Transcript — Terre Haute City Council, 2026-06-04

Machine transcription of the recording of the Terre Haute City Council meeting on 2026-06-04, aligned to the video timeline. This is not the official record — the clerk's minutes are, and this is unreviewed automatic speech recognition that mis-hears names and numbers. Check anything that matters against the recording.

Each line is stamped with its position in the recording, both as a clock time and as [t=SECONDS]. Those are the same seconds the archive's source links use: open the recording and add &t=<seconds> to jump to any line.

Speakers were separated automatically and named from the meeting's speaker roster where the evidence supported it; an unnamed voice is shown as Speaker <n>, which is a machine label and not a person's name.

Transcript

0:00:00 [t=0] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): Can I call the order of the special meeting of the Terre Haute City Council on Thursday, June 5, 2026 for the review of CF1 forms?
0:00:09 [t=9] Speaker 2: Michelle, can you please have a calling on the roll?
0:00:11 [t=11] Michelle (clerk): Councilperson Azar? Present. Councilperson Boland? Present. Councilperson Chalos? Here. Councilperson Devon? Here. Councilperson Dinkle? Present. Councilperson Henson? Present. Councilperson Loudermilk? Present. Councilperson Nation? Here. Councilperson Thompson? Here. All are present. Thank you. I need to have more facts.
0:00:30 [t=30] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): Okay, this meeting is for the review of recently filed compliance of benefits from CF1 concerning tax abatements compliancy. First item is AMPHISET CF1 form for resolution 5-2017.
0:01:00 [t=60] Speaker 11: Mr. President, did you want me to read any of the information? Okay. This is a personal payment for 10 years.
0:01:12 [t=72] Michelle (staff): It expires 2028, page 2029. They currently have 151 employees. They estimated they would have 187 employees.
0:01:24 [t=84] Michelle (staff): and their salaries are, the total of their current salaries are higher than they originally estimated.
0:01:36 [t=96] Speaker 20: Mr. President?
0:01:37 [t=97] Speaker 15: Council President Thompson.
0:01:38 [t=98] Speaker 18: If there's no discussion, I would move that we find Amphicent CF1 Form Resolution 5, 2017 in substantial compliance.
0:01:48 [t=108] Amanda Thompson (councillor): Second.
0:01:49 [t=109] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): It's been moved by Council President Thompson, seconded by Council President Boland. The AMPA-SET CF1 form for Resolution 5, 2017, be found in substantial compliance. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. AMPA-SET CF1 form for Resolution 5, 2017, is found in substantial compliance.
0:02:08 [t=128] Speaker 8: Next item.
0:02:10 [t=130] Michelle (staff): AMPA-SET CF1 form for Resolution 9, 2023. This is another personal abatement. It was for 10 years. They currently have 151 employees. They estimated they would have 177. and it expires 2033, page 2034.
0:02:34 [t=154] Speaker 29: Councilperson DeBond.
0:02:35 [t=155] Speaker 30: Mr. President, I make a motion that we find
0:02:38 [t=158] Speaker 31: AMPHASET CF1 form, Resolution 9-2023, in substantial compliance. Second.
0:02:45 [t=165] Speaker 33: Moved by Councilperson DeBond, seconded by Councilperson Thompson, that AMPA-SET CF1 form for Resolution 9-2023 be found in substantial compliance.
0:02:53 [t=173] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. AMPA-SET CF1 form for Resolution 9-2023 is found in substantial compliance. Next item.
0:03:03 [t=183] Michelle (staff): Review of AMPA-SET CF1 form for Resolution 10-2023. This is a real abatement for 10 years. Expire – I do not have the exact expiration date. I would estimate it would be 2033 pay 2034.
0:03:18 [t=198] Speaker 41: They currently have 151 employees. They estimated 177.
0:03:40 [t=220] Speaker 17: Mr. President.
0:03:41 [t=221] Speaker 45: President Thompson.
0:03:42 [t=222] Speaker 47: If there's no discussion, I would move that we find AMPSET CF1 form for Resolution 10-2023 in substantial compliance. Second.
0:03:53 [t=233] Speaker 33: It's been moved by Councilperson Thompson, seconded by Councilperson DeVon.
0:03:56 [t=236] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): The AMPSET CF1 form for Resolution 10-2023 be found in substantial compliance.
0:04:01 [t=241] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. AMPSET CF1 form for Resolution 10-2023 is found in substantial compliance. Next item.
0:04:12 [t=252] Michelle (staff): CHI overhead doors resolution 11-2021.
0:04:16 [t=256] Michelle (staff): This is a personal abatement for 10 years. They estimated they would have 130 employees. They currently have 54. It will expire 2033 pay 2034.
0:04:33 [t=273] Michelle (staff): Salaries are much are almost the same for the 54 employees than what they estimated for
0:04:40 [t=280] Speaker 56: the 130 employees. Mr. President. Councilperson Thompson. I was looking at this, I believe
0:04:48 [t=288] Speaker 62: we had some questions about this even back in 2024 about the CF1 forms. In 2024, they originally had the same estimate that they were going to have 130, but at that time, they had it I believe at 74 employees so they were short employees then and I was trying to
0:05:18 [t=318] Amanda Thompson (councillor): recall I don't know if anyone else on the council remembers did we bring them here last year to explain their employee difference in employee numbers I could not recall
0:05:29 [t=329] Speaker 66: but I can't remember it wasn't open completely gone in there.
0:05:40 [t=340] Speaker 70: There's something about it. I'm trying to pull it up. I think we did. I'm trying to remember if it was because they didn't file originally and then they did file and you still wanted a hearing.
0:05:53 [t=353] I'm trying to log in right now.
0:05:55 [t=355] Speaker 74: So you said the actuals last year were 74?
0:05:57 [t=357] Speaker 65: That's 2024. Here. That's why we filed with us in 2024. Am I reading that right?
0:06:05 [t=365] Speaker 77: So they're actually lower now than they were then. Right.
0:06:09 [t=369] Speaker 62: So given that, I would move that we find CHI overhead doors, CF1 form for resolution 11-2021,
0:06:21 [t=381] Amanda Thompson (councillor): not in substantial compliance and have them come before the council.
0:06:26 [t=386] Speaker 81: I'll second that.
0:06:28 [t=388] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): It's been moved by Councilperson Thompson, seconded by Councilperson DeBond, that CHI Overhead Door CF1 form for Resolution 11-2021 be found not in substantial compliance. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. CHI Overhead Door CF1 form for Resolution 11-2021 is found not in substantial compliance. We will hold a hearing on Thursday, July 9th at 5.30 p.m.
0:07:02 [t=422] Speaker 88: Yes, next item please.
0:07:05 [t=425] Michelle (staff): It is Patisa, CFO for Resolution 2, 2018. Real abatement for 10 years. And they estimated they would have 147 employees. They have 128 currently.
0:07:22 [t=442] Speaker 10: And salaries are much higher than originally estimated. This is set to expire 2029, pay 2030.
0:07:30 [t=450] Amanda Thompson (councillor): Mr. President.
0:07:36 [t=456] Speaker 60: Councilperson Thompson.
0:07:37 [t=457] Amanda Thompson (councillor): If there is no discussion, I would move that we find the TESSA CF1 form for Resolution 2, 2018 in substantial compliance.
0:07:47 [t=467] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): Second. It's been moved by Councilperson Thompson, seconded by Councilperson DeVon, that the TESSA CF1 form for Resolution 2, 2018 be found in substantial compliance. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Or say nay. The task of CF1 form for Resolution 2, 2018 is found in substantial compliance. Next item.
0:08:07 [t=487] Speaker 95: Same company, Resolution 3, 2018, Companion Tax Abatement for Personal Property. It's a 10-year.
0:08:13 [t=493] Michelle (staff): They estimated 147 employees. They currently have 128. Salaries are much higher. It expires 2028, pay 2029.
0:08:23 [t=503] Speaker 44: Councilperson Debon.
0:08:24 [t=504] Speaker 98: Due to the much higher salary, I will move that we find CF1 form for Resolution 3-2018 in substantial compliance.
0:08:40 [t=520] Speaker 31: Second.
0:08:41 [t=521] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): It's been moved by Councilperson DeBond and seconded by Councilperson Boland that FITESA's CF1 form for Resolution 3-2018 be found in substantial compliance. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. The test of CF1 form for Resolution 3, 2018 is found in substantial compliance. Next item.
0:09:00 [t=540] Michelle (staff): Same company, Resolution 7, 2021, real abatement for 10 years, estimated originally 139 employees. They currently have 128. Salaries are much higher than originally estimated. And the expiration, I do not have an exact date, but I'm guesstimating it is 2032, pay 2033.
