Good afternoon.

Welcome.

I will call and order this meeting of the business housing and zoning committee for September 30th, 2025.

I'm Councilmember Jamal Osman and I'm the chair of this committee.

Before we begin the meeting, I want to remind everybody that these meetings are broadcasted live to enable greater public participation.

They include real-time captioning to increase the accessibility of our proceedings to the community.

Therefore, all speakers need to be mindful of the rate of their speech so that our captioners can fully transcribe all comments for the broadcast.

We'll be using uh speaker management, so please go ahead and sign up.

At this time, I'll ask City Clerk to call the role so we can verify a quorum.

Councilmember Vita.

Present.

Cashman.

Present.

Jenkins.

Present.

Chavez.

Present.

Vice Chair Chowry.

Present.

And Chair Osman.

Present.

There are six members present.

Let the record reflect we have a quorum.

Our agenda is front of us.

I will move to amend the agenda by making a rental license ordinance item number three instead of four.

With that, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

And those opposed say nay.

The ayes have it, and the motion is adopted.

All right.

Uh before we proceed to the public hearing, we will be first taking our consent agenda.

Item 6 through 11.

Item 6 is approving one liquor license.

Item 7 is approving 40 liquor license renewals.

Item 8 is accepting and authorizing the spring 2025 brownfield grants.

Item 9 is accepting a quality of live grant to update animal shelter housing.

Item 10 is accepting a modification to previously authored loan authorized loan for the Dreamland on 38th project.

And lastly, item one is setting a public hearing for October 14 to consider ordinance related to the permanent conibus cannabis event.

With that, do any of my colleagues have any comments.

See none, I'll move all items for approval.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

And those opposed say nay.

The ayes have it, and the motion carries.

Now we'll proceed to open the public hearing.

First we have a public hearing and presentation for liquor license and a sidewalk cafe license for Bellcor.

I welcome Max Cervantes from Business to give us that presentation.

Welcome.

Thank you, Chair Osman and Committee members.

I am District Supervisor Max Cervantes from Licenses and Consumer Services.

I'm presenting an application today from Bellicor Cafe LLC, DBA as Bellacour.

The business will be located at 107 3rd Avenue North Suite A, located in Ward 3.

Bellicour is applying for an on-sale liquor license with Sunday sales.

No entertainment and sidewalk cafe license.

There's currently no license at this location.

The building previously housed Muse Event Center.

Bellacourt proposes to be a contemporary French-inspired cafe and restaurant.

Bellacourt will operate out of the first story of a mixed-use building and will offer indoor and outdoor seating.

The premises will include 71 seats indoors and eight seats outdoors on a sidewalk cafe.

These concerns were shared with the applicant, and the business does not intend to immediately provide ambient music on their sidewalk cafe, but is interested in the potential to add them in the future.

Any future outside speakers will be positioned down and inward to mitigate sound within ambient noise levels.

This would be consistent with their other restaurants and in and they intend to operate as a good neighbor.

Licenses and consumer services division recommends approval of an on-sale liquor license with Sunday sales.

This concludes my presentation at this time.

Thank you so much for that presentation.

Now I'm going to proceed to open the public hearing.

And I have Gavin who sign up.

Please come up.

Hello.

Hi.

So yeah, we're gonna build a restaurant there, Belcourt Cafe.

Uh so we're it's gonna be a French bistro and bakery.

So the reason the hours are as such is that during the morning in the afternoon, uh, we'll be doing a bakery and then close in the afternoon, then reopen for dinner service at 5 p.m.

Thank you so much.

Are there anyone who would like to speak?

Councilmember Cashman.

Oh, uh I'm gonna close the public hearing.

I will close the public hearing and recognize Councilmember Cashman.

Thank you so much.

I just wanted to thank you for opening this business.

I've heard great things about the baked goods, so I know North Loop residents and all downtown residents are really gonna enjoy it, and I'll move this for approval.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh with that motion, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

And those opposed say nay.

The ayes have it, and the motion carries.

Thank you so much.

All right.

Next item is item two, which we have a public hearing for liquor license for classics, kitchen, and cocktails located at 40 428 2nd Street.

Again, I'll call Max Cervantes from Business to give us that presentation.

Welcome.

Thank you again, Chair Ospin and Committee members.

I am District Supervisor Max Cervantes from Licenses and Consumer Services.

I'm presenting an application from Classics LLC DBA Classics Kitchen and Cocktails Cream Cafe by Classics, located at 428 South 2nd Street in Ward 3.

Uh Classics currently holds an on-sale liquor license, no live entertainment with Sunday sales license.

The applicant is requesting an upgrade to limited entertainment.

Classics Kitchen and Cocktails has been operating at this location since 2023.

If approved, Classics Kitchen and Cocktail will provide limited entertainment to allow DJs and live musicians to perform on certain days.

While there will be no patron dancing, um the addition of DJs and live music will allow for the business to enhance their guest experience during brunch, lunch, and dinner.

On September 8th, 2025, public hearing notices were sent to property owners within 450 feet of the premises.

Notices were also sent to the downtown Minneapolis Neighborhood Association, Warehouse District Business Association, and Councilmember Rainbow.

We received one comment of support from the downtown Minneapolis Neighborhood Association.

Uh in a review of any complaints, 311 calls, police calls show no significant issues at this business.

Licenses and consumer services division recommends approval of an upgrade and entertainment to limited entertainment for class 6 kitchen.

This concludes my presentation.

Thank you so much for that presentation.

I'm going to proceed to open the public hearing and call Gerard.

Thank you guys so much for having me.

Yes, we have been uh in this space for two years and wanted to get a chance to know the neighborhood before we added any entertainment, and we feel good about that and would like to just add it to the business that we're doing to help keep our customer base there, especially going into this fall.

Wonderful.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else who would like to speak?

See not I'll close the public here and recognize Councilmember Cashman.

Or Chowdhury.

Yeah, I would love to move this item for approval.

I was there at Classics Kitchen this year for Valentine's Day.

I took my parents alongside my partner, and it was just a wonderful experience, and I feel like this edition would just only enhance what you've been doing over there, and just congratulations on two years of really good business.

We love your Cajun Boyle wings.

Okay.

With that motion, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

And those opposed say nay.

The ayes have it, and the motion carries.

All right.

Uh all right.

Uh first we have a public hearing and presentation for rental uh manager.

Amy, I think we're first.

We amend the agenda.

Oh, you mend it?

Yes, sorry.

Uh first we have a public hearing and presentation for rental license ordinance.

I'll be presenting this ordinance along with Councilmember Wansley Chowry Cashman.

And waiting for the staff.

Okay.

All right.

Well, uh, we are bringing forward uh the Islam Lord tier oversight and protection ordinance because too many of our renters are leaving in unsafe conditions.

In my in my in my years working with housing um as a chair of bees and in war six, I have had uh from families, I've heard from families who have dealt with leaks, mold, and safe conditions while landlords are keep collecting rent.

This ordinance is about accountability.

Make sure landlords step up and meet basic standard because that's the end because at the end of the day, everybody just deserves to be safe and health home.

And now I will pass it to Councilmember Cashman.

All right, thank you, Chair Osman.

So I am co-authoring this policy because there are some uh tier three properties in my ward, which have been very hard to find uh moment of oversight for and solutions to.

So this policy will hold landlords accountable for maintaining their rental units in good condition.

It only impacts the high-risk tier uh rental properties, which is part of the tiering system established by the regulatory services director.

And the rental properties that are subject to conditions will be required to have their rental renewal application come before the council for approval as an additional step in accountability and transparency.

And this process aligns with other license renewals in our city, such as liquor and gambling license, which we apply uh which we approve through this committee on a regular basis.

All right, and then I want to just ground us in what this policy does and does not do.

So to rent a housing unit in the city of Minneapolis, you need a rental license, which is circled there in red.

And having a license means going through the process of licensing, inspection, and tiering, which is described here at a high level.

This ordinance focuses on licensed renewals, not the other aspects.

Over half of the people who live in Minneapolis are renters, so a lot of folks in our city are impacted by this, and it merits that we pay a little bit more close attention to this process as council members.

And this slide was taken directly from a presentation to this committee from regulatory services on their annual uh process.

All right, so currently all rental licenses are renewed through an abbreviated process.

As you can see in this screenshot, license holders visit a portal on the city website, type in their license number, and pay their renewal renewal bill.

The amount that they pay does differ based on property tier, which will be described in the next slide, but the process does not.

Renewals are granted upon successful payment, and currently this is a missed opportunity for us to apply more oversight and accountability to the process of getting a rental license for properties that are in the tier three category.

So this next slide has a lot of information, so bear with me.

But it does explain what tier one, tier two, and tier three rental properties are.

Next, I'll take it up.

My name is Councilmember Chowdhury.

I'm proud to represent the 12th ward and be a co-author on this ordinance.

Before you, you can take a look at a map of all of the properties, rental properties across tiers.

Currently, we have about 24,000 rental licenses in Minneapolis, indicative of the fact that we are a renter majority city.

And while that is a lot of rental licenses, we are really focused in on the high-risk rentals.

And so if you look at that third map in orange, we're zooming in on the 160 tier 3 licenses covering about 2,260 units.

And these units have several documented issues that may have an urgent impact or urgent impact on renter safety and habitability.

It takes about 40 points to get to this tier.

And so that's really important to highlight because those violations can be life safety, could be notice to condemn and a plethora of other code issues.

And it just really hones in on the fact that this ordinance is about addressing the health and safety issues that should be addressed for any person that lives anywhere in the city of Minneapolis.

One thing that's important to highlight is that some of these licenses have been renewed year after year without change.

And this policy sets a new process on how these licenses can be renewed.

One of the roles of the city council and our policy making authority is to have oversight.

So what this ordinance does is create a process of oversight over these high-risk rentals, increase transparency and accountability.

A rental license essentially ensures that a property meets basic health, safety, and livability standards, and a city classifies it, classifies a rental license based on how well they meet city standards.

And if you look at that tier three and what it takes to get to those violations, we clearly see that there's an issue in actually meeting these standards, and there needs to be a system change for recourse.

