fact, they are Southport is the only one that does not have the population to vote for their own.

So it is possible, for example, for Beach Grove to they've been talking about a $25 tax, uh, that they we can vote one way or another here.

They have that tool themselves.

Southport does not, but they chose to not uh ask for that money here.

And one of the biggest problems I really struggle with on this is that the flat tax approach and the dollar amount that we're talking, this this hundred dollars.

At the low end, if you have a low-value vehicle under the current model, it I heard a lot of senior citizens tell me, I have an old car, I'm paying seven dollars and fifty cents because I drive a 20-year-old Toyota.

But at the same time, if you drive a brand new Ferrari or a brand new Bentley, you're actually paying 10625 today.

So you get a little bit of a tax break in this.

And I just I can't, I just cannot reconcile that.

Uh and so for those reasons, I I'm not gonna be able to support this, and I certainly encourage my colleagues to do the same.

Thank you.

Councilman Scary.

Thank you, Ma, Madam President.

Um, my issue is is equity, and I've said it in caucus.

I think the 25 districts should get their decent amount of money in return.

It's a tough pill pill to swallow too.

I have one neighbor who has four daughters or three daughters and man and wife, so it's five cars.

That's five hundred dollars.

Um, but unless we get equity, I really cannot support this right now.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Additional comments.

Counselor Brown.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, just want to reiterate wanted to reiterate what I said during one of our public hearings on this, which is that this is political oppression.

When you heard Councillor Nielsen accurately describe what's going on here, this is the State House coming to us with the political equivalent of a gun to our head, saying that we have to raise money, even though we're already a donor county in terms of how we fund the state.

We have to raise additional money, not from the people who live in Hamilton and Johnson County and the Donut Counties who use our roads without paying us for it.

We have to raise it from our working class residents who can't afford it.

Under Republican rule in this state, the rich have gotten far richer.

The rest of us have not, and that's very, very obvious because eighty dollars over a year should not be a make or break amount of money.

And yet it is.

We're hearing from our constituents.

We understand, you know, the elderly people, the people on fixed incomes are really struggling.

The cost of living is going up, wages are not, property taxes are still incredibly high.

The rate to rise ride the bus just went up a dollar this year.

So while everybody else seems to be getting tax cuts, while everybody else seems to be able to make political donations that then make sure the tax policy favors them, the rest of us don't have that opportunity.

So look, the council cannot do what we should be doing here, which is tax the rich.

When Herb Simon's net worth has tripled in the last six years, so that now he's in upwards of six billion dollars in net worth.

It's ridiculous that we are asking little old ladies to pay 80 extra dollars a year to drive their 20-year-old car that we just heard.

That is ridiculous.

And yet, our state house does not give us the legal authority to ask the people who can afford it to pay what they ought to pay.

And I would urge you all to go back and read a recent um op ed that was written by a Republican friend of mine, uh from Shepherd Community Center, Jay Height.

His pithy phrase was that potholes are a tax on the poor.

As a person currently living uh close to poverty, I can attest to this.

When you lose a tire, when you lose a rim, when you have to get your car towed to get it repaired, you can miss work, you can get laid off.

This is far more devastating to your finances and harder to predict than an $80 fee one time a year.

We need, although I'm reluctant, we need to vote yes on this proposal tonight.

And then, even more importantly, all of us need to get busy electing new outsiders to the State House who are not part of this corrupt political establishment, who can put an end to this rule by the Israel lobby, the slum lords, and the data center developers, and instead create a government by of it for the people.

Thank you.

Councilor Bain.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um I'll be brief.

I certainly don't have the um political wherewithal to connect Israel to potholes in Indianapolis, but some of us do.

But at least when it comes to this proposal and tax increases in and of itself, I think there's just a fundamental disagreement about how we get there.

For me, I look at any tax increase as the government saying we know how to spend your hard-earned money better than you do.

And to some extent, we all we all know the taxes are a necessary evil.

You have to have police, you have to have fire, have to have emergency response.

We have to have public infrastructure like roads.

