Call the meeting of the St.

Paul City Council to order.

Roll call, please.

Kim.

Here.

Yang.

Here.

Bowie.

Here.

Coleman.

Here.

Johnson.

Jost.

Here.

Council President Naker.

Here.

Six present, one absent being Councilmember Johnson, who is expected shortly.

Thank you so much to everyone who has taken time to join us for our city council meeting today.

We invite everyone to join us in standing for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.

And to the Republic, for which it stands.

And ten is being withdrawn.

Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Ms.

Bowie for the balance of the consent agenda.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed.

The consent agenda is adopted as amended, and item number ten is withdrawn.

Item number nine is resolution twenty-five-seventeen fifty-two.

No, uh, we had a chance to talk with the city attorney's office, and they were really clear about you know, this is uh just a technical item.

So the motion is to lay over till December third.

Correct.

All right.

Any discussion of the motion?

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item number 15 is resolution 25-1781.

Approving the mayor's appointment of Councilmember Nelson Yang to the St.

Paul Port Authority Board of Commissioners for a term beginning on December 1st, 2025.

Um and I think Ms.

Yang wanted to pull this item.

Thank you, Council President.

Well, I will officially be back from maternity leave as of December 1st.

Since I do appreciate um, want to say thanks to Mira Carter for reappointing me to the St.

Paul Port Authority Board and also the Board of Waters Commissioners.

And I want to give a shout out to Council President U for filling in for me on the port board, not just once, but I think maybe twice or three times now.

Um, and then also to Councilmember Johnson too, because this is her second time filling in for me on the water board.

So when I just reflect about um, you know, uh um just my time during the council here, which is my fifth year on the council.

I mean, I'm the first St.

Paul council member to ever go on maternity leave.

And I I look at the table around us today.

I see moms, I see young moms, I see um you know, council members who care for children and who put in so much time into their family and are also doing so much important work out in the community.

And um, you know, with the change in representation here at the table also means that we have to be building towards systems that work for us and that are sustainable for us.

And I really appreciate how you all show up, um not just for me, but for each other and making that happen.

It's really important, not just for us, but for the future generations of people who are in elected office.

And so thank you to you all, and also um to both of the council members who filled in for me, our staff, and big thanks to you two, council vice president for filling in for me on the budget board uh committee.

Well, thank you for taking the time to pull this off, Ms.

Yang and for those eloquent words.

Uh I I agree completely, and I will say I've been honored to be able to fill in for you on uh the Port Authority Board.

It's been really beautiful to watch your family expand, but even more than that, to watch the way that you have so um amazingly balanced your work responsibilities and your family, which I know is also um a huge priority for you.

And um uh yeah, I think to those who say you can't do it all, you just have to look at Nelson Yang.

So awesome work, thank you so much.

Um, and we're happy to have you back fully, although I'm not sure we noticed that you were gone because you somehow made it to every single meeting while you're on maternity leave.

Um any other discussion of the motion.

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

And I just want to say I did misspeak.

Item number nine is laid over to December third.

I mistakenly said adopted.

So item number 16 is resolution 25-1782, approving the mayor's appointment of council member Nelson Yang to the Board of Water Commissioners for a term beginning on December 1st, 2025.

Uh Ms.

Yang.

I think we'll just move.

Yes.

I'll take a motion from Ms.

Yang for approval.

Any discussion?

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Uh, before we go on, sorry, um, I just want to make one note.

I think for those who received a printed copy of the agenda uh when you came in, it says that we have a suspension item that we are taking now.

We're actually gonna move that till after our public hearings.

Uh so if you want to stick around and listen to the port authorities budget presentation, you are very welcome to do that, but you definitely don't have to because we're gonna move it till later.

Awesome.

So item number 17 is ordinance 25-63, amending the legislative code chapter 220 to allow for garbage cart sharing at properties with two or more dwelling units beginning January 1st, 2026.

And again, for those of you who are not super familiar with the way our council meetings work, uh we have three readings for every ordinance.

The first reading we get a staff report.

