Good afternoon and welcome.

My name is Linnae Palmasano, and I'm chair of the Enterprise and Labor Relations Committee, and I'll call this meeting to order for our regular meeting here on June 1st, 2026.

As we begin, I'll offer the regular friendly reminder that these meetings are broadcast live to enable greater public participation.

These include real-time captioning as a further method to increase accessibility.

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

Please moderate the speed and clarity of your comments.

I'll ask the clerk to please call the roll.

Councilmember Vita is absent.

Schaefer.

Here Stevenson is absent.

Chavez?

Present.

Shugtai.

Present.

Vice Chair Whiting.

Present.

Chair Palmasano.

Present.

We have five present.

Thank you.

Let the record reflect that we have a quorum.

Colleagues, I am just getting my computer booted up, so if we could use our flags for just a couple minutes here, that would be great.

For members of the public that are here for one of the public hearings, if you wish to address the committee, please register with the clerks to my right.

You can also provide any written comments or materials that you would like in the public record.

Let's start with our consent items reflected as items two through 11 on our agenda, which I can read now for the record.

Item two is approving a gift acceptance from local progress.

That's for council member Robin Wandsley.

Item number three is authorizing a grant application to host five VISTA members for 2026 through 2031.

That's with AmeriCorps.

Item number four is passage of resolution approving project authorizations, appropriations, and bond issuances for Hiawatha Public Works Maintenance Facility Expansion.

Item five is authorizing a contract with Deloitte Consulting for benefit consulting and actuarial services.

Item six is authorizing contracts with multiple vendors to provide temporary staffing services.

Item seven is authorizing a contract amendment with principal financial group for custodial banking services.

Item eight is authorizing a contract event amendment with environmental systems research for the support and maintenance of the city's geographic information system.

Item nine is authorizing a contract amendment with Shaw Lundquist Associates for the City Hall Restack Phase Three Project.

Items 10 and 11 are both legal settlements related to workers' compensation claims.

That of Stephen Morris and that of Tracy Turble.

Is there any discussion on these items?

And please use your flags.

Councilmember Chuktai.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I am hoping to pull item number four on the printed agenda and three on the on the digital agenda related to the Hiawaka Public Works maintain maintenance facility expansion project and reappropriating project authorizations and appropriations and bond issuances.

Happy to.

Anyone else, Councilmember Whiting?

No.

Okay.

I'll move approval of the consent agenda.

And I'm sorry, I think is there one additional item clerk on this consent agenda that we have.

Madam Chair, that is a clerical error.

There are no additions to the agenda.

Okay.

For the consent agenda minus item number four.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

The ayes have it.

And those motions that motion carries.

All of those consent items are approved.

Next, we'll go to consent item four and ask you, Council Vice President, for any thoughts or questions you might have.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um, I am just hoping to understand this item a little bit better.

Um, I understand that this is uh more so a procedural item um around the reissuance of of these bonds, but I'm hoping that someone can speak to um speak to that further and can speak to what the effect of uh an approval or denial would mean in this circumstance.

Looks like we have someone here from public works ready to answer your question.

Could you please introduce yourself?

Uh yes, uh Chair Palmasano and and uh committee members.

I'm Dave Wheeler, the senior manager of banking investments and debt.

So uh I can speak to this item as far as a procedural item.

Uh, this is the Hiawatha North expansion project.

Um we're looking to finance the project costs with bond issuance.

Uh this was previously authorized uh in in various uh city budgets uh under the Water 18 project code for city policy.

Uh we can't issue bonds uh after four years uh of the resolution date.

So uh this just reauthorizes um those uh bonding uh issuances to include uh in the 2026 uh bond issuance this year.

Thank you.

Uh Madam Chair, if I may ask Mr.

Wheeler some more questions.

Please thank you.

Um Mr.

Wheeler, can you speak to um when these bonds then were last issued?

Was it exactly what was it four years ago in 2022?

Uh the last time bonds were issued on this project was back in 2017.

Um so this was uh you know prior was the roof depot site and those uh that was I think was for preliminary work, those bonds have actually since been repaid.