0:09:22 [t=562] Amanda Thompson (councillor): Mr. President. Councilperson Thompson. If there is no discussion, I would move that we find Pottessa's CF1 form for resolution 7, 2021, in substantial compliance. Sorry.
0:09:35 [t=575] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): Moved by Councilperson Thompson, seconded by Councilperson Devon, that Pottessa CF1 form for resolution 7, 2021, be found in substantial compliance. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. Pottessa's CF1 form for resolution 7, 2021 is found in substantial compliance. Next item. Same company, resolution
0:09:55 [t=595] Speaker 95: 8, 2021 companion. This is the real abatement. I'm sorry.
0:10:00 [t=600] Michelle (staff): This is the personal abatement. 139 employees
0:10:03 [t=603] Michelle (staff): originally estimated. They currently have 128. Salaries are much higher. It will expire 2030, pay 2031.
0:10:12 [t=612] Amanda Thompson (councillor): Mr. President. Councilperson Thompson. If there's no discussion,
0:10:16 [t=616] Amanda Thompson (councillor): I would move that we find the TESSA CF1 form for resolution 8, 2021 in substantial compliance. Second.
0:10:23 [t=623] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): It's been moved by Councilperson Thompson, seconded by Councilperson Boland, that FITESA CF1 form for Resolution 8-2021 be found in substantial compliance. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, say no.
0:10:35 [t=635] Speaker 104: FITESA CF1 form for Resolution 8-2021 is found in substantial compliance. Next item.
0:10:41 [t=641] Speaker 123: Fox Hotel Partners, formerly Sycamore Hotel Partners,
0:10:44 [t=644] Michelle (staff): Resolution 12, 2015, real abatement for 10 years, expires 2029, pay 2030. Originally estimated 60 employees.
0:10:54 [t=654] Michelle (staff): They have 32, but they are connected with the other hotels, so I'm not sure if that's why they're not showing as many employees,
0:11:01 [t=661] Michelle (staff): because both hotels were supposed to be counted together.
0:11:14 [t=674] Speaker 62: Mr. President.
0:11:19 [t=679] Speaker 127: Council President Thompson.
0:11:20 [t=680] Speaker 62: It looks like as part of the attachment that we received,
0:11:24 [t=684] Amanda Thompson (councillor): there is some explanation that some employees can work either at the home to suite or the Holiday Inn. So that seems to explain the discrepancy that some employees are being reported as holiday
0:11:41 [t=701] Speaker 129: at one of the other hotels employees that could explain the lower number of employees.
0:11:57 [t=717] Speaker 44: Councilperson DeBond.
0:11:58 [t=718] Speaker 133: I'm curious. I can't recall if we've had them in here previously to have them address this, because I do remember this issue has been, I remember seeing this in the past when we've been reviewing these.
0:12:11 [t=731] Speaker 137: Mr. President, members of the council, Eddie Felling, this is one of our clients.
0:12:27 [t=747] Eddie Felling: I know they have not been called in before, but I know they've made this mistake in the past.
0:12:32 [t=752] Eddie Felling: They are operating normally. I can at least say that on the record. Obviously, if you want to bring them back in, we can give you some additional explanation. But I don't anticipate it's anything out of the ordinary. It was probably a mistake on their end.
0:12:45 [t=765] Speaker 145: Thank you.
0:12:49 [t=769] Speaker 62: Mr. President. Council President Thompson. Given that explanation from Council,
0:12:54 [t=774] Speaker 47: I would move that we find Fox Hotel Partners CF1 form for Resolution 12-2015 in substantial compliance. Second.
0:13:05 [t=785] Speaker 34: Then moved by Council President Thompson, seconded by Council President DeBond,
0:13:08 [t=788] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): The Fox Hotel Partners CF1 form for Resolution 12, 2015 be found in substantial compliance.
0:13:14 [t=794] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): All those in favor say aye. Aye. O say nay.
0:13:18 [t=798] Speaker 156: Thank you. I'll make sure that gets fixed in the future. Thank you.
0:13:22 [t=802] Speaker 39: Fox Hotel Partners CF1 form for Resolution 12, 2015 is found in substantial compliance. Next item.
0:13:29 [t=809] Speaker 38: GATX for Resolution 16, 2024.
0:13:32 [t=812] Michelle (staff): This is a real abatement for 10 years. They estimated 63 employees that currently have 53.
0:13:38 [t=818] Michelle (staff): but that's great news because their project is not completed yet. And salaries are slightly higher than originally estimated. Estimated end date is 2037, page 2038.
0:13:57 [t=837] Amanda Thompson (councillor): Mr. President? Councilperson Thompson. If there's no discussion, I would vote that we find GATX CF1 form for resolution 16-2024 in substantial compliance.
0:14:07 [t=847] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): Second. Then moved by Councilperson Thompson, seconded by Councilperson DeBond, that GATX CF1 form for Resolution 16-2024 be found in substantial compliance. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. GATX CF1 form for Resolution 16-2024 is found in substantial compliance. Next item.
0:14:29 [t=869] Speaker 123: GATX Corporation for Resolution 17-2024.
0:14:32 [t=872] Michelle (staff): This is companion. This is a personal abatement for 10 years. Same numbers, estimated originally 63 employees. They currently have 53 and salaries are slightly higher. Estimate for expiration is 2037, pay 2038.
0:14:50 [t=890] Speaker 30: Councilperson DeBond. Considering this is a companion to the last one, I'll go ahead and make a motion that we find GATX CF1 form for Resolution 17-2024 in substantial compliance.
0:15:02 [t=902] Speaker 33: Second. And moved by Councilperson DeBond, seconded by Councilperson Nation, the GATX CF1 form for Resolution 17-2024 be found in substantial compliance.
0:15:12 [t=912] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say no. GATX CF1 form for Resolution 17-2024 is found in substantial compliance. Next item.
0:15:23 [t=923] Michelle (staff): Gavonna, Resolution 10-2020, this is a personal abatement for 10 years.
0:15:28 [t=928] Michelle (staff): They originally estimated, I've got a typo, 65 employees. They're listing that they have 152. And this, I do not know the exact expiration, but it appears 2031, page 2032.
0:15:52 [t=952] Speaker 172: Mr. President? Council President Asian.
0:15:54 [t=954] Speaker 175: Okay. Michelle, am I seeing this correctly, that they estimated that their salaries were going to be $1.6 million, and with less than half of their employees, they're at $1.7 million?
0:16:12 [t=972] Speaker 178: Yes, that's why I'm pulling up last year's real quick. Give me one moment, please.
0:16:17 [t=977] Speaker 175: So either have a lot more employees who are being paid a lot less money or there's some kind of a basic math error.
0:16:28 [t=988] Speaker 123: Councilman Nation, last year they showed 172 current employees at 1.69 million.
0:16:38 [t=998] Speaker 183 (councillor): Doing the math at 1.7 million, 152 employees, that's an average salary of $11,289.
0:16:45 [t=1005] Eddie Felling: dollars. That can't be. May I briefly address this one? Govina Inc. is, I don't know if any of you know what it is, it's a
0:16:53 [t=1013] Eddie Felling: printing business. It's actually very interesting. They're one of the few businesses that do contracts for major sporting teams. So we have the NBA finals going on right now. My client told me it's interesting because they call in by per day, per who wins, on how many of which of the jerseys to print for the championship. So you always heard the stories about all those t-shirts going to Cuba. That's what he does. So they end up throwing away so many of them. Anyway, Kirby Johnson's the owner. I work closely with him. Again, my guess would be he made a mistake that most others make
0:17:29 [t=1049] Eddie Felling: in that he added. He's put way too many employees on, so he added the existing plus the ones he added after the expansion. So he doesn't have that many employees. I know he doesn't. It's impossible to fit
0:17:41 [t=1061] Speaker 148: that many people in the building where it's currently located. But he is operating at normal capacity as well. I can vouch for that.
0:17:49 [t=1069] Speaker 173: Mr. President.
0:17:51 [t=1071] Speaker 189: House presentation.
0:17:54 [t=1074] Speaker 175: Well, first, thank you, Eddie. Given Mr. Felling's explanation, I move that we have him come in and explain. So I move that we find resolution number 10 of 2020 for Govina not in substantial compliance. I'll try to get to the bottom of it.
0:18:11 [t=1091] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): Second. It's been moved by Councilperson Nation, seconded by Councilperson Hinton, that Govina CF1 form for Resolution 10, 2020 be found not in substantial compliance. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay.