Oh, thank you.

And a diet, Dr.

Pepper.

Uh the first reading, we get a staff report that gives us background information on the item.

The second reading, we have a public hearing.

Um, and then the third reading, or sometimes later, if we need to consider more amendments, we adopt the ordinance.

So we go in sort of reverse order here, and you'll see that we have a number of items that are here for final adoption.

They're all really significant items, but we've already talked about them at least twice, including having a public hearing.

So if you feel like we're moving too quickly, um, not to worry.

This is really the third time we're looking at all of these items.

Um so with that, I would look to uh take a motion from Ms.

Coleman for approval of this item.

Any discussion.

See none.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed?

Six in favor, none opposed.

The ordinance is adopted.

Item number eighteen is final adoption of ordinance 25-66, creating chapter 420 of the legislative code, establishing regulations for registration of cannabis and hemp businesses, creating chapter 428 of the legislative code establishing a permit requirement and uh and process for temporary cannabis events and amending section 310.01 to add a definition of cannabis fees.

And this is also before us for final adoption.

I would take a motion for approval from Ms.

Joest.

Is there any discussion of that motion?

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed.

The ordinance is adopted.

Item number 19 is final adoption of ordinance 25-67, amending chapter 170.02 of the legislative code to allow director of parks and recreation to adjust the hours of certain parks to accommodate for park use during the 2025 World Junior Hockey Championship.

I will take a motion for final adoption from Ms.

Yang.

Is there any discussion of the motion?

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed?

Six in favor, none opposed.

The ordinance is adopted.

Item number 20 is ordinance 25-68, amending section 106.01 of the legislative code to allow businesses in the downtown entertainment district to temporarily allow items in the right-of-way without a sidewalk use permit during the 2025 World Junior Hockey Championship.

I will take a motion from Vice President Kim for final adoption of this item.

Is there any discussion?

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All opposed?

Six in favor, none opposed.

The ordinance is adopted.

Item number 21 is final adoption of ordinance 25-69, amending section 293.02D of the legislative code to remove the requirement for a sound level variance in the downtown entertainment district during the 2025 World Junior Hockey Championship.

I will take a motion from Ms.

Bowie for final adoption of this item.

Is there any discussion of the motion?

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Six in favor, none opposed.

The ordinance is adopted.

Or item number 22 is final adoption of ordinance 25-70, amending section 409.08 of the legislative code to allow holders of liquor licenses issued under section 409 to apply for extended service of alcoholic beverages until 2 a.m.

during the 2025 World Junior Hockey Championship.

And if you're following along, you'll notice that downtown is going to be a lot of fun while the World Junior Championship is here.

Is there any discussion of that motion?

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed?

Six in favor, none opposed.

The ordinance is adopted.

Item number 23 is final adoption of ordinance 25-71, amending section 55.04A of the legislative code to simplify the requirement for a temporary structure permit during the 2025 World Junior Hockey Championship.

I will take a motion from Ms.

Joce for final adoption of this item.

Is there any discussion?

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye, aye.

All opposed?

Six in favor, none opposed.

The ordinance is adopted.

Item number 24 is uh final adoption of ordinance 25-76.

Creating chapter 297 of the legislative code prohibiting the use and placement of virtual currency kiosks within the city.

Uh so I just want to make a comment uh before we take a vote on this item.

I first of all want to thank all of my colleagues for your support, both uh here throughout this process and also during um our policy session when we really got familiar with this um predatory behavior, that these scams that are affecting our low-income community, our seniors, um, family members of folks who've been incarcerated, and and so many others in our community.

Um, I think we're doing the right thing today by banning these kiosks in the city of St.

Paul.

Um, and I'm really grateful to our staff who've taken a close look at this and done the homework to figure out that how we can do this.

Um, I also want to especially shout out to Mr.

Tim Plunkett, who first bought brought this issue to our attention and who is here with us today.

Thank you for your bravery in telling your story on behalf of many others who have also been affected and and may or may not have been able to tell their stories.

