Are we here?

Uh, I'm okay.

Is the world.

Good afternoon, and welcome to the regular meeting of the committee of the whole for June 23rd, 2026.

My name is Orreen Chowdry, and I'm the chair of this committee.

I will call this regular meeting to order and ask the clerk to call the roll to verify the presence of a quorum.

Councilmember Payne is absent.

Wants Lee.

Present.

Greenville.

Present.

One.

Present.

Osman.

Present.

Schaefer.

Present.

Stevenson.

Present.

Chavez.

Present.

Whiting is absent.

Palmasano.

Present.

Vice Chair Chittag?

Present.

And Chair Chowdhury.

Present.

There are eleven members present.

Thank you, clerk.

Let the record reflect that we have a quorum.

Before we begin the meeting, let me offer a friendly reminder to everyone that these meetings are broadcast live to enable greater public participation.

The broadcasts include real-time captioning to increase accessibility for our entire community.

So it's important that all speakers be mindful of the rate of their speech so that our captioners can fully capture and transcribe all comments for the broadcast.

We ask all speakers to please moderate the speed and clarity of their comments.

Colleagues, our agenda is in front of us, and we will begin with our reports of standing committees.

After that, we will take up discussion and then a receive and file.

Okay.

I will first make a motion to amend the agenda and add an item to consent.

Before you colleagues, there should be a printed copy of the request for committee action.

This is an item request for a block party events permit for the Minnesota United and Brits Pub for the World Cup watch parties.

Very fun.

Staff from Business Licensing are here to answer any questions people may have, but I will propose that we take that up at the beginning of our meeting as in a consent item.

Second.

Thank you.

Are there questions about that order or any additional amendments?

Okay, we've made the motion to, may I have a motion to adopt the agenda as revised.

Second.

Okay, great.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Those opposed say nay.

Great.

Next, we will begin by taking our reports of our standing committee, starting with the enterprise labor relations committee chaired by councilmember Palmasano.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

The Enterprise and Labor Relations Committee has six items to bring forward on Thursday.

Item one is a legal settlement of federal insurance company versus Fournier Network Solutions.

Legal Settlement Number Two is John Clausen versus the City of Minneapolis.

Item number three is election judge and deputy city clerk appointments for the state primary.

Item four is a gift acceptance from local progress for both Council President Payne and Councilmember Chavez.

Item number five, our workplace advisory committee appointments.

Item number six is a contract with guide house for ERP system implementation services.

Thank you, Chair.

Are there any questions on this report?

Seeing none, we will next get a report on our business housing and zoning committee given by its chair, Chair Osman.

Thank you.

Item three approves an extended hours and rental hall license for millennium event center.

Item four approves a land sale at 3726 Logan Avenue North.

Item five, I'm sorry, item five approves an ordinance related to the tailgating.

Item six is an ordinance related to the license business regulation with adult bath house and entertainment venue.

This item was sent without recommendation.

Item seven approves an ordinance related to the moratorium on data centers in the city.

Item eight approves two liquor license.

Item nine approves forty-two liquor license renewals.

Item 10 approves for gambling renewals.

Item 11 approves the business license operating condition for wondercycle pedal cars.

Item 12 approves a business license operating condition for urban east.

Item 13 approves 13 Minneapolis Workforce Development Board appointments.

Item 14 approves one Minneapolis Advisory Committee on Housing Appointments.

Item 15 approves 16.

Minneapolis art commission appointment.

Item 16 is appointment to the Minnesota Ballpark Authority.

This was sent forward without recommendation.

Item 17 accepts a workforce and opportunity act grant from U.S.

Department of Labor.

Item 18, authorized amendment to the NICLET New Nicola Tree Development.

Item 19 approves additional funding for 2116 Nicolette Avenue Project.

Item 20 approves appropriation from the U.S.

Housing Department.

Rezoning application for 2007 Stevens Avenue.

Item 22 accepts a grant for NAPC forum conference.

Item 23 approves the depth mitigation for the rental reclaim housing portfolio.

Item 24 approves the staff doctors related to the business regulation environment in the city.

Item 25 authorizes a contract with MPHA for security and safety.

Item 26 authorized city census tract ranking for the opportunity zone program.

And lastly, item 27 authorizes a contract extension with theater for 20 years.

Thank you.

Colleagues, is there any discussion?

Seeing none, we will go to Council Member Rainville.

Councilmember Rainville, go ahead.

So uh I just I'm gonna vote no on some of these items.

Your microphone, sir.

Thank you.

Uh I just want the chair to know that I'm gonna vote no on some of these items.

We don't necessarily have to discuss them.

Yeah, and and we're not taking a vote right now on this.

But I'm just preparing everybody.

Okay, announcement for Thursday.

Okay, excellent.

Yes.

Do you are there already items that are moved forward without recommendation?

We don't need to pull them out ahead and give the clerks a heads up.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Next, we will go to uh report on the climate and infrastructure committee given by its chair, Chair Wandsley.

Thank you, Chair Chowdery.

The climate and infrastructure committee has 20 items to bring forward.

The first is the Van White Memorial Boulevard Resurfacing Project, project approval and assessment.