0:18:25 [t=1105] Speaker 195: This is why their lawyers should fill out their CF1 form. You're just making my case for me, Councilman Nation, so thank you. A little bit of advertising.
0:18:33 [t=1113] Speaker 197: Mr. President, don't forget to state the hearing, please.
0:18:35 [t=1115] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): Govina CF1 form for Resolution 10, 2020 is found not in substantial compliance,
0:18:40 [t=1120] Speaker 86: Hearing will take place on Thursday, July 9th at 5.30 p.m. Next item.
0:18:46 [t=1126] Speaker 203: Hydrate Chemical, they have two. The first one is Resolution 2, 2022.
0:18:51 [t=1131] Michelle (staff): It is a real abatement for 10 years. They estimated 59 employees.
0:18:57 [t=1137] Michelle (staff): They have 53 currently. And it is set to expire 2033, page 2034.
0:19:07 [t=1147] Speaker 74: Councilperson Thompson.
0:19:08 [t=1148] Amanda Thompson (councillor): Mr. President, if there is no discussion, I would move that we find a hydrate chemical CF1 form for Resolution 2, 2022 in substantial compliance.
0:19:18 [t=1158] Speaker 33: Second.
0:19:19 [t=1159] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): It's been moved by Councilperson Thompson, seconded by Councilperson DeBond, that hydrate chemical CF1 form for Resolution 2, 2022 be found in substantial compliance. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. Hydrate chemical CF1 form for Resolution 2, 2022 is found in substantial compliance. Next item.
0:19:39 [t=1179] Michelle (staff): Their companion one, which is for Resolution 3, 2022. Same situation. This is a personal abatement, 10 years.
0:19:48 [t=1188] Michelle (staff): Estimated 59 employees currently have 53. It's set to expire 2032, page 2033.
0:19:57 [t=1197] Speaker 209: Councilperson Thompson.
0:19:59 [t=1199] Speaker 206: Mr. President, there is no discussion. I would move that we find Hydrate Chemical CF1 form for Resolution 3, 2022.
0:20:06 [t=1206] Amanda Thompson (councillor): in substantial compliance.
0:20:09 [t=1209] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): The move by Councilperson Thompson, seconded by Councilperson DeBond, the hydrate chemical CF1 form for Resolution 3-2022 be found in substantial compliance. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. Hydrate chemical CF1 form for Resolution 3-2022 is found in substantial compliance. Next item.
0:20:29 [t=1229] Michelle (staff): Revolution, this is for Resolution 5-2015. It was a personal abatement for 10 years. This is the last year. They have 229 employees. They originally estimated 245.
0:20:48 [t=1248] Speaker 74: Councilperson Thompson.
0:20:49 [t=1249] Amanda Thompson (councillor): Mr. President, if there is no discussion, I would move that we find Revolution CF1 form for Resolution 5, 2015 in substantial compliance.
0:21:02 [t=1262] Speaker 47: Second.
0:21:02 [t=1262] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): It's been moved by Councilperson Thompson, seconded by Councilperson Hinton. the Revolution CF1 form for Resolution 5, 2015 be found in substantial compliance. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say no. Revolution CF1 form for Resolution 5, 2015 is found in substantial compliance. Next item.
0:21:23 [t=1283] Speaker 219: Also for Revolution, oh my gosh, Resolution 35, 2017, Personal Abayment for 10 years,
0:21:33 [t=1293] Michelle (staff): They are showing that they have 230 employees and the numbers are exactly the same. It has to be a typo because the estimated numbers are matching the actual numbers.
0:21:50 [t=1310] Speaker 224: 53 million.
0:21:51 [t=1311] Speaker 225: I'm going to do a little work there.
0:21:59 [t=1319] Michelle (staff): And it is set to expire 2028, pay 2029.
0:22:03 [t=1323] Amanda Thompson (councillor): Mr. President. Councilperson Thompson. I would agree that it appears that the $53 million was a scrivener's error, that there were two numbers added at the end that made it look accidentally inflated. With that, I would move that we find Revolution CF1 form for Resolution 35, 2017 in substantial compliance.
0:22:29 [t=1349] Speaker 47: Second.
0:22:32 [t=1352] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): It's been moved by Councilperson Thompson, seconded by Councilperson Loudoun. The Revolution CF1 form for Resolution 35-2017 be found in substantial compliance. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. Revolution CF1 form for Resolution 35-2017 is found in substantial compliance. I have a question, Mr. President.
0:22:53 [t=1373] Speaker 236: Councilperson Hinton. Can we ask them to send us a request? A corrected form. I can't. Yeah.
0:23:01 [t=1381] Speaker 239: Thank you.
0:23:02 [t=1382] Speaker 237: Thank you.
0:23:03 [t=1383] Speaker 241: Yeah, thank you. Next item.
0:23:08 [t=1388] Speaker 243: Your last one.
0:23:09 [t=1389] Michelle (staff): It is River Valley Apartments, Resolution 9-2020, a six-year real abatement. They estimated three employees. They have three employees.
0:23:22 [t=1402] Michelle (staff): Expiration is unknown. My estimate is 2032, page 2033.
0:23:29 [t=1409] Speaker 160: Councilperson Thompson.
0:23:32 [t=1412] Amanda Thompson (councillor): Mr. President, if there's no discussion, I would move that we would find River Valley
0:23:38 [t=1418] Amanda Thompson (councillor): Apartment CF1 form for Resolution 9-2020 in substantial compliance.
0:23:43 [t=1423] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): Second. It's been moved by Councilperson Thompson, seconded by Councilperson Nation, the River Valley Apartment CF1 form for Resolution 9-2020 to be found in substantial compliance. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. River Valley Apartment CF1 form for Resolution 9-2020 is found in substantial compliance.
0:24:04 [t=1444] Speaker 54: Mr. President, it was a lot of work, but we were able to get all the forms in.
0:24:07 [t=1447] Speaker 250: We've had everybody that's required has filed, so we have none that are outstanding. It's a miracle.
0:24:13 [t=1453] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): Thank you for your work. So those that were found not in substantial compliance, hearing date will be on Thursday, July 9th, 5.30 p.m.
0:24:22 [t=1462] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): Moved to adjourn.
0:24:24 [t=1464] Speaker 253: Second.
0:24:24 [t=1464] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): It's been moved by Councilperson Azar, seconded by Councilman Boland, that we adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Say nay. We stand adjourned.
0:24:36 [t=1476] Speaker 254: Nobody can adjourn like that.
0:24:37 [t=1477] I really do.
0:24:40 [t=1480] Speaker 259: Making the most motions to find in rooms or not in substantial compliance of what...
0:24:54 [t=1494] Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
0:30:54 [t=1854] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): At this time, I call to order the regular meeting of the Terre Haute City Council on Thursday, June 4, 2026. The first item on the agenda is a moment of silence and pledge of allegiance to the flag. Tonight, the pledge will be led by Councilperson Candace.
0:31:24 [t=1884] Speaker 265: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for
0:31:39 [t=1899] Speaker 266: which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
0:31:54 [t=1914] Speaker 268: I'll show you. Will you please call the roll?
0:31:59 [t=1919] Michelle (clerk): Councilperson Azar. Still present. Councilperson Boland. Present. Councilperson Chalos. Still here. Councilperson DeBond. Here. Councilperson Dinkle. Present. Councilperson Hinton. Present. Councilperson Loudermilk. Here. Councilperson Nation. Here. Councilperson Thompson. Here. Niner present. Thank you.
0:32:18 [t=1938] Speaker 86: This time we reserve up to 30 minutes of time for public comment on items not on the agenda.
0:32:23 [t=1943] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): We have a sign-up sheet that we'll work through in a moment. When you are called, if you please come to the podium, state your name,
0:32:30 [t=1950] Speaker 86: direct your questions towards the council, and limit your comments to three minutes. First person on the list is Jeffrey White.
0:32:40 [t=1960] Jeffrey White (resident): Good evening, everybody. My name is Jeffrey White. I'm the trustee of the Eternal Flame Lodge Trust. I put that together 6-1-26. I'm a veteran, servant, resident up here in Terre Haute. I'm not here to fight you. I'm here to help house our homeless tonight. And what we have, basically the problem of 500 in house in Vigo County, 100 need beds to be in compliance with July's ordinance. Martin versus voice is clear. City can't criminalize sleeping outside if no shelter exists. City attorney knows this. I serve notice of trust 6126 to protect us all from that lawsuit.