And finally, a huge shout out to my legislative aide, Megan Jackett, who not only did all of the work on this um but also visited personally four of the different uh retail establishments in St.

Paul where those kiosks are located.

And I think it's worthy to note, especially given that we heard some testimony from the um kiosk uh one of the kiosk businesses last week about the effect on on small retail operators that of all the four stores we visited, the staff that we spoke to there expressed concern about the behavior that they had seen, the people who they had seen in distress visiting these kiosks, and um, we heard loud and clear from Stillwater that as soon as they enacted their ban and just communicated about it, even before it took effect, um the businesses in their community that had these kiosks wanted to get rid of them.

They didn't want to be part of this kind of activity.

Um, and I expect that that will happen here in St.

Paul as well.

Um with that, I would move approval and I would welcome any further discussion.

Ms.

Joost.

Um thank you so much, Council President.

First, I just want to thank you and um your legislative aid, Mike and Jackett, for um bringing a lot of education and awareness to this issue when we were presented on this in May.

You know, I don't know that I'd seen a cryptocurrency kiosk or noticed one, but there are at least five of them in my ward.

Um, and you know, when we were presented on that at this at the time, there was discussion of banning the the kiosks or potentially trying to regulate them.

And I commented that you know it was hard for me to see what what purpose these kiosks serves to our residents.

Um, and I I still don't see what what that purpose is or benefit to our residents and to our businesses.

I think that I do understand that you know they get some of the revenue um from the transactions at these crypto uh kiosks, but I don't think to your point that they know what's going on, and some of the concerns that I've also heard uh are very similar, that they they do see folks using them that seem to be in distress.

Um they they are worried about them as well.

Um, and for me in my ward, uh, where these are concentrated is a lot of them are along Ford Parkway, uh, where we know that there is a concentration of seniors and older folks, and there will be more um moving into you know Highland Bridge.

And so that's very, very concerning to me.

Um, and so I will be voting in support of this, and I just really appreciate you bringing it forward.

Thank you, Ms.

Just.

Um, Vice President Kim and the Ms.

Yang.

Awesome.

Yeah, I'm very appreciative of your leadership on this issue, Council President.

Um, and I'm very appreciative of the testifiers that came to give just very compelling personal narratives that are very difficult to share.

This is um a consumer protection issue that's cropping up across the country.

We're not the only city, we're not the only state that is facing crypto um crypto kiosks.

Um and so I'm very proud of this council again for taking a really great common sense step um to ban these from our city.

So um I'm also looking forward to vote in support of this.

Thank you, Vice President.

Ms.

Yang.

Thanks, Council President.

I am also voting in support of this too, and I really commend you for your leadership and bringing this forward.

I really love what we have done with our policy committee, which is use it as a space for residents to be able to come in and speak up about their experiences.

I don't know if if we would be here today um, you know, passing this ordinance or voting on it if it weren't for um the resident you said their name is Tim, right, who came in and spoke up about this.

So to me, it just really goes um it's really grounding about how powerful it is when we do use our voice to create change, and that's clearly what has happened here, and um it's really moving to see how um in the council here we're able to take action to prevent people from being uh victims of scams at these kiosks.

And so I I know this will be a very um life-changing uh policy that we are making here.

So I am in support of it.

Thank you, Ms.

Yang.

All right, doesn't look like there's any other discussion.

Thanks so much.

Oh, Ms.

Bowie.

I just also wanted to share.

Um I I do appreciate um Council President Acre, um, your uh your leadership on this and how we had utilized the public uh policy committee to really have this really critical conversation and how uh you coordinated across multiple cities of different versions of this ordinance.

Um and I and I do um recall particularly, you know, sharing with you in terms of you know my support of um really having more of a regulatory approach.

Um, you know, I also am in support of continuing um supporting the state's efforts and monitoring and really holding bad actors and illegal activity um um accountable.

I have had a chance to talk with some of my constituents, uh, primarily you know the Gen Zs, where I learned a lot about cryptocurrency or crypto kiosk.

Um and from our conversations, it really seems like this is kind of like the beginning of the future of banking, right?