Um despite you know further authorizations from city council, no other bonds were issued on this project as that was working through uh the issues there, and so uh this is uh essentially a new project and and new funding.

So if you have project specific questions, we could we have someone from public works or I'm sorry, property services that could speak to it, but as far as the financing uh issuing debt, uh no other debt is outstanding or has been issued on it.

So this is primarily just the initial uh original amounts that were authorized uh that we're seeking um to be able to issue uh as bonds now.

That's helpful to know, and then I have two follow-up questions.

The first being, um, has have project costs changed at all since 2017.

I would assume the answer is yes, given the rising costs of all things related to building things um and beyond, but um are you asking for the same amount again, or have you updated the cost that you're seeking authorization on?

Uh Councilmember Chucktai, um we are seeking reauthorizations of the original amounts um to speak to any further cost uh um uh assumptions.

I would maybe uh speak uh ask Paul Miller to come up and speak to that um to give you a definitive answer.

Through through the chair if it's okay to have Chair Paul Mosano.

Um, um, Councilmember Chug Tai, um I'm my name is Paul Miller, I'm a senior project manager in property services, but I uh um represent this project and also for public works.

And um with uh call I'll call it the reimagining of the the north campus at the Hiawatha Public Works Facility.

Um we do feel that what we're proposing is within uh the amount of money that um we have bonded previously.

We are working very closely with public works right now to I'll say rescope the project um so that it fits within the available bonding.

We do not intend to come back for um additional money.

That's helpful to know, Mr.

Miller.

Um, but uh I suppose I feel like this is putting a little bit of the cart before the horse in that you're asking for authorization for a certain dollar amount when the project hasn't been rescoped yet, um, is coming up on being 10 years old at this point from its initial authorization, um, construction costs and project costs have increased.

So I I'm having a tough time really wrapping my head around why ask for the same amount of money again when the project rescoping hasn't happened.

Can you shed some light into the thought process there?

Um so with um I'm gonna say the design that that was um completed up through um I would say the um the I'll call it the the point in time where we took the Rough Depot site off.

Um that particular design was at about a 90% level.

Um, and so we've been able to carve out um I'll call it the the south part of the the roof depot site of that project um and are very confident in what remains of the project fits within the budget.

Um now we um I'm gonna just say by circumstance through this last capital budget cycle have um I'll I would say improved our cost estimating um on all of our projects and um based on what we know of the scope of the project today and current market costs um we feel really confident that our numbers and our scope are gonna fall within that range.

That's helpful and so am I understanding correctly that we're not talking about the roof depot site, we're talking about the campus, um, and it's uh its expansion um at a different site or at the same one.

We were next yep.

Um Chair Palmasano, uh Councilmember Chug Tai.

We are definitely talking about the North Campus.

So the existing site, we're not talking about Roof Depot, and we're not talking about a different location.

Um, I would say just as an example, um, the existing office building um on the very north end of the campus.

Um we would be um there would be an addition to that building um for office space and specifically um we currently have our surface water and sewers engineering component in temporary location in the city of uh actually in the public service center, which I think you're very familiar with.

Um, and that's where they and that's that addition is for those people to go down there, and it's always been there.

So that gives you a sense of what we're doing there.

Gotcha.

And so um, I think this is my last question, but uh Mr.

Miller, if you and and Mr.

Wheeler can speak to what exactly it is that you're seeking authorization for for bond issuance on, um, in in the simplest terms, that would be really helpful here.

If you could if you could uh summarize in uh in layman's terms uh what exactly it is that you're seeking bond issuance for.

Sure.

Um Chair Palmasano, Councilmember Chug Tai.

So it would be um the the addition to the office building.

Um there would be improvements to the central stores building.

There wouldn't be an addition to it's kind of the same building, but the other end of the building, which is the maintenance base of the building.

Um, and then there would also be a um a fairly significant structure um where there's a lot of parking right now for it's actually a parking facility, but it's for a lot of the pieces of equipment the public works has there needs to be tempered, so it needs to be indoors, so it's an indoor storage uh parking facility.