Two is the West Fulton Neighborhood Improvements phase project approval and assessment.

Uh three is the appointment of the public works department director.

Is the sorry number four is the 35th Avenue North Flood Mitigation Project, acquisition of temporary construction easements.

Five is a cooperative agreement with Minne Haha Creek watershed district and Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board for a stormwater best management practice.

Six is bicycle advisory committee appointments.

Seven is pedestrian advisory committee appointments, eight is University Avenue Southeast and Fourth Street Southeast.

Master Utility Agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation.

Acquisition of Permanent and Temporary Easements.

11 is a bid for pump station six electrical room rehabilitation.

12 is bid for 35th Avenue North Flood Mitigation Project.

13 is a bid for small diameter sanitary pipe cleaning and televising 2026 project.

14 is contracts for 2026 through 2029 vehicle auction services.

15 is the frequently water Maintenance Facility roof and masonry Repair Phase 2.

16 is pump station number three wet well rehabilitation project.

17 is bid for Logan Park Industrial Phase 1.

Green storm water infrastructure and landscape plantings.

16 is contract with FOF infrastructure and environmental LLC for engineering and design services of 22nd Avenue Northeast Storm and Sanitary Sewer Reconstruction Project.

19 is Oliver Avenue South Flood Mitigation Project Permanent and Temporary Easement Agreement with Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board.

20 is public engagement and redesign of Highway 280, which is a resolution.

With that, I will stand for any questions.

Members, is there any discussion?

Seeing no discussion, we'll get our final agenda report from the Public Health Safety Equity Committee from its chair, Chair Chavez.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

The public health safety and equity committee will be bringing forward 24 items.

Item number one is approving the mayor's nomination of Rachel Sayer to the appointed position of emergency management department director.

Item number two is an ordinance related to adult bath houses and sex venues, health and sanitation.

Item number three is an ordinance related to all gender and sexuality.

Welcoming city ordinances.

Item number four is authorizes a revenue contract with the Minnesota Timberwolves to provide bomb detection security services at Target Center.

Item number five accepts the National Environmental Health Association and FDA retail flexible funding model grant and authorizes an agreement for the grant.

Item number six accepts the Bloomberg Philanthropic grant for youth climate leadership and engagement and authorizes a contract for the grants.

Item number seven is accepting a gift for the National Association of County and City Health Officials for Damon Chaplin Commission of Health to attend the NACCHO conference in Lexington, Kentucky.

Item number eight is accepting a gift from the Government Alliance on Race and Equity for three race equity inclusion and belonging staff members to attend the Region 5 Learning Exchange in Detroit, Michigan.

Item number five, approves five appointments to the Minneapolis Advisory Committee on People with Disabilities.

Item number 10 approves nine appointments to the public health advisory committee.

Item 11 approves seven appointments to the Minneapolis Advisory Committee on Aging.

Item number 12 approves 11 appointments to the homegrown Minneapolis Food Council.

Item 13 approves two appointments to the community commission on police oversight.

Item 14 approves six appointments to the Save and Thriving Communities Work Group.

Item 15 authorizes a memorandum of understanding with the University of Minnesota to work with capstone students at the Humphrey School of Public Affairs.

Item 16 approves a legislative directive related to off-duty police regulation.

Item 17 approves a direction to the city attorney's office related to off-duty police management.

Item 18 approves the legislative directive related to an alternative site for police officers to use for gun range facility.

Item 19 approves a staff direction to research and analyze the organizational structures of institutions that provide comprehensive public safety services.

Item 20 directs the city clerk to formulate a plan and recommendation to update the Minneapolis Code of Ordinances to wherever practical remove gender-specific references in city code.

Item 21 calls of the Minnesota legislature to establish local authority to explicitly protect transgender, non-binary, and gender expansive residents equal access to restroom facilities.

Item 22 approves a legislative directive related to gender neutral restroom access incentivization efforts and opportunities.

Item 23 considers a contract amendment with Sound Thinking Inc.

for a gunshot location system.

Item 24 authorizes a contract with emergency management services international inc for after action review services.

I'll stand for any questions.

Members, are there any questions for that report?

All right, seeing no discussion.

We will now move to take on our walk-on item for the World Cup event permit as a consent item.

I'll move this item for approval.

Is there a second?

Second.

Any discussion.

Okay.

Seeing none on that motion, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Those opposed say nay.

That motion carries.

Next, we're gonna go to our discussion agenda.

I'm actually going to have us take up item number two under discussion.

This is an item uh that's a resolution from councilmember Warren regarding our commitments of city council members.

And I believe Councilmember Warren has a motion, so I will pass it to her to start us off.

Thank you, Chair.

I am going to um refer this item back to staff.

It was birthed out of the National League of Cities.

Um I had a very detailed conversation with um Chair Chowdry.

We talked about it and figured that it was something that we could discuss in our strategic planning.

So um without any further discussion, uh, refer it back to staff.

I think it would be referred back to author.

Refer it back to author then.

There you go.

You got it back and put it back in my I'll take it.

Or referring it back to Vachel.

That's what we're doing.

Um, I just quick wanted to say uh thank you, Councilmember Warren, uh, for the discussion on this.