I've long said that infrastructure is well over 90% of my constituent correspondence.

That's why over the past couple years I've led efforts to amend our budget.

You know, I've I've never seen Council Democrats amend the infrastructure budget and the roughly 10 years that they've been in the majority here.

Potholes are not a partisan issue, which is why two years ago I went over to the state legislature to uh ask for this very opportunity for us to get this $50 million match that will be a historic investment in city roads.

Keep in mind that's the Republican supermajority.

But you don't have a gun to your head, because you can walk away at any point in time that you want.

People who generally put guns to your head, don't allow that as an option.

Um but don't let anyone tell you that the only way we get to this $50 million match is through a tax increase.

I think Councilor Cahill said it perfectly.

Our budget just grows organically every year.

We just have to have the courage to flatline some of these existing uh what I like to call more accoutrements of city government.

Things that can be nice to some.

I disagree with a lot of them, such as a DEI office that we spend over a million dollars a year on, and that's on top of the Office of Minority and Women Business Development.

So technically we have two DEI offices here in Indianapolis that we spend millions of dollars a year on, though we could easily put that money towards roads.

That's a choice that we're making.

The question is are we do we have the courage to fund the necessary um the necessary departments in Indianapolis?

For me, that's public safety and that's infrastructure.

Those should be fully funded.

And everything that's left over, that can be divvied up among the remaining departments.

But we just have to have the courage to say these are our priorities, and these are not.

Thank you.

Chairman Elsley.

Thank you, Madam President.

First, let us acknowledge that no one in this chamber has put us in this undesirable position.

To be frank, this is not the direction that we as the council would have taken.

We are here because it is the sole option finally offered by the General Assembly to repair our decades of crumbling streets.

And as elected representatives, we have a responsibility to act now on this sole option.

With an affirmative vote, the council has the ability to raise more than $70 million in new revenue and put it towards the most critical issues facing our neighborhood streets.

Yet I worry the plan currently on the table does not do enough fast enough.

We need to move and we must move faster and be bolder.

Because if we're asking the citizens that we represent to pay more, we must ensure their hard-earned dollars are spent fairly quickly and where they will see the most immediate benefit.

We must leverage the revenue raised from tonight's vote to create a once-in-a-generation neighborhood road funding program that can sustain Indianapolis' road maintenance for years to come.

This is not an easy vote.

Asking people to pay more never should be, but we must fix the issues our city is facing, especially those as important as the state of our roads and infrastructure.

So tonight, if we move forward, let us do it with our eyes open, with our responsibilities clear, and with a firm commitment to fixing the roads of our city.

And finally, I am committed to working with the General Assembly alongside my colleagues to improve the options available to Indianapolis.

We need a funding model that is fairer, more equitable, and one that is based proportionally on the value of our vehicles as it is today.

Thank you.

Leader Maori.

Thank you, Madam President.

I can appreciate all the hard work that's gone into this from uh from Councillor Nielsen and others that have worked on this proposal.

Uh I and I don't think there's any one of us in here that would disagree that potholes are the number one issue that face our constituencies.

Uh if that was the question on the board tonight, we'd have a 25-0 and we'd pass that, but that's not the question tonight.

How do we fix that problem?

One thing I've continually heard through through all the meetings we've sat through for this is constant no's from almost everyone that's attended the meeting.

Uh, and that's that stuck out to me.

There's been very few yes people.

Uh one of the only people I heard remember hearing say yes doesn't even live in the county.

Uh, if that's the case, then if he's willing to, you know, have us all pay the our fair share.

Where's the option for him to donate to this this proposal uh for these donut counties to then kick their fair share because they're using our roads as well?

One of the last times I can you know can remember hearing of some uh tax hikes such as this was indigo, they now receive over 81 million dollars for empty buses.

We put that vote to the community and the citizens through a referendum and let them vote on it, and they told us what they what they wanted us to do.

I don't see why that can be the same situation here.

We're gonna take a tax hike, let's let this community vote on it.

If they want to do that and get these three roads repaid that way, let's do it.

