Jeff Melton
One of the most memorable political battles in recent Bloomington history concerned Stony Springs, a 54-acre tract of forested land along Highway 37 owned by land speculator Bill Brown. News that Brown planned to sell part of the land to Indianapolis developer Tom Herman, who wished to build an apartment complex there, sparked a firestorm of controversy and a four-month treesit. In keeping with our newsletter's title, the Monroe County Green Party was right in the thick of this battle to preserve precious local greenspace, making public statements and attending County Council meetings.
One reason why the proposed Canterbury Apartments complex touched such a nerve among local residents was the unique fragility and natural beauty of the site, home to some of the oldest trees in the county as well as a cave, springs, a 10-acre sinkhole and seven smaller ones. The Bloomington Environmental Commission unanimously recommended that the site not be developed, due largely to concerns that new sinkholes would form directly under the buildings.
Project opponents also objected to proposed taxpayer subsidies. A classic corporate welfare boondoggle allows developers to call average-priced apartment complexes such as Canterbury "affordable housing" and to receivemultimillion-dollar taxpayer subsidies. But for many Bloomington residents, the complex will not be affordable. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, someone would have to work full-time for $10.94 an hour to afford an apartment renting for $569 a month, the proposed rent for two bedroom units in the complex; the majority of hourly workers in Bloomington earn less.
Overflow crowds expressed such concerns with near-unanimity at County Council meetings concerning the financing for the project. Ignoring these concerns, a 5-2 majority of Council members approved $10 million worth of tax-free bonds and assorted tax credits to fund the project, sparking a one-hour takeover of the Council chambers by outraged attendees.
On July 6, Indiana State Police and local sheriff's deputies used bulldozers and a cherry-picker to reach and remove three of the four tree-sitters. The fourth, Green Party supporter Mike Englert, was able to remain aloft by scrambling 20 feet above his platform. Unfortunately, Englert ran out of supplies and had to come down the next day.
Many expressed anger at the tactics of the police, who seemed to have little regard for the safety or well-being of the protestors. For instance, in the course of clearing the area around the tree-sitters, the bulldozer felled a tree that landed directly on the traverse line holding one of them up, rammed into the tree occupied by another tree-sitter, and destroyed major roots of the main sit occupied by Englert. Several of the officers blocking access to the property responded to the concerns of onlookers with such indifferent reactions as: "It was their choice to be up there."
The intensity of the conflict was perhaps largely attributable to the fact that it concerned privately owned land. Developers and other property rights ideologues argued that property owners should be able to use "their" land as they see fit. Englert is among many who saw things differently: "He [Bill Brown] has no connection to the land, he does not live on that land....He's just speculating on this land, he doesn't care about the land itself except for the fact that he can make a lot of money....People should not have the right to just buy up land and do what they want regardless of the environmental consequences."