I think it's gonna be great to have as an item in our strategic planning.

I have communicated to uh council president Payne that this is an item of interest for us to take up.

Uh, really appreciate the spirit of your resolution.

I think all of us want to come together on some commitments with each other around civility and dignity on this body.

So really appreciate that.

Um, so that motion has been made and seconded.

And I'm seeing if anyone else is getting on cue.

So seeing no one else on queue, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Those opposed say nay, and that motion carries.

Next, we will pick up item number one, which is a legislative directive regarding the Minneapolis police department and their changes and an interim chief update.

I will ask for one of the authors of the legislative director to speak more directive to speak more on this.

Councilmember Wandsley.

Thank you, Chair Chowdhury.

So, this legislative directive is in response to former Chief Brian O'Hara's resignation last month.

I know that I am not in alone in having constituents and community members uh reach out with significant questions about MPD's current status and what is yet to come.

There were several circumstances surrounding the chief's resignation that appears as huge red flags and um begs the question whether the city administration um has appropriate oversight channels and safeguards with MPD to make sure that we don't repeat the same systemic failures that led um not only to the situation pertaining to the chief, but also to the consent decree and the settlement agreement we're currently in.

With that in mind, section one and two of the legislative directive is meant to help the council and the public to understand whether the policies within MPD support accountability and transparency when it comes to organizational structures and promotions, and whether the Office of Community Safety has a functional and effective role in that oversight of MPD.

Uh, it looks like in this, or just based off of the press release uh shared this afternoon by Mayor Fry.

It does feel as if this legislative directive is already producing results.

Um, this afternoon we learned that Mayor Fry uh does uh intend to initiate a selection plan for the next police chief, which is request uh requested in section 2.8.

And I appreciate the mayor's statements where he emphasized that he is going to take the time to get this right, but I do want to note um something that I've said before many, many times.

Likely I'll say it again in the future.

There is never going to be one police chief who is going to single-handedly save MPD.

One person is not going to bring forward systemic and transformative change, and the resignation of the former chief is just a latest example in a pattern of several years where we've experienced unstable or substandard leadership in MPD.

And I'm glad to see, again, the mayor has a plan to hire a new police chief, but it does not address how the mayor plans to stabilize the department overall with high quality leadership and to make sure that there are strong policies in place so we don't end up back in the situation where we're at today.

Now, that is also why instead of just asking about what happened with the police chief, section two also inquires about the processes and mechanisms in place to ensure that we're getting leaders throughout the police department and potentially outside of it who have high qualifications, professional experience, and moral character needed to support reform and to serve as officers in our city.

I am concerned that the hiring and promotion processes within the Minneapolis police department is not fully supporting or aligning with best practices, and it's still unclear what oversight is in place outside of MPD to ensure that they are hiring and promoting individuals that will support the city's goal of meeting our required settlement agreement requirements and being a constitutional and equitable police department.

I'm also unaware of any other department that has had significant turnover in leadership amongst divisions when there has been a new leader brought on.

For example, in 2022, interim chief Amelia Huffman made significant changes to leadership positions within the police department at that time.

And many of those changes received significant public outcry because many of those who were being promoted had really extensive misconduct histories.

And I share those concerns with uh MPD and the city at that time in terms of what standards and expectations are we holding for those who are being placed into leadership positions.

And while that was four years ago, it's still unclear what those procedures or processes are, and they have remained unanswered.

So prior to the chief's resignation, Mayor Fry repeatedly stated that by not appointing uh Brian O'Hara himself, the stability of the police department would be severely jeopardized.

And now that he's gone, I think a number of us are trying to understand the rationale of what appears to be again another significant shakeup in organizational leadership within MPD during an interim period.

And when a new chief is appointed, will we once again see a massive flip in all these leadership positions?

And what does that mean again for the stability of our department department, uh police department, and thus what impacts will it have on the safety of our residents.

The rest of the section asks for information on how we can better understand Mayor Fry's plans for stabilization of the department during this interim period.

And then section three relates to off-duty and specifically uh the scheduling management.

Um city council and the public needs current information and accurate information about how MPD is approaching off duty, especially since there's been significant turnover in both leadership within the finance department of MPD.

And there's also stories that came out of the chief's resignation that highlighted scenarios in which off-duty work may have been abused and has raised questions whether the current system is actually effective at all.

And it's also concerning to me that there are allegations that police officers may be hiding their off-duty hours or potentially double dipping working off duty while on an active shift with the city.

And it's even more troubling that the hiding of these hours were allegedly done at the leadership level of MPD.

Especially in light of the Biden Department of Justice already noted many times years ago that MPD's off duty system was ripe for corruption.

And council has made significant efforts to try to take action to rein this in.

We've provided budget funding, we've passed ordinances that have given the Fry Administration tools to take action to regulate this, but none of it has been implemented.

So I am hopeful that with this information as well as the off-duty motions that are moving through the public health and safety and equity committee that we will get more information on how, as a body, we can strengthen our oversight over off duty.

Now, section four of the directive inquires about the city's policy surrounding paid administrative lead.

Um, the chief's resignation also spotlighted a practice that is is very unclear in terms of how leave is the minister when misconduct allegations are applied to uh MPD leader.