Gotcha.

Um that's helpful.

Um, Chugtai, if I may.

Um, I have been part of this project for 10 years and voting accordingly on it for 10 years, and I would say that based on when this bond issuance was initially uh given its approval over four years ago now.

Um this project has changed to cut the original roof depot site into two for public works to shrink their project substantially and really just attach that top portion of it to their existing building operations in a way.

That's so helpful.

Thank you.

And so then that brings me to my actual last question.

I'm sorry, Mr.

Miller, Mr.

Wheeler.

Um, is there something that you're planning on doing in 2026 that would make it so you I know I know you, Mr.

Miller and you, Mr.

Wheeler to be people who um are very sensitive to the the standard process that we go through.

This seems like something that likely should actually come before the body through the city's annual budget process, but you're bringing this forward for authorization for 2026.

That tells me that more likely than not, something is planning on happening in 2026.

That's why you're seeking approval in this way right now instead of waiting until the end of the year.

So can you speak a little bit more to what's in the works that that we may not uh quite be preview to or or uh fit the pieces of the puzzle together yet?

Chair Palmosano, uh Councilmember Chungtai.

Yeah, so we are actually um are poised to also re-kick off the remainder of the design with our architect and would like to do that as soon as we possibly could.

Um, and so it's really just uh the completion of the design work that we would like to get started immediately on.

Gotcha.

Thank you, Mr.

Miller.

Thank you, Mr.

Wheeler.

Thank you, madam chair.

Thank you.

Um are there any other questions on that?

Yeah, Mr.

Miller, if it's possible to quick question too.

I thank you.

Um just taking a I right.

I'm new to this kind of process here in this project specifically, but I think it's helpful um right to kind of understand and appreciate Council Vice President Choc Chai's um points on this.

And so just so that we're clear here, I'm looking at pulled up Google Maps and I'm looking at kind of the satellite images here.

So everything north of it looks like East 27th Street, kind of that roof depot spot, that is where this project is taking part, this expansion.

Yes, you're correct.

Perfect.

That is really helpful.

That is all.

Thank you.

Could you help me see if there doesn't appear to be anybody else in speaker management?

So with that, I will move item number four for a rec with a recommendation for approval.

All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Are there any opposed?

That carries.

Thank you.

Um, next we'll take up our public hearing.

That's the very top of the agenda.

It's related to an appointment to the Civil Service Commission.

Again, please sign up with the clerks to my right.

Um, and anybody that is signed up gets two minutes each to testify.

For everyone in attendance and especially those who may participate, let me offer this notice.

These hearings are recorded and broadcast.

Both the recording and broadcast are classified as public data under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act.

By attending and participating in these proceedings, your image and any testimony or information you provide will be subject to disclosure under that law.

That includes but is not limited to your attendance, your name, and any other personal details you provide and any comments you provide that include written submissions you make, which are included in the record of this meeting.

Our public hearing today is to approve the appointment of William Walker to the Civil Service Commission.

For those unfamiliar with the commission's role, this commission is an independent three-member commission that's authorized by the city's charter.

It oversees our employment practices, including the hiring, promotion, discipline, and discharge for certain city employees.

The commission promulgates rules that cover all aspects of employment.

They hear appeals from employees who believe that the rules have been unfairly applied, and here's appeals from employees who've been recommended for discharge from their positions or who have been recommended for suspensions of 30 calendar days or more.

This arrangement was established to ensure that the application and enforcement of the employment rules of the city were not political but based solely on merit and objective evaluation measures.

The commission is a neutral body advocating neither for the interests of employees nor for the city.

Historically, but not uniformly, commissioner appointments have typically been made with one commissioner having a human resources background, one having a legal background, and one having a labor background.

Each of these commissioners serve a three-year term.

So with that, this is the appointment of William Walker and Clerk.

Is there anyone signed up to speak, please?

Madam Chair, we have no members of the public signed up to speak, but we do have uh Mr.

Walker in the room.

I thought we might.

Welcome, Mr.

Walker.

Um, did you could you please?

Yes.