And the goal is to ensure that we are getting getting these properties into a better place, right?

The goal isn't to revoke licenses left and right.

That's a last resort.

But we're saying here you don't need to be at tier three.

We want less properties in tier three.

We want people to have their basic rights to shelter that is safe, that is clean, that is habitable.

Many tier three rentals, as you saw in that map, are located throughout the city, but more specifically on the north side and low-income neighborhoods, working class communities, and communities that are predominantly immigrant or have student housing.

Oftentimes in communities where we have people who are working class, speak different languages, are really busy and might not have the time or capability or accessibility to get city support and help and address these issues, or maybe they have tried, but there just hasn't been a place for recourse or for their voice to be heard.

And this policy allows for that to happen for these high-risk rentals.

On the next slide, I want to highlight a part of our ordinance.

It's right at the top, it's defining what a high-risk rental license application is.

If you take a look at that, uh, it gives a pretty pretty um open definition that allows regulatory services to uh develop a new tiering system in the future, which is something that they have been discussing.

This ensures high-risk rental properties in any tiering system established are subject to this oversight that we are discussing.

Staff to us have also had conversations that recommended including rental properties that are subject to conditions to come before the city council for approval to ensure that conditions are being met by property owners, and again, we're not trying to get to a place of revocations, but this place of dialogue and oversight where there can be conditions that are placed on these high-risk rentals to reduce the number of rentals we see in tier three or this category of high-risk rental.

Next, I will pass it back over to Councilmember Osman.

Thank you so much, Vice Chair.

So this ordinance changed the process so that only high-risk rental properties come before the council for renewals.

The director of regulatory services will bring forward a high risk obligations to the city council for approval.

For too long, we have had situations where the worst properties just got approved year by year.

By requiring council review, we are putting a real oversight in place, the same way we do on liquor license and gambling license.

That means landlords can keep ignoring problems while renters pay the price.

We have made uh we have made sure to keep the appeal process in place because this has to be fair as well.

If property owners disagree with the decision, whether it's denial or conditional approval, they can still appeal.

In the event that rental license isn't approved, the city will work with the owner, the renters, and the council to create a plan.

That plan could mean renewing with conditions, granting professional license, suspending, or in some cases, revoking.

But our goal is not to punish people out of their homes, it's to get these properties fixed so families can live safely.

This ordinance makes sure that the city steps in the real solutions instead of allowing neglect neglect to continue for many years.

If approved, this ordinance will be effective on January 1st, 2027.

That gives the private owners all 2026 to make improvements and bring their buildings up to standard.

This timeline creates accountability while also giving landlords a fair chance to do the right thing.

By the license, by the time licenses are up for renewal, renters will see a real change in quality safety of their homes.

The goal is not to have people displaced, but it's important to note that the city also has a tenant relocation assistance program, which we will talk about next.

Councilmember Wandsley, who is here with us, has a legislative directive out about a tenant relocation assistance, so this committee will have further discussion about it soon.

If a license is revoked, renters are not left without support.

The city has a tenant relocation assistance program that can provide up to three months' rent to help families move to into safe homes.

Tenant relocation assistance, a city policy that supports renters if their landlords fails to obtain or qualify for rental license.

Renters might be eligible for payment equal to three months.

With that, I would like to uh hand it to my co-author, Councilmember Wansley.

Thank you, Chair Osman, and also want to extend much gratitude to my fellow co-authors, uh Councilmember Chowdery and Councilmember Cashman, um, as well as uh many thanks to the committee or bids committee today for allowing me the opportunity to speak to this ordinance that I'm co-authoring while also not sitting on this committee.

Um I just want to take some time to talk about, of course, my excitement for this ordinance uh to pass.

I believe that this is a step in a new direction that will significantly support better housing enforcement and renters' rights throughout the city, as uh my fellow co-author highlighted uh councilmember Chow Jerry.

We are majority renter city and need to be responsive to uh the needs of those constituents.

Uh I would also again just want to emphasize Councilmember Osman um's leadership in the development of this policy.

Um it came from the reality of the day-to-day difficulties that you've shared that your tenants in War 6 have been experiencing, and this is an effort to troubleshoot them and give your tenants that you've seen struggle some level of recourse and to give some accountability to the landlords who have not provided them the highest quality housing that they deserve.

Um, and this proposed policy will now help tenants citywide, and I will note especially in my ward, which has a huge or large chunk of the tier three units.

Um, and also in relating to our citywide dynamic, or two is also a majority renter ward.

I also want to highlight War 2 has the largest population of students in the state.

And often these renters are first-time tenants and often are not aware about the rights that they have as renters granted by our current uh legislative authorities.

Since entering City Hall, my office has filled it constituent concerns from renters in my ward and from all across the city who are again experiencing this issue of substandard housing being provided to them by landlords in our city.

And they raised concerns to their landlords as well and to the city, um, but have often seen no improvements from it.

And the mayor's administration has told renters as well as council offices that the best tool in these types of situations is to call 311 to report those concerns or complaints.

Um, but we are not seeing those 311 calls translate into the type of enforcement that's needed to get these landlords to provide quality housing and meet our current housing code.

Um while I can appreciate that 311 is a vehicle in which the city captures data to understand problems happening um in our housing landscape across the city.

Right now, it's the only tool that we can offer residents, but often leaves our offices as well as renters and residents from across the cell the city feeling unheard and not seeing material improvements in the places that they call home.

And in the last six weeks, since council member Osman and I gave our notice of introduction for this ordinance.

Primarily that's housing students, and has been operating without a license for five years.

And it's unclear how this unoccurred.

And I am awaiting to see regulatory services next steps in responding to this.

Um, this mistake is deeply troubling, and it reaffirms that there is a significant need for more oversight over the regular service uh department and particularly its handling of rental licenses.

Slum Lord tier oversight and protection is absolutely a step in the right direction.

And we as a council may need to um do more um to build off of this in the upcoming term.

I absolutely expect that we will need to do more.

Um, but this again gives us a foundational um step to at least move from and being at least timely in our response to uh ongoing issue that thousands of renters are experiencing, and that is living in sub-quality housing right now.

The city must have robust enforcement to protect tenants, or else landlords know that there will be no consequences for bad actions.

And the majority of people who live in Minneapolis and rent in our city will then suffer as a result of that.

And this is simply unacceptable.

And I am grateful that many of my colleagues with that and agree that we need to maximize our oversight authorities and functions.

And because of that, this is where this ordinance comes into play.

And this ordinance will make the council as well as the public better informed about the city's processes and the responses to housing violations that's allowing our residents again, thousands of residents to live in what um one of my fellow uh co co-authors, council member Cashman highlighted.

We're talking about living in in apartments with repeated pest conditions that could possibly have had condemnations um posted on them.

These are real life conditions in which renters are having to live in, and we're talking about in some of our most vulnerable communities in North Minneapolis or in communities of color and working class communities.

And I am very excited to be able to take leadership on this issue by moving this policy forward.

It's helping folk focus the council's attention on the city's most problematic properties.

Again, we're honing in on those 160 landlords that are not meeting our current city's housing code and are currently tier three properties.

And I want to say that this particular conversation has energized and inspired many conversations around other policy actions that we need to take uh subsequent to this policy to make sure that our renters, again, regardless of where you live, are living in the highest quality housing that you deserve, and that landlords are also providing that.

Um, because if you're going to decide to be a landlord, it is your responsibility to provide safe and livable housing to those that you are providing housing to.

So I look forward to bringing forward more actions and policies that hopefully will build upon this work of this body in this ordinance that we're considering today and will ask for the support of my colleagues.

Great.

Thank you so much.

I'd like to open the public hearing.

And if you haven't signed up, please see the clerk to sign up.

All right.

Oh, my apology.

Um, you want to add a comment?

Yeah, if she had asked questions, yes.

All right.

Um, we're gonna take the public kingdom first and the first person, and I apologize for mispronounce your name.

Uh FoNessa.

Yep, please come on in.

From Ward 9, yes.

Yep, four minutes, please.

Ready?

Uh hola, my name is Vanessa.

My pronombre is ella.

So inquilina de la Cooperativa Uncelusi Limite, donde nosotros quitamos los edificios de un dueño abusivo.

Hello, my name is Vanessa, and my pronouns are she and her.

I'm a tenant in the sky without limits cooperative, where we took our buildings away from an abusive landlord.

My experience that was that when the owner Steve Friends' license was revoked, we as tenants were unfortunately threatened with eviction by the city.

If you can back up a little bit from the mic, it will be a lot clearer.

Okay.

Oh, okay.

This law would help hold landlords accountable to the city and make that accountability more transparent, especially for tenants.

But you would need to develop a more concrete plan where inspectors and regulatory services staff would have to have these conversations directly with those who are most affected, the tenants.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next person is Bennett.

Uh Cathy Bennett.

Good afternoon, Chair Osman and members of the biz committee.

My name is Kathy Bennett.

I'm the executive director of the Twin Cities Housing Alliance.

We advocate for solution oriented policies to increase housing production, improve the existing housing stock while considering the impact to those most vulnerable to housing instability.

Our opposition to this ordinance does not diminish our call for serious and swift action against unsafe housing by enhancing the existing regulatory process.

We are concerned that this ordinance could lead to unpredictable and potentially detrimental consequences, such as increased resident displacement and also stifle housing production and improvements.

Instead of pursuing this amendment, we advocate for optimizing the current regulatory framework and reinforcing the established oversight system by providing staff with the resources to enhance well-defined conditions and actionable plans, and empowering residents by increasing mechanisms for residents to safely and anonymously report housing condition complaints without the fear of retaliation.

Elevating these decisions to the council level could create a public and intimidating environment that deters residents from voicing their concerns.

Thank you for your attention and consideration of this perspective.

We believe that by working collaboratively with the existing regulatory framework, you can create a more effective approach to improving housing conditions for all.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next person is William Harold II.

Welcome.

Thank you, Chair Osman and Committee members.

My name is Will Luther, and I serve as the Director for State Affairs for the Undergrad Student Government at the University of Minnesota Twin Cities.

