Case Date:

9/6/2023

Some comments ahead of budget approval: Are staff members being considered throughout this budget cycle? This question comes up frequently from the employee perspective, but it does not seem to be at the forefront of council, the administration, or even HR’s agenda. Staff are continually told how valuable their benefits are while being grossly overworked and underpaid, often carrying the duties of multiple positions because this organization cannot keep a full staff employed. Employees and citizen onlookers watch this dance every year as the mayoral and department head staff continue to get inflated wages while the vast majority of workers are severely underpaid with high expectations of their output. Yet promises are made during the approval of each budget for things that will benefit staff, however staff never reap the benefits. The staff health clinic has yet to have even a proposed plan discussed to internal staff but was promised last year, a compensation study was to commence yet the results have not been provided internally to staff and the amount allocated is laughable seeing as there are still LARGE wage gaps between the work performed at the same pay grade level accross roles within the organization let alone just in individual departments (pay data is public after all), the bonuses were delayed in getting released to staff via paychecks let alone the other health benefit reimbursements that are constantly delayed in processing, and alleged “progressive” benefits such as paid parental leave (in which the city is just behind in offering such a benefit) are still currently a “trial” so no one employee can actually calculate the value of the “benefits” because they don’t exist or do not apply to them (i.e. the bike cash out program that the majority of staff members cannot even use due to location of where they live, yet this is the topic of concern?). It seems that the organization is constantly asking how can we get people to stay in their roles, when the answers are right in front of them every year - skills based hiring, retention pay incentives, and adequate market/competitive pay. Our municipal counterpart in the County and federal roles work less hours (often closing at 4pm), have more paid holidays, have remote and hybrid work options without repercussions, retention incentives, higher pay rates, larger bonus incentives, and continue to float higher cost of living adjustments than the City. When did it become the case that City civil servants should bare the brunt of public backlash and demand, yet make so little that they cannot afford to live in the city they work for? It is very concerning to watch on every year as the average worker in this organization falls off of the organization’s top priority list. After all, how are citizens’ needs and demands going to be met if there are no people running the city each day? It’s really sad to see that the only individual throughout this process so far to discuss the employees’ treatment is the Clerk. This organization should be doing better than this, and set the same priorities for employees with the newly incoming administration. Someone truly needs to address the large pay gaps, the systemic staffing issues, etc. because it has yet to be accomplished.

Case Date:

12/5/2023

What happened to the employee clinic that had funds allocated for it to be in place by end of 2023? Yet again another example of staff being told they have x number of dollars worth of benefits when in fact that benefit does not exist or is not applicable to certain (all in this case) employees. There should be plans or information made publicly available in regard to this and yet nothing has been sent out or an update provided. When is this to be expected?

Case Date:

7/7/2023

Would like information on when the city clinic is going to have a plan put in place to open? As an “employer of choice,” interested to see these ‘benefits’ go into action. Is remote work still being embraced to recruit and retain more employees? Is the paid leave policy going to be retained for more than a single year ‘trial’ basis? Many would like info on how this budget is actually working for the people

Case Date:

7/9/2023

When is the city going to match the County for work hours/hours worked? Closing at 4pm makes public meetings available to start earlier in the evening, reduces traffic stress on roads as a major employer (remote work accomplishes this too), and creates less confusion on need of City versus County services and what hours they can be reached.

Case Date:

9/20/2023

County is getting 16 paid holidays and discussion of 8.5% COLA raise with starting salaries already at a higher wage than most comparable positions within the City, in addition to many roles working 8am-4pm. Will this continued deficit in pay and benefits be addressed in the upcoming budget decisions for City staff?

Case Date:

4/8/2024

Using the MyBloomington website, ( https://bloomington.in.gov/mybloomington/ ) It would be helpful to list the historic designation per the SHARD for houses both in and out of historic districts. (i.e. C / Contributing, NC / Non-Contributing, O / Outstanding, etc.) and linked to a page that explains WHAT THAT MEANS in terms of modifications to the outsides of houses, whether or not that structure is in an historic district. Many homeowners come before the Historic Preservation Commission angry and uninformed. Consult with the HPC Program Manager, Noah Sandweiss, on what to put in these blurbs - it changes based on whether the property is in a district, as well which district it is in. (Noah’s email: noah.sandweiss@bloomington.in.gov )

Case Date:

3/28/2024

There is an illegal business, a garage, being run from a garage that is part of 2600 S Banta Ave. They are burning what smells like rubber outside on the property.

Case Date:

4/2/2024

I am the property manager with tenants located at 111 E. 6th St. Since August 2023, I have received complaints from tenants regarding floodlights that never turn off and are located on the back side of the Tempo (formerly Village Pub) building. The floodlights are unbearably bright and are left on 24/7. The floodlights emit bright and obnoxious light into at least four of the units that I manage, as all four units have patio doors that are right across from the stained glass panel that the floodlights surround. The light from the floodlights enters all four apartments significantly, and is particularly an issue in the nighttime where the light is exceedingly intrusive. This appears to be a clear violation of Bloomington Ordinance, 20.04.090 - Outdoor lighting, which states that "Floodlights and spotlights shall be fully shielded so that the light element is not visible to an observer on any property either zoned or used for residential purposes..." I would like to request that the floodlights adhere to the ordinance and that they turn off in the evening to avoid polluting light into the units I manage.

Case Date:

3/24/2024

The SUNOCO station on South Walnut is lit up like the sun at night, with lights that point out and across their property — towards neighbors, the park, and even towards drivers going south on Walnut. Could the lights at least be angled down into their property?

Case Date:

4/5/2024

Commercial vehicle driving without a valid license.