0:33:17 [t=1997] Jeffrey White (resident): The solution that I come up with, my trust will contact, insure, and operate 100 beds at the Vigo County Fairgrounds, 3901 South U.S. Highway 41, starting as soon as possible. Zero city dollars needed. Trust assumes all liability. City provides access only. Pathways or Catholic charities can run day by day. If council prefers, trust will pay then. Jay Carver died, 12-15-26, waiting on collaboration. Others shouldn't be dying waiting on budgets. What I'm asking is three things tonight from the council. Approve access to the Eagle County Fairgrounds for 100 beds. Authorize the mayor.
0:33:59 [t=2039] Jeffrey White (resident): I have an MOU, a Memorandum of Understanding with Eternal Fire Lodge Trust. And I'll let Crane account, receive city partnership funds when available in closing. Council, you can be the ones who said yes when Terre Haute needed you. The trust is ready. The beds are ready. The only thing missing is your vote. And hopefully that can start this evening. Thank you very much.
0:34:20 [t=2060] Speaker 282: Thank you. Next is Richard Whitlock.
0:34:31 [t=2071] Speaker 284: I'm here this evening to look for a special ordinance to rezone property at 2921 and 2931 North 14th Street into one single parcel. The lot numbers are 84-06-10-253-003.000-002. The second lot, 2931, is 8406-10-253-000.000-002. and that those will be merged together to put two three-bedroom, two-bath homes on the properties up there now and then hopefully next year we'll put two two-bedroom homes on the property.
0:35:26 [t=2126] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): So Mr. Wicklock, if you're requesting a rezoning, there's a formal process for that.
0:35:30 [t=2130] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): You'll have to file all the paperwork through the city clerk's office. has to go through the process through engineering review, goes to area plan commission, and that will come to us for action. So we cannot take action without the paper being filed.
0:35:42 [t=2142] Speaker 250: Good enough. Thank you. If you call the city clerk's office, I'll be happy to help you. Thank you. Thank you.
0:35:52 [t=2152] Speaker 160: Next on the list is Michael Carroll.
0:35:59 [t=2159] Speaker 291: My name is Michael Carroll. I live at 812 South 5th Street.
0:36:02 [t=2162] Michael Carroll (resident): this is a story that happened to me that is going to address a broken window theory, if you're familiar with it. March 20th at 10.30 a.m., I was driving north on 5th Street, and as I approached Oak Street, a car emerged, and we had an accident. Airbags deployed in both cars. After a brief moment that I had to apologize to Jesus for, I went and made sure that she was okay. She was upset and crying. she was driving a relative's brand new car that still had temporary plates on it, and she was extremely upset. We called the police, and the police officer took our statements.
0:36:42 [t=2202] Michael Carroll (resident): When we were almost done and the wreckers were on their way, I mentioned to the police officer that the real cause of the accident was a pickup truck that was parked along a yellow curb right next to a fire hydrant. The officer sitting in his car proceeded to inform me that, and I want to remember this correctly, but I don't remember his exact words, but he said he informed me that he either wasn't going to address it at this time or didn't have time to address it.
0:37:14 [t=2234] Michael Carroll (resident): I thought about that for a few days, talked to our neighbors, found out that there was an additional accident that afternoon at the same intersection. We called 3-1-1 and informed the 3-1-1 officer of the pickup, and that was obstructing view. We didn't get a response. We found out later from the 3-1-1 officer that while it was parked illegally, he thought that he could see around it, so he didn't do anything about it at that time. I have since found out there's been a couple more accidents at that corner. It hasn't moved from that spot. on your way home tonight,
0:37:51 [t=2271] Michael Carroll (resident): I suggest each of you make a right turn on the third, a left on the oak, and go up to oak and fifth and see if you can see around that pickup truck. It is still parked at the same spot,
0:38:07 [t=2287] Speaker 296: and I'm just trying to figure out how broken windows is such a small thing,
0:38:15 [t=2295] Michael Carroll (resident): but it creates such a big problem and an eyesore for a community everywhere.
0:38:20 [t=2300] Speaker 300: And I just hope we can get something done about the little things, getting them addressed. Thank you.
0:38:24 [t=2304] Speaker 301: Thank you.
0:38:29 [t=2309] Speaker 97: Next is Shep Poland.
0:38:37 [t=2317] Speaker 303: Good evening. My name is Shep Poland. I reside at 3715 Ohio Boulevard.
0:38:44 [t=2324] Shep Poland (resident): I'm here tonight to speak about the property that's on the north side of Ohio Street between Brown and Fruit Ridge, where I'm sure all of you have been down the street in the last couple of weeks, and you've seen where all the timber's being cut in there. I'm really here first to say that when I was out of town when this first got started, and when I got back it was kind of a surprise to see that but the biggest surprise was the large piles of wood and timber and debris that were being piled up and after talking with some of the neighbors in the neighborhood I learned
0:39:27 [t=2367] Shep Poland (resident): that this was planned to be burned and some of the piles over there are larger than the houses that are around them over there and I know a lot of people were alarmed i was and as a result we started contacting you individuals on the council and i appreciate your responses to that because i'm not sure how it happened or who had effect on what or how or what or when but i've now learned that that burning is not going to take place and we really if you were involved and helped do that i really appreciate that and i know the people in our
0:40:03 [t=2403] Shep Poland (resident): neighborhood are very thankful for that and appreciate anything that you might have done to help that out but part of this as this was begin beginning to develop there were a lot of questions that began to come up and I know that I began to look in some of the records and some of the people that I know in a neighborhood begin to look at the records and questions begin to arise as to whether or not this was actually something that could or could not have been done. And we began to learn that the property is zoned agriculture, which permits that sort
0:40:43 [t=2443] Shep Poland (resident): of behavior or that process in the neighborhood. After digging into this a little bit and looking, I know last year, this time I was standing it just podium podium and we were in a different matter but there was an application submitted that it needed to be rezoned so that apartments could be built there and you go back and you look at the application and the applicant said that the zoning was r1 which is not agriculture and And you begin to look, and what is it? Is it R1 or is it agriculture?
0:41:25 [t=2485] Shep Poland (resident): And then when you start digging a little bit deeper, if it's R1, which is a city zoning, agriculture, which is a county zoning, which takes precedent? Who's in control there? Is it the county or the city? and if it's the city could that be why this was stopped maybe and I guess what this is leading to is on down the road because if it's kind of a misunderstanding I guess or maybe not an understanding or something whatever as to whether it's R1 or AG or what what does that mean in the future for that piece of land what can be done with that piece of land if it's R1
0:42:15 [t=2535] Shep Poland (resident): what can be done if it's agriculture and what can be done if the agriculture takes precedent and the county decides that they're in control and they can say that whatever I'm asking questions I don't have the answer to and I'm hoping that if I just throw this out here maybe I can begin to get a little bit of understanding of how this works but that's my question to you and I appreciate y'all's help for this
0:42:44 [t=2564] Speaker 307: Thank you, Chair
0:42:46 [t=2566] Speaker 310: Council, might as well address some of those questions
0:42:54 [t=2574] Eddie Felling: I know we've been getting a lot again, Eddie Felling Farnsworth and Woodkey a couple things to unravel there number one, that property is zoned R1 there's some where I could see some easy confusion If you pull the property tax ID card, it's classified as agricultural.
0:43:13 [t=2593] Eddie Felling: That's just how they earn agricultural use. That's just how they classify it from a taxing perspective. It's also being used agriculturally currently. So the question is what could happen there tomorrow? And that's any one of the 16, I think, let's see, 15 different options under city code, everything from a single family dwelling, churches, cemetery, parks and playgrounds, child care, covenants and monasteries, golf courses. There's all sorts of things that can be done there at that property. So just to be clear, the additional step, there may always be
0:43:58 [t=2638] Eddie Felling: an additional step that would have to be taken that would involve a rezoning, which would be a a platting process through Area Plan Commission. All those standards are set as far as what minimum lot standards would need to be if there would be something more than just, I think it's only two parcels currently.
0:44:15 [t=2655] Speaker 313: There might be a third parcel as attached there. So I hope that answers your question.
0:44:23 [t=2663] Speaker 315: I hope so.
0:44:24 [t=2664] Eddie Felling: Perfect. And, of course, if it would be anything outside of that, then it would require the property owner to come back to Area Plan
0:44:31 [t=2671] Speaker 313: and the city council for a potential rezoning if they wanted to do something outside of most of those items that I just recited. Thank you.
0:44:40 [t=2680] Speaker 319: Council President of the Nation.
0:44:41 [t=2681] Speaker 175: Sorry, I don't want to grill you, but can you address the fire thing? Because that's what I am getting the most questions about. Are there plans to burn all those big piles or not?