I'm here today to urge the council to support the passage of an ordinance to amend Title 12, Chapter 244 of the Minneapolis Code of Ordinances related to housing maintenance code.

This amendment, which sets a new standard for licenses to be renewed if a rental property is below city standards, is crucial in holding property owners accountable to the necessary health, safety, and livability standards set forth by the city.

Though a more rigorous licensed renewal process through a more rigorous licensed renewal process, a new level of transparency will be created between rental stakeholders, furthering the goal of creating a high standard of living that is accessible to all of Minneapolis residents.

While I am the only student here today, I urge the look at the letter at the countless letters passed by the entire student government body provided in the public comment.

Of the thousand rental licenses below city standards within Minneapolis, there is a high concentration of tier three rental licenses around the University of Minnesota area, with over 75% of our students residing off campus, many of whom who are first-time renters.

These inferior conditions that often go unaddressed due to lack of resources, time, or knowledge in regards and holding property owners accountable.

Thus, units are left in subpar conditions from lease to lease, getting progressively worse over time.

Additionally, many of these problems are often not discovered until after students have committed to their lease, leaving students unable to seek alternative housing options without incurring severe financial losses and or housing insecurity.

Though this policy, through this policy, proactive members will be put in place that limit renters from being placed in difficult conditions due to circumstances out of their control.

In closing, I urge the council to support this amendment in order to establish stronger provisions to the license renewal process.

As Minneapolis is a majority renter city, this ordinance is pivotal in making that all making sure that all community members, including University of Minnesota students, are able to trust that their properties up to par with basic standards for health, safety, and livability.

This necessary step will enable protections for renters, ensure accountability for property orders, and advance Minneapolis' command for safe, equitable living housing for all.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Uh next person is Will O'Keefe.

Thank you, Council members.

I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you as a Minneapolis resident in Ward 8 and a member of the city's housing advisory committee.

I'm here to testify in part to draw attention to the letter that was submitted by our committee, as well as my personal concerns about this policy.

I'm a firm believer in following the experts in our regulatory services department are the experts in this case.

The proposal, as written, has a significant budget impact at a time where budget is crucial and threatens to further overstretch our staff so that they can write reports for council versus making the decisions they're already empowered to do.

Why are we adding council into this process?

We all want to see the count the quality of housing raised for our most vulnerable residents.

But I don't see how this achieves that goal versus working collaboratively with regulatory services to empower them or give them more tools.

Beyond that, we have as a city made an important commitment via the renter first policy adopted in 2019.

Implementing this ordinance would almost certainly end up undermining this policy and leaving more people without homes and little time to rectify the situation.

If we're looking for solutions that raise the level of housing in the community, I want to hear more from city staff about how we can better support their efforts.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next person is Joe Hesta or Hesla.

Um thank you.

Too close.

Thank you, Chair Osman and co-author Wansley and co-authors, um Chaldery and Ashman.

Glad to be here.

I'm a member of Ward, I live in Ward 9.

And I'm speaking in favor of this amendment to this ordinance.

It's all it's long overdue.

Obviously, people have been living in these in these apartments with substandard housing and and substandard health and mold.

And I think it's terrible, and um you will hear people voting it urging you not to vote for this, but I bet if you asked every renter in the city, they'd be for this.

And um it's not about with the due respect to the staff, it's not about what the staff want.

The experts are people living in these apartments, and they know it's needed.

And obviously, we don't have a system that is accounting for this, and there's there's no replacement for for licensing as a tool as an enforcement, and I can't see why I can't see an argument against that.

And I would hope that this vote is 13 to nothing for this ordinance.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh next person is Linnea Carvet.

Sure.

Hello, my name is Linnea Cabot.

I am in the 10th ward, and I am here as a representative of uh of a newly formed union, tenant union IPG.

And this is for how he's uh this is not my thing, so he's kind of my grounding person.

Um first of all, I would like to thank the council member from ward two and for your advocacy and for your three one one.

We've had problems, we've had so many problems.

I'm going off script here, so I apologize.

I live um on 23rd and Blazedale Avenue South.

I've been there 15 years or so.

I moved in, and it was a beautiful area.

I love the diversity.

I there's a school across from me through the years, and especially with 2020, our community just congealed.

And we're dealing with a lot, so bear with me here.

Um we've been organizing for about a year and a half now.

We didn't know we could organize until about yeah, about a year ago, and um because there's been no oversight.

There is absolutely no oversight.

We've made 311 call after 311 call after 311 call with absolutely zero results.

And uh I mean there's there's things, there's there's mold, there's human excrement of any kind that you can imagine that they either don't clean up adequately or they don't clean up at all, even if it's brought to their attention.

Um broken doors, broken security doors, excuses why it's it's it's it's a lot.

Um I just I see it spreading th further and further throughout the city.

I'm getting off track here, so bear with me here.

Um ground.

Okay.

Um I'm I'm here.

This this obviously I'm not having uh uh much uh success with this whole thing.

Um my anxiety is going through the roof, but I'd rather be up here doing this than not stand up for my community.

These these these tenants, these um landlords, they they are they they want to break up our community.

That's part of their strategy.

They have intimidated us, they have evicted people, they're trying to evict people unlawfully, they uh they they um they intimidate, they retaliate.

I have cases of it all.

And I just it and there's no oversight.

Thank you.

That's all.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Next person is Daniel Saador.

So I live in Ward 8 in Minneapolis.

I worked for years as a tenants' rights attorney with a local nonprofit.

In that time, I advised almost 4,000 tenants and over three years, 1,000 in Minneapolis alone.

I've defended tenants in court, I've taken tenants, I've represented tenants in court on repair issues, and I can tell you one thing landlords in this city do not care about the tier system.

It's all carrot, no stick.

Tier one, if the inspections ever happen, you're looking at the better part of a decade.

These supposedly annual inspections required under tier three, they're not happening.

This process affects just one point eight percent of units in the city.

Nobody needs to stand up for the 1.8% of the worst landlords in this city.

That's less than 2%.

Even all, as a tenant advocate will say that's probably a sign that the system is working overall.

We don't need to bend over backwards for the worst of the worst.

And we're gonna hear things like this is going to reduce supply, this is going to be a problem.

I'll tell you, people do not need to live in these substandard housing.

They need better housing, and this is not a process to destroy housing, is to induce compliance.

You heard the co-authors say how they're going to work on voluntary compliance.

And that's all this takes.

These are not difficult conditions to fix.

These are often deferred maintenance.

These are people who don't pay attention to their properties and let them molder for years and years and years on end.

Again, this is less than 2,500 units.

2,260 was the number we saw in a city with over 127,000 units.

That is a tiny portion.

This is a targeted measure intended to address the worst conduct.

Thank you, and I support this ordinance.

Thank you.

Uh next merch.

Next person is Andrew Follestrom.

Hi, Al.

Um is a good start, but the renters of Minneapolis deserve so much more.

Tier 3 is bad housing.

I've done walk alongs with the inspectors out there.

I remember one in the tier three building just touching a hole that was a tiny hole in the ceiling.

He touched it, an avalanche of roaches came down on his head, and he had to brush them off.

This is a license that had been automatically renewed by the city of Minneapolis in tier three housing.

Can you imagine living in those conditions?

You wouldn't allow your families to.

Landlords have already had the chance to do the right thing, right?

And they've failed.

City staff is going to need to follow through on this ordinance because they're not.

Inspectors need to talk with tenants.

Regulatory services needs to talk and coordinate any actions with tenants.

And we know under the current administration, this is not going to come from a directive of the mayor's office.

It needs to be codified into ordinance.

If the city does take away a license, and sometimes that is the right move, under the state law, the city attorney can file an ETRA in civil court and can take some responsibility for the buildings.

With the value of housing flying and millionaires and multi-billion dollar corporations buying up buying up housing, we can't privilege those few who are buying up housing in our city.

In the opinion of any landlord who would prioritize their own profits and comfort and leisure over basic livability standards, isn't worthy of your consideration.

Slumlord or not, imagine going out to a nice restaurant while families in the buildings you own have their food eaten up by roaches and mice.

That is sick and disgusting and should turn anyone's stomach.

How can these people live with themselves?

Slumlords should give up their latest phone, their car upgrade, their vacation or their boat and use the money that residents are paying them every month to actually maintain the homes that they were rich enough to buy up.

If they're gonna choose to own more homes than they can use, then that's the literal least these slumlords can do.

Thank you.

Right, next person is Cecil Smith.

Welcome.

Thank you.

I'm Mr.

Chair, members of the committee.

My name is Cecil Smith, I reside in Ward 1, and I am president and CEO of the Minnesota Multi-Husing Association.

I appreciate the opportunity to testify today.

While we strongly share the council's goal of holding negligent property owners accountable, MHA is opposed to this ordinance because the need effect does not help renters, nor does it adequately address the issue.

I want to highlight three serious problems with this ordinance as proposed.

First, the risk of displacement.

As the department's memorandum makes clear delays or denials of rental licenses could leave renters facing forced moves within 30 days.

For those already in the most distressed housing, finding safe and affordable alternatives on short notice is challenging.

The result could be homelessness or further concentration of families into unsafe housing, undermining a shared commitment to stability and dignity for renters.

Second, the burden on regulatory services.

The ordinance shifts the responsibility to the council, what places a heavy administrative burden on inspectors and staff.

Instead of focusing on inspections and rental complaints, they'll be preparing committee reports and provisional licenses.

This redirection slows the very enforcement work that protects renters day to day.

Third, the appeals process.

The proposal allows the same body that denies the license to hear the appeal.

That structure undermines basic due process and creates conflicts of interest, which could invite legal challenges and weaken public trust.

In summary, this ordinance risks display displacing renters, straining a vital city department, and compromising due process.

I urge the committee to reconsider this approach and instead strengthen the reforms already underway that address negligent property owners without harming residents.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next person is Emory Brush.

Welcome.

Hello.

Good afternoon, and thank you all for introducing this proposal.

I'm here today to voice my support for this ordinance.

I'm a tenant in Loring Park at the Brentwood uh buildings over on Grant Street.

And this past year, my neighbors and I organized to create a tenants union.

