Ellettsville and Richland Township boards vote to send reorganization plan to November ballot

The Town Council of Ellettsville and the Richland Township Board voted at a joint public meeting to send a proposed reorganization plan to the November ballot, clearing the way for residents to decide whether to combine municipal authority.

The vote followed public comment in favor of a ballot referral and a presentation by committee members who drafted the plan. Clark Grryer, interim CEO of the Bloomington Economic Development Corporation (BEEDC), told the boards the committee had “demonstrated extraordinary leadership and foresight” and urged a favorable vote: “Therefore, we strongly encourage a favorable vote tonight to place the reorganization measure on the ballot and grant your residents the voice and opportunity they deserve to decide this issue coming in November.”

Why it matters: The referenda will let voters decide whether to proceed with the reorganization rather than have elected officials enact it without a public vote. Supporters at the meeting said residents want the opportunity to weigh in; opponents raised concerns during earlier sessions and at the roll call in one board.

At the Richland Township roll call on the resolution to send the plan to the ballot, the transcript records at least one recorded “no” vote from David Willoughby and approved votes recorded in the roll call (transcript lists “Don Dal” voting to approve). The Town Council approved Resolution 11-2026 to send the same plan to voters; the transcript records roll-call “yes” votes from Scott Holden, William Ellis, Trevor Sager and Camel Samples and reports the motion passed after a second and roll-call vote.

A business owner and Richland Township resident, Valerie Dwarf, praised both boards for sending the question to voters and urged a “campaign of information” so residents understand what will appear on the ballot. “I want them to know what we're talking about,” she said, adding she would help ensure voters are informed.

Several speakers asked about ballot wording; the meeting record indicates the proposed language is included in the meeting packet on page 45 and that it “follows the statute exactly.” Officials told attendees the packet is available to the public for review.

Public comment included a range of perspectives from residents involved in the reorganization work. Andrew Henry, who has been involved in the process, said he has not heard anyone say they did not want the chance to vote: “One view I have not heard a single time, not once, is I would like to not have the opportunity to vote on this.” Another longtime resident and builder described his experience with local planning and said he supported letting the public decide.

What comes next: With both bodies approving measures to send the reorganization plan to the ballot, the next formal step is placement on the November ballot and public outreach to explain the proposal and its consequences. Meeting materials, including the proposed ballot language, are available in the meeting packet (page 45). The joint meeting adjourned with no further business.

Notes on transcript spelling and names: The meeting transcript contains inconsistent spellings of some names (for example, variants of Ellettsville, and differing spellings for some council members). This article uses names and spellings as they appear in the official meeting record; the town name has been normalized to the official spelling, Ellettsville, in this text.