If they don't agree with it, let's go back to the drawing board and actually start cutting the budgets where we need to, or flatlining the budgets, as Counselor Bain said.

One of the things I also heard was that there were a lot of, and even in my own constitution in my own district, is that uh we have a lot of folks that are on fixed incomes, especially the elderly community that can't necessarily afford an extra hundred dollars a month or two hundred dollars a month or I'm sorry, a year.

My apologies.

I misspoke there.

Uh I say that to say uh I I cannot support a proposal that's gonna be such a tremendous increase and something that's gonna take such a negative effect on so many people.

So I think if we're gonna do this, we should let the community have more of a say on this than introducing it one month, passing it the next, and all because we have to get to September.

We've known about this for well longer than when this has been around, so why wasn't this put out well before this so we could have time to talk to the community about this?

If we had that time, maybe we could get to somewhere where we could support this, but doing it all in a month is not right.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam President.

I wasn't gonna speak tonight.

Um votes like this are hard.

It's a it's a huge increase.

In fact, it's a $98, $93, excuse me, $93 increase on myself, quite frankly.

I'm one of those people who've done it right.

Bought a used car, paid it off early, as a matter of fact, uh, not to have those high prices.

But I couldn't put up with the ignorance that's being preached over here about some of this and trying to mislead the public.

2019 RTV6 Hogset proposes regional infrastructure fund, 2023 IBJ Hogs that plans to push state to change road funding formula.

That's just two articles, quick Google search.

We have been talking about this for years.

This is not new.

This didn't come out of nowhere.

And when you look at council dem's, when I joined this council, we were off the heels of a Republican administration, we were spending 50 million dollars a year on roads.

We've had multiple years of 250 million, 300 million plus without any increases.

You now have a state that is cutting revenue from the city of Indianapolis, I think 40 or 50 million last year.

We understand the governor has some plans for next year.

Uh money just doesn't come off trees.

You're literally the other side of Market Street is putting us in a in a very extreme financial difficult position.

There is no doubt that there are more cuts to be made, and there is no doubt that those cuts are probably going to be happening as we move forward with the budget.

The other thing I want to say, I want to highlight when when folks sit here and talk about how unfair this this wheel tax is, and it absolutely is, it's ridiculous.

Why should I have to pay more while people making 200, 300,000 are actually gonna pay less or not even pay what I'm paying?

Because they're driving Cadillacs, Mercedes, and BMWs.

Makes no sense.

But did any of them go over there and testify on the other side of Market Street when they were putting this proposal together?

I don't think so.

People behind doors, they came up with the match.

They act like this was not meant to be.

There is a reason why all the regional places, municipalities around the state of Indiana are increasing their wheel tax.

It is the expectation of the General Assembly.

That is why they changed the wheel tax and made it a hundred dollar straight fee.

Not fair, not equitable.

So anybody trying to tell you something different is full of it.

And I hope you call them out on it.

They absolutely know what the expectation over there is.

And there's anger in me because I don't want to have to vote for this.

It is ridiculous.

But as some of my colleagues had this year, I had a flat tire from a pothole.

$250.

That's all I'll say.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you.

Counselor Hart.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, you know, I've heard a couple of things, and I one thing I just recently heard was uh quotes from from Mayor Hogsett.

The most recent quote we have from Mayor Hog said is that he does not think we need to raise the wheel tax.

And if I want to look at this chamber, I want to look at this chamber who's had a supermajority since 2020.

Look at a chamber who's had a majority since 2015.

I'm not going to use the phrase that keeps being used, but uh when we talk about what the Republican legislator did, what they did is they've looked at the spending of this council and they gave an opportunity to get a match.

They gave an opportunity to get its priority straight because clearly, when you have a majority since 2015 and a supermajority since 2020, and you still can't get the funding right, and then the state still comes to save you and gives you an opportunity to put another $50 million by just matching that and getting more year over year, that's a great opportunity.

I went to a handful of committee meetings, and I've seen multiple press conferences or press releases that were telling the public that this has to be a new tax.

This has to be a new tax.