And I'm deeply concerned that we might be sending a message to police officers by uh by not implementing clear policies and protocols that there's no accountability over this, and in looking and surrounding jurisdictions, when allegations are made specifically of misconduct towards uh respective police chiefs, we have seen those jurisdictions actually place police chiefs on administrative leave during the investigation.

So this legislative directive asks the prior administration to provide rationale as to why they declined to use administrative leave for one of the highest officials in MPD, and instead applied it to a lower rank officer tied to the investigation into former chief O'Hara.

Um, and also as for clarity of if there's written policies in place to ensure that pay administrative leave is used in a standardized and uniform way, and also make it clear who are the decision makers in enacting those administrative leaves.

So that said, section five of this directive does go into internal affairs, and I know we'll get into this part deeper when we have discussions about the upcoming Alifa report uh regarding the settlement agreement.

Um, but it's very clear that we need to have further clarity on how the administration is looking to stabilize the misconduct process that's being backlogged within IA as well that contributed to some of the things we saw in this resignation or the investigation process.

Um, so I want to be clear that continued failure to intervene and address failures within stabilizing this department, the continuous instability of leadership over MPD, these are not things that we want to take lightly, especially as we're looking at selecting a new chief, and ideally not putting ourselves in this position as a department and as a city that allowed our police department to become um to be put in a position or place themselves in the position to be under potentially two consent decrees.

Um there are significant red flags with how MPD is operating and residents, this body, the public deserves transparency on how we're gonna move forward, and while the mayor is the sole authority over MPD, the directive does ask how did things get so bad, and then what is the plan to turn things around, and what is council's role in that?

Um, and I'm really looking forward to us using the information from this directive to figure out how we can maximize our oversight capabilities so that again we're not in this place once more.

Um, and with that, I will uh ask for a second and move this item for approval.

Second.

Thank you, Councilmember Wandsley.

I put myself in queue.

I just wanted to say that I really appreciate this legislative directive over the last few weeks, have had several um meetings with constituents, open office hours, and um community town halls, and there have been so many questions um surrounding the chief's resignation that I have gotten, um, what it has meant to have an interim chief, and also just what does this mean for public safety for the city, also around accountability, um, and how do we how do we have clarity into what are the safeguards that we have in place or don't have in place in regards to um the complaints that led to the resignation of the chief and the investigation that showed that he was tampering um with investigation.

So I'm glad to see a legislative directive that's going to bring this information to light.

I've heard through the Grapevine that the personnel roles within MPD have changed, um, under the new interim chief, and I also was really alarmed when we saw the resignation essentially overnight, and we had led up to the nomination process, and there was um there was a theme in that saying that if we had did not uh appoint the chief, it would lead to a lot of uncertainty and instability for the police department and safety.

And that was pretty pretty urgent language, and now we're in a place where we don't have a chief, and so it makes me wonder that same type of alarm.

Like, what does that mean for public safety for constituents?

And that's what I'm hearing from them.

So I am supporting this.

I also wanted to ask if I could be added as a co-author.

Okay, thank you.

And those are all my comments.

Members, is there anyone else that would like to get into discussion on this item?

Seeing none with that motion before us, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Those opposed say nay.

Clerks, you noted that down.

Excellent.

Now on to our last item of the day.

We'll be receiving a report on tenants' right to organize.

This was a staff direction on issues last term that was issued last term and reissued this term.

I will have Sarah Renner from our legislative and research oversight division give this presentation.

Welcome, Sarah.

Thank you, Chair Chowdhury, Council members.

I'm Sarah Renner.

I'll be presenting on tenants' right to organize.

As mentioned, this came from a uh legislative directive to the to the legislative department asking in in March of this year, uh, asking to um explore options to strengthen enforcement and understanding of the new Minnesota state law on tenants' right to organize.

Uh, the request also asked about current city efforts in this regard and example city experiences.

First, I will elaborate on what Minneapolis's Minnesota's tenant right to organize entails.

Um, and the law just for information went into effect in January of last year.

Uh, in the lead up to the law's adoption, advocates testified uh that some owners or their agents had specifically tried to break up tenant organizing, specifically by calling police on tenant meetings, threatening immigration enforcement, raising rents, or filing evictions.

Um, advocates tested testified that immigrant tenants faced the sharpest landlord retaliation and had the fewest tools to respond.

Um, so Minnesota legislature responded by adopting the tenants' right to organize law.

The law has two parts.

Uh the first part provides at tenants with an affirmative right to organize in tenant associations and lists the protected organizing activities.

The second part prohibits landlords from retaliating against tenants for organizing as well as for reporting problems.

Uh the state law is one of just a few in the country that explicitly does both.

Um the slide here is the first part of the law, which provides specific protections to enable tenant organizing.

Um, according to the law owners must allow tenants and tenant organizers to distribute information in common areas and to individual units.

Initiate contact with other tenants, so canvassing and emailing about organizing are explicitly legal.

Um, they must also allow convening meetings at the residential building.

Um these are protected activities under the law.

Uh, experience has proven the need to elaborate such activities in detail.

Under the law, tenant association meetings must be completely independent of owners.