And this tool, um, although it has have been very harmful, um, but it's a tool, right?

And um people have used it for good and people have also used it for bad.

I am a strong advocate of really making sure that we're holding um this illegal activity and those who prey on our most vulnerable accountable.

So I do want to ensure that there is a caveat of you know, the working with the attorney general, working with the state, working with our county attorneys, and having a really strong um um um um approaches, but I won't be in support of this ordinance, but I am in support in all of the efforts and all of the leadership.

Um I understand this is you know, I'm not on the succeeding side of this vote, but I do want to make sure that I'm being consistent that this ordinance um or whatever I vote for is actually gonna address the root causes.

And you know, yes, uh we are going to, you know, this vote is going to ban crypto kiosk, but it's not going to stop people from actually who you know are vulnerable and preyed upon to go to the next city or go to the next suburb.

Um, and I honestly think this like penalizes businesses and penalizes the actual company um and just kind of relocate the issue.

Um but I do want to say I wholeheartedly do think it's it's important that we you know raise awareness, and I think that is really well what that was really good in terms of what came out of out of this, but I will not be in support of this ordinance.

Thank you, Ms.

Bowie.

I really appreciate your thoughtful disagreement.

And I um and I I want you to know I agree with you, and I think with so many of these issues, you know, we'd we would prefer that the state take action.

Um and yet we are where we are and and have the opportunity to act where we can.

Um but I am hopeful that on this, as in so many other issues where we have led, um, that the state will follow suit.

So thank you for saying that.

Ums Johnson.

I just want to say um I appreciate the I've appreciated the discussion over time.

I think it was an area that coming into the council, right?

We have I learned a lot more about actually the different kiosks that we have on the east side, mostly because as someone who, you know, I this is just not an area of expertise for sure for me, and then also as we've been heading into conversations, there's been so many other issues that can seem more um pressing or more urgent in nature, but the predatory nature of it as well is something that is was hard to ignore as it started to unfold, especially with the testimonies from community members, and I think in general, just the leadership of some of our other cities that have taken stances.

Um, you know, I think St.

Paul often we love to be um a spearheader or kind of like a you know, as a city to set the precedence, but so much of this was interestingly unique, where you know, we were able to hear from like Forest Lake and Stillwater and like entities that I feel like is this not common for you know folks to always be getting an invitation from the St.

Paul City Council to come to the chambers to talk about their efforts to address this issue.

And I think it's you know, as we head into 2026, I see many opportunities for local leadership to continue to have that coalition model in mind of you know, we're stronger both as a city, but also these local municipalities throughout the state.

Like any time that there's efforts, especially to go beyond the you know, first ring suburbs or suburbs to urban big cities to small city uh collaboration as somebody who was born and raised in a rural town.

I understand sometimes you don't always make it to the big city to talk about policy, and I think that this is a very unique and um unique situation where that did happen, and it was really cool to watch.

And so I appreciate the leadership there, and I appreciate the work.

And if we haven't shouted out your legislative aid, check it out.

I also appreciate her leadership in it too, because some of these memos were some of the most in-depth memos that I had received on the CS with in my uh for sure in my time, and also just in general.

Um, so I did appreciate learning and kind of going through that with you, and I look forward to whatever comes from the um from this step, especially what other cities can learn and how we may be able to impact them in their decision making as well.

Thank you, Ms.

Johnson.

All right.

Uh any further discussion?

All right, seeing that I think it's time to call for a vote, and I think we'll do a roll call vote.

Kim?

Yes.

Yang.

Aye.

Bowie?

No.

Coleman.

Yes.

Johnson.

Aye.

Joe's.

Yes.

Council President Naker.

Aye.

Six in favor, one opposed.

That being Councilmember Bowie, the ordinance is adopted.

Item number 25 is first reading of ordinance 25-78, establishing chapter 15 of the administrative code to establish and define structured quarterly reporting requirements for certain personnel vacancies and overtime utilization.