This does not have to be a new tax.

I've talked with the legislature.

It just means come up with the money.

The mayor knows that.

That's why he said he's not raising these.

So then we talk about timeline.

This same council, myself included on this one, spent more time putting together a snow policy than we did taking consideration from the public, and we did some good public hearings, I'll give you that, on what we're gonna do to raise their taxes.

Something that in seven years I've never done this council.

It's a it's a pretty big deal.

But we spend more time figuring out how we're gonna remove their snow.

That to me are not straight priorities, going back to what our state legislature is giving the opportunity to do here.

So let's be very clear that there is no time rush.

We do have the money.

The mayor's telling us, the controller's office is telling us who's head studies, who's head consultants.

We can get to next year.

You've got the time to look at it.

He's even telling us you can get past one more year.

You can still look at it.

We have these opportunities to look at the natural appreciation of the co-it that's gonna come in.

And we have the opportunities to cut.

I've been in here year, like last year I spent a ridiculous amount of time looking at our supplemental county income tax and giving amendments on that.

Those were dollars, right?

We did a good job putting dollars this year.

Last year, we even put 10 million in the budget for next year.

So we really only have to come up with 40 million.

So I think there's a lot of opportunity we have, and one of those biggest opportunities is we don't have to raise the wheel tax on people this evening, especially when the thing I hear the most in my email is don't raise the tax.

So that's the vote I'm gonna be casting tonight is a no towards raising taxes for all those various reasons I just said today, Madam President.

Thank you.

Vice President Barth.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, let me start, excuse me, just by uh thanking Councillor Nielsen uh for digging in on this and for his leadership.

Um, in my time on the council, I've seen few people who have dug into the budget with such detail and precision as he has.

He's um uh done a yeoman's job digging in on this, preparing this, working with the General Assembly and getting out in the community and explaining what we're doing.

So thanks, thanks to Council Nielsen.

Uh, you deserve a lot of credit for getting here today.

Um, my comments are that the poor condition of Indianapolis roads is not a matter of opinion.

It's a matter of record.

Years of chronic underinvestment have left our infrastructure in a state of serious deterioration, imposing real costs on residents, businesses, and long-term competitiveness of our city.

The question before this council is not whether action is needed, it's whether we have the will to act.

The state of Indiana has answered that question with a commitment of its own.

50 million 50 million annually in matching funds available to Indianapolis, but only if the city demonstrates a sustained, credible local funding match.

That requirement goes year over year through 2031.

A short-term fix will not satisfy it.

A short-term fix will not satisfy it unless not pretend that it will.

Only a durable long-term funding structure will.

Proposal 192 provides exactly that, and I want to place this proposal in its proper historical context.

In the decade since UNIGOV unified the city and county governments in 1970, no administration and no council has put forward a comprehensive long-term road funding plan.

We've had studies, we've had short-term appropriations, we've had good intentions, but we've never had until now a sustainable framework for addressing road infrastructure as a generational obligation rather than an annual budget problem.

I recognize that asking Indianapolis residents to contribute more at a time when household budgets are already under pressure requires justification.

The justification is this the cost of inaction is not zero.

It is paid every day by residents whose vehicles sustain damage on deteriorating roads, by neighborhoods that bear the burden of deferred maintenance, and by a city that contributes that continues to fall further behind.

The proposed fees represent an investment.

One that combined with the state match will generate a projected $856 million in road improvements over five years.

That is a dramatic improvement in what we can expect in our roads in the coming years.

This council has before it an opportunity that no previous council has seized.

The state has provided the mechanism, the funding is available, the deadline is real.

I support proposal 192, and I'm confident that when Indianapolis looks back on this moment, it will be remembered at the point in which we finally chose to lead on a critical issue that affects everyone.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Mr.

VP.

Councilor Roberts.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um I come here today with you know the clarity.

This is a very, very hard vote.

In fact, this might be the hardest vote we've ever taken as a body in my two and a half years on the council, but honestly, simultaneously, I have the most clarity on this vote.

I think of any vote I've ever cast as a counselor.