The owner or their representative are prohibited from attending unless they are specifically invited by the tenant association to discuss housing matters.

On this slide is the second part of Minnesota's law, which prohibits landlords from retaliating against tenants who organize or report problems.

As you can see from the language on the slide, landlords are specifically prohibited from doing things like filing legal actions, contacting immigration for enforcement, or increasing the rent after a tenant engages in a protected activity.

Protected activities include joining a tenant association, reporting a housing code or safety violation, seeking assistance from a community organization.

With the adoption of the immigration status of renters ordinance by this body in May of this year, the City of Minneapolis has adopted this portion of Minnesota law into ordinance.

Minneapolis prohibits landlord retaliation using the exact same language as the Minnesota's right to organize law.

Since our focus is on enforcement, I want to zoom in a bit on the existing enforcement mechanisms.

Under state law, tenants can sue for violations.

This is known as private right of action.

If a landlord's alleged retaliation is within 90 days of a tenant engaging in protected activities, the burden of proof is on the landlord to prove that they did not retaliate.

This is known as a retaliation presumption.

It's considered key to making such protections practical and enforceable.

Without a retaliation presumption, it can be very difficult in a court, for example, to prove that my landlord increased my rent because I reported a problem with the pipes.

The landlord can always claim coincidence.

If tenants are successful in court, they can recover from the landlord up to $1,000 per occurrence and reasonable attorney fees.

The city of Minneapolis can now, in theory, enforce its prohibition against retaliation by issuing citations and fines.

However, there is no dedicated mechanism in the city to investigate tenant claims of retaliation.

The report considers a range of city-level mechanisms for enforcing both parts of Minnesota law.

First, the tenant's affirmative right to organize.

This is the Minnesota law, only now in state law.

It seeks to prevent landlords from interfering in organizing.

That's the shorthand.

And second, the prohibition on landlord retaliation, which again is in both Minnesota law and Minneapolis ordinance.

And to be clear, the rest of the report considers potential city enforcement as an added layer on top of the private right of action provided in Minnesota's tenant right to organize law.

Low-income and otherwise disadvantaged tenants rarely have the time or resources to sue their landlords.

Given power imbalances, tenants can also be too intimidated or fearful of retaliation to pursue lawsuits, probably particularly the case in suing against retaliation.

Fear and intimidation also prevents some tenants from reporting violations or requesting repairs.

This is especially true for immigrant tenants who may fear detention or deportation, particularly now in Minneapolis's post-surge context with continued stepped-up immigration enforcement.

Collective tenant action can help alleviate some of the fear and intimidation of individual tenants.

These realities have driven some cities to try and expand accountability for landlord interference in organizing and retaliation beyond the private right of action.

In other words, they try to provide a more informal city level city level mechanism, civil rights protections against landlord retaliation, meet and confer obligations, and then finally education support and outreach.

I will discuss each providing a city example and considering the feasibility for Minneapolis.

City-led enforcement mechanism.

Several cities have adopted these, and what uh what the first component is simply inviting tenant complaints about uh interference in organizing and or uh landlord retaliation.

Where there is sufficient evidence, these cities uh issue fines or citations to deter a landlord's noncompliance.

Examples in the report include Seattle, Los Angeles, Austin, Washington, DC, and Evanston, Illinois.

As evident in uh Los Angeles and Seattle, such mechanisms have in practice led to little actual enforcement.

Seattle, for example, uh invites tenant complaints, but there's not a single documented case of enforcing anti-retaliation or tenant organizing protections.

Um, Los Angeles' uh anti-retaliation and harassment ordinance fares better, but an audit found that fewer than one half of one percent of related tenant complaints were referred to the city attorneys for potential enforcement.

Looking across cities, there are I saw at least two uh reoccurring constraints to enforcing such ordinances in practice.

The first is a lack of legislative or sorry, investigative capacity to handle what are complex behavioral allegations.

Both Seattle and Los Angeles explained that tenant complaints about landlords or their agents' behavior are more difficult and time consuming to investigate than complaints about physical property.

There is typically less evidence in such cases, which makes sense because tenants rarely see their landlords tearing down signs, for example, or recording them, they don't record them making verbal threats.

Um the second reason is is a reluctance on the part of city regulatory and inspection units to get involved in landlord tenant disputes.

Um these units typically strive to remain impartial.

Um they are also not typically trained to catch and document behavioral violations.

So looking at constraints and opportunities in Minneapolis, uh, Minneapolis could adopt an ordinance mirroring the state's tenant right to organize in full.

The following uh city examples following the city examples in the report, enforcement would require a few things if we were to add a enforcement element.

The first is clear protocols or thresholds for evidence for dealing with tenant complaints.

This is needed to guide decisions for when complaints merit investigation or constitute a violation.

Um LA, Los Angeles lacked such protocols, and that led to a lack of enforcement despite a flood of tenant complaints.

Um the second uh requirement is dedicated investigation capacity.

Um this might require new FTEs or contracted support, which is challenging giving given the budget context.

Um LA hired about 14 staff dedicated to enforcing anti-retaliation and harassment, and they expect to hire more.