0:44:54 [t=2694] Speaker 326: So, yeah, let's take a step back.
0:44:57 [t=2697] Eddie Felling: So those that aren't familiar with logging process, a lot of what's out there is staged trees that will end up being sold at market. So I know there's several piles out there. A lot of those are usable trees. I mean, currently the property, again, is being used agriculturally for both general ag purposes and what I would call a tree farm. There was aged timber there. There was a lot of good timber that was taken out. burning is regulated both on the state and local level so it is somewhat convoluted I would say
0:45:34 [t=2734] Eddie Felling: because of its agricultural current use on some of the applicability of the local ordinances but there are state ordinances as well that that could apply so I guess I'm not sure where the burning came up or how the rumor mill started with burning. But regardless, if any burning would occur, there is a potential for either state and or local ordinances to apply.
0:46:03 [t=2763] Speaker 331: So that doesn't sound like a yes or no answer.
0:46:07 [t=2767] Eddie Felling: Well, is the question, is burning going to occur? Yes. I don't know.
0:46:12 [t=2772] Eddie Felling: I don't own the property.
0:46:14 [t=2774] Speaker 334: Okay.
0:46:14 [t=2774] Eddie Felling: If the question is, can burning occur on the property, it's not as straightforward as one would think. I have my own legal opinion.
0:46:28 [t=2788] Todd Nation (councillor): I've asked our city council attorney to look into this.
0:46:34 [t=2794] Speaker 342: Mike, do you have an opinion on whether our local code would allow for burning to happen?
0:46:41 [t=2801] Speaker 345: I haven't looked at it. That's the first time I've heard that issue raised, so I would need some time to research that.
0:46:50 [t=2810] Todd Nation (councillor): Yeah, and in your defense, that's not what I asked you to look into. I asked you to look into the zoning issues around it. And you answered that, and I appreciate it. Yeah, I just know that from conversations with Mr. Poland and other neighbors around there, they're distressed about the idea that large-scale burning could happen at that site. And I'm just trying to get an answer to reassure them. That's it. But I understand also that you're not in a position to give it in advance one way or another.
0:47:23 [t=2843] Eddie Felling: It's just tough. Anytime you have differing, I mean, you always have your state code and your local ordinances.
0:47:29 [t=2849] Eddie Felling: and we have a very complex issue here where we have a use of a piece of property that's zoned R1 that goes well beyond the zoning ordinance where it's always been used agriculturally. So there are protections that are afforded under state code for ag land so that farmers can use their land properly, and one of those extends to burning.
0:47:52 [t=2872] Speaker 355: Okay. Thank you. All ye will know.
0:47:58 [t=2878] Speaker 358: Councilperson Thompson.
0:47:59 [t=2879] Speaker 360: I would just agree. I've gotten a lot of contact about the burning that almost occurred, I guess, last week. And I've looked into the code, too, and I would agree with Eddie. It's complicated to get a clear legal answer on the issue because there are multiple statutes, local ordinances at play, and you never get a clear answer on which one's really going to dictate. three attorneys here, you're probably going to get three different opinions on it. So unfortunately, if it does come to that, it might be something that has to be ultimately litigated
0:48:39 [t=2919] Speaker 360: and end up in front of a judge here at some point. It's my two cents.
0:48:45 [t=2925] Speaker 361: Thank you.
0:48:49 [t=2929] Speaker 365: Anything else?
0:48:50 [t=2930] Speaker 84: I yield. Thank you, Eddie.
0:48:52 [t=2932] Speaker 365: Thank you all.
0:48:52 [t=2932] Speaker 84: Next under public comment we have Margaret Herdlick
0:48:57 [t=2937] Speaker 369: Hi I'm Margaret Herdlick I live at 908th 7th and I love coming to city council because you just never know what people are going to talk about and I had no idea these gentlemen would be talking about any of these things. I do want to say that in the last year a block from my house at Farrington and Center a neighbor and I had to call dozens of times because there was a house of students and they kept
0:49:28 [t=2968] Margaret Hurdlik (resident): parking in the yellow line. And the police did come out it really was blocking line of vision. Police did come out I saw tickets. It didn't change and at a certain point you just sort of give up but I was wondering why the vehicle wasn't impounded. I mean at a certain point when you've done this a dozen times, it seems like something should happen. So I just want to echo what Mr. Carroll was complaining about. I also just, I don't live on Ohio Boulevard or near there, but it's been interesting how many friends and contacts have reached out about that piece of land over the last few weeks.
0:50:11 [t=3011] Margaret Hurdlik (resident): I didn't, last year I came to some of those meetings where it was being discussed, and I mean, I'm sure you remember, it got pretty ugly. And I think a lot of trust between the citizenry and the local government was lost. And so I really hope that this will be handled in a better way. I mean, when we reach out and say what's going to happen there, and we hear we've been told it's going to be agriculturally handled or something like that, that's just you know that's kind of like blah blah blah especially when I hear well but tomorrow there could be construction and that would be the worst
0:50:54 [t=3054] Margaret Hurdlik (resident): possible outcome what we need here is just some honest discussion about the best use for that land and I'm sure that there can be a middle ground that can be reached again I have no horse in this race I don't live near there but I do care about that land and I think that the administration and the city council should care about trust and transparency. So I just want to throw that out there. Actually, I'm here because I was at several of the meetings last year when the Historic Preservation Ordinance was discussed, and I do support that. No secret there.
0:51:29 [t=3089] Margaret Hurdlik (resident): One sticking point at that time was the idea of a city survey, that that hadn't been done in a long time and needed to be done. Then there was a question about funding. And so I was delighted to hear that now there is a line item in the budget for that. And so I was hoping to get an update, specifically what are next steps, what are deadlines. I heard that firms have been reached out to, so when are we going to hear from those firms? Basically, I'd like to know about the procedures and timeline. And I would also like to know who's in charge.
0:52:08 [t=3128] Margaret Hurdlik (resident): So who can people reach out to when they have specific questions about how this is moving forward? Thank you.
0:52:16 [t=3136] Thank you.
0:52:20 [t=3140] Speaker 376: Well, first, I have a picture of the ticket that was written. I do want to add that.
0:52:25 [t=3145] Brandon Sakbun (staff): I think we should revisit that because it's a $10 ticket, and that might explain why it's taken a dozen times and a half dozen tickets because I've got a list here, and I can see how frustrating that is
0:52:37 [t=3157] Speaker 378: because I bet some of these individuals are like, yeah, I'll just pay the ticket. And we do have some pictures of your corner that we'll look at tomorrow. So thank you for bringing that to our attention.
0:52:50 [t=3170] Brandon Sakbun (staff): Secondly, yes, we did get a couple of firm recommendations from Tommy Kluckner. So we are looking at those, evaluating those. There is going to be like one group, I would say, one tranche of contracts. The first is for the survey as well as our code rewrite for rezoning. And we can't, I mean, it doesn't make sense to do one without the other. So we're still now looking at firms for the rezoning portion. The goal is, frankly, like a September Board of Works meeting to get that approved so that way they can get started by the beginning of next year.
0:53:26 [t=3206] Brandon Sakbun (staff): But remember, we are entering budget time, which does take up a large portion of the office. But Jason Holler is doing a great job looking at firms for both zoning and historic preservation, and we're trying to say, hey, if these two firms go forward, are they working together, or is it one firm? Because if it's one firm, then we would rewrite the RFP and get that issued in August.
0:53:51 [t=3231] Speaker 381: Does that make sense, or are there questions? Councilman Nation.
0:53:55 [t=3235] Todd Nation (councillor): I would challenge the notion that these two things have to happen together by the same firm or anything like that. The 1980 interim report that needs to be updated is needed to be updated for decades now. It is separate from zoning ordinance. I acknowledge that both of these things need to be done, and they're both going to be big undertakings, and they're both going to involve other law firms. But to tie them together, I mean, I get it. If you can figure out, if you need to do that from a legislative point of view
0:54:36 [t=3276] Speaker 385: to get the money moved through for edit or for some other reason,
0:54:41 [t=3281] Todd Nation (councillor): then that's your prerogative. but the idea that zoning and updating our 46-year-old interim report inventory of historic resources are somehow interconnected, I think, is wrong.
0:55:01 [t=3301] Speaker 378: I don't think it's a legislative reason. I'll tell you why. I mean, it's kind of like those insurance commercials of bundle and save.