And this is a first reading, so the first time we are ever seeing this ordinance come before us, and as a result, we will have a brief staff report from our chief policy officer, Mr.

Tim Greenfield.

Welcome up.

Hi, I have slides.

Thank you, Council President.

Um, I just need the password to log in to get the slides.

Sorry.

And then I will begin.

It's good.

I will just say by way of uh tap dancing a little bit while we wait for the password.

Um, that this is we have had a very busy year on this council, and this is yet another one of our uh council legislative priorities, something that we talked about a great deal during our last budget cycle.

Um, that now also through the hard work of um many folks in this body and and Mr.

Greenfield is now coming before us um as legislation.

So it's exciting to see that conversation about really we should have these becoming something that we actually will have now going forward.

Okay.

All right, thank you, Council President.

Um slides are forthcoming.

This is just a brief, you know, uh staff report on uh ordinance 75-78, which establishes and defines structured quarterly reporting requirements and requires a yearly vacancy analysis uh as well as a structured quarterly reporting requirement for um overtime utilization and a yearly analysis over overtime utilization by um two public safety uh public safety departments.

Um so this uh initial legislation was before uh in draft form uh before the budget committee in May, um, where the council heard uh testimony that um is in um similar structure to what has been presented.

Um there there are some differences, and so I'll highlight those differences to what's been uh you know put before council in May as well as kind of what's been discussed um uh and put forth in this current language that that might be more new and might uh be more applicable.

Our voice activated tech support has arrived.

I think we're trying to type questions.

Is there any more you can tell us while you wait or not?

Yeah, so while I well, yeah, before we begin, this is a uh an amendment that establishes uh a new chapter in the code of the administrative code, um, which uh pursuant to our authority, the city council's authority under the charter.

Um, any act of the council uh that establishes procedures for administrative actions must be admitted, uh must be enacted via administrative ordinance, and that all administrative ordinances must be codified within the administrative code to ensure transparency and accountability.

Um so that this this new chapter that regulates vacancy and overtime usage on both a quarterly and a yearly analysis basis is within that theme of regulating regulating the administrative behavior and conduct of city departments.

Um in terms of the structure of the um of the the ordinance before you for 25-78.

Um there are five sections.

The first section is a definition section that provides kind of the the definitions and the types of reports that may be used.

And I think we might be ready to go in terms of presentation.

Okay, great.

Um so the first uh sorry for the disorganization a little bit there.

Um so to begin, uh the first section that establishes a quarterly vacancy report is a uh essentially an attempt to establish a structured reporting for we can go now there to it.

Uh beginning on January 1 of 2027, requiring quarterly reporting by city departments.

Uh the quarterly vacancy report is prepared by human resources and covers full-time budgeted, non-appointment, and non-temporary roles.

Um, the vacancy, the data that is to be submitted on a quarterly basis is to include the job title and department, the duration of the vacancy, and anticipated timeline for filling the position, the anticipated budget savings uh from the uh the vacancy and any uh recruitment effort that uh that are made by the department to resolve or address or uh um fill the vacancy.

Uh the the report is to be prepared and submitted to the council and the mayor within 30 days of the date uh specified in section 1502 and and is to be posted publicly.

This structure of this report is uh what was before the council largely in May and was worked closely on with the city attorney's office to capture the correct personnel data to make sure that the information that's being returned to the council isn't private information, that the information is usable and is developed in a systematic way so as to inform uh longer term, uh broader projected based decision making on behalf of the council as part of uh as part of the budget process.

And that's what influenced Section 1503, um, which is the yearly analysis uh component of the of the chapter 15 uh the new chapter 15 of the administrative code.

This requires a yearly vacancy analysis beginning on October 1, 2027, and each October 1 thereafter.

This is seen as more of a long-range, broader, uh broader brush uh to uh approach and analyze the the state of the city's vacancies in amongst its workforce, and it is meant to bring forth a more systematic process that already seems to exist as part of the budgeting um negotiations between the mayor and the council in terms of identifying uh vacant positions and and ways that those those positions are determined.

