An illustration of the proposed mural submitted by Turning Point USA. (Courtesy of City of Bloomington)
The Bloomington Board of Public Works has denied for a second time a conservative student group’s application to paint the phrase “All Lives Matter” downtown.
Tensions were high among attendees Tuesday as the Board considered the proposal. During the meeting, racial slurs and epithets peppered the comment section of the board’s Zoom meeting.
The issue was whether Turning Point USA would be allowed to paint a 12-by-120-foot mural of the phrase — which is commonly associated with opposition to the Black Lives Matter movement — on Kirkwood Avenue west of Indiana Avenue, by the Sample Gates.
Board members Kyla Cox Deckard, Elizabeth Karon and Jennifer Lloyd voted unanimously to deny Turning Point’s proposal.
The board’s decision comes after it adopted an updated city policy on public art rules late last year. That followed a federal judge’s determination that the city likely violated Turning Point’s First Amendment rights the first time it denied the group’s mural request.
Background: City updating public art rules after court order
City Attorney Michael Rouker wrote in a recommendation to the board that Turning Point’s application is still inconsistent with Bloomington’s now-updated policy and should, therefore, be rejected.
According to Rouker’s letter, city staff offered Turning Point the opportunity to submit an amended proposal but the group declined.
Rouker’s letter cites five times the application conflicts with the new policy: the mural includes words, is an art installation, is proposed by a private sector group, is asking to be installed in the public right-of-way and is expected to remain in the public right-of-way for longer than a week.
“Over the last two months, Turning Point and City staff worked through Turning Point’s application to address as many issues present in the application as possible,” Rouker wrote. “The majority of issues identified for clarification have been addressed, including traffic control, scaled drawings, and planned paint materials. However, because Turning Point’s application is inconsistent with the City’s Policy and Procedures on Private Art Installations within the Public Right of Way, staff is recommending that the Board deny Turning Point’s special event application.”
Rouker’s letter states the proposed mural is “speech”, defined under the policy as: “words, letters, numbers, universally recognized symbols or logos of any kind.”
Background: Court sides with conservative group on All Lives Matter street mural
Under the policy, speech is only permissible as part of temporary art installations, which are only expected to remain in the public right-of-way for seven or fewer days.
Kyle Reynolds, president of Turning Point USA at Indiana University, told the board that he would raise the issue in federal court again if the application were denied.
“We feel that removing the speech elements would defeat the purpose of the mural,” Reynolds said. “We feel that, as the city has allowed private organizations to participate in producing public murals with speech in the past and have participated in this public forum, we see no reason why our right to do so should be denied.”
Reynolds told WFIU/WTIU News he was disappointed by the board's decision.
"I and the other students of our Turning Point USA chapter have followed every requirement and request the City has made of us," Reynold said in a written statement. "Without protest, we have agreed to place the mural in a safe location, to use the paint that the City prefers and has used on other street murals, and to comply with every other one of the City’s demands except to censor our message. The City cannot open a public forum and then censor the content of messages in that forum. Since the City continues to ban our message and deny us our first amendment right to free speech, we have no choice but to go back to federal Court and again ask our judiciary to require the City to respect our rights guaranteed to us by the Constitutions of the State of Indiana and the United States of America."
In 2020 and 2021, the Board of Public Works approved requests to display three Black Lives Matter street murals around town. In July 2021, Turning Point requested approval for an All Lives Matter mural.
The city denied the request, saying it does not accept requests from private individuals. Turning Point then challenged the city, and the court sided with the group last November.
Many oppose mural as racism, heckling erupts in comments
The board’s vote followed expressions of opposition to Turning Point’s application — and plenty of heckling.
When the time came for public comment on the proposal, many in chambers and over Zoom urged the board to deny Turning Point’s application.
Bob Costello, president of the Kirkwood Community Association, asked the board to deny Turning Point’s request, as well as all others to paint murals on public roadways.
“I think the petitioner can find plenty of private buildings that would be more than willing to let them put this as a mural on the side of the building, if that’s what they wish,” Costello said.
Bloomington resident Heidi Darling called the proposed mural a “euphemism to deny the existence of racial injustice” and an insult to Black residents.
“Of course, all lives matter — but that’s not the point,” Darling said. “The phrase was derived in direct opposition to Black Lives Matter in order to diminish the racial injustice that remains in our society and around the world. The point is that Black lives matter, too.”
Background: Bloomington City Council Approves Painting Of Two 'Black Lives Matter' Murals
Resident Sue Aquila said the proposed site of the mural is inappropriate due to its proximity to Peoples Park, the former site of the Black Market — a Black-owned business that was firebombed in 1968 by a man with ties to the Ku Klux Klan.
“It seems an insult to that park,” Aquila said. “Furthermore, as the parent of a child of color, I don’t want anyone coming from campus or coming to our downtown to see something which is veiled racism. We don’t need that in this community. We are working hard to shore up support for everyone in this community.”
Another commenter, Maqubè Reese, challenged Turning Point to live up to its promise of “All Lives Matter” by opposing pending state legislation she called discriminatory, including the following:
- Senate Bill 1334 , which would require Hoosiers applying to vote by mail to show some kind of voter ID.
- House Bill 1608, which would limit discussions of certain topics regarding sexuality in elementary schools.
- House Bill 1116, which would require those voting by mail to attest they won't be available to vote in-person any time 28 days before the election.
“If the ‘All Lives Matter’ statement were actually true, then the racial tension of America wouldn’t be so polarized and the history of enslavement of Africans, mass genocide of Jews and native peoples in the violation of religious freedoms would not have happened,” Reese said. “But we are polarized, and discrimination is still proud and prevalent today."
Reese’s comments were echoed by Rhys Masterson, a Bloomington resident who emigrated from Ireland.
Read more: 'Parental rights' bill future uncertain, Senate leader 'does not see a path forward'
After Masterson spoke, Zoom participant with the username Charles Duncan wrote in the comment section, which is viewable by anyone on the meeting: “Shut your (expletive) mouth Conner mcgeegor” — a reference to Irish mixed martial artist Conor McGregor.
Masterson and his cousin, both attending via Zoom, spoke out against the anti-Irish sentiment.
“The amount of anti-Irishism and racism that’s been going on in the comments has disgusted me,” Masterson’s cousin said. “My cousin has just broke down crying because of this anti-Irishism and I really do not appreciate it. So, if we could have a ‘sorry’ or an apology, I’d really appreciate that.”
At that point in the meeting, public comment on the mural had ended. That did not stop another Zoom attendee from submitting a barrage of written comments with the N-word.
The user was blocked from the meeting, but the slur-ridden comments remained visible on screen for another 14 minutes until the meeting was adjourned.
No members of the public spoke in support of the application.