Myself and many neighbors have seen the failings of the system we have now.

As you've heard from others who've testified today, we called 311 dozens of times.

And while citations were issued, orders to correct were sent out, things were not repaired.

Seemed like our landlords just paid the fines.

And I'm not arguing that anybody's housing should be taken away through a license revocation.

Something I appreciate about the ordinance proposed is that it wants to work with landlords.

But what it creates is a higher system of accountability outside of a monetary payment that the landlords would have to pay.

One of the things that my neighbors and I discovered about our buildings was that the fire safety equipment was nearly five years out of code.

After we started talking, we learned that there were several stories where that had created dangerous scenarios that endangered people's lives.

If the basic fire safety equipment like alarms is five years out of code, were inspections happening for a property listed as tier three, or how thorough were they?

The stop slumlords ordinance would not be an attack on landlords, like you've heard other people say it's less than two percent of the units right now that would be affected.

Uh if landlords are doing their jobs and taking care of their properties as they should be, there's nothing to worry about.

It's not putting any new requirements on landlords, just simply asking them to follow the rules we have already had for years and provide more material mechanisms to hold them accountable if they do not.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next person is President Cynthia.

Cynthia, she's gone.

Okay.

Next person is our organization of community justice.

Number 13.

Hey, Cynthia, come on in.

Sorry, I was over in the overflow.

Thank you for come.

Welcome.

Good afternoon.

I I am first appreciative of this ordinance ordinance as I am fully let me catch my breath.

I do work out by the way, but I'm in full support of this ordinance.

It's it's a start.

But the amount of complaints that come across the NAACP's desk in a in a day in reference to housing and slumlords is unbelievable.

Now, if I was to take a poll, just kind of glancing up here.

Nobody is written up here.

And if you and if you are, and if you are, and if you are, you can afford where you're renting.

Which means you're probably not having no rats and roaches and ceilings falling down and etc.

etc.

I've been to the housing, I've talked to this person, I've talked to that person.

But the truth of the matter is, you guys, this should this this shouldn't even be a topic.

I mean, we're we're struggling with homelessness.

Now we got people living in housing, and we can't even get basically I mean, people's human rights are being violated.

And obviously they don't that ain't really going to affect a lot of y'all because it's not going to affect you until it does.

So somebody's building burns down because the electrical is out and some babies are ch and children are killed.

That's when it's gonna really impact you know these these folks.

So what I'm recommending is not only is this ordinance a very, very good start, and it should be unanimous across the board without even a shadow of a doubt.

But we have to do more.

We have to do more.

Letting people live in these unjust they I mean, I can't even fathom what I've seen.

And some of these landlords, they don't even live here, they live out of state.

They don't care about these folks.

But this is an election year.

This is an election year, and we vote people in to help us out.

And it's not just a lot of rhetoric, it's about doing the work.

Put yourself in these people's position.

I don't have housing, thank God.

But I've seen it, and it is horrible.

It is horrendous.

It's not even livable means, y'all.

It's not.

So please pass this ordinance and then let's do more.

And this brother who came up here and suited and booted.

Thank you.

I'm giving her my time.

He's he's here suited and booted talking about what what we should not do.

He's saying that because he's one of them.

Sure.

If I came in here suited and booted and said we don't want this ordinance because it's gonna do this, yeah, it's gonna cause you to be accountable and that you don't want to be accountable.

So I'm asking this board, please pass this ordinance, help these folks be accountable, and I'm gonna continue to be.

I can only be so many places, but this is something that's very important to me.

Very important to me.

Outside of home uh homelessness, this is a housing issue, is very important to me.

So I'm asking that you please pass this ordinance with flying colors, and we gotta do more than just that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Karina, you guys.

All of y'all board members.

I got one more makeup.

No, come on, talk.

Come on up and talk.

Say some more.

Hey, you guys.

Um, I fully fully support this ordinance.

Um the housing issues we have in Minneapolis.

Residents in Ward 6, Elliott Park neighborhood is having some housing issues.

We have a vacancy issue in Minneapolis.

And so I encourage the renters that are here today to stand up strong because we matter.

Um I've called regulatory services 311 so many times.

Same thing for me.

Those calls went unannounced.

I had only maybe one part of a success, but then I think that blew up in my face.

Um, the housing issues that we have in Minneapolis are substandard and is unjust the things that I know that's happening throughout the city.

To the good landlords that's out there, the bad lords are making you guys look bad.

And so I encourage you guys to pass this, create a work group with this ordinance, and just salute yourselves for having the courage to do this today.

But it's gonna take more than writing on a piece of paper to make the city renters believe that this is gonna be a process that really supports us.

We have homeless issue in Minneapolis, but we have a house issue in Minneapolis because we wouldn't be here today talking about this ordinance.

So please hold yourselves accountable as well and don't let this go unheard.

Thank you all.

God bless you.

Thank you.

Anina Breven, Braven.

Welcome.

Hi there, thank you, council members and chairman Osman.

My name is Amina Ray Baravon, um, and I'm a renter in South Minneapolis, and I've been a renter for three years since I first moved here.

Um when I was a first-time renter, I had no idea what the process was and ended up in a terrible housing situation, and this is not uncommon.

Um, I am speaking in support of this ordinance because I believe, like many others have said, that it is the very first step in what we need.

It is a basic step to have this city council oversight.

Um we see liquor licenses, we saw that happen earlier this meeting.

If liquor licenses are passing through and housing isn't, that is a problem.

Housing is literally dealing with people's lives.

And like you all mentioned, um, the majority of the city is renters.

So these are y'all's constituents.

Even if y'all aren't renters, this is deeply important and a deeply held thing for all of us in Minneapolis.

Um, I'm a part of the South Minneapolis Tenants Union, which means that I myself have lived in these conditions, but even more so, I see every single day my neighbors and the people I work with who are also members of our union, and what we live with.

Um, last winter, um, my neighbors next door, the entire 40 plus unit building went without heat for weeks when it was um under negative 10 degrees.

They were shivering in their beds at night, couldn't reach their landlords, and all the landlord has to do is pay a fine.

When you're a millionaire, that does nothing.

Um we need this ordinance because this um licensing of actually having a rental license is one of the only points of intervention we have that can actually pressure landlords um to do the right thing.

And I want to speak to the idea that this is gonna hinder people from wanting to be landlords or um take away housing.

There it will only take away housing for landlords that were planning to be shitty landlords.

If not, you won't be intimidated by this.

This is the worst of the worst.

Um, if any landlords are actually following the law, this is not about anything other than enforcing the law, and we need that enforcement.

This is one step of many that need to be taken, and I really hope that I see this pass unanimously.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, Amina, for your testimony.

Next person is Peter R.

Good afternoon, council members and board members.

My name is Peter, and I'm here to speak about the urgent need for stronger enforcement of our rental licensing ordinance.

The law already requires every landlord to maintain a license and meet basic housing standards.

But too often CPED and regulatory services fail to act until conditions become unsafe.

This puts tenants, neighbors, and entire communities at risk.

We don't need new ordinances.

We need accountability and consistent enforcement of the ones we already have.

That means proactive inspections, timely follow-ups, and real consequences for landlords who repeatedly ignore their obligations and disrespect the city council by not doing what they're supposed to do.

Every day a delay allows more families to live on safe, unhealthy housing.

I urge the city to make enforcement of rental licensing ordinances a priority.

Because safe housing isn't optional, it's a right.

With that in, I would like to add one last thing to this.

And the housing inspectors.

So we can have efficient number of bodies that can respond within 24 hours of a complaint.

And then that way it won't get to a point where cockwills are falling on people's heads.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next person is Mark Safranos.

Yeah.

Welcome.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Uh thank you for your time.

I wasn't really planning on speaking, but I felt I needed to talk.

Um I live in Ward 7 and I'm at the 110 grant.

Building's incredibly old and not well upkept.

Uh the laundry facilities there have not been fully functioning the entire time I'm there, and hundreds of people need to do laundry, and there's not even a working laundry machine.

My apartments flooded twice, and the one across from me, I can't even I've lost count.

I have flies, I have cockroaches, I have mold.

There are a lot of elderly people in my building.

And the there's no wheelchair accessibility whatsoever.

There's one woman in an electric wheelchair who has to go down the parking ramp all the way down to the sea level to catch an elevator to her apartment.

The HVAC system constantly goes out.

My apartment is cold in the wintertime and hot in the summertime.

And again, a lot of elderly people in there have complained about the same.

The parking garage doors don't close, which invites people to come in unwanted and they break in and they steal.

That's my list.

I just wanted to give a just uh testimony to what my living conditions are.

I really am for the transparency when I've approached my apartment uh property manager about this.

He says he doesn't communicate about any of the issues or anything that's being done about the issues because he doesn't want to be made look a fool.

I think he's the fool for not communicating.

And I also think if we you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

So I really would appreciate this being passed.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

And the last person who sign up is Ashley Worth the trial.

Welcome.

Hello, everyone.

My name is Ashley Worth Patrick.

I'm actually before you today holding multiple identities.

So I actually have rented in Minneapolis for many years, but I also own and rent out a unit in Minneapolis.

Um I do not like the name landlord, so I don't identify as such, but I do have a unit in South Minneapolis that I rent out.

I think it's an honor to provide housing for someone.

And I only own and rent out one unit because that's what I feel like I can manage.

I think when greed takes over, then people just want as many units as possible.

They want to neglect and abuse people so they can collect money.

This is not a value that the city should allow to happen or a value that they should stand behind.

We should be valuing safe and dignified housing for all.

Thank you so much.

Thank you so much.

Are there anyone who would like to speak before we close the public hearing?

Anyone on the overflow room.

All right.

Seeing none.

I'll close the public hearing.

And uh I've been up uh discussion with my colleagues.

I would like to recognize Councilmember Fita.

Thank you, Chair Osman.

Um, I actually have a lot of questions, and I'm happy to have further discussions with staff and others uh offline too if I need to.

But um the the first thing is I I really do feel like the issues that were brought up here today.

I'm I'm concerned for folks too when it comes to slum lords.