Um we would love an introduction to you.

I I tried to do service to what it is this body is about.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Um I think you summed up exactly what the commission does.

I have um this is my second appointment.

Um I've served in essentially we handle cases involving the police department, the fire department, there may be people that are terminated from their jobs.

Um the city would argue for cause.

Um, employees have a right to have a hearing, and I generally preside over those hearings and issue findings.

Um they're very important jobs.

I mean, some of them involve Veterans Preference Act persons that are military, and so they have a right to have certain hearings or matters heard within a certain prescribed time, and there's certain rules that apply.

Uh there are other instances where it might be a, for example, a 911 operator who may have been derelict and um not promptly dealing with what they're supposed to do.

Uh and there are other instances where the fire department or police department, they have collective bargaining agreements that we have to review as a part of the commission.

It's very, very exciting.

My background is law.

I'm a lawyer of about 30 years.

I uh my undergraduate degree is an urban planning.

Uh I did a dual degree at Hamlin, JD, master's in public administration, and um I'm happy to serve.

Are there any questions?

Thank you.

Um are there any questions from my colleagues before we open the public part of the public hearing?

Seeing none, thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Walker.

Uh I will now open our public hearing and ask the clerk again.

Is there anybody signed up?

There are no members of the public signed up.

Uh thank you.

I'll ask again for members of the public.

We need to do this a couple times.

Bear with me.

Um, is there anyone else who wishes to speak at this public hearing?

All right.

Um seeing no one else wishing to speak, I will now close the public hearing and ask if there are any um additional questions or thoughts from my colleagues.

And I see Councilmember Sorensen and Q.

Uh, thank you, Mr.

Walker.

Could I ask you a couple of questions, please?

Uh yeah, thank you for being here.

Thanks for serving on this commission.

I have a couple of questions for you.

Um this is not uh a commission that has generated a lot of public uh input, as you can see.

Uh I had to do a little bit of digging to figure out what it was and who was on it anyways.

Um so I appreciate you serving on this um outside of public fanfare.

Um, in this, in your work, have you come across um I'm forgetting what they're called?

Have cases what I I don't remember what they're called.

But have you come across an instance where you saw that the employees did have a valid case of where the the administration, sorry, the the enterprise, the city enterprise had not followed the rules properly.

Have you seen that come through?

Yes.

Okay, very good.

Um what is your typical approach to these different um these different cases when when you're sitting there?

What's going through your mind in the outset before the cases are presented to you?

So I think I follow the question.

Essentially what happens, yeah, every person, every citizen, every employee is entitled to due process.

So they have a right to come to the hearing, and the hearing should be fair and impartial.

It should be, you know, I d I shouldn't approach the hearing um with a preconceived idea.

Oh, I'm going to side with the city, or I'm going to side with this with the with the employee.

Um typically, I mean, they have a right to have a lawyer present.

Um, I would say half of the trials, and you only you're talking about the trial component, like a person who's been discharged from the city.

Yeah.

So they then, you know, half the time they come in with a lawyer, the other half of the time they don't.

But the rules, the evidentiary rules are a little bit relaxed, and so we allow them grace, uh, much like in any other court of law.

If you were in JP court or uh conciliation court or district court, the judge would hear the case.

The city attorney, or they're bound by the rules.

Um, and so we expect them to follow the evidentiary rules, but even then, we give them the opportunity to um present their case.

The employee then has the right and option to testify on their own behalf or call witnesses that they believe are uh uh that would sort of marshal their case forward as to why they should not be removed from employment.

But I don't hold uh at all an opinion one way or the other.

I try to be neutral, fair because there is a record, and the uh the next step is not to district court, but it's it goes to the court of appeals, de novo.

And so with that, the record needs to be clear.

Um it shouldn't it should be free of bias because bias would certainly be a basis to overturn a decision, and there's time and money that the city has spent uh putting forward that case, and so we try to we try to approach it from that standpoint for those issues.

Yeah, great.

Um I'm I'm glad you hear that.

With uh can can you tell me a little bit about and maybe this is some education for me.

