Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Redevelopment commission adopts amended College Square resolution, signaling conditional availability for host hotel with protections for city interests
Loading...
Summary
After extensive public comment and debate, the RDC amended and adopted Resolution 25-136 to provide notice that the College Square property may be made available to a host hotel project in a form and on terms to be determined by the RDC and structured to protect the city's best interest and limit public risk. The vote follows calls from council members and the public to avoid transferring the parcel at a nominal cost without compensation or council approval.
After a multi-hour public discussion and substantial public comment, the Bloomington Redevelopment Commission voted Dec. 15 to adopt an amended resolution (25-136) indicating the RDC may make the College Square parcel available for a host hotel under terms determined by the RDC that are structured to protect the city—s interests and limit public risk.
Background: Staff briefed the commission on the history: the Monroe County Capital Improvement Board (CIB) selected a preferred developer (Dora Hospitality) in 2024 and identified an RDC-owned parcel at 200–216 South College Avenue (often called College Square) as a candidate site. Negotiations found a substantial financing gap in the developer—s pro forma; the RDC previously authorized expenditures to study site feasibility but had not agreed to final terms or a land conveyance.
Original language in the proposed resolution said the parcel "may be made available... at a nominal cost." After city council members sent a memorandum urging that the RDC not transfer or lease the site for merely a nominal value and multiple residents urged caution, a commissioner proposed an amendment deleting the phrase "at a nominal cost" and replacing it with language that the property "may be made available in some form and on terms to be determined by the RDC and structured to protect the city—s best interest and limit public risk." The amendment passed 3–2 on roll call. The amended resolution then passed by roll call vote 4–1.
Public comment and council input: Several council members submitted a memo urging the RDC to obtain value for the property (at least the purchase price $6,895,000) or pursue other mechanisms such as a land swap, long-term market-rate lease or county contributions of tourism-related tax receipts. Members of the public urged the RDC not to "give away" the land and recommended pursuing a land swap that could protect existing affordable housing (Seminary Square / 70 Square). Representatives of the CIB said signaling a willingness to make land available at a concession would help close negotiations but warned that removing such language could make future negotiations harder.
Why it matters: The site is downtown and was appraised in staff materials at roughly $7–8 million. Commissioners and the public debated trade-offs between advancing a host hotel that could help the new convention center reach scale and preserving the city—s leverage and fiscal prudence, especially in light of changes to state law (SEA 1) that staff said have tightened local funding flexibility.
Outcome and next steps: With the amendment adopted, the resolution is framed as a notice of possible participation rather than a commitment to specific subsidy terms; any final land conveyance, lease or subsidy would require separate public RDC approval. Staff and the CIB will continue discussions about next steps, including whether to reissue RFPs or renegotiate with the preferred developer. Commissioners asked staff to report back to the CIB at its Wednesday meeting about the RDC—s action and to continue pursuing alternatives such as land swaps or county contributions as appropriate.
Representative quotes: "By taking out the phrase 'at nominal cost,' we preserve our leverage and protect the city—s best interest," said a commissioner who sponsored the amendment. "If you pass the amendment, you—re going to send a message," said a former staff member and public commenter, urging clarity in signaling to developers and the CIB.
What comes next: Staff will present the commission—s amended position to the CIB and continue to engage stakeholders in search of financing structures that could close the developer—s pro forma gap. Any binding agreement on land value or conveyance will return to the RDC for separate public votes.