0:55:08 [t=3308] Brandon Sakbun (staff): With the impacts of Senate Enrollment Act 2025, we've reduced staff by 15 employees. We've reduced our services contractual budget for several city account line items by hundreds of thousands of dollars. So if I'm going slower to find a better price, it's to find a better price. And just frankly, the national and international environment we're in with fuel prices, inflation, and tariffs, every single, just so you all know, I know we've talked about this a little bit,
0:55:35 [t=3335] Brandon Sakbun (staff): but every single contract that the city has for something as simple as toilet paper to paper towels to mat cleaning is being opened up and evaluated. We are in the middle of like a six-month process, Jesse and I, of relooking at all of that to get better contract pricing from things like vehicles to mats to include service contractual relationships with firms that are rewriting city code. So it does feel, I'm sure it feels like for yourself and for our citizens that things are moving slow, but there are real budget constraints that we're under. And some of it is self-imposed.
0:56:12 [t=3372] Brandon Sakbun (staff): I do try to be very fiscally conservative with some of our accounts, like services contractual.
0:56:17 [t=3377] Speaker 378: But at the end of the day, it is a bundle and save mentality as we're trying to lower our pricing for a number of services in the city.
0:56:24 [t=3384] Todd Nation (councillor): Mayor, can you address where the money for the update will come from?
0:56:30 [t=3390] Speaker 390: Yes, that would be under Edit Services Contractual or CCD Services Contractual.
0:56:37 [t=3397] Todd Nation (councillor): Okay. And do you anticipate needing more money than is already in those accounts? Does this involve like a council vote to move money around?
0:56:46 [t=3406] Brandon Sakbun (staff): I don't think it will. And the reason why I say think is technically under your Services Contractual line, it's not broken out all of your contracts. We maintain that, Sally Up and Engineering does, and there's actually multiple entities that operate out of that budget line. So you have to really evaluate. I mean, we do weekly budget sinks for this exact reason because if some of your contracts are over or under, it opens up room to either broaden your survey and your zoning
0:57:16 [t=3436] Speaker 390: or maintain what you've got planned and keep it at a certain number.
0:57:22 [t=3442] Speaker 396: All right. Thanks. I yield.
0:57:26 [t=3446] Speaker 84: Thank you. This time we will close public comment. Corrections to the journal from the preceding meeting.
0:57:37 [t=3457] Speaker 399: There are none.
0:57:38 [t=3458] Speaker 84: Communication from the mayor.
0:57:43 [t=3463] Speaker 273: You're back on.
0:57:45 [t=3465] Brandon Sakbun (staff): Good evening, Council President Dingell, members of the Terre Haute City Council. Some exciting news. Street paving, of course, is ongoing.
0:57:52 [t=3472] Brandon Sakbun (staff): I'm sure you've seen some of that work in and around the community. the Neighborhood Investment Fund. Those grants are open and live. I want to thank A.T. Ryan for all the work that she's done there. If you go to the City of Terre Haute's website, under the Government tab, Human Relations, you will see the Neighborhood Investment Fund. And I did ask some of our council members, but not all, our councilmen and women who are at large, I've asked two of them to help us decide on some of that. Sorry to the district council members, but I didn't want any bias there.
0:58:24 [t=3504] Brandon Sakbun (staff): I know you all have your districts that everyone wants the most funding in. Jimmy, that's not an excuse to send me five texts tonight over your specific district, okay? But we're really looking forward to this program, folks. A lot of the folks who come to us from a number of neighborhoods across the city really do have very specific and actionable ideas. And this gives that specific line item within the casino gaming revenue budget to fund some of those projects.
0:58:50 [t=3530] Brandon Sakbun (staff): Think wayfinding, pedestrian safety, placemaking, public safety with lighting. So we're really, really looking forward to that project.
0:59:00 [t=3540] Brandon Sakbun (staff): We did get some bids back for our bus shelter renovation, so we're really good on timeline there, and we're looking forward to that project. And overall, as I understand, there's a lot of construction around the city of Terre Haute. There's a lot of local city construction and in-dock construction like Ohio and Sherry right alongside of us. And I just ask that you communicate to your constituents, please, please, please think about construction safety. Literally just out here on Ohio, you can see where they've had to replace barricades multiple times in just two weeks.
0:59:34 [t=3574] Brandon Sakbun (staff): So please, please, please be safe, be smart. I know texting and driving and being on the phone, we all fall victim to it sometimes, but it's becoming more and more popular. So construction safety is paramount, especially during the spring and summer months. with all the construction we have going on.
0:59:53 [t=3593] Brandon Sakbun (staff): Last thing I have is with regards to demolition. So Jordan Marvel's got a demolition hearing at July 30th, and then a batch of demos will be released June 25th. So there's a couple of addresses
1:00:07 [t=3607] Brandon Sakbun (staff): that have actually been sent to me, and we follow up with each of those. That July 30th hearing will be another like 40-home hearing. And again, our goal this year is 120 homes to come down. So we're meeting that goal, which is good. We're meeting our housing goals, which is good. But that does require more frequent demolition hearings. So if you see a parcel, if you have questions, just reach out. Jordan's got a tracker. He can tell you the exact address, if it's been scheduled for demo, if it needs a hearing,
1:00:36 [t=3636] Brandon Sakbun (staff): if it's been released for demolition but not scheduled, sometimes even who the contractor is.
1:00:41 [t=3641] Brandon Sakbun (staff): So we have a very detailed process in that. and if you just reach out, we'll be able to give you specific answers as it pertains to your districts. With that, I don't have anything else, so if you have any questions, I'll answer. If not, we'll continue on tonight.
1:00:57 [t=3657] Speaker 406: Just reach out to Jordan specifically for that information.
1:01:00 [t=3660] Speaker 409: Yeah, honestly, if you text him or email him, it'd be quicker.
1:01:04 [t=3664] Speaker 410: I just think that way we can get complaints from our constituents in our neighborhoods and stuff. We'll kind of know what path of specific these are going to be on.
1:01:12 [t=3672] Brandon Sakbun (staff): Yeah, so his would be the best. because redevelopment handles that. If you send it to me, sometimes it takes two or three days. So you can skip me for sure on that one. Don't worry, Councilman Bowling.
1:01:21 [t=3681] Speaker 414: Thank you.
1:01:23 [t=3683] Speaker 413: Councilperson A.
1:01:24 [t=3684] Todd Nation (councillor): Mayor, this is a little bit off topic, and you may not be able to address it, but I think you might have some insight. I read recently in the Tribune Star about a county commissioner's effort to form a board that can deal with property outside of the public process that we're all familiar with.
1:01:49 [t=3709] Speaker 416: Can you talk a little bit about that and the impact that that might have on city property?
1:01:53 [t=3713] Speaker 417: So, okay, let's use an example. If there's a city property and it's behind on its county taxes,
1:02:00 [t=3720] Brandon Sakbun (staff): the system they have allows them to theoretically move a share of sale property through this new board. However, and this is where it gets complicated, and the attorney stuff is difficult at times for me, what we do with the county is a little bit different, where pretty much every two to three years, I go in with a master list of county-owned properties that are within city limits, and I request that list be legally transferred from their government entity, the county, to the city of Terre Haute.
1:02:33 [t=3753] Brandon Sakbun (staff): When we do this transaction with, for example, an Indiana State, it's done within weeks after a board meeting. When we do it after, say, Bego County, it takes years. We are still getting documents back from the hundred parcels we requested within like four months of the first year that I was mayor. Because that process is so slow, this does give them the ability to theoretically move a parcel to a builder quicker. However, what Jordan Marvel has done at redevelopment by taking over 100 parcels, getting it down to like 12 that redevelopment owns and controls is quite impressive.
1:03:17 [t=3797] Brandon Sakbun (staff): And what I like that Redevelopment Commission does, for example, the Indiana State lots, which you helped us with, we do put some stipulations on what they can build there. We do try to get reduced on-street parking, garages if able, pulling in from the alley. So we have a little bit more control when we do it our way, and it can be slower. That's why I'm going to keep doing it our way. But their larger properties, they are free to move, or frankly, properties in the county, they're free to move through that quasi-governmental board that they've created. It is a very popular method.
1:03:52 [t=3832] Brandon Sakbun (staff): I know South Bend has done it that way. You do see communities do that if they have a very large backlog. I think the trajectory we're on, we don't need to do it through their system yet. But if you had a couple of slow years, you might have to.
1:04:07 [t=3847] Speaker 350: And when you say we, you're talking about city government?
1:04:09 [t=3849] Todd Nation (councillor): We, as in city, yes. So if I'm hearing you right, one of the things that we can anticipate coming out of this, at least for now, is that it's mostly going to affect county properties, properties outside the city. and what we, people inside the city, can anticipate is to continue to do it the way that we have been doing it. Yes. Is that fair?
