Why are you seeking public office and what are your qualifications?

I am seeking re-election to Council because I believe:

• that city living is the optimal
• that Bloomington is a great city to live in
• that

I have stated many of my qualifications above. I am seeking this office because I believe that my concerns as well as those of my neighbors have not been heard. Our current representative is not easily accessible to most of us. He seems to play favorites among neighbors and neighborhoods. Some people get good service, and some get none. Landlords are not visible on his radar screen, and their concerns are not addressed. Business owners are also widely ignored. Parking is a major issue for this neighborhood and his response is to get cars off the street and out of the downtown. I want a vibrant neighborhood between the university and downtown, and I want flourishing business in the city center. That will only be possible when we come to terms with the parking dilemma. Having struggled with no parking on Dunn Street for decades, I understand the importance of downtown parking particularly for those businesses in which there is heavy equipment which needs to be loaded and unloaded. As time goes on, movement of freight is going to be pivotal in the city and the county. We can buy on line, but our merchandise still has to be shipped and delivered.

How would you support a vibrant downtown (transportation initiatives, parking, etc.)?

The most successful downtowns cater to pedestrian scales of movement and mass. Car traffic doesn.t need to go super-fast; cars need a reliable guarantee that they will find an affordable place to park. Bicyclists, pedestrians and bus riders should have priority in the downtown.

One way to solve a lot of these problems is simply to charge a market rate for parking, both on-street and in lots and garages. We should now be devoting the money we've been using to subsidize parking to a downtown circulator, to improving the streetscape, burying power cables, powerwashing, putting up more streetlights, and so on.

See my next response for a further answer to this question.

As explained above, we need to have a parking strategy. We can no longer afford to solve issues piecemeal. The entire transportation system and parking system must be addressed. For one thing, we need several islands in from of businesses where trucks can unload merchandise without interfering with parked cars. The garages are a disgrace. I hope that the new management company can make them more attractive. Attendants must be on duty at all times, otherwise people will not feel safe in the garages. The garages must be cleaned daily or more often if necessary. They must be well lit and paint and markings must be fresh, Floors need to be clean. Parking on the square must remain, and I argue that it should be free. Only one two hour parking place per day within ten blocks of the square should be allowed. Meter readers monitor this area anyway.

Are you in favor of committing city resources in the downtown? If so, specifically what would you support?

Yes. I represent much of the downtown, and the resources the city has committed to it consistently in the past has made it vibrant.

In particular, I'm eager to find funding to operate the Downtown Shuttle. It will relieve many people of the need to move their parked cars, the need to spend an excessive amount on structured parking, or even the need to drive at all.

Yes. Our first priority should be the vitality of the downtown. Property owners pay a lot of tax. They ought to at least be entitled to good lighting, safe sidewalks, well-maintained streets, some amenities such as landscaping wherever possible. Police presence downtown is also necessary. We should not allow loitering and panhandling around banks and other centers of commerce. If you do not continue to spend money on downtown improvements, customers and businesses will take their dollars elsewhere. As time goes on it may be necessary to enhance downtown further to attract new small and larger, both local and chain businesses. Customers need the widest possible choices of merchandise. If they do not have a choice, they will go elsewhere.

Would you support a CBU proposal for a second water line (36'') from the Monroe Plant along with associated pumping and storage facilities?

Sure; a redundant connection to our primary water supply will prove to be a shrewd investment the day that our current pipeline inevitably breaks.

Yes. Adequate water has been a problem for the City of Bloomington. Indiana University almost left Bloomington because the water supply was not reliable and sufficient. As I understand it, only one water line exists between Lake Monroe and the City. If there were a major break, the city would run out of water within several hours. The line also is decades old and subject to wear and tear like everything else. In the past there have been breaks which could be repaired.

Would you support funding to increase the capacity of our water treatment facility?