Translated down into Minneapolis's population, the equivalent would be uh the equivalent to 14 in LA is one or two FTEs in Minneapolis.

With that said, there could be steps taken that might be possible to leverage Minneapolis's existing capacity in the form of housing the housing liaisons team and regulatory services.

They have a track record of helping tenants with claims of retaliation, working with tenant associations and tenant organizers.

Input from staff and organizations working with tenants might also be employed to target enforcement to key problem areas here in Minneapolis.

For example, the city might issue warnings or penalties to owners who send representatives to tenant association meetings uninvited, and this is directly in contradiction to the law.

If we wanted to narrow it, it could be limited to buildings with more than uh three to nine units where the majority of the tenants have signed a petition to join the tenant association.

Um further to Minnesota law, the city might include a requirement that landlords allow tenant groups to access common spaces free of charge for meetings.

Tenant groups rarely have the funding to hold meetings in outside venues.

Enforcement again may be needed if landlords block access to common spaces per day fines would be very effective.

Any investigation capacity the city might manage to cobble together through housing liaisons, for example, might be prioritized to cases in communities experiencing a disproportionate amount of retaliation and harassment.

Evidence from different from other cities, not from here, suggests that this is the those that are experiencing disproportionate retaliation are immigrant renters and tenants living in areas with increased rent pressures.

Another option here is the civil rights protection against landlord retaliation.

Uniquely, the city of Madison, Wisconsin addresses landlord retaliation through civil rights investigations and enforcement.

The city amended their equal opportunities ordinance to make building code complaintants a protected class.

The year after they did this, housing complaints in civil rights more than doubled in Madison, from 66 cases in 2022 before the ordinance to 155 in 2023.

The change was initiated after civil rights investigators noticed that they had many cases where they could not link there was no probable cause linking landlord behavior to discrimination, but the behavior was retaliatory.

In Madison, the tenant complaints about landlords retaliating are documented and passed to civil rights.

Merited cases typically end in Madison in mediation with the landlord agreeing to pay specified remedies.

To address retaliation, Minneapolis could consider adding building code complaint as a protected class and its civil rights ordinance.

Tenant organizing in Minneapolis is most often motivated by maintenance issues, and they may violate building codes.

One advantage of the civil rights approach is that it offers potential redress to tenants facing retaliation in the form of lease non-renewals, landlords deciding not to renew their leases.

Capacity again is an issue.

Madison handles now with the with the building code complaintants, about 155 cases per year.

And Minneapolis handles around 30 cases of housing discrimination complaints per year.

There are four investigators in the civil rights complaint investigations division, but they handle not just housing, also public services, employment, and other areas.

San Francisco's model is another example.

The example is actually rather exceptional for its impact.

It has generated significant building level outcomes as documented in the report.

Their union at home ordinance makes tenant organizing a housing service, which is on par with water and garbage collection.

The ordinance also obliges landlords and tenant associations to meet and confer in good faith.

And they specify specifically what is meant by conferring in good faith.

For example, responding to reasonable requests for information, negotiating with tenant associations.

These obligations and their enforcement incentivizes landlords and tenant associations to settle disputes in a manner akin to collective bargaining.

The San Francisco ordinance applies to buildings with more than five units in which a majority of residents have signed a petition to join the tenant association.

In Berkeley, which has a almost identical ordinance, applies, they apply it to almost all rental buildings, but only those that employ a property management service.

Through Berkeley and San Francisco's rent stabilization ordinances, they have a strong enforcement mechanism.

If landlords interfere in organizing or do not confer in good faith, tenant associations can petition the rent board for a rent reduction.

This rent board was created to enforce rent stabilization, and it's able to mediate disagreements, hold hearings through a hearing examiner, and make decisions that have ramifications in court.

They can decide, for example, to order a landlord to lower the rent for an entire building, commiserate with a reduction in housing services.

Thus, landlords in San Francisco and Berkeley have a powerful incentive to negotiate with qualifying tenant associations.

San Francisco's ordinance applies to buildings.

Oh, I said that alright.

As this mechanism relies on rent stabilization, it's not available in Minneapolis.

Minneapolis tenant associations have reported difficulty getting owners or their agents to respond to their requests for information or engage in negotiations in good faith.

Regulatory services might explore ways to employ the tier system to incentivize landlords to meet and confer in good faith with qualifying tenant associations.

An example, landlords who negotiate with tenant associations and put agreements in writing might be rewarded.

It's very important to be extremely specific in these kinds of mechanisms.

In buildings where a majority of tenants have signed on to the tenant associations.

Minneapolis might help tenant associations by connecting them to available help to employ Minnesota's rent escrow law.

This can be a very powerful lever to motivate collective bargaining.

And finally, tenant organizing can be enabled through education support and outreach.

In the lead up to this report, regulatory services committed to incorporate education about the tenant right to organize law in its planned communications, about Minneapolis's new immigration status of renters ordinance.

Communications will include newsbytes from the city, informational programming on cultural radio shows, and attending the Twin Cities Immigration Forum.

In collaboration with partners, Minneapolis's housing liaison team works with tenants to help them document cases of landlord retaliation and harassment.

In the last 10 months, they've handled around 37 such cases.