Um, you know, my um ward had one group of uh one company that owned a lot of properties that have been put up for sale that have been taken away.

A lot of things have happened.

They've changed the name several times, so I won't even bother saying the name.

But I've had that issue in my ward.

Um, but this doesn't sound like um a legislative issue to me.

It really does sound like a management issue.

I've always saw it as a management issue.

Like what are what are our staff doing?

How are they uh evaluating these properties and then like what is the what is the level of scrutiny that is being put onto these landlords?

I mean, we've had all these people who've come today and said um talked about personal experiences that they've had in their um rental properties.

It doesn't mean that they're gonna be at the tier level to where it comes before the council.

It just means that they have some questions and concerns about the way they're living.

I I don't know if that particular building will come before us.

So I don't I I don't see how this is a council issue when every single property and every single issue someone has is not gonna come before us.

Again, if it feels like it's a management issue to me.

Um I don't know what the financial impact would be of this for us to switch this and bring this to council uh to bring this before council.

Has anyone done a financial analysis of this and know what that's gonna look like?

Yes, please, Councilmember Wantsley.

Go ahead.

Thank you, Councilmember Vita for that question.

Um and also I want to put for the public record.

We did also attach a response to some of the concerns which you're highlighting that was raised by uh Rick Services uh director Enrique of Alaskaz, where they highlighted a concern around resources.

One thing that we highlighted, because we have time before implementation, we're here to work with regular service leadership on any budgetary needs that they might have pertaining to this ordinance.

Um people have already highlighted there's already a lack of inspectors and other issues.

Those have not been identified in their budget requests as of yet, but again, we're here to support them.

Another piece of this too is fees.

Um we've had a long-standing conversation around how fees are underutilized in all departments, it also including rec services when it comes to licensing fees.

That could be an avenue of bringing in resources that shifts the burden off of property owners.

Um, so that could also be an avenue for funding resources with getting landlords compliant with this ordinance.

So we don't have a number.

Thank you, Councilmember Wandsley.

Um, also, um, I mean, this just feels like it's gonna turn into eviction court to me.

Like there'll be certain landlords before the council, and let's let's be real about how situations work.

If you're a landlord who can hire a high power lobbyist to come and talk to all 13 council members in the mayor, you might have a different outcome than a landlord who doesn't have money for a high power lobbyist, or it could work the other way around.

You might feel fine to help the people who don't have the lobbyists and the people who don't.

We don't know.

I don't know.

That doesn't seem fair though.

If it feels like there's there's a uh opportunity to pick winners and losers when it's about the 13 council members selecting um what they believe is bad acting versus good, or how how they even get before us.

Um I mean it does it just feels like it's gonna turn into eviction court, and then what was what happens, you know, Councilmember Osman, you brought up a point about um, or maybe it wasn't you, if it wasn't, I'm sorry, but like someone brought up a point about uh it not being this maybe this um the unintended consequences that people don't have somewhere to live.

If your license gets pulled, I was always under the understanding that you got 30 days um that these tenants are gonna have 30 days to evacuate, possibly, and and we're assuming that there is a housing stock for them to move into, even if we use city funding to relocate them.

That you can't make that assumption.

Um people need so many bedrooms and they have like there's not always a three-bedroom available.

People's kids go to certain school systems they want to be in.

I mean, we're making a lot of assumptions here that if you have to move out within 30 days, the city's gonna give you three months of money to relocate, and then we're gonna have somewhere for you to go that keeps your kid in the same school system that doesn't uproot you and your family from where you're at, um, because it comes before the council and the council decides to revoke the license of someone.

I mean, those all those things matter to me.

So I'm trying like one of my favorite programs is stable home stable schools because people get to keep their kids in the school district for a long period of time, and that and that builds um, you know, that builds the family unit up that builds community for them.

And so, like I'm I'm really trying to understand like some of these these things that are unintended consequences of policy like this when I really do believe that it's management issues.

The pressure should be put on management to make sure that folks are being evaluated properly and they're being being held accountable, and that we have enough staff there doing this work because where I see the complaints at is people saying inspections not coming out to do this, like these things are going unnoticed because we don't have um enough inspectors out doing the work.

And so um my last thing is I I I really'm really trying to struggle to to understand like how you all are comparing this to liquor licenses because liquor licenses do come before us and they come before us as like uh here you got a liquor license, you can sell liquor at your building.

They also come before us if there's a clear violation of something and we get legal advice on like how to proceed with that.

How if you don't pay your taxes, you lose your liquor license.

If there's there's a criteria for this.

So I'm really trying to understand how you all are comparing this rental license coming before the council to the liquor license.

Like what is the how like it's not like apples and apples to me.

So I I want you to maybe maybe that's an offline thing too, but I'm really trying to understand the how you're connecting these rental licenses as the same thing as liquor licenses.

You're done with your comments?

Yes.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you.

I am in Q.

I I do like to make just a couple of comments.

We're here to, we're not here to punish the landlord or uh renter, renter uh individuals that are renting our community that are providing services.

We just want to make sure the service they're providing is safe and healthy for for our community members.

We are obligated to protect the residents in City of Minneapolis.

And on this process, it's just uh uh oversight to assist our staff, in my opinion, uh regulatory services, because for example, when we approve thousands of thousands of liquor licenses that come front of us.

I know when the liquor license owners come in front of us, they come with their best behavior because they know uh the consequences.

Uh there's uh a lot of planning, they do it scooter to planning and inspect the local inspector, they do all those processes and they come.

What we're asking is that this is let's just say this is 160 units out of 24,000, you know.

Uh I'm sorry, 160 properties out of 24,000 properties, the tier three uh properties are very, very small.

Um, and we're just making sure that the issue is here.

You hear the issue today.

You hear people uh that lived and experienced uh having a you know uh tier three uh properties, living what kind of condition it is.

And let me just say this.

311 is not a solution, it's not the only solution, it's an option for folks to come.

There are people that don't know what 311 is in my in my community.

They have no idea what 311 is uh because of language barriers.

And even reporting 311 is a retaliation to them.

That's how they get evicted if they report to the city.

So these folks are facing so much uh uh challenges and and and difficulties of just trying to be a tenant, pay their rent, live it, live a normal life.

But if you are a businessman and a landlord, right, and you are coming to the front of the city, you know, we want to make sure that you are obeying the city code and the city law.

We want to make sure that you're providing the heat that's required.

Say state law is a city law, you have to have a heat.

If you're not providing heat, you shouldn't be hosting anybody.

You have to have basic things that are required for any human being to live there.

Otherwise, it's not safe, it's dangerous for the folks to live there.

So we're here to just, you know, uh create a process and work with the landlord.

Be compliance, right?

Um for the staff to to work with with the landlord to make sure that any issue they are dealing with it, they can work with it before the before they come through the front of the council.

And let me just say that.

If there's no consequence for landlords, they will continue to be bad.

They will continue.

Some of them don't even pay the citation or the fines, right?

And they still get a license renewals.

I believe the city of Minneapolis, I'm not, I'm not correct, I'm not wrong, only revoked it to license for the last five years.

So the very, very small uh numbers, and that's going to the extreme.

So if we're coming, uh fire inspector is coming and inspecting your unit and and sending you correction, and you're you're grabbing that correction and throwing away and not there's no consequences.

So it has to be some kind of oversight of responsibility, right?

We can write as much citation as we want or as much correction as you want.

The bad landlord's not gonna listen to you because there's no consequence.

He's gonna continue renting and collecting money.

So the point here is not to punish anybody, but to protect the resident and work with the landlords to make sure they're providing good service for our residents.

Uh I next I would like to recognize Councilmember Jenkins.

Thank you, Chair Osman.

Uh, I guess my first question is do we know what the balance in uh renter relocation program is, and and then how does that um get regenerated?

Um, etc.

Yes, please, council members.

Thank you, uh Chair Chavez, and thank you for the question, Councilmember Jenkins.

Um, I can note or you can know for staff follow-up, the exact amount.

Um, I do know both council member Ellison and I actually in the 2024 budget appropriated and this body passed that uh additional allocation for tenant relocation assistance.

Because we've also learned that fund was not charging fees at the maximized amount that they could have to allow it to be self-sustaining by our current rec services department.

We're bringing forward or we're waiting for legislative directive to be returned to us by November to help us learn how they can make it self-sustaining, how they can charge appropriate fees to get to that.

So there is work happening to get more clarification about the funding around our tenant uh relocation assistance ahead of budget.

Thank you.

Um I I guess the outcome of bringing these issues before the council seems to be revocation.

I I mean that's the only tool.

What would be the other?

I I I just don't understand what would be the other tool.

I can't.

Thank you.

And that's a good, it's a really good question for us to kind of air out here in this committee.

So in my part of the presentation, I said over and over again, like we want revocation to be the absolute last resort, right?

We don't want renters, community members to have to relocate.

We know how much of a hardship that can be.

Um and that's why in our process that's laid out within the ordinance, staff can make a recommendation to us.

It could be a recommendation for approval with conditions, allows for some dialogue, bringing in the expertise, really carving out an opportunity for like a case by case kind of conversation.

If it is a denial that's recommended, that doesn't necessarily mean automatic revocation.

There's an appeals process that our city attorneys have vetted.

That denial can also lead to a provisional license, so renting can continue without revocation.

There can be corrections made, and perhaps there's an appeal that comes back before us through after the um uh appointing here appointed hearing officer goes to that process where there might be some conditions that come to light that allows for us to move forward with approval.

And the beauty of this is this occurs with renewals.

And so the hope would be next year that the same um property manager or landlord comes back and we see significant improvement and uh we can make it an easier approval, and then the following year, hopefully they're in tier two and no longer high risk, and they don't even have to come before this body.

So it's really to have a lot of different steps for intervention and correction, right?

We just want to help people get better at managing their properties because at the end of the day, they're violating the law.

Like that's what it's about.

If you're violating the law, we have to enforce the law and then we have to fix it.

We have to work together to fix it.

Um thank you, Councilmember Chowdhury.