So the way that this ordinance is intended to work is to have both the quarterly structure, quarterly reporting structure as well as a yearly analysis, of which the final quarterly report is submitted in concurrence.

The next section of the ordinance is section 1504, which again requires a quarterly overtime utilization report.

Uh this requires uh on a similar schedule uh to section 1502 and 15 uh 1502, but instead of being prepared by the Department of Human Resources, this is prepared by the departments of police and fire and separated by a specified employee types in paragraph A of Section 1504.

And the report required reporting contents include average overtime hours used by the department, payroll shifts, payroll shifts covered by overtime, quarter or totally uh quarterly, total payroll costs related to overtime pay, and quarterly premium pay expenditures within each department to track for structural or seasonal factors that affect the use of overtime and to give the council broader data sets in terms of the utilization and the use of overtime on a quarterly basis.

Um to you know track the trends as they as they may be occurring.

Then the final component of this uh of this ordinance is to include an overtime utilization yearly analysis.

This also begins on October 21, 2027, and requires a yearly analysis of overtime utilization for each of the previous employee types specified in section 1504.

And this again is seen as the again the higher version of what has been reported more quarterly uh to give yearly trend coverage trends, including any notable increases, decreases, or seasonal patterns in the use of overtime uh by public safety officials, uh as well as a comparison of actual cost to budgeted allocations and a three-year analysis of previous actuals to budget it.

So by the time this ordinance takes effect, um, you know, the the intention would be to capture previous years data as part of that 2027 report um and allow for more informed decision making from that point forward.

Um so even though the the reporting may not be due by 2027, the expectation is that that report that is first submitted will have capture previous year's data to account for a more informed decision making at that time.

And that concludes the the basis of my slides.

Um happy to stand for any questions or uh provide any further detail.

Great.

Thank you so much, Mr.

Greenfield, for that thorough overview questions at this point.

Ms.

Johnson.

Thank you, Mr.

Greenfield.

I appreciate uh just kind of being walked through uh this ordinance as well, and I think the sentiments of being able to ensure that we have adequate reporting on multiple fronts is just an overall value that I have a lot of alignment with.

Uh the the last slide, I was just hoping that you could just share a little bit more again about the the yearly analyti the yearly analysis, just because I think I was I'm trying to visualize the timelines for when there would actually be a yearly analysis if it begins October 1st.

Um, just kind of wondering is that the 2026 yearly analysis that we would receive at that time, or just wanting to understand a little bit more about the back end of how that actually works and why it's in place the end and not like earlier.

Uh thank you, Councilmember Johnson.

I think that's uh it's an important question and consideration.

Um, you know, the date selection of 2027 was just to reflect um the need for developing standard and systematic practices for reporting and tracking this information, so while I'm you know maybe on hand for these departments, and I don't want to represent that necessarily, the date was chosen to give that on-ramp time to allow for um you know exactly for the council's intent to be reflected in in terms of that report.

So if there are modifications that need to happen in order to get the data necessary, we thought it would be appropriate with this language to give till 2027 to allow for both the 2025 and the 2026 budget season to unfold and then find that that uh ability to refine as necessary without it coming into an existing season.

Ms.

Johnson.

And I think just for what it's worth, then the one question that I'd have or slight thing comment that I'd make would be if the overtime utilization yearly analysis is at all meant to influence future budget cycles, then the October 1st deadline might be a little bit late, being that usually the mayor of proposal is at the end of August, early September.

Um if the goal would be to you know advocate in any way for adjustments to the budget or after seeing 2025 or 2026 budget and the overtime utilization.

If there was if it was meant to influence things at that time, it'd be influencing the council's uh I guess decision, but not maybe not necessarily departmental or administration-wise, because that would be after they've already reproposed you know their proposal for the year for the for the 2028 year in that case.

But that's just something to take into consideration.

Uh, otherwise, I could think for the most part, a lot of what is shared is an alignment with where we're at too.

But just sometimes those deadlines um again, if it if the intent there is not necessarily to influence like future budgetary conversations, but maybe a be amongst the council, then there that gives us sample time to respond.