The team is a pretty unique resource.

I didn't see anything equivalent in the other cities I researched.

Some additional ideas that the city could consider in this area.

The city could engage vulnerable communities around reports of increasing tenant intimidation.

Engaging immigrant renters, for example, might help the city develop protocols and improve outreach.

Regardless of any ordinance changes, the city might also consider developing a shared protocol with partners to respond to claims of landlord retaliation.

I found the system rather fragmented.

And so uh and the lack of a universal tracking also makes makes it difficult to see trends, and people may hear different things depending on who they call.

Finally, the city could look into potentially providing more reliable funding to support effective tenant organizing.

The lack of reliable funding was mentioned by Homeland and others engaged in tenant organizing.

And that concludes my presentation.

Thank you so much for that presentation.

We have a few people in queue.

I'll recognize Councilmember Chavez.

Thank you, Chair Charterie.

Thank you, Sarah, and the LRL team for all the work that you all did on this report.

I'm looking at page six, and it says that the city of Minneapolis can in theory enforce its prohibition on retaliation.

However, there is no dedicated mechanism to investigate tenant claims of retaliation.

Would you be able to just explain that a little bit further?

Sure.

Sure.

So by adopting the the uh the prohibition, the same one that is in the state law, um, it is already um in the maintenance code and can be enforced using its its licensing standards essentially.

So um it's the same enforcement is available as is available for the entire maintenance code.

So private right of action and um administrative fines and uh citations are can be done.

It's just when a complaint comes in um claiming retaliation, there's no protocols or standards for or mechanism for determining whether it's a violation or not.

And so that's that was the substance of the of the report is just to suggest what other cities are doing in that regard.

And do you think like an ordinance could help get more clarification on how that could be enforced?

Um, I mean, yeah, it it could, yeah.

Uh it could offer more clarification.

Um, and it could, and it's a matter of, I think capacity, so looking for ways to sort of limit it in the enforcement mechanism might also make it more enforceable.

Cool.

Thank you.

Yeah, so I authored this draft direction with Councilmember Wansey and Council President Payne, as we heard uh concerns from many of our residents.

Uh I know that we're interested in adopting an ordinance mirroring state law, so we'd just like some assistance in that.

And I know that some of my colleagues on Digas are also interested in this as well, so we can connect offline.

Um, but I guess I'll just tell my colleagues today that uh we'll be doing a notice of intent in the future and let this serve as a public awareness that I'm letting you know this ahead of time.

And if you have any questions, please reach out to my office.

Thanks.

We'll go to Vice Chair Chad Tai next.

Thank you, madam chair.

Um, thank you for this presentation, Sarah, and the uh work that your team did to compile the report that you're presenting on before us today.

Um, you know, I'll start with saying uh what caught my attention was that the housing liaison team over a period of 10 months has uh received 37 cases or process 37 cases that that are related to landlord retaliation and harassment, and you know, 37 cases over 10 months breaks down to something like one case a week, and and I think that's a severely underreported number and a severely underreported and utilized resource in the first place, um, but is quite significant and and worth noting.

Um, and I think shines uh a very small light into the severity of uh some of the experiences that are our renters in the city, but in particular our most marginalized renters that have an additional identity that that makes them more vulnerable to being able to utilize these types of resources or unable to.

I I just think that that, yeah, the the severity of the problem is very um underreported and underunderstood.

Um a couple things that that caught my attention in the in the report that that I'd just love to hear some um some additional perspective on.

Uh first on regarding that we don't have a mechanism of enforcement and uh or a policy or mechanism for um even issuing citations to um owners uh and operators that are in violation of the existing policy right now.

Um, can you tell us a little bit more about um how you arrived at that conclusion?

I have full trust in it, but I would imagine that you had conversations with regulatory services with 311, just to understand how we're capturing this information and and how we're responding to it.

So we'd just love some additional insight from you here.

Okay.

Um yeah, I'm I did speak to all those that um you mentioned, and uh, I mean, I think it was it was uh so recent that it was just May that we adopted the anti-retaliation uh ordinance or the prohibition on retaliation, um, that they're just starting to process that and think through the options for what it means in practice and and uh and this uh I think doing this research sort of accelerated that and hopefully hopefully helps inform uh everybody's decision making in that regard, but it was was just uh a month ago, so that's helpful to know.

I mean, um in um one of our our new tenant unions established as a result of uh the change in state law is the IPG tenant union um based largely in in the 10th ward, but um in different pockets of of South Minneapolis.

Um and uh, you know, for the last few years, um we've been working with constituents at different buildings owned by this this one owner and operator um that we're we're you know, people are living in an uninhabitable conditions, um, and uh, you know, I'm really proud of of uh and and really honored to represent my constituents who are um who went to the Capitol and advocated for this policy and testified at every opportunity um in support of it.

Um and and I think the policy that we see is is clearly a reflection of of a lot of involvement by um tenants and their representatives, um, and and I think it's why so much uh is articulated and enumerated within the state law that that really deals with retaliation and interference, because those are the the first two most common ways that uh that efforts by tenants to organize and leverage collective power are undermined, right?

Before they're able to establish something that's robust.