And you know, uh, I guess I would just have to point to our advisory committee and staff who are deeply concerned about this, and we have selected um these individuals to serve on the Minneapolis Um Housing Advisory Committee, and they are suggesting that this process would be detrimental to tenants.

Um as is staff, and so uh I'm I'm really concerned about that.

I just need to state that.

Uh thank you.

And uh maybe Councilmember Wandsley, you want to jump in, but I I I read the letter differently.

I I didn't see it as um our housing advisory committee taking an opposition to it.

They shared that there was robust dialogue and conversations and also a difference of opinions on this ordinance, maybe councilmember Wandsley.

Yeah, thank you, Councilmember Chowgery.

Yeah, the letter that is also attached from um to this file for the ordinance by the housing advisory body does not take an official position.

Um they share concerns, much of which we've heard from staff, uh, but there was not an official position taken by that body.

No, they expressed deep concerns.

I didn't say they took a position, I said they expressed deep concerns.

So I am leading that as we need to do more work on this um amendment.

Uh Vice Chair Chowdry.

Thank you so much, Chair Osman.

I just wanted to kind of uh take a moment um to thank all of the community members that showed up to come to our chambers, uh, representing different voices within our city, immigrant voices, working class voices, student voices, thank you for taking the time out of your day to come and speak, um, to be in the public square and have an opportunity share why this is important.

Thank you for taking the time out of your day to come and speak, um, to be in the public square and have an opportunity share why this is important.

And a part of what I appreciate about this ordinance is a public hearing opportunity, right?

I don't think that renters should be struggling in the dark.

I don't think that laws should be violated and there's no public recourse.

I think if a law is being violated and you want to come before the city to get a rental license, there should be a public process, and it opens up an opportunity for dialogue.

It gives renters something that they have been missing for a really long time, which is a place to be heard.

It really sucks to have a 311 call be closed or go unanswered and to struggle day after day.

I'm a renter in this city.

I'm really fortunate now to be living in a tier one apartment.

But I I at a time in my life, I lived in a rental unit where I woke up in the morning and I saw mice running across my room, and then at the same time my ceiling was leaking, and we had multiple repairs that we needed to be fixed, whether it was a refrigerator that kept on going out, or issues with heat over and over again, and what ended up having to happen, even as someone that was connected in to local government, uh, was relying on organizations that do um renters protections work and asking them to help me figure out what the phone number of the property owner is, and eventually being able to get out of my lease without any punishment, but then still ending up housing insecure.

I had nowhere to go.

I had to go from couch to couch, all because the property management company and this owner who was pretty absent, didn't do their job of making sure honestly, what could have been a really beautiful rental property wasn't taken care of.

Like we were struggling in the dark.

We were calling 311.

And this is I'm just giving an example of something that isn't the most egregious.

And I also want to highlight that we are talking about less than two percent of properties in our city.

And also say change is hard, right?

Like we're creating a new system, change is hard.

It's not, it's not gonna be something that we're used to, but the status quo just isn't working.

We're leaving people behind.

And I think it's clear that this is also not enough, right?

We need to see more investments in regulatory services.

I love the idea of trying to get more proactive about housing expenses expections, getting better at kind of streamlining our processes and using technology and having better customer service.

I think these are all things we can achieve, and that's why that enaction of January of 2027 is there.

It gives us two budget cycles to have conversations about the future of regulatory services.

Um I'm really proud to be an author of this today.

I think this um this is an important new system.

And if there are hiccups along the way, we have the power and the ability to make changes legislatively.

We have the power and ability to budget for it, and we want to be in collaboration with our city staff, but we also want to be in collaboration um with landlords and especially the renters who are the most impacted here in these high-risk properties.

Thank you so much.

Uh Councilmember Wandsley.

Thank you, Chair Osman.

Also, I just want to just say thank you to Councilmember and co-author, uh Chowdhury, for your comments.

Um, I absolutely second it.

Um, one thing that we just heard earlier that it's, you know, the reason why we're seeing a number of residents, we're talking about thousands potentially of residents living in substandard housing, is because of management issues.

And I want to make it very clear under government structure, who is the ultimate boss of said managers, Mayor Fry.

Um, that is administrative staff who, as we've heard, countless examples today of people living in squalor, living in inhabitable, in have like unlivable housing conditions that is happening currently under this mayoral administration.

And so they're knowledgeable of it.

And it seems there needs to be legislative support towards getting that enforcement goal, which is making sure that every single renter living, especially within a tier three um units, is not forced to live in poor quality substandard in inhumane housing.

And until I we have for years, the current mayoral administration has had the ability to address this to rectify it.

And 311 has been the only solution offered, and as we heard repeatedly today, that cannot be.

It has not been working.

So this essentially, and this meaning this ordinance essentially gives additional legislative support for our staff to use existing tools that they are underutilizing and tools that's also being utilized by other departments.

It was raised the question around houses similar to a liquor license.

If you look at both this ordinance and our current liquor uh license ordinance, it allows the same provisions around council authority, around a review, around appeals process and the options to administer provision uh provisional licenses with conditions in place or the ability to suspend or revoke.

Those things literally happen right now in a whole separate process, and this policy language was modified after our existing process that goes fine pretty smoothly.

Um so the world will not end should this ordinance get passed and be enacted in 2027.

And I've heard a lot from some of the opposition around, well, this is gonna place burden on our administrative staff.

Again, Mayor Fry staff as of now.

What I will say is if it means filing a few more RCAs, attending a couple committee meetings to present your own plan to get these tier three properties, 160 properties up to housing code so that residents aren't living um in places where roaches is falling on them or their units are repeatedly being flooded.

If a little bit of paperwork on the front end means we can stop residents from living in unlivable conditions, it is absolutely worth it.

And ideally will lead to the compliance that's currently not happening for these 160 uh landlords that own over 2,000 units of housing that then creates unlivable housing conditions for thousands of residents.

I think some administrative, you know, work is it's absolutely worth that.

And just want to reiterate this body is here, has always been here to collaborate with rec services around how we can make sure our residents are living in the highest quality housing that they deserve.

And as uh someone testimony uh testify to that they pay for.

This is rent that they're paying.

They are going to their jobs, um working sometimes multiple jobs to pay rent and then having to come home to a unit where they're dealing with mold or mice or roaches or other ungodly things.

That is unacceptable.

And it doesn't have to be like that.

This ordinance gives us one level of additional oversight, this body that is well worth making sure that the residents that we represent are living in quality and dignified housing.

So I again encourage our colleagues to support this.

I would hope that this is a 13-0 vote, and ideally that we won't be subjected to the veto pen by Mayor Fry.

Um, but again, at least today, I'm it's very hopeful that my colleagues would support this so that we can start not only with this piece of getting um some of the worst housing that is being provided to our residents up to co, but as many testify that then we can start working on other avenues to make sure that every resident is getting the dignified housing that they deserve and that they pay for.

Councilmember Fita.

Thank you, Chair Osman.

Um, yeah, this conversation is just making me feel like I the last thing I would want in my life is for where I live to come before this body and for it to play out in public like this.

I mean, there's gonna be like a landlord who has to come before this body where someone lives, and there's gonna be a back and forth about their housing and and how it should be or not be in public.

That that just feels so wrong.

I mean, that that just that does not that does not feel right at all.

Like I don't I I'm fortunate enough that I I'm a homeowner, but but I know that every single person who is a landlord or has a rental property is not some like gigantic corporate landlord that owns massive amounts of properties.

Some of these people on this 160 list, which I don't agree with the list, um, the number on the list.

I think if we're gonna do something like this, there should be an assessment of all rental licenses to make sure there's 160 um that needs to be evaluated and not just the the 160.

Like I said earlier, some of these people who have been here speaking today might not be on this tier three list, and and they deserve for their properties to be looked at too.

So I I don't think there shouldn't, um there should be this number shouldn't be taken seriously, in my opinion.

It should be an assessment of the entire city of Minneapolis rental license portfolio to make sure that this number is correct.

That's first.

Um, and yeah, I mean, like this is this is uh this is this is an interesting conversation to have about where other people live.

And I I'll I'll I'll end with this.

You know, this conversation to me is it can be a little one-sided every time we have this.

People always talk in terms of the landlord and not the renters.

Everybody's not a perfect tenant.

Like everyone is not taking care of things in a way that should be taken care of.

I think you you know, I've I've I've known situations where tenants wouldn't even let people in their property to do appropriate things who've said that who've refused to let people in.

So then when you're faced with that, what do you do?

Like you can't you can't have this conversation and talk about ordinance change and not talk about all sides of everything.

This conversation just cannot be one-sided.

You really have to talk about what happens in these situations all across the board, not just the spooky corporate landlord who is a slum lord.

That is one kind of person.

There are a lot of people who own properties who uh don't the the challenges come from not having the money to fix things or not, I mean, like these things can play out into a family dispute.

This could be a parent renting to a child and they're t they're a tier three situation, and then they're gonna be before us having a family dispute over how the mom or the child kept the property, and then we're gonna we're gonna say you have to go or you can stay.

I mean, I I just I really think uh we gotta start talking about these things all across the board and not really having these laser-focused conversations about one side of things.

Councilmember Shavis.

Thank you, Chair Osman.

I know that the housing advisory committee was uh letter was about up here.

So I'd also like to highlight some other things that they mentioned in the letter because there wasn't necessarily agreement with an approach in the committee, and I know that the committee has both landlords and uh folks that have experienced homelessness, renters, and there's uh bet different perspectives in the group themselves, especially when you have power dynamics of landlords having oftentimes more power at City Hall.

Uh what I'll say though is in summary, what the housing advisory committee also talked about.

Uh they talked about that there was a broad agreement on the need for increased accountability for landlords of high-risk properties and better outcomes for renters.

It's very clear that we can all agree that the current system that we have in Minneapolis is not functioning the way it should.

It leaves many renters behind, it leaves many renters experiencing uh violations of their renters' protections by landlords uh in this city.

And we're not talking about tier one, two, and three.

We're talking about tier three.

We're talking about uh a high-risk property.

Folks that have been known to violate people's renters' protections.

I'm not gonna be sitting up here today uh protecting the rights of those 160 properties, uh rent rent uh those 100 or so plus well those tier three licenses.

