In eight out of nine of the originally proposed annexation areas, we are confident that the annexation will be voided or has already been cancelled due to overwhelming public opposition because we have worked to secure more than the 65% of the necessary signatures to void annexation. We are still kindling hopes that the largest annexation area, 1B, will also be voided. We were encouraged that in many of the areas, 80% or more of the property owners signed petitions.
It’s too late to avoid the eventual responsibility of maintaining the new parks, bike infrastructure and other amenities Bloomington has created over the last decade. But we can consider alternative strategies for managing the city’s assets and future liabilities. We can stop blindly accepting that urban growth is an inherent good.
By Thomas A. Schwandt, Ph.D. Two significant flaws characterize efforts of the Office of the Mayor of Bloomington to promote the annexation of the city’s suburbs: The absence of legitimate arguments for the annexation of specific subareas within a given proposed larger annexation area, and the use of hyperbolic characterizations of alleged benefits of theContinue reading “Bloomington’s Annexation: The Suburbs Don’t Need Rescuing”
By Peter Dorfman This blog came into existence as a protest against the Hamilton Administration, aided and abetted by a thin (and, I hope, temporary) majority on the City Council, buying into a fad theory about housing density and foisting it on a town that widely rejects it. It became “The Dissident Democrat” because itsContinue reading “It’s Not Partisan”
By Peter Dorfman I learned a new word the other day: “Workwashing.” According to Stowe Boyd, who I consider one of America’s most astute observers of trends in the workplace and the economy, workwashing is a verb meaning: “Providing a plausible and positive cover story by a business or industry to conceal the actual reasoningContinue reading “Homewashing”
By Peter Dorfman On Tuesday, August 3, County Residents Against Annexation sent the Mayor and the Common Council in Bloomington the following: Memorandum for the Record: County Residents Against Annexation is a group of County residents whoare circulating petitions among residents who have been targeted forannexation, especially in those areas without an active group alreadyContinue reading “County Residents Report on Their Petition Drive to Stop Annexation”
By Peter Dorfman A couple of weeks on from the disheartening finish of the City Council debate on upzoning, with annexation hanging in the cicada-thick atmosphere over the suburbs, Bloomingtonians are waiting for the next shoe to drop. Our local NPR affiliate, WFIU, organized a May 27 Noon Edition panel discussion, hoping for fresh perspectivesContinue reading “Matt Flaherty Says the Quiet Part Out Loud”
The city’s upzoning process has come to its predictable ugly end. It got intense toward the end. And personal. Planners, pro-density Council members and upzoning fans in the public (as always, a minority among the people who turned out for the meetings) flexed their muscles. They made it clear that conditional use, annual caps andContinue reading “Wasn’t Housing Affordability Supposed to Be the Whole Point? Oh Well. On to 2023.”
By Peter Dorfman There’s no point in trying to sugar-coat what’s been going on in the City Council. Opponents of the city’s upzoning plan turned out in large numbers to support Amendment 1, to remove the plexes from the amendment to the UDO. By Council Member Dave Rollo’s count, upzoning opponents who spoke during theContinue reading “Where Are We Now?”
By Peter Dorfman In an article in the April 25 Herald-Times, local realtors complained about the lack of houses available to sell in Bloomington. It would be unfortunate if this chorus of woe bolstered a more general perception that we have high housing costs in Bloomington because of a lack of supply. That would beContinue reading “High Rents in Bloomington: It’s Not About Supply. Seriously. It’s Not.”