Maybe uh maybe someone else is the best person to answer, I'm not sure.

What is the relationship from your commission to HR, and how do you see the relationship?

I don't see a relationship.

Okay.

I and in fact, I uh as I understand the commission is an independent body.

Okay.

Um, and because they're an independent body, there is no relationship.

I may have to rule against the city, okay.

If there's a wrongful termination or a procedure wasn't followed, and that happens.

I recall a case recently where there was a gentleman who um really challenged the rules um the collective bargaining agreement, the contract agreement, the uh, I mean, he laid in on the rules and ultimately there was no violation, but that case could have easily went one way or the other.

And so I don't have a any allegiance to anyone when I hear these cases.

Oh okay.

Yeah, I wasn't trying to imply an allegiance.

Um, no, I understand.

Um I appreciate uh these answers.

This is what I wanted to know and wanted to hear.

Thank you.

I'd like to answer more.

If you have others, I'm happy to.

I'm all out.

Well, good news.

Um, Councilmember Whiting is in queue.

Uh I guess maybe unfortunately I don't have any questions for you.

Uh Mr.

Walker, just wanted to read a note specifically uh about your reappointment.

Uh, so I will read that verbatim.

Uh the reappointment of William Walker to the Minneapolis Civil Service Commission merits support based on his demonstrated qualifications, experience, and commitment to the principles of fairness, neutrality, and merit-based public service.

Commissioner Walker has consistently demonstrated the expertise, professionalism, and partiality required for this important role.

Throughout his service, he has approached each matter with fairness, sound judgment, and a commitment to the merit-based principles that underpin our civil service system, his understanding of labor and employment issues combined with his ability to remain neutral and objective, have made him a valuable member of the commission.

Reappointing Commissioner Walker will provide continuity and stability and stability while ensuring the commission continue to benefit from his experience and thoughtful leadership.

Support for his reappointment is strongly encouraged.

And so just wanted to thank you for your work in uh serving in this role for our city.

It's it's much appreciated.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Or there any other questions?

There are no more questions, sir.

Um I will go ahead and move approval of this item.

All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Are there any opposed?

The ayes have it, and this motion carries.

Thank you, Mr.

Walker, for your continued service to our city.

Our next item is a resolution related to the 2026 City of Minneapolis open streets events, including the approval of those events, their locations, and their organizers.

Staff, Mr.

Ballard has prepared a presentation, and I will invite him.

He is our Enterprise Events Manager with the Office of Public Service to go ahead and get us started.

Welcome.

Oh good afternoon.

I'm sorry.

Chair Palmasano, members of the committee.

For those of you who don't know me, my name's Andrew Ballard, and I'm the Enterprise Events Manager for the City of Minneapolis.

Here today to talk about our 2026 open streets events.

From last year, last year we had four events that took place on Central Avenue, Cedar Riverside, West Broadway, and Hennepin Avenue.

They were widely attended.

These events are a great opportunity for the city as far as community engagement.

The events themselves, brief background, we uh basically shut down the streets to uh vehicular traffic and and open everything up uh for um uh for folks to uh enjoy the neighborhood walk, uh bike, rollerblade, um and uh we shut um we um uh utilize about uh uh anywhere between a 15 20 block uh area along these streets.

Um and it's a great opportunity to promote small business in the neighborhoods, uh great opportunity for you know folks to get out, enjoy the day, see their neighbors, see what's you know, around in their communities.

And um they uh you know over this is my third year uh uh working with these events and uh actually become one of my one of my favorite events.

It's it's a great time to just go sit, walk and and talk to everybody that's um that's participating.

So this year, um, where to go?

Ah, there we go.

This year we're looking at um proposing three events uh starting in September.

Uh we will uh uh like to uh do the event on uh West Broadway again.

Um and then uh Nicolette Avenue and then Hennepin Avenue with uh the last event uh being uh the second weekend in October.

Um from a funding standpoint, um, the city is contributing uh 40,000 uh to each of these events uh as well as um uh in-kind services and uh the waiv of uh permit fees and application fees and those kinds of things.