But it's something that could be a discussion topic earlier in the year if it was like say, you know, if it was like earlier than when the administration usually typically proposes their budgets.

Yeah.

Yeah, and and and Chair Johnson and and members of the committee, I think the the idea with October was to provide, you know, again that maximum on-ramp and allow for adjustment as necessary.

Um, you know, kind of from my perspective, putting that that date together, I think was reflective of the idea that putting it too early may not result in complete information.

Sure.

Uh, and so that was the kind of the window of time where I was trying to find where enough of the year potentially maybe has a lapsed, but at the same time capture it within the budget cycle.

So uh, but you know, as a non-budget expert, that was kind of a a shot a little bit in the dark, but uh I'm happy to you know take on all feedback as necessary and just as needed.

Thank you, Mr.

Greenfield.

Other questions, Ms.

Yang.

Thanks, Council President.

Well, um, I am really thankful to you for your work on this.

I know we have um talked about this a lot this year already, and um I'm excited to see it moving.

I just want to say overall, like I'm I'm I would love to follow up with you some more just because as I think about our budget process for next year, I would imagine that the council members are still very interested in getting vacancy reports, just as we have um Ben for this year, and you know, we've requested them, and we most likely will do the same for next year.

So I I just if we for example, if the language stays as 2027, I just want to make sure that for next year there is still um there is still well just being transparent, like we're still gonna want a vacancy report.

So I will touch base with you more about that.

Yeah, absolutely, Councilmember Yang.

I think that that is the expectation that is that is not changing.

Um, you know, it it was more of finding ways to reflect what's already been practiced between council and the and then and the administration, but at the same time allow for enough programming of the actual you know requirements in in ordinance and finding that that balancing act with timing.

Um I think that's kind of where the hedge was more towards the later aside as opposed to a more earlier budget cycle.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Yeah, and to Miss Yang's point, we nothing about this will keep us from asking for the same reports that we've been asking for.

This will just give us that formality in code that from then on we don't have to ask for it.

It's presented to us as a matter of course.

Um and high level, I'm I'm I am I share my colleagues' enthusiasm for this.

This is something we've noticed uh over the last several budget cycles.

The vacancies and the overtime are big, um, have a big impact on our budget, and being able to have that information more early and more often and more transparently is gonna make a big difference.

So um thank you uh for your work on this, Mr.

Greenfield.

And I'll also say to my colleagues, this is our ordinance.

So uh we'll have a public hearing on it next week.

And if anyone wants to bring any amendments to the questions that were just asked or ideas other people have, let's do that.

Ms.

Bowie.

And also I just want to just give um um shout out to you, Tim, like really for um working on this.

And I I'm really really fascinated by this process, just like how we've done um other um public policy committee um uh reviews.

I I'm really fascinated to be part of a council that's really truly like the founders of a new budget policy and approach um really to establish like a better process in especially how we govern.

Um, one of my recommendations I would just say in terms of I don't think it would be worthwhile for amendment, but uh maybe as a as an additional resolution with this is that we built in some internal evaluations of this ordinance so we're being able to see what our best outcomes that come out of this.

Um, and also just um you know, I just want to echo like how important it is to have a transparent reporting system.

I mean, that that is just critical to our role as council members um who have been elected to provide oversight.

And I just want to also highlight the thoughtfulness that went into making sure we have a timeline um to be able to test, right?

To test it before it is ready for for launching.

So um, and I also do share some of uh council member Johnson's questions, particularly on the timeline.

I do think it is really really important that we are in alignment with the administration's proposal timeline, just so we can be able to utilize this ordinance effectively.

So also just thank you.

Kudos to everybody and their work.

Thank you, Ms.

Bowie.

I concur, and knowing this council, I think that we will be taking a critical eye as to how it's working and um and be looking for ways to improve it, regardless of writing that into the ordinance to your point.

Um okay, if there's no further questions for Mr.

Greenfield, we'll have this back next week for uh public hearing.

The the third.