1:04:33 [t=3873] Speaker 378: Except, and I hate saying but, but except for, like, one property they're looking at is the mill, right?
1:04:40 [t=3880] Brandon Sakbun (staff): And they're trying to push it through this board to whomever purchases it. I know they've got a purchase agreement out there with the folks who run the mill, but that is a larger, like, brownfield-style property. That's a tricky one, yeah. Whereas like Terre Haute Redevelopment, like the city, for example, I'm not itching to get into that legal mess when it comes to brownfield and insurance recovery.
1:05:00 [t=3900] Brandon Sakbun (staff): So for a property of that size and scope and the difficulties there, it's like take that through your board with the private sector because if we wait and do it, it's going to be a very long legal process. So that's why I say there are some caveats.
1:05:13 [t=3913] Brandon Sakbun (staff): There are discussions between myself and the commissioners about specific properties like that. It's a good question.
1:05:19 [t=3919] Speaker 427: Thank you, Mayor. I appreciate the explanation.
1:05:21 [t=3921] Brandon Sakbun (staff): Councilman Loudermilk, did we hit that correctly? I'm only looking at you because you know from the auditor's office how difficult this can be,
1:05:29 [t=3929] Brandon Sakbun (staff): and we've had our struggles at getting what we've gotten over. So did we loosely hit that okay?
1:05:35 [t=3935] Speaker 431: Yes, you did.
1:05:36 [t=3936] Brandon Sakbun (staff): Thank you.
1:05:36 [t=3936] Speaker 431: I see it being more county properties or the big lots,
1:05:40 [t=3940] Speaker 433: and it's a way for them to take them into the county and get them sold off. They can use that money and put it back into that board, and they can use that to purchase or do other things. They used to call it the land bank, and there are other communities that have done that. But you described ours the way we do it correctly.
1:06:06 [t=3966] Thanks. Thank you.
1:06:12 [t=3972] Speaker 441: Reports from city officials.
1:06:15 [t=3975] Speaker 444: There are none. Reports from Board of Public Works and Safety. There are none. Reports from standing committees.
1:06:21 [t=3981] Speaker 400: There are none.
1:06:22 [t=3982] Speaker 444: Reports from non-standing committees. There are none. Items previously tabled. There are none. Tax payments for confirmation. There are none. Items on second reading. There are none. Items on first reading.
1:06:30 [t=3990] Michelle (staff): Appropriations 7-2026, $11,900 from edit number 04040096 to services contractual 0404009603432010.
1:06:43 [t=4003] Speaker 10: Don't forget, you must vote to take action.
1:06:45 [t=4005] Speaker 450: Petitioner.
1:06:46 [t=4006] Speaker 453: Hi. Good evening. President Dinkle, members of the City Council, A.T. Ryan, Director of the Human Relations Commission. Last month, the Vigo County Commissioners awarded $11,900 in support of our community warming centers, and tonight we're asking for that those funds be formally appropriated from the revenue to edit services contractual so they can be used for that purpose. These dollars are in support of the 2025-2026 warming center operations that have already completed.
1:07:17 [t=4037] Speaker 453: We appreciate the Commissioner's support of this project, and I respectfully ask for the Council's approval of this appropriation. Happy to answer any questions.
1:07:26 [t=4046] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): Thank you. Is there any member of the public who wishes to comment on Appropriation 7-2026? Hearing none, we'll close public comment.
1:07:34 [t=4054] Speaker 458: Council?
1:07:38 [t=4058] Speaker 459: Mr. President. Councilperson Hinton. There's no discussion on moves that we take action on Appropriation 7-2026.
1:07:45 [t=4065] Speaker 463: Second.
1:07:45 [t=4065] Speaker 33: It's been moved by Councilperson Hinton, seconded by Councilperson Bullen, that we take action on Appropriation 7, 2026.
1:07:52 [t=4072] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. The motion passes. We may now take action on Appropriation 7, 2026.
1:08:00 [t=4080] Speaker 464: Mr. President. Councilperson Hinton. I move that we approve Appropriation 7, 2026.
1:08:05 [t=4085] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): Second. It's been moved by Councilperson Hinton, seconded by Councilperson Bullen, that Appropriation 7, 2026 be approved. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay.
1:08:15 [t=4095] Speaker 39: Motion passes. Appropriation 7-2026 is adopted. Next item.
1:08:21 [t=4101] Michelle (staff): Appropriation 8-2026, $505,071.41 from CCMG 0492-0000 to paving number 0492-00003-432-105 in this vote to take action.
1:08:37 [t=4117] Speaker 472: Petitioner.
1:08:38 [t=4118] Speaker 473: Good evening, Mr. President, members of the council. Marcus Meyer, city engineer. Mayor. So tonight we're asking to transfer $505,000, 71.41 from CCMG to paving. This is the dollars that we were awarded from the state for our CCMG grant last year to complete the project we're working on now. The project is underway and going well. Just need this transfer so that we can continue the project and continue making payments. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you.
1:09:07 [t=4147] Speaker 477: Is there any member of the public who wishes to comment on Appropriation 8-2026? Hearing none, close public comment. Council? Councilperson Loudermilk. If there's no further discussion, I'd like to make a motion that we take action on Appropriation 8-2026. Second.
1:09:26 [t=4166] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): It's been moved by Councilperson Loudermilk, seconded by Councilperson Thompson, that we take action on Appropriation 8-2026. All those in favor say aye.
1:09:34 [t=4174] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): Aye. Opposed, say aye. The motion passes. We may now take action on Appropriation 8-2026.
1:09:40 [t=4180] Speaker 483: Mr. President, I'd like to make a motion that we approve Appropriation 8-2026.
1:09:46 [t=4186] Second.
1:09:47 [t=4187] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): It's been moved by Councilperson Loudermilk, seconded by Councilperson Thompson, that we approve Appropriation 8-2026. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. The motion passes. Appropriation 8-2026 is adopted. Next item.
1:10:03 [t=4203] Michelle (staff): Appropriation 9-2026, $87,500 from edit number 04040096 to services contractual 04010096-03432010.
1:10:16 [t=4216] Michelle (staff): You must vote to take action.
1:10:17 [t=4217] Brandon Sakbun (staff): Petitioner. Councilman Nation, to remember earlier how I talked about how a lot is bundled in services contractual and the budget moves pretty fluidly. Here's a specific example. So we are taking $87,500.
1:10:31 [t=4231] Brandon Sakbun (staff): It has to be listed as an additional appropriation, even though it is not. This is our reimbursement from our previous Make My Move contract. So that money then goes into the account at the top side, the revenue side, and we then must reappropriate it down at the bottom for the revenue side, for the expense side, into services contractual. So now our starting services contractual budget amount looks like on paper it went up, but really it's a wash because that money came in on the revenue side.
1:11:02 [t=4262] Brandon Sakbun (staff): What we're doing here today, of course, is moving that reimbursement down. I am sorry I was on my phone back there, but I am getting another meeting set up with Make My Move because the state is having some conversations about reducing their reimbursement amount. So I'm not confident that we're going to keep doing this program,
1:11:18 [t=4278] Brandon Sakbun (staff): and I'm leaning towards stopping it because if the state stops putting money into it,
1:11:23 [t=4283] Brandon Sakbun (staff): then we're just not going to continue at that point. But we've got a meeting scheduled this month before we get like halfway through budget, so that way we know what our amount is for next year. But with that, I'd ask that you approve Appropriation 9-2026, $87,500 from EDIT, which is the reimbursement through the Make My Move program to services contractual.
1:11:43 [t=4303] Speaker 490: Thank you.
1:11:44 [t=4304] Speaker 86: If there are any members of the public who wish to comment on Appropriation 9-2026. Hearing none, close public comment. Council, Councilperson Nation.
1:11:54 [t=4314] Todd Nation (councillor): Mayor, I remember the Make My Move effort. Was it $5,000 per person who moved here or per household?
1:12:04 [t=4324] Brandon Sakbun (staff): And I believe it was like $7,500 if the family was bigger,
1:12:07 [t=4327] Brandon Sakbun (staff): but it was predominantly $5,000 is what we routinely received. And that was the previous contract that was signed in 2022 that had run us through where we're at now.
1:12:17 [t=4337] Todd Nation (councillor): So is the number of people or families who moved here roughly 87,000 divided by about 5,000?
1:12:27 [t=4347] Speaker 346: I mean, are we talking about 16, 17 families?
1:12:30 [t=4350] Brandon Sakbun (staff): It's higher than that because we basically do a reimbursement like almost every year, sometimes two a year.