What I am gonna be doing though is supporting an oversight component of it because I think it is important that we as a council bring to light some of the concerns that we are seeing.

I mean, folks here may or may not live in the tier three license tiers in Minneapolis here testifying, but they are bringing deep concerns to us that we have heard that I have heard across Ward 9: Roaches, mice, broken windows, um uh being called racist slurs by property managers and and people and experiencing that, uh being told that they're gonna be replaced by other people of a different race.

Like I have had to navigate many different conversations with tenants and the landlords because of egregious behavior that I have seen.

That is not even my responsibility as a council member.

But now I have the opportunity to vote on something that's gonna create oversight.

I think that's something that I wanted to at least thank the authors, uh, Councilmember Wansey, Chair Osman, Vice Chair Child Rig, and Council Cashman for bringing this forward.

And I think at the end of the day, if instead we were instead of if landlords in this tiers would stop fighting this kind of oversight and instead spend their time on helping fix up their buildings and making sure that our tenants can live in good living conditions, we would be in a lot better place.

So this ordinance is simply common sense, it's pragmatic, it's the right thing to do.

It's gonna have an extra layer of oversight, and at the same time, this is not the only thing that we need to do.

We need to do a lot more to actually protect our tenants in these buildings that have their rights violated on a daily basis by a lot of these slumlords.

All right, uh, trust the reminder for members, we do have to uh um until 445, 430, 415.

Sorry, four fifteen.

Um captions uh until we have the captions, and then I believe there's uh meeting up right after that.

So we do have two items uh to go.

I am are there anyone else any of the members who would like to council member Jenkins?

Uh oh, councilmember Jenkins, sorry.

The slide got longer, so I'm uh councilmember Jenkins, please.

Thank you, Chair Asman.

Um, you know, I guess I will say as a person who has been in this council um setting for a very long time.

Uh the tier system is relatively new.

Um it's an effort to continuously try to improve rental conditions and housing conditions for um for the majority of renters um that live in the city of Minneapolis.

Um you know I I commend my colleagues for really bringing this forward to try to continuously improve.

That's what we should be doing is continuously improving the experience of renters.

But I I just don't see where the outcome is gonna be different from revocation.

And that seems like the only way that we're gonna improve these conditions.

And that will in turn create serious issues that we have been trying to address on this council.

Um evictions.

I think that was one of our stated goals.

And so now we're gonna create a scenario where we're actually doing that.

Instead of the landlord evicting the tenant, we'll be doing that.

So I'm just saying I think we need to really think through this ordinance.

And if it's gonna be um enacted in 2027, then I think there is time to do that because as it stands right now, it needs improvement, in my opinion.

Councilmember Cashman.

Thank you so much, Chair Osman.

Uh, just wanted to share a little bit about why I decided to co-author this ordinance.

There are four four properties in Ward 7 that are tier three, one of them has over 300 units.

And the residents of this particular high rise in Loring Park have been bringing concerns to me for years about mold, about flooding, about dirty water, and most recently we found out that this landlord has over 300,000 in unpaid water bills to the city.

And we are trying to find ways to hold them accountable to improving the conditions for the over 300 residents who live in this single building.

And it's it's really sad that these residents have to face this.

They signed a lease and they pay thousands of dollars a month.

And so this bill is about basic consumer protections.

If you sign a lease, you deserve to have the conditions as laid forth in your lease.

And if you don't have that, who are you supposed to go to for help?

I can't tell you how many 311 complaints they've made.

And inspectors have gone out time and time again and have found yes, you're correct.

There is mold.

Yes, you're correct.

There is uh flooding issue, yes, you're correct, there is dirty water.

Um and so it's our job as council members to create some type of consequences for this.

And I think that license revocation is not the consequence we're looking for.

In fact, we never almost never revoke uh rental licenses.

And you've seen today we have 40 something liquor license come through our agenda.

We never revoke liquor licenses.

That's not what this ordinance is intending to do.

What it is intending to do is to create a moment of conversation.

When that license comes for renewal, there's an opportunity for council members for city staff, the owner, and the tenants to come together on resolving the issues that have made it uh untenable for the residents who live there.

And I think conversations and collaboration is something that we all agree is a good thing at the local level for us to advance dignified living conditions for all the people in our city.

So I am going to go ahead and move this item for approval and hope that we'll have the support to bring this common sense ordinance to a vote.

Right.

All right.

Um Leslie, Councilmember Shavis.

If they can answer what other strategies has staff done besides just provoking a rental license from uh landlord.

I believe uh staff is overflow.

Um give them a moment.

Okay.

Hello, welcome.

It's a little bit of delay on the TV side, I think.

Thank you, Chair Osman, uh, Councilmember Chavez.

Sorry, ran in here.

Um I would be in the interest of time, I'd be happy to get back to you on that.

It is a complicated answer about the other tools that we have to get enforcement.

Um, so I I'd be happy to get back to you on that.

Are there other methods besides revoking a license that staff has used in the past?

Yes.

Thank you very much.

That's the answer I was looking for.

It's very clear that revoking a license is not the only pathway to accountability and making sure that someone's property is up to date.

There's clearly a whole variety of initiatives and issues that we can do to make sure that properties are up to code, that they're not violating renters' rights, and that there is strong oversight.

So this ordinance makes sense.

We're not gonna just be evicting every single tenant by revoking a license.

That's not the goal of this ordinance.

But just in case folks haven't heard, Councilmember Wansi is the goal of this ordinance to evict every single tenant from their building, and is the goal of this ordinance to revoke every single license from every individual that owns property in Minneapolis in tier three.

Yes, oh wait.

No, thank you.

I just it keeps being sad that we're gonna be evicting and remoking licenses from everybody.

That's not the goal of this ordinance.

Clearly, staff just said that there are other ways to hold property managers accountable that we have done different initiatives that does not include revoking the license.

There's clearly different strategies that we can do, and that was the point of my question, and thank you.

All right.

Um, I see Council Member Vita.

Thank you, Chair.

I I just want to be clear.

I don't think that everyone's license is gonna get revoked in front of the council and everyone will be evicted.

But what is not clear is how is coming before the council going to be any different than what staff is doing right now in trying to work with the landlords to get the properties fixed, to get them up to code, working with the tenants.

I mean, councilmember Cashman just spoke to a building with 300 units in it.

Let's just say there's 700 people living there.

We don't have a place in Minneapolis where those 700 people can go if that building comes before us and they lose the license.

But we do have a system in place where we can work with them.

We have a system, and then you also brought up the water bill.

That's a whole different policy and issue.

The city of Minneapolis has to make people pay the water bill.

They don't they don't shut the water off because you don't pay the water bill in the city of Minneapolis.

It doesn't what what's not adding up to me is like how are we not just at revocation?

If it comes before the council, it's already, they've already done everything they can to like try to fix the situation.

Then it comes before us.

So when it gets to us, it's getting revoked or or what else is this?

Like they already work on that.

They already have the tier system for that reason.

These things are tier three because it needs X, Y, and Z done.

This is tier one because it needs X, Y, and Z done.

When it comes to us, it's gone through all of that and now it's before the council.

What what like we're gonna go back and say now that you've come before us, fix it.

No, they should have fixed it when they were at two or when they got to three.

I I really don't understand how this is not at revocation level once it gets to the council.

When when the liquor license comes before us with recommendation that is being taken away, they have a whole list of things that have happened at that property or whatever has happened, police calls, incidents, whatever that the liquor license is being taken away.

There I I really just I'm I'm not understanding where we're like it's not at revocation, and that's where the people being unhoused come in at.

And in impossible large numbers.

We can just use council member cashman's example for 300 units.

Like how how was how were we how was it coming before us?

And it's just like, okay, we're gonna work with them now.

All right.

Um well thank you so much uh for uh members that came and spoke, and also I want to thank uh special thanks to um ward staff, uh two staff or six or twelve or seven for helping us out with the presentation and everything.

So thank you.

Uh I will ask clerk to call the role.

I'm I'm sorry, to call second.

Yes, uh, with a motion um with Council Member Cashman.

Councilmember Vita.

No.

Cashman.

Aye.

Jenkins.

Aye.

Chavez.

Aye.

Vice Chair Chowdery.

Aye.

And Chair Osman.

Aye.

There are five eyes and one name.

Thank you.

The motion passes.

Next we have uh a public hearing for ordinance that amends alcohol license provincialists to clarify and counsel that its process.

I will welcome Manager Amy Lingo from that from business license in for our presentation.

Thank you so much uh for being patient.

Now we switch things around.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair Osman and committee members.

I'm Amy Lingo, Manager for Licenses and Consumer Services, and I'm presenting an ordinance amendment relating to Title 14 licenses and business regulations, chapters 360, 362, 363, and 366, which is liquor, wine, and beer.

And bringing forth many changes there of varying levels of impact to these alcohol licensing chapters.

Initially, the request was to simplify the process and to make financial backgrounds more efficient and less comprehensive.

However, due to the requirements in state statute, we were limited on what we can change.

Not big ones to overlook an opportunity for improvement and modernization when able, we looked at changes we could make under our control.

Minnesota State Statute 340A regulates licensing for alcohol and permits in the entirety of the state.

A license or temporary permit is required whenever alcohol is to be sold, served, or consumed by the public.

Minneapolis is able to be more restrictive, but not less.

And also there are very specific dictates of what type of establishments may qualify for a license.

Hotels, restaurants, bowling centers, sports facilities, theaters, live, not film, and liquor stores are some examples.

Smaller impact changes include amending language wherever possible to be gender neutral.

For example, changing he or she may to applicant.

Another goal was to make specific what was already listed as general, such as changing verbiage on temporary alcohol permits for the nonprofit to receive excessive permits to receive over 50%.

The public hearing notice range for downtown was updated to match the rest of the city from 450 feet notice to 600.

This will be easier for staff and to be consistent across the city, and also addresses the increase of residents in what used to be primarily work and entertainment centers.

Medium impact changes include defining what a commercial promoter and promoted events are, as well as requiring a contract between the promoter and the establishment.