I think the you mentioned this in your presentation, but uh the reality of Minneapolis's landscape as it relates to this this uh change in state law, the ability to organize, the ability to to leverage collective power, um right now the the biggest response that we see from uh landlords and property management companies where tenant associations are being formed or tenant unions are being formed, is the the tactic of ignoring them completely, refusing to take meetings, to discuss any type of housing condition issues and uh you know uh engaging in what I would describe as retaliation, but you know, uh I don't know if it would meet the threshold of the state law, but um so the meet and confer obligations example that you lifted up out of San Francisco is one I'm really interested in.

Um is do you can you speak at all to whether there are any um additional limitations with with a policy like that that we should be aware of for Minneapolis?

Um yeah, I think that that particular model is significantly different from the Minnesota law.

Um so passing an ordinance um that's uh that requires meeting and conferring in good faith.

Um would probably it would at the very least need to be consulted with the CAO.

Um and there's some uh might be some issues there.

Uh but it's basically an incentive mechanism enforced by a very strong sort of mechanism to uh to hold landlords accountable.

So I tried to look at ways that we have an incentive system, which is our tiering system, and we have a um pretty strong lever that's not available in any other state that I could find, which is this um which is the escrow account law uh rent law, um, which allows tenants to put their rent into an escrow and pay to the court rather than to their landlord.

So usually there's some sort of assistance needed to make that all happen.

So that's that's a pretty powerful potential combination as well.

So that's awesome.

Thank you.

This is all really helpful.

And then I'll just note for colleagues that I'm I am really interested in working on the meet and confer obligation.

So if anyone else here is, please reach out to my office, and then I'll I'll give the city attorney's office a heads up right now through through deputy city attorney Abelson that I'll be reaching out to talk about this in greater detail.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you.

Members, is there any other discussion on this item?

Great.

And I'll just make a very quick comment to say two things.

Just the other day I had a neighborhood association leader approach me to share that it's been really, really difficult to try to find a way to engage with all the renter communities that we have throughout the 12th ward and the large buildings that have been developed over the last 10 years.

And she and I both shared that there's this really big sense of one like need for community building within the buildings, and then also connecting renters to the larger community on the south side.

This bill can be a powerful tool for accountability, but also a really important tool for just community building and organizing and accessing resources more powerfully as renters because oftentimes there's just this level of isolation that happens between renters and folks that live in single family homes in the neighborhood.

So I think that's really interesting, and just wanted to share that feedback from an organizer on the ground in the neighborhood.

And the last thing I'll say is that this state legislation passed in 2024 in a tenants' bill of right, and that really came from leadership in Minneapolis.

It was Senator Mohammed who led this effort in the Senate, and then Representative Esther Agbaje in the House, and so this is really coming from our Minneapolis delegation and leading this and getting it passed through through that body, and then ultimately signed by the governor.

And then I will recognize Councilmember Schaefer.

Yeah, I will just um confirm what I'm hearing around the rent escrow tool and that how powerful it is.

And even in just the six short months that I have been here in this role, we have seen that power come to almost fruition.

Some unsuccessfully, some on the verge of having that ability.

And what really drove this community that has sprouted up in particularly the Loring Park area has been a community conversation event that we had as ward-wide, bringing homeowners and renters together for a discussion around renters' rights.

And through that process, we're able to connect folks that were interested in starting their tenants' union with those who had already done that process, though maybe some more successfully than others, and having that informal connection and platform across varying residents really was helpful in number one, giving hope to those renters that were caught in that kind of a situation without the resources or the knowledge to move this forward with those who had already walked the role or walked that process and having that kind of an informal mentorship across buildings in a very high density localized area that has become very fruitful for us in our Ward 7 office, and I'm very excited about one tenants union that was started in an over 200 unit building in our area in the last couple months that already came directly from that renters's rights community meeting.

And so the power of informal connections is really strong.

And just to testify again that that rent escrow is a powerful tool when we can get it organized in such a way to benefit those in need.

Thank you.

Next, I'll recognize Councilmember Warren.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you for this lovely presentation.

And you don't have to answer this question.

I just want to name it that in this process of tenants having the right to organize.

So I really want to ensure that in all of our knowledge and research that we're doing that we're getting all of this information and we're retaining it and utilizing it to make very clear and conscious decisions about who we allow to develop and what they're allowed to develop in our city so that we we can reach a happy equilibrium with you know both our landlords and our tenants, but great work, thank you.

Again, just to add on that, that when there are repeated uh through housing liaisons when there are repeated cases over time or over uh buildings of of similar types of retaliation, those also get sent up to the alternative enforcement unit, and they can do a portfolio uh they they look at it to see if a portfolio um inspections would help to figure out whether it's uh reoccurring and there's a single owner.

Um, but whether or not we have the information on the on the correct owner is another question.

That's true.

That's true, yeah.

Thank you.

Thank you for your work though.

Thank you.

Members, is there any further discussion on this presentation?

Great.

Seeing no further discussion, thank you again, Sarah, for the great presentation, and thank you to the colleagues for a great discussion.

I will ask the clerk to file this report and presentation, and with no objection and no business before us, I declare this meeting adjourned.