Um the um uh event organizers uh on their own will also raise money to cover uh the remainder of the expenses for the event.

They um typically range anywhere between five and another 50 to 75,000 dollars, depending on uh how the event organizer uh puts their event together.

There we go.

Um it's a quick trigger.

Um, city provides in-kind services for these events.

Uh they range from uh public works, uh providing all the barricades and cones and things for the uh to facilitate those street closures.

MPD is out there with a number of officers.

Traffic control is out there.

And providing their services also.

And those are the the main things we provide, like I said, in addition to the permit fee waiving and and those kinds of things.

Additionally, as part of our agreements with the event organizers, the city will provide other support things like boardable toilets and trash and recycling services.

And let me see.

So that is it.

So if there are any questions, I am more than happy to answer them.

Thank you, Mr.

Ballard.

I will say that I've seen open streets events and how we organize them and how we support them change a lot over the years.

And so when I saw the opportunity to ask you to give us a little explanation as to where things are here in 2026, I took it and I thank you for the presentation.

I see a couple of my colleagues in queue.

We'll start with Councilmember Schaefer.

Yes, I had a question around the Hennepin Avenue Open Streets.

From what we can determine, Councilmember Chugton, it seems like it has expanded in length this year all the way up to Franklin.

So if you could speak a little bit about the reasons for that extension, how do you think there was a you know more opportunity for vendors to show up?

If you could just speak to why it was expanded.

Sure.

Um Chairman Paul Samano, uh Councilmember Schaefer, sorry.

Um the primary reason for the expansion is to highlight um the areas that have been uh under construction uh now that they are open back up to basically remind people in the community that hey we've got we've got cool stuff here.

Um and um so that that was our primary reason uh for expanding the Hennepin Avenue.

Is also one of the reasons uh why we went to Hennepin Avenue last year too was to um you know highlight you know the the businesses and and what's in that community you know now that the construction's complete.

Great, will it be fully activated in that whole stretch?

Yes, okay.

Great, thank you.

I'm I think people will really be thrilled with this expansion.

It's always, you know, uh more space to to walk and roll and bike.

Thanks.

Yes, sure.

Next we have council member Stevenson and Mr.

Stevenson.

I'm sorry, earlier I had referred to as Council Member Sorens in my bad.

Everyone does it, so I forgave you before you did it.

Um yeah, thank you for this presentation.

This is great.

I'm really glad to see Nicolette in here.

And uh I I looked it up, and I think our streets, the organization is doing Lindale, so I'm glad that that's happening.

Otherwise, I'd be asking you why not Lindale.

Um sad to see only three events.

These are really incredible.

So I'd love to see more in the future.

I know we hit a peak of like what seven a few years ago, and and this year with three.

So this is me telling you you have my full support to do more in the future.

But thank you.

These are these are incredible events, really excited.

Great, I appreciate that.

Thank you.

Seeing no further discussion, I'll move this for approval.

All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Is there anyone opposed?

This item carries as well.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Ballard.

Um, our next item is a resolution approving the equalization of assessed valuations of property as recommended by the 2026 Local board of appeal and equalization, and receiving the related report.

Uh staff have prepared a presentation.

It's in front of us in paper version two, and I'll invite Director Malmquist, our city assessor, to get us started.

Welcome.

Good afternoon.

Chair Palmasano and committee members.

Thank you for allowing me a little bit of time this afternoon to review with you the results of the this year's 2026 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization.

Before I review the outcomes, however, I want to briefly recognize the importance of this process.

The local board serves as one of the most important accountability measures within Minnesota's property tax system.

It provides property owners with a direct opportunity to have their concerns heard and reviewed by an independent body, helping ensure that property valuations are fair, equitable, and supported by market evidence.

This process reinforces public trust by promoting transparency in how assessments are developed and giving property owners a meaningful avenue to appeal before values become final and taxes are established.

It also helps strengthen the quality of our work in our office by providing an additional layer of review and oversight.

Ultimately, the local board is not simply just an appeal process, it is a critical safeguard that supports equity across the tax base, accountability within our own office, and confidence in the integrity of the property tax system as a whole.