Clarifications include specifying litter radius to be 100 feet instead of reasonable distance.

Late night food menu time frames have been made to be more precise and consistent, stating two hours from close may offer a limited menu as approved by the licensing official when before it was much more convoluted.

Various application requirements were amended to allow for ease of application and clarity.

Two of the most notable changes are clarifying the disqualifying convictions to be felonies related to alcohol or financial crimes.

In cooperation with Minneapolis police licensing, the percentage of ownership requiring to submit financial documents for review was updated from 10% to 15.

This will make the application process more concise and better address those that are more directly involved with the business while maintaining a list of relevant owners and shareholders.

Larger impact changes.

We'll see changes regarding the temporary liquor process.

Currently, um there is a requirement for Minneapolis on-sale establishment to provide liquor but liability insurance.

This is often a challenge for nonprofits pulling permits, and now without that requirement, they'll be able to provide their own insurance coverage, get their own buyer's card, and pull their own permits.

New liquor stores will no longer be required to be 300 feet from a place of worship while the distance from K-12 schools will remain.

The spacing exemption for downtown zones will also be removed.

These changes will further rely on tobacco cannabis and alcohol retail.

Permanent outdoor limited entertainment licensing options are being proposed for areas beyond downtown.

The establishments will need to follow amplified sound measurements and time restrictions.

This will ease the burden of cost and time for businesses that have consistent events on their licensed outdoor premises, as they will no longer need to apply for temporary expansion permit each time, which is currently 184 if they apply 30 days in advance.

The largest impact is the creation of the regulation of 18 plus events.

This largely closely resembles St.

Paul.

The goal of this addition is to aid in the prevention of underage access to alcohol.

This creates greater restrictions for access to 18 to 20 year olds in on-sale establishments.

Businesses may apply for up to 12 18 plus events per year.

18 to 20 year olds must be for these events in a portion where there is no alcohol served, sold, or consumed.

There are exemptions.

Staff is exempt.

You can work at an on-sale establishment and be 19 years old.

If you are present solely for the purpose of consuming a meal, sit-down restaurants, sports arenas, convention centers, theaters, live and film, bowling alleys, concert venues, and private functions.

Ticket events are not considered to be private.

Coop Robin.

Thank you.

This concludes my presentation at this time.

I'll stand for any comments or questions you may have.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Before we take any questions, I'd like to open the public hearing and see if there's uh anyone who would like to speak.

I see here uh Sir Johnson.

Welcome.

Uh Chairman Asman and Council members.

Um I represent uh the Gay 90s restaurant and bar in downtown Minneapolis.

Um as you may know, we've been there for over 100 years.

Uh we've had 18 plus tonight for over 40 years down there.

Um we're not necessarily in opposition to what the goal is here as far as future, but we're looking to work with the city and work with the staff to possibly come up with some type of grandfathering language.

Uh this would be pretty crippling for us if uh this were to pass.

Uh we employ over 100 people, contribute a lot of taxes, and as we all know, the uh climate downtown is difficult enough as a bar, and we think that this would be potentially the death nail, of course, we'd try to work through it.

Um we've always worked well with the city.

Um late as about two years ago, city came to us and we worked with them to come up with a number of conditions that we work under in order to ensure that we don't violate the drinking of underage and all that.

And since March of 2023, we've had no citations, no problems.

So we're asking that uh in putting this forward uh that they consider uh some type of grandfathering language that we could work with the city on to talk about so that it doesn't have such a huge impact on us and we can continue to operate safely in downtown Minneapolis.

Thank you.

Great.

Thank you so much for your testimony.

Uh next I would like to call Dennis.

Danis.

Oh, that's that was you.

Uh you're good.

You want me to question?

No, I was uh you had sign off twice, I believe.

Oh no.

Or the first one Okay, I see, I see.

And I just did one.

Thank you.

All right.

Um else who would like to speak on this item.

See none.

I will close the public hearing and recognize Councilmember Cashman.

Thank you, Council, or Chair Osman.

I wanted to thank Manager Lingo for all the hard work you've put into this ordinance over the last couple of years.

I think it's important for us to keep modernizing our language and streamlining it according to changing state laws and according to other changes that we've made to ordinances in the city regarding cannabis, tobacco, and other things that we've done in the last couple of years.

And I was also you know, joined as a co-author of this ordinance because I wanted to help remove some of the barriers to doing business in the city that I had heard from restaurants and bars.

Um, and specifically the, you know, raising the threshold of the investor information that needs to be submitted from 10% to 15% will help uh remove some of those barriers for businesses and want to thank uh Kristen Anderson, Sam Turner, Glenn Oslin, and other business owners from Ward 7 who have weighed in on this.

And that being said, I'll move this for approval today.

But that being said, I wanted to thank Mr.

Johnson for coming in uh from the saloon and would be happy to meet with you after this to hear about what specific concerns you have in the language and how we can uh work on amending that.

I'm sorry, you're from Gay 90s.

Thank you so much for coming in.

Still in still in Ward 7, still happy to work with you on this.

Um, and we'll be willing to chat with you after our meeting.

Thank you.

Yes, um, well, not my comment is that you know, uh I know it hasn't been tough for a lot of business, especially bars uh since COVID uh in my district and see the riverside, you know, with junk.

We lost so many bars.

Bombers bars, like 120 years old, you know, it's going away.

Um sadly from the from the neighborhood that knows very well.

And her corner's bar also is going away.

It's like a student uh bar.

So I encourage the staff to really, you know, work with work with the bars and make sure that you know things might be a lot easier right now for folks to just click and order what they want from their apps, but you know that's segment of having opportunity to go, you know, uh spend money and go out and um, you know, we want to keep those um businesses going and making sure if that's grandfathered and if that's making sure that we're not making it too difficult for some of the policies that uh that we're putting forward.

So just just want to make that comment that you know War Six will be losing, continue to lose more bars um in in very popular, historically popular in the city of Minneapolis.

All right.

Um I will recognize Councilmember Vice Chair Troudy.

Thank you, Chair Osman.

Um, I'm happy to support this today.

I would also love to just learn more about what we can do to support um businesses like the gay 90s um and what what's possible um in the policy arena here on that it's important to me um that they're able to continue business.

I feel like it's a Minneapolis rite of passage.

I'm I may or may not have been to the 90s when I was 18.

Um don't laugh, Chavez.

I know where you were when you were.

Um but I'm happy to support this.

Councilmember Cashman, I would love to just stay in touch with you to learn about what we can do here and just also kind of check in about what we might be hearing from other local businesses on this.

Thank you.

Council member.

Thank you, Chair.

Um, I have had a few people reach out to me about grandfathering.

I know that uh Councilmember Rainville, who was previously on this committee, had been working on an amendment to this.

So I want to just have some time to reach out to him and talk about um what he had uh been working on or what he was planning to work on because I've had several.

I've had Vanquish, I've had uh the 90s, I've had um quite a few, and I've only been on the committee for two weeks, and I've had quite a few people reach out about this issue.

Um so I I just want I'm not gonna support it today, but I I am gonna meet with Councilmember Rainville and talk to him about what he had uh previously been working on to hopefully help some of our long-standing businesses continue to do business um in a way that's productive and where they can um keep downtime throughout downtown thriving.

And so um thanks for being here today.

I I think we're all committed to making sure that you can run your business successfully, and I'll just be in touch, colleagues, with um amendments possibly.

Councilmember Jenkins.

Thank you, Chair Asman.

I I guess I'd like to hear from Ms.

Lingo.

I guess I I'm just not clear what the intent of this amendments are, and and even more specifically reducing the number of 18 plus events to just 12.

Uh how do we land at that number and and what's the point?

Through the chair, Councilmember Jenkins.

So the point is that there has been concerns, um, especially in the downtown core about youth access, 18 to 20 year old adults for underage access to um it's a little it was still too easy for them to have the alcohol.

Plus, it is also those are the nights where we have a lot more issues downtown, or at least historically it has been.

And so there has been concern and conversation over the years with um with various council members with MPD on trying to find ways to be able to kind of control and to curb the 18 plus activity because those seem to be it seems to be like at a head.

I don't eighteen to 20 year olds don't always necessarily work well with the bargoing crowd.

There seems to be some issues and some concerns.

So this was brought forth in that moment to be able to find a way to kind of contain and control that the language um I used is existing language in St.

Paul with some tweaks here and there, so that's where we got the 12.

That pretty much is once a month.

All right.

Thank you.

I mean you know, I don't know, it just kind of seems like prohibition a little bit.

Um 18-year-olds can go to war, they can get married, they can you know do all the things that adults can do in our society.

I I don't understand the magical 21-year-old thing.

That's not the issue here.

I'm just expressing my own opinion.

Um but you know, I mean, I think some of the challenges with bars is people are just not drinking alcohol that much anymore.

The studies are showing that alcohol consumption is down.

Um that is what's impacting these businesses and so to put further restrictions, etc.

Um seems like it's gonna be challenging for these establishments to um continue to be profitable and that's the only point of being in business is to make a profit.

So yeah.

Uh I um will move this item without recommendation.

Uh I think are you gonna make good?

I think that uh Councilmember Rainville also have spoken to me uh about this and he planned to bring amendments, so um with that.

Uh all those in favor say aye.

All right.

And those opposed say nay.

The eyes have it and the motion carries.

All right, we are on the last item.

Um last item is quadrant judicial hearing regarding license runoffation for the Camden Social and Gig Garden located at fifth 4601 Lindale Avenue North.

I will invite our attorney uh to briefly speak about this item.

Thank you, Chair.

This is a uh statutorily required revocation due to non-payment of taxes.

Fortunately, staff has received informal documentation from the property owner indicating those taxes have been paid.

We fully expect to receive that necessary formal documentation by the time of the council meeting.

And so if this body would like to proceed with its normal course of action, I would recommend forwarding this without recommendation to the council meeting.

See none, uh close the public hearing and move this item without recommendation to the full council.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

And those opposed say nay.

The ayes have it and the motion carries.

See no further discussion now uh with uh no further business before us with no objection, I will declare this meeting adjourned.

Thank you so much, everyone.