1:12:36 [t=4356] Speaker 503: But I can get you that exact number and I'll let you know. I'd have to look at the previous years and the other reimbursements that we did.
1:12:42 [t=4362] Speaker 504: Would you characterize this as having been a successful effort?
1:12:48 [t=4368] Brandon Sakbun (staff): I actually would because when the program was started years ago, the state IEDC was putting funding into it. So that 5,000 number that was discussed, it was only like half of that. And so it was a different program a few years ago,
1:13:02 [t=4382] Brandon Sakbun (staff): but now with the cuts at the state level and they're not wanting to do it anymore, it really doesn't make mathematical sense because you used to be able to say, okay, if the city puts in $2,500, what do you receive back? And you can do that calculation based off income tax data, and every single time it comes back, you're doubling, sometimes tripling what you're getting back. And then I always viewed it as an investment. You start changing what that amount is going out from your municipal level instead of the state level, and then if you have a few cases that it's a wash,
1:13:36 [t=4416] Brandon Sakbun (staff): it's not worth it, in my opinion. And so because there have been so many state changes, I don't believe the program is as valuable as it once was.
1:13:44 [t=4424] Todd Nation (councillor): Thanks. I've wondered about that. I appreciate the explanation. I yield.
1:13:52 [t=4432] Speaker 510: Oh, I'm sorry.
1:13:55 [t=4435] Todd Nation (councillor): If there's no further discussion, I move that we take action on Appropriation 9-2026.
1:14:00 [t=4440] Speaker 183 (councillor): Second. It's been moved by Councilperson Nation, seconded by Councilperson Loudermilk, that we take action on Appropriation 9-2026. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. The motion passes. We may now take action on Appropriation 9-2026.
1:14:14 [t=4454] Speaker 342: Mr. President.
1:14:15 [t=4455] Speaker 183 (councillor): Councilperson Nation.
1:14:16 [t=4456] Speaker 342: I move for approval of Appropriation 9-2026.
1:14:18 [t=4458] Speaker 183 (councillor): Second. The move by Councilperson Nation, seconded by Councilperson Lauderdale, that Appropriation 9-2026 be approved. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. The motion passes. Appropriation 9-2026 is adopted.
1:14:31 [t=4471] Speaker 39: Next item.
1:14:32 [t=4472] Speaker 446: Special Ordnance 4-2026, rezoning a property located at 1103 North 13th Street, parcel number 8406-15543-014-00002.
1:14:44 [t=4484] Speaker 10: You must vote to take action. Area planning is favorable with conditions and recommendations.
1:14:48 [t=4488] Speaker 516: Petitioner.
1:14:49 [t=4489] Eddie Felling: Mr. President, members of the council, Eddie Felling, Farnsworth & Woodkey. I'm here tonight with Mr. Brown. He's looking to rezone this particular parcel. It's right across from the new, I think what they call the student or athletic housing that ISU's put together just to the west of this location. He's asking for this rezone so that he could place three efficiency homes on that property. That was passed last evening by the Airplane Commission unanimously.
1:15:18 [t=4518] Eddie Felling: He is not requesting any variances for the size of the homes or for hard surface parking, and he is anxious to get started as soon as possible. So I would be happy to answer any questions that the council may have.
1:15:32 [t=4532] Speaker 478: Is there any members of the public who wish to comment on a special ordinance for 2026?
1:15:39 [t=4539] Speaker 417: Good evening, Council President Dinkle, members of the Territ City Council.
1:15:44 [t=4544] Brandon Sakbun (staff): So this is one of the really good examples that I'm going to talk about when it pertains to this. You'll hear the phrase tiny homes. I don't think these are tiny homes, but that's what the public will refer to some of these as.
1:15:54 [t=4554] Brandon Sakbun (staff): So this specific builder came to engineering in the mayor's office, went through the code, discussed the appropriate setbacks, made updates to their drawings to meet city standards, and then now we're going in for rezoning. This is the example of what our builders should be doing. I'm here to say that the administration's really enjoyed working with this builder. We wholeheartedly support his project. We're actually going to put together like an MOU in the steps that he followed and put this together so that way other builders who want to do smaller size homes like he's doing
1:16:27 [t=4587] Brandon Sakbun (staff): can follow that plan because until we get the rezoning completely overhauled, we need to have some sort of system to make this as easy as a decision for you all as possible. We did things like check site prisms, check the parking, look at where parking would be, and whether it's concrete or coming off the alley.
1:16:47 [t=4607] Brandon Sakbun (staff): It was a good process that we enjoyed going through, so we're going to try to codify some of this.
1:16:50 [t=4610] Brandon Sakbun (staff): I spoke with Councilman Nation on the phone a little bit about this today, kind of highlighting this is a process that we like that we're going to try to formalize a little bit more.
1:17:00 [t=4620] Speaker 521: Thank you.
1:17:03 [t=4623] Speaker 478: Are there any other members of the public who wish to comment on special ordinance for 2026? Hearing none, we'll close public comment. Council? Councilperson Chalmers.
1:17:13 [t=4633] Speaker 526: And then real quick, I think Square Project dudes in my district, what are the square footages on these?
1:17:19 [t=4639] Eddie Felling: 512 square feet is the current. So, yeah, and the mayor touched on that.
1:17:23 [t=4643] Eddie Felling: You know, they're called efficiency homes. They're not tiny homes. They meet all the standards. So it's not the new tiny homes that we've heard about so much recently. So they meet all the minimum standards. It's just a small house.
1:17:36 [t=4656] Speaker 529: I would agree. Those are 200, 300 square feet. Right. This is apartment size. Great. It's not a bad idea. All right. How do you?
1:17:43 [t=4663] Speaker 532: Mr. President. Councilperson Chalos.
1:17:50 [t=4670] Speaker 534: There's no further. I ask that we take action on Special Ordinance 4-226.
1:17:59 [t=4679] Speaker 536: Second.
1:18:00 [t=4680] Speaker 183 (councillor): It's been moved by Councilperson Chalos, seconded by Councilperson Loudermore, that we take action on Special Ordinance 4-2026. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. Motion passes. we may now take action on Special Ordinance 4-2026. Mr. President. Councilperson Chalers. I move that we pass Special Ordinance 4-2026.
1:18:20 [t=4700] Speaker 538: Second.
1:18:21 [t=4701] Anthony J. Dinkel (chair): It's been moved by Councilperson Chalers, seconded by Councilperson Loudmouth, that Special Ordinance 4-2026 be approved. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay.
1:18:30 [t=4710] Speaker 183 (councillor): Motion passes. Special Ordinance 4-2026 is adopted.
1:18:33 [t=4713] Speaker 539: Thank you very much.
1:18:35 [t=4715] Speaker 183 (councillor): Next item.
1:18:35 [t=4715] Speaker 446: Resolution 10-2026, transfer of $2,000 in the judge's budget.
1:18:43 [t=4723] Michelle (staff): I was panicking there for a moment because I forgot about it. So I explained to the judge I would speak on this tonight. He's very appreciative of everything the council does for us. With the misdemeanors being moved, infractions going up, ordinances going up, We're finding that we're using some items more, like file folders and things like that, and some items less. So that's why they're requesting to transfer some money from services contractual to office supplies. And as the mayor alluded to earlier, things are going up in price.
1:19:18 [t=4758] Speaker 197: Happy to answer any questions.
1:19:20 [t=4760] Thank you.
1:19:22 [t=4762] Speaker 86: Are there any members of the public that wish to comment on Resolution 10-2026? Hearing none, we'll close public comment. Council?
1:19:30 [t=4770] Speaker 188: Mr. President. Councilperson Nation. If there's no discussion about this, I move for approval of Resolution 10-2026.
1:19:37 [t=4777] Speaker 513: Second.
1:19:38 [t=4778] Speaker 478: I move by Councilperson Nation, seconded by Councilperson Loudermilk, that Resolution 10-2026 be approved.
1:19:44 [t=4784] Speaker 551: All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those say no. The motion passes. Resolution 10-2026 is approved. There is a meeting next week. I'm so glad to be spending my fourth wedding anniversary with all of you.
1:20:02 [t=4802] Speaker 556: Councilperson Azar.
1:20:04 [t=4804] Speaker 561: Well, in that case, I move to adjourn.
1:20:06 [t=4806] Speaker 559: Second.
1:20:07 [t=4807] Speaker 447: It's been moved by Councilperson Azar, seconded by Councilperson Loudermilk, that we adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Or say nay. Tarantino City Council stands adjourned.
1:20:16 [t=4816] Speaker 565: I can. I can.