By: Diane Benjamin
It is no accident that a special meeting was called for the City of Bloomington days after the new Council member took the oath of office and the others were sworn in. Renner has been possessed with downtown since being elected.
The new Alderman has a problem though. Amelia Buragas’s father, David Dorris, is a property owner downtown. Any public spending Buragas votes for in Downtown Bloomington is a vote to enrich herself, since she is an heir to the Dorris estate. Renner hopes to raise property values through development, if successful the Dorris property would also increase in value.
Unless the building is in a non-revocable trust with no members of her family as the beneficiary, she is setting herself up for legal problems in the future.
Will she recuse herself from the discussion and vote? Stay tuned.
Remember the Central Catholic-Jim Fruin controversy? Fruin received no financial benefit, he just had the appearance of impropriety. Tonight should be interesting.
Who is DFB Properties? David Dorris.
If her family owned one of the buildings that the targeted development was going to be in, then, yes, there is a problem. But, I think you’re stretching a little to far here. You could venture to guess that this could raise property values ALL around the area, not just DTB. So, any alderman that lives in the wards surrounding major development should recuse themselves because of that…I think this one is a little too far out there.
Did you notice how close daddy’s building is to where they are tearing down buildings? Tonight is just the start of the spending Renner has planned. So when does her involvement cross the line?
I agree with Diane. There is financial benefit. If her dad’s office is that close to a new hotel I’m sure his property value and worth of building will dramatically increase.
Isn’t her father on the zoning board?
Amelia is still listed as on the board.
Ms. Benjamin/BLN,
Again, you’re off the mark with your baseless accusations and flawed information.
That the daughter is a City Council member who may vote for or against the proposition to develop property downtown is not a valid case.
Simply because a daughter MAY be an heiress to any estate in the future does not make her an owner of anything currently.
Secondly, the property owned by DBF does not lie within the parameters of the proposed redevelopment area. Because it is near there, adjacent or even contiguous to it, does not create any impropriety, even if the daughter was a legal owner while she sits on the City Council.
Too, your claim that the meeting tonight was no accident, implying without explanation it is somehow connected to the new Alderman’s presence, is also without foundation.
Of course it was no accident. This project has been discussed for months – since before the new Alderman was even in play – as most everyone “in-the-know” is aware of.
Apparently that doesn’t include you or the sources you rely on for information.
Where and how you devise your conclusory allegations is beyond simple imagination.
You concentrate of meaningless activity.
In the end, you miss the bigger picture.
The deep and dark need to villianize most everything you comment on is typically off the mark and absent any supporting, viable proof or confirmation.
It compels me to resort to the conclusion the driving force behind your wanting and unsuccessful effort to accomplish anything is nothing more than an agenda created and funded by former Alderwoman, Judy Stearns. and another unnamed funding source.
I don’t always disagree with your positions, but you squander opportunity after opportunity to truly inform due to the tunnel-vision of yourself and your affiliation and their blindness to an effective approach to significant issues and information.
Might I suggest you concentrate more on substance rather than personalities?
But, maybe that’s the idea – to not really address significant issues and sidetrack your readers with meaningless banter.
Actions speak louder than words.
Begs the question, who’s side are you on, really?
Keep reading, another article soon!
Downtown redevelopment has been discussed for over 20 years. The city just retired a TIF grant from the 1990s with a financial gain of only $1,800.00. Redevelopment is great if handled properly.
Bloomington has a lousy record with TIF’s and developers. This deal is no different.
DARE YOU TO PUBLISH…. I would have thought your comment had some merit but you switch to bringing in a former council member into the topic.
I’d like to know myself when people like you are going to open your eyes and be aware of the reckless spending by Renner and Hales. It pisses me off to no end when I drive around town and see the deplorable condition of the streets and they aren’t getting any better that is for sure. Their job is not supposed to be urban development and buying property for development on the backs of the taxpayers and don’t give me this crap that they need to develop to have sources of funds.
When I heard Hales diatribe about selling part or perhaps all of Highland Golf course I though okay buddy you just picked a good fight. Maybe the one to scoot his rear end right out of Bloomington. Yeah his and Renner’s cash cow to fund Renner reckless spending. I’d like to write here exactly what I think of Renner and Hales but that would resort me to using words that begin with an F. Got it! Both Renner and Hales need to go. Hales first and then Renner at the next election if he tries to run again.
If you want a taste of what Bloominton will eventually look like take a drive up to WI to the town of Waukesha and take a drive on their streets. Another city ran by a art major mayor for a number of years. Oh yeah they too poured money into the downtown and still to this day buildings sit empty. Another poorly ran city that ignored the basic need of water over those reckless spending years led by some art major that was going to make the downtown the art mecca of the world. Then while you are there ask what the water bills will eventually explode to because now they have to import their water. I suggest you get a rental car to avoid having to pay for car damage or an alignment.
I’ve found out more on this site than what the Pantagraph prints and WJBC reports. Two absolutely worthless news sources. Who funds the Pantagraph and WJBC?
The point here is this: after TWO feasibility studies the same conclusion has come up. a hotel in Downtown (wonder when Tari will change that to uptown like koos) Bloomington does NOT need a hotel! I know Tari wants it so bad he cant stand it but the facts are facts. To bad Prof. Tari is too obsessed to see that!
He is not going to let facts get in his way!