uReport

City of Bloomington, Indiana

Search

Fields to display

Search Results: (311)

closed #186665

Other

Case Date:
1/3/2024

Re: case #186498 why was this closed as a non response? The statement made was that CBU has special equipment. Isn’t that the case for many departments such a street? However, this expansion has been presented as for the move of administrative staff members. Does the director of CBU operate street sweepers or am I missing something? This seems like a response that is not inclusive. I think the community is well aware that the police force also has special equipment including but not limited to the bear cat vehicle, however it seems the plan is to move police into the central city hall location. Not sure how this plan matches up with the promise to consider all opinions, views, community members, and is certainly not mindful or inclusive of all city departments.

closed #186517

City Performance

Case Date:
12/13/2023

Along with many others of tonight’s council meeting, the new council and administration need to consider the public feel toward the showers west expansion - we don’t want police presence at our city hall and farmers market and showers plaza or by the tech park. This idea that you will progressively change the police by combining certain positions with CFRD in showers is very optimistic but comes at a greater cost. Inclusivity, equity, and reality of the community’s pulse should be accounted for in such large impact decisions for current and future development. As discussed, real estate is an asset - don’t sell the 3rd street station, do buy showers west for city hall expansion, but the plans for BPD need reimagined. CBU is also not being included in this ‘all administration needs to be under one roof’ idea and they aren’t included as eligible for certain benefits either. This addition of weapons, ultimate safety threat to regular staff members, and overall change in feel should simply not happen for a move literally next door to city hall. Staff have not been included in any discussions - has a survey or other metric been obtained about 100+ employees feelings about police presence moving to their day to day workplace? How about the tech park that received a special zoning overlay? Inequities already exist in city hall regarding pay, benefits, etc (the data is public). Now you want to move the group next door that has higher wages, gets rent/house payment assistance to live in city limits, some with take home cars, and has better negotiation ability for wages and benefits? This is an interesting move that doesn’t consider your core staff that run the city day to day -and in case one hasn’t noticed, they’ve been leaving like a revolving door for better pay, benefits, and work hours. This was highlighted tonight regarding the mayors office - not just for administration change turnover. Based on budget presentation information discussed in October of most years, most staff do not live in the city and need to commute in - while that is likely due to inability to purchase or rent in city limits, this is never discussed by administration and HR as wage increases would be needed to resolve this problem. Please pass this information onto incoming administration and council. Discussion with non union staff is not occurring and they’re not being taken into account or even given a seat at the table. Typically even council only focuses on police and fire, likely because they have unions and feel they can more freely advocate for themselves. Please consider other perspectives of many individuals you might impact and how to move forward in these decisions. Thanks for your consideration in this matter.

closed #186498

City Performance

Case Date:
12/12/2023

In regard to ticket #186427 - if the sentiment is that all administration needs to be under one building, why is CBU operating separately. This still doesn’t make sense as there are not even enough parking spots for employees at city hall (although remote/hybrid options should be supported in these modern time and progressive city). Will there be access to the west side of the building for all employees to fully enter city hall? This is much needed as the entrances are quite difficult for accessibility needs.

closed #186497

City Performance

Case Date:
12/12/2023

In regard to report #186454… can you assist in communicating that you’ve received citizen requests for this? Again, it’s very tough to get this to be a priority even as taxpayers and residents of the County.

closed #186454

City Performance

Case Date:
12/8/2023

Can the city work with the County on getting a contact form or system similar to uReport? There is no way to contact the county on a regular basis, let alone easily, without creation of an account in their new government online system and submitting a property complaint form. This puts too much of a burden on citizens or visitors who have inquiries, questions, complaints, feedback, etc. It is very difficult as a Monroe county citizen to get the same level of accountability and transparency from the commissioners and other departments.

closed #186427

City Performance

Case Date:
12/5/2023

Why is the expansion of the showers building into the west not for the expansion of city hall? This seems most logical as there are employees spilling into hallways, lack of meeting rooms, lack of parking, and no need to move those (police and fire) into a smaller space when they both respectively have their own headquarters. Very puzzling choices

closed #186401

City Performance

Case Date:
12/1/2023

With the new administration incoming, will there be a renewed focus on female centered solutions for various items in city hall? The women’s bathrooms have gaping cracks in the stalls which lack privacy, there is a bolt missing in a lock that creates a peep hole, and the breastfeeding privacy area is a curtain at the entrance of the 1st floor bathroom which provides little to no privacy as folks can see into the area when the door opens and you can clearly see shoes and who’s in the area below the curtain. It is difficult to report these issues on the internal system as they require a lot of information and cannot be reported anonymously by staff who just simply seek workplace improvements and equity. Thank you for any assistance with this!

closed #186225

Leaf Collection

2101 E Woodstock PL

Case Date:
11/7/2023

I live on Woodstock Place, and several of my neighbors have leaf-blown their leaves into great piles along the street. I'm concerned that the street has been narrowed for traffic and that the leaves will be washed down into the sewers and cause backups. There was a yard sign in the yard nearest High Street about no leaf collection this year, but evidently it has been ignored. Can my neighbors be compelled to mulch or collect their leaves before they turn into a slick mess this winter?

closed #186113

Scooters, Bike-share and Related Issues

Bloomington, IN 47401, USA

Case Date:
10/26/2023

I am a Park and MC-IRIS adopt a Greenspace volunteer. Late afternoon I was volunteering to remove invasive plants in SEP and observed a white male adult driving a gas-powered motorbike at a high speed westbound on the Renwick trail and then driving up into a backyard about three houses south of the Moores Creek Pike parking lot. My park colleague informed me that this is illegal and to submit this as a U-report. This behavior endangers park and trail users.

closed #186082

City Performance

Case Date:
10/23/2023

I just watched someone get a ticket warning for being parked on the grass in front of the house they live in. There is absolutely nothing that necessitates a law to prevent people from parking on sand, grass, dirt, or any other “unapproved surface”. If the property isn’t city owned and funded why would a person need to move their vehicle? Damage to their lawn is their business and they can reseed if they want to? Does the city also require perfectly grown grass on every lawn? The car is off the street. It is not preventing traffic or any permitted parking from occurring. The only reason you would pass such a law is to require the owner of said property to pay the money to pave so that the neighborhood “looks” a certain way or pay you to park on the street that they don’t need to use. There is no point in buying property if you can’t park your car wherever you’d like on it. I’m not the person who got the warning but it’s ridiculous for the local government to try to bully people into buying street parking permits from you. This city ordinance requiring a particular parking surface is completely unreasonable and it erases the meaning of property. I know absolutely no one will read this or care and that you will all just keep unreasonably ticketing people but just in case a single person actually cares I’ll send this message.