Not if it was going to go to sprawl development outside the city limits. I would only support it if it was coupled with an understanding that developments seeking city water/sewer services agree to abide by the city's GPP, even outside the city. Many states now permit Transfer of Development Rights (TDR), in which a greenfield owner can sell the rights to build on that land to other property in areas where all jurisdictions wants to see denser development. We should be pursuing a similar policy.

Yes. With all of the building going on downtown and on campus we will probably be stretching the current capacity of the treatment facility. I do know that certain projects in the county were curtailed because of concerns about water and sewage. Additional waste water facilities need to come on line so that quality of life can be maintained at current levels at a minimum. Once again rate increases and tax increases for this purpose only need to be explained clearly to the taxpaying public. Money must not be diverted from the fund for other purposes of pet projects of certain interest groups.

Would you support allocating city resources for infrastructure improvements on east-west thoroughfares, namely the Second and Third street corridors?

Not if they're being designed like state highways. Wider is not better if it's only going to be devoted to cars. Braess' Paradox describes a remarkable phenomenon: in many cases, adding and widening roads actually increases gridlock.

West Second and Third Streets need to be considered and designed as boulevards, not highways. Boulevards are high-capacity urban roads that also respect and enable other kinds of traffic, in particular bus, bike and pedestrian. Highways go around cities; boulevards should go through them. We don't do enough for traditional, pre-automotive forms of transportation for me to be enthusiastic about the value of the "improvements" to these corridors.

Yes. Our economy is changing in this country. More work can be done at home, and more merchandise can be ordered on line, but that merchandise must be delivered. We are going to see more heavy duty trucks on our main corridors. They will be stopping to unload products. Accommodations must be made whether it is traffic islands or additional lanes in order to deliver and pick up products from businesses and homes (where many more businesses will be located). Without infrastructure improvements residents will not be able to send and receive products and services which are needed to lead a quality life. Sure I hate to see trees cut, but I also want to have my computer delivered, too.

Do you support funding of infrastructure improvements that provide a good foundation to develop key areas in the community for new business recruitment?

I find this question insufficiently specific. My initial reaction is, "of course; who doesn't?"

Yes. If the community does not grow, it becomes stagnant. The university will not be able to accommodate top-notch faculty if areas and infrastructure for growth are not available. Increasingly there is a link between university and high-tech businesses. Once again organizations like IU and the Chamber of Commerce will have to explain why certain improvements must be made. Taxpayers will need to be convinced why new thoroughfares and specialized hubs need to be built. Benefit to all must be conveyed.

What are your views on the government's role in supporting economic vitality (i.e. TIFs, incentives, abatements, etc.) to promote new and expanded business in the community?

I don't know that "TIFs, incentives, abatements, etc." necessarily equal "economic vitality".

"New and expanded business," for example, could include "Vx nerve-gas destruction" or "enlargement of my pig farming operation". These may well be viable businesses, but most self-respecting cities have higher standards for the types of businesses they want to nurture.

So my first question is, "Which types of new/expanded businesses?" Incentives should be directly tied to city objectives for economic development - specific objectives which should be formally stated. Too often we've given incentives for unspecific goals. Should we pursue new manufacturing with our limited economic development dollars, or more life sciences? What new industries might play to Bloomington's specific economic strengths?

Incentives should be targeted to helping smaller companies rather than larger, and to developing an industry through smaller incentives to a raft of small businesses, rather than a few larger incentives to a handful of established companies.

Unfortunately, I have seen certain businesses browbeat city officials into allowing them to use certain incentives for their projects. Business people were able to convince the city that land parcels would not be developed without special treatment. Sometimes I had to compete against some of the businesses which got abatements and incentives, and it was tough. All incentives must be used judiciously so as not to provoke ill feeling within the community. While it is true that some lots could not be developed without an incentive, most can be with a little creativity. The public needs to be aware of the fact that the school districts get no financial support in TIF districts. The burden for the school system falls on a smaller group of taxpayers in those areas. I think the value of so-called incentives is overrated in Bloomington.