As city assessor, I view the local board as one of the most valuable parts of our assessment process.

It provides an important check on our work, creates transparency for our property owners, and helps ensure equity across the entire tax base.

Every appeal is an opportunity for us to explain our methodology, listens to listen to property owners' concerns, and demonstrate that our assessments are based on market evidence and they're applied consistently.

This board's work helps reinforce public trust, that the system is fair, open, and accountable.

So for the most part, we followed the same processes and procedures that we have used the last two years, with the hearings being held here in City Hall.

We did try some new approaches to recruitment to ensure we have a diverse experience and knowledgeable board, and I will say that those efforts seem to be quite fruitful.

We had a very well-rounded experienced board, and so this is a very challenging board to appoint to, and so we have to be innovative and leverage our resources.

We work with the city clerk team on the application process, and then our team takes it from there for onboarding the board members, providing orientation, and then satisfying all of the many statutory requirements that are that the board has.

While we still receive some paper applications, the primary tool for collecting applications was online.

We have been leveraging this technology now for eight years.

It provides the property owner the opportunity to submit the application and supporting documentation with ease, but from a staff perspective, also gives us real-time reporting on appeal counts and their statuses.

This is the timeline of the local board formation and confirmation.

You appointed the four board members on March 9th.

We mailed the valuation notices on Friday, March 13th.

On March 24th, you approved the local board policies and procedures.

You appointed the members, and I presented the annual assessment report.

The local board convened on Tuesday, April 24th, and reconvened and adjourned after two long days of sessions on April 15th.

Moving into some of the statistics, there were just over 1,500 valuation inquiries received by our team representing just over 1% of the taxable properties in the city.

Approximately 1,250 of those were resolved at the staff level before the statutory 10-day window began, which changes how appeals are then handled.

Statute dictates that an appeal resolved 10 days or less prior to the mean of the local board requires board action to allow adequate time for notification of those valuation changes to property owners.

Of the 311 remaining properties that were brought to the board, 133 were recommendations that our office brought for action.

74 oral appeals were heard, and there were 104 right-in appeals that were reviewed.

Reviewing the workflows, workflow and counts in another way.

We mailed approximately 125,000 value notices.

We received 1,564 inquiries.

1,253 were resolved before the local board.

Of the 311 appeals to the board, 105 resulted in no change, and 166 reductions by the board.

This is a historical look at our appeal counts, but some of these are not exactly Apple to Apple because over time we've changed our processes and some of the terminology.

So as the years go on, you this will become more of an apples to apples comparison.

What we used to call an application to the board is different now, and that was to streamline processes and improve the process for appellants.

So but this does give you an idea of how many actual applications we've received.

This slide breaks down the appeal count by the major property type groupings, with the majority of our cases being residential, which is typical, but we did have 11% of our appeals were commercial, industrial or apartment.

This is a heat map that we created to see where geographically where the appeals were, and we will break this down by ward here in the next slide.

So there's a lot of information on this slide.

It's an illustration of both the total estimated market value appealed by ward as well as the appeal count by ward.

The green bars represent the market value, and the blue dot represents the appeal count.

You can see here that ward two and followed by ward seven had the greatest appealed value, however, wards 11 and 13 had the highest appeal counts.

While all properties have the right to appeal to the local board, the local board may not have the technical commercial appraisal experience and or adequate time to perform the analysis necessary to come up with their own independent valuation decision.

These appeals are eligible for the county board.

However, the county board is also a group of volunteers who may or may not have the experience to do the analysis.

Most appeals for these classification of properties are filed with the Minnesota Tax Court, which allows time for both our staff and the petitioner to conduct the required analysis.

This is a summary of the actions taken by the board.

There were one 300, as I mentioned, there were 311 appeals heard by and acted on by the board.

Of those 145 had their value sustained, and 166 saw reduction.

The bottom line represents the total market value before the board action and the resulting market value.

Of the 311 appeals heard by the board, the market value was originally 334.5 million dollars and was reduced to 320.8 million dollars, which represents a 4.09 decrease.