I should start off by saying in January, when we were starting to think about this, I had a survey of my constituents that 500 people took.

Democrats, Republicans, independents simultaneously, and 81% of people supported this.

Now, a few weeks ago, I had a follow-up survey, which 300 people responded to, and still 63% of people responded to, and the feedback on that was amazing.

And I will also mention going door to door when I talk to people about this and people that are opposed to me about this.

A lot of times by the end of it, we're able to have a really good conversation because I think they're able to realize a lot of things that we all wish that we could do.

We all wish we could change the road funding formula.

We wish we could tax marijuana.

We wish we could tax data centers.

We wish there were things that we could do simultaneously on this that we are just not able to do.

I do truly believe this is the best tool in our toolbox to work on these road funding issues.

Um, this is by far the biggest issue we face as a city.

And the reality is, like it's been highlighted, people already paying every single year for bad roads.

When people hit a pothole, that is a uh an unpredicted outcome they'll have in their budget.

And I will also disagree with Counselor Bain to his point.

Um I I am uh, you know, very much an advocate.

There are definitely some agencies we need to looking at.

The budgets very tough uh in a tough way to cut things.

Um, and they're definitely, you know, probably tens of million dollars we can cut.

But one million dollars here, one million dollars there is a very hard way to get to a hundred million dollars.

And I'll just give an example.

You know, a lot of the agencies we have, IMPD, parks, fire department.

The reality of cutting agencies like that is having parks like in my district at Som Park.

We're not even able to open the summer because we can't staff the park manager and the people that are there.

And the reality is I think a lot of times this idea there's just millions and millions of dollars to cut, it is very, very hard to do.

And I I would love it if we could have some kind of interactive to show our city budget and let people cut themselves, look at individual programs, because it gets a lot harder when you actually have to do it yourself.

And yes, there are still things we absolutely should be doing, but really truly to dedicate the money we need to have better roads in our city, it will take courage, it will take leadership, and I really do give credit to Councilor Nielsen for working on this because I do truly think it'd be a generational mistake if we passed on this investment for better roads.

Thank you.

Counselor Graves.

Thank you, Madam President.

Uh, Madam President, if you don't mind um bearing with me, I'd love to bring in the voice of a particular constituent that I uh spoke uh spoke with a few months ago, and I've shared it with my colleagues in our in our caucus.

But um uh it was a standard call uh about a pothole uh client, excuse me, a constituent, upset and uh initially I thought it was routine.

Uh but as I uh as I listened to her share her story, it looks like not only did it uh damage her tire, but it damaged her electronic sensor uh and her alignment.

So this bill was ultimately 1,400.

Uh and what struck me was she shared that she didn't really know how she was going to repair that, and she was a mother of of children.

So, Madam President, it's uh constituents like her that I want to uh acknowledge, and that is why I'm supporting this proposal.

Uh this will tax and surtax is the only way for us to meet the requirements established by the state legislature and receive that state matching funds that are be necessary to make meaningful investments in our roads.

But I also, Madam President, I want to be clear about my expectations.

I do know that, and I want those who don't know to understand it, every dollar that we receive is for one purpose, and that's our roads, no other projects.

With that being said, I want to make sure, Madam President, that the east side receives the attention it deserves.

Our residents have waited far too long for better streets on the east side.

We fought, we've continued to fight, we'll continue that.

We'll hold everyone in this process accountable uh for delivering the results.

We see Indianapolis is a world-class city, and the east side uh is on the rise.

I encourage you all to come and visit.

We've got some great, great things on the east side, our streets though, um they are they're lacking.

Uh we've got four parks in my specific district, and the the streets that access each of those parks are in the worst conditions that you can imagine.

We need this funding.

Our residents deserve roads that are safe, reliable, and worthy of the city that we're building.

So for that reason, I'll be voting in support of this proposal.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh thank you, uh, Madam President.

Um, we have engaged in this discussion over the past 30, 40 days.

Um, and I think I've said enough.

Um, but I feel compelled tonight just to make a general statement.