Uh not the week of Thanksgiving, December 3rd for public hearing.

The ordinance is uh laid over to December 3rd for second reading public hearing.

Item number 26 is second reading public hearing of ordinance 25-72, amending chapters 60, 61, 68, and 72 of the legislative code pertaining to the Mississippi River Corridor critical area and the floodplain management overlay districts.

This brings us to the public hearing section of our agenda.

Uh so if you are here for a public hearing item, including this first one, uh, what we'll have you do when your item is read and just momentarily for this one is to come on up to line up.

Both sides are equally good sides to stand on, so you don't all have to be on this one.

Um when it's your turn to speak, come up and stand right between the two microphones.

You don't have to adjust them, they will pick your voice up just fine.

Um, and you'll have two minutes to testify.

Please start by saying your name and where you're coming from, and uh then you'll have two minutes.

My unenviable job is to keep everyone to the same two minutes.

There will be a timer right in front of you.

Um, and it's it is not a lot of time.

So just know that there are other ways to send us testimony.

If you run out of time, we can accept your written comments here.

You can also email us um as well.

Uh so with that, this is a public hearing on item 26.

Um, anyone who's here to testify, please come on up.

Oh, and when you're done testifying, please sign in on the sign-in sheets on either side.

Welcome up.

Hello, my name is John Fury, and my address is 1752 Nebraska Avenue East, and I work for the Capitol River Council, which is the district council for District 17, which includes downtown and the capital area.

Um, the overwhelming majority of people who are engaged in our work have been supportive of the vision and tentative plans for the river's edge development.

Um, a lot of downtown residents have a sense of loss because of the closing of Lunds by Earlys and other businesses that have either closed or that seem to be struggling.

We understand that more residents and workers are needed in order for our grocery store and other downtown businesses to be more viable.

We share the concerns that others have expressed that the height limits and regulatory process of getting a conditional use permit would cause the development process to be delayed.

So the Capitol River Council Board of Directors recommends amending the proposed um MRCCA ordinance to make downtown exempt from the building height limits.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide input.

Thank you very much, and make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

We'll go alternate sides, so yeah, come on up.

That's that's the advantage to standing on the right, everybody.

Good afternoon.

Oh, good afternoon.

Uh, my name is Claudia Klinkhammer.

I am a redevelopment manager uh in the community and economic development department at Ramsey County.

I am here today to express the county's concerns with the language with the proposed Merca ordinance that applies to heights in the urban core.

This particular language creates new restrictions that are difficult to administer and interpret and overly burdensome process for downtown development projects.

This wording works against our shared vision of decades of work and recently outlined in the downtown investment strategy of a more vibrant, a more inclusive, and more economically resilient downtown.

River's Edge is a bold project supported by the county and the city.

This project represents an unparalleled opportunity to fulfill many important shared objectives.

Removing barriers to accessing the Mississippi River, creating new public spaces that center the beauty of the Mississippi River, cultivating new opportunities for housing and entertainment, and creating an important new tax base for the city and county.

Downtown St.

Paul serves as a unique and critical geography in supporting the city and county's fiscal health.

Projects like River's Edge and numerous others in downtown are key to building tax space and helping relieve property tax pressures.

River's Edge alone is projected to bring in 10 to 15 million dollars in property tax for city, county, and the school district.

Unfortunately, this restrictive language severely hampers our ability to deliver on these objectives.

The DNR defined the management of the urban core, be done with the greatest flexibility to protect commercial, industrial, and other high-intensity urban uses.

An ordinance that allows the underlying zoning to determine height maximums while prioritizing tiering away from the river accomplishes that.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Hello, my name is Jacob Hooper.

I'm here representing uh Sustained St.

Paul right now.

Uh first of all, I wanted to thank the city staff for all the hard work they put into this.

It's important that we update and maintain compliance with the DNR and uh sustain is grateful for all the work put into this so far.

In fact, um we really appreciated the staff's original recommendations for this update.

They maintained uh DNR compliance while finding the right balance of protecting our river while also allowing for necessary development downtown.