Per state statute, the local board may not reduce the overall market value of the city by more than 1%.

This is a total that we keep track of because if that amount goes over 1%, all actions of the local board are null and void.

The markup value prior to the local board was just over 65 billion dollars, and the reductions by the board resulted in a change of 0.0209%, so they were well within their statutory allowed changes.

All property owners that appealed to the local board receive a determination by our office, those were mailed a couple of weeks ago, and they indicate the board's decision as well as the next steps.

The next step now is the appeal.

If they disagree with the outcome of the local board, they may appeal to the county.

As of late last week, there were 41 Minneapolis cases registered for the county board.

Our team does continue to work on those appeals at the county level rather than county staff.

Of the 41, one has canceled, 17 have reached a concurrence.

One's been canceled.

We are bringing three corrections from our office, and there are 20 cases that are proceeding to the county board.

Again, the next step is the county board.

They convene June 15th, so two weeks from today, there's the contact information.

Property owners can always appeal to the Minnesota State Tax Court, and the deadline to appeal their 26 value is April 30th of next year.

So before I close, I again want to reiterate the importance of the local board of appeal and equalization and the role of your city assessor's office.

At a time when residents are asking important questions about government accountability and transparency, and our office is under scrutiny from many directions.

The local board process is more important than ever.

It provides a public forum where property owners can challenge our conclusions, have their concerns heard by an independent board, and receive a thorough review of the facts.

That level of transparency helps strengthen trust in both the assessment process and in local government.

With that, that concludes the results of the local board.

I want to send a huge thanks to our team in the office.

The local board work is done, but the county board work continues.

This is an uncomfortable time, it's a confrontational time, it's emotionally taxing on our team.

And I this year more than ever, we've received comments and accolades from property owners about the compassion, the thoughtfulness of our team, and the professionalism, and I'm it's just an honor for me to work with them.

And of course, to our board members who serve in a volunteer capacity, and have to you know work amongst neighbors.

Um it's not an easy board to serve on, and I'm just very grateful for their willingness.

So thank you very much for your time.

Thank you, Director Momquist.

Um I put myself in queue more preemptively, but would yield to any of my colleagues that have some questions or comments for Director Momquist.

I'll let them get their thoughts together and go ahead and start.

Thank you for this presentation.

I'd like to point out the pretty amazing fact that your staff resolved over 80 percent of all assessment inquiries prior to the local board of appeal and estimate, even convened, and and that's a huge lift.

Um you got a lot of inquiries as I'd imagined you would.

And I I just appreciate that you're open-minded, and it looks like you changed the value on about a third of them.

And to me, I think that goes to show those that did not receive a change that they were truly given fair consideration.

It's not, you know, it really is a thoughtful process.

In looking at the appeals and reductions, wards two and four are interesting and opposite in terms of the appealed amount versus the reduction given.

Is that just due to smaller data sets?

Meaning ward two had fewer requests but for a large amount of money, and ward four had a larger number of requests for smaller amounts of money, or could you comment on that?

Chair Palmasano, great question.

I was expecting that one.

That is correct.

It is about the type of property that was appealing within those and how large the market value was.

We likely had a number of commercial and industrial and apartment appeals within ward two that were higher valued, which is the lower count, but a lot lot more value.

So you are correct in your assumption.

Okay, explaining that.

Um, after the board conducted their assessments there, or actually, after you all conducted your assessments, there was an overall reduction in 0.02 percent of the estimated market value to our tax base.

I think that's correct.

Is that consistent with past years or more or less or any thoughts on that?

Chair, again, great question.

It is very consistent with previous years as far as the amount.

We we don't want to get anywhere near one percent, but it would be pretty challenging.

We'd have to have a lot of days of board meetings to get to that one percent.

Um, so it this isn't pretty consistent with previous years.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Um, I don't see any of my other colleagues in queue.

Um, so I will go ahead and ask the clerk to file that report and move approval of this item.

So all those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed.

That carries.

Um with that, we've concluded all business to come before this committee today.

And if there are no objections, we are adjourned.

Thank you.