Uh if it wasn't 941, I would address this conversation around the way to address the issue of infrastructure, is to uh attack equity and diversity.

And it's interesting from whom that came.

But it's 941.

Um leaders lead.

You elected us to lead in difficult situations.

This is a difficult situation.

I spent a lot of time traveling across this country in cities similar, smaller than Indianapolis.

And every time I fly back home or I drive back home, I'm reminded of the condition of our infrastructure.

I wonder as a council, can we imagine a better Indianapolis?

I wonder if we can imagine a city, a county, where we are proud to live here, but we're also proud to welcome people here to visit.

I infrastructure needs work.

And I encourage us, as I'm supporting this proposal tonight, to consider what it looks like for us to have a better Indianapolis.

I'm also going to challenge the administration because we have engaged in this discussion over the last 40 days.

And publicly, the administration has shared the unwillingness to raise taxes, but have not given a clear plan as to how we get the matching funds.

As a council, this is our proposal going forward to the people that have elected us.

You've elected us to make difficult decisions.

And tonight is one of those.

Thank you, madam president.

Thank you.

Chairwoman Brown.

Thank you, Madam President.

I just want to.

My colleagues have said a lot.

The one thing I do want to say is somebody whose district is entirely in an excluded city.

I live in Lawrence.

My whole district is the city of Lawrence.

I can tell you I know exactly how much money is going to go back to my district.

City of Orange is going to receive $3.8 million from this.

And in Indianapolis, that doesn't sound like a lot, that's more than 10% of the city's current budget.

That's going to make a heck of a difference.

Beach Grove is going to get over a million dollars.

Lawrence has 50,000 people.

Beach Grove's got a what about 8,000, I believe.

So that's quite a difference for our excludes.

I'm not sure of the numbers of Speedway or Southport off the top of my head.

But this just doesn't affect Indianapolis.

It affects all these other cities who have been hit so hard by SB1.

And if what's being talked about by people who are entering the State House this next session about cutting property taxes or even eliminating them, excluded are going to disappear, and Indianapolis is going to be crippled.

We can't cut our way out if we end up with no money.

We have to do this.

It's terrible, it's horrible.

It's what we're being fed.

And I don't know, I've talked to Republican leaders at the State House, and they have told me this is what this was set up for, was for you to raise taxes.

This is what we're doing with it.

It's what we have to do.

None of us want to do this.

It's terrible that we have to.

But if we don't, this is generationally going to destroy Indianapolis's roads.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Chairwoman Jones.

Thank you, Madam President.

As a chair of public works, it's no secret that I love infrastructure and I geek out on infrastructure.

So thank you for this opportunity.

Thank you to all my colleagues who have worked really, really hard on this topic, not just for the last few months, but for for years before this, and advocating on this, and for our residents for coming out to the committee meetings and to the public meetings for your voices to be heard.

One point I do want to make that your voices were heard, and for the colleagues that have alleys, we advocated for alley funding in this proposal because we have districts that have alleys that do not get funding, or very much funding, and so that was something that we uh advocated heavily for to have a tool to have some resources put into alleys for those districts.

So we have listened to our residents, and as tough as this is, this is something that we must must do.

And also for our ASME 725 workers, this is dedicated work.

This is guaranteed work.

This is a fiscal injection into our residential streets.

This will guarantee them work as well.

And one thing that we hear about, as Counselor Bain talked about, he said, I think he said 90% of his constituent correspondence is infrastructure.

So as tough as this is, and like you said, you don't want to raise taxes.

Our residents are depending on us to fix the future of the city and to fix the future of our infrastructure.

And I'm just thanking my colleagues, thanking the constituents, whether you agreed with us or not, for writing in for coming to those committee meetings, and um thanking the Department of Public Works uh workers also for the future work that is in your future.

If we can get this across the finish line, and I thank my colleagues for sharing the stories of their constituents as well.

Thank you.

Additional comments, Councillor Allen.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um taking a note from you.

You said you said in several of our meetings, you said as elected officials, we don't wake up and say that we want to raise taxes.

That's not something that we all do, and thank you, Counselor Nilson, for all your hard work on this, because I know that this hasn't been easy, and I've seen you sit in each meeting, and you turned around to each constituent to hear exactly what they had to say.

You stayed after each meeting to make sure that you answered every question that every constituent showed up to every meeting.

So I commend you for all the work that you put into this.

Also, with that being said, also, Madam President, as you said, in each meeting, we haven't gotten another plan, and this is the only plan that has been presented to the council, and in leadership, leadership is hard.

And Councilor Roberts, I have to say, this is probably one of the hardest decisions since we since I've become a counselor that I have had to make because I too have a mom that is a senior citizen.

Am I gonna have to help her probably pay for her registration for a license plate?

Yes, I am, but at the same time, I received those emails.

Um, even just last week, I did a press release for a greenway trail, which I thought was gonna be good for the far east side because oftentimes people think or have felt that the far east side or the east side has gotten left out, and we're doing we're we're having economic development happen on the far east side.

But when I posted about the greenway trail, I got negative feedback and said this is what y'all choose to do with our money.

We need pot, we need our potholes, we need strip, we need strip patching.

Also, another um subdivision in my district, they've been waiting for years to get a new stir patching on their street, and I took and put that as a priority, and to get that phone call, nothing against DPW, but to get that phone call from our council liaison and say, Counselor Allen, we cannot fix the street, it's gonna take more money, it's gonna take more work.

And I'm like, How do I tell tell my constituent, the property manager, the president of this HOA?

Only thing you can do is be honest.

And I responded back in no response until two weeks ago when they had another complaint.

So I say all of that to say our streets are very important, and we're putting our constituents as spending more money when they had to get their tires fixed.

And not only that, it's taking out time and it's still taking out food.

I mean it's taking money from the table also.

So either way it goes, we're between a hard spot.

You know, it's is this is not difficult.

So I encourage each one of my colleagues to support this.

Is this a great decision?

No, but is it hard?

Yes, but we have to take a stand to do something.

Thank you.

Additional comments, okay.

We'll now proceed to the board for our vote.

The proposal carries 14 to 10.

We'll now proceed as special service district council.

There is no business there.

Exciting on our agenda is new business.

Seeing that we'll proceed to announcements and adjournment.

The document agenda for this meeting of the council having been completed.

Chair will now entertain motions for adjournment.

Madam President, the chair recognizes Leader Maori.

Madam President, I have been asked to offer the following motion for adjournment by Councillor J.

Brown in memory of Jim Schrum.

By Councillor A Brown in memory of Kevin Bennett, by counselors Robert, by Councillors Roberts in memory of Helen Ridge and Sean Shawtown Hennings.

Apologies for that.

By counselors Lewis in memory of Harold Coleman Jr., Laura J.

Van PhD, Michael T.

Crawford, Don R.

Dillinger, and Tracy Y.

Washington.

By Counselors Lewis and Osley in memory of Virgil R.

Madden, by Counselor Nielsen in memory of William Ferdinand Wendina Jr.

and Rita Walsh by Counselor Lewis and Nielsen in memory of Ann Marie Sutton by Counselors Lewis Gibson and Osley in memory of Mark Russell by Counselors Roberts and Lewis Anne Bain Cahill Dilk Hart and Maori in memory of Betty Maudlin McQuillen by Counselor Barth in memory of Mary Joe Campbell by Councillor Osley in memory of Francis Evans, Fred Slack, Samuel Leesing, Aubrey Summers, Scott Anthony Ferguson, and Virginia Hawkins.

Madam President, I would like to move the adjournment of this meeting of the Indianapolis City County Council in recognition and of and respect for the life and contributions of those persons I have here specifically named.

I request I respectfully request ask this board of fellow counselors.

I further request that the motion made part of the permanent records of this body and that a letter bearing the council seal and the signature of the president be sent to the family of each person advising of this action.

Thank you, Leader Maury.

Hearing no objection, the motion is received and requests are so ordered.

Here are no further motions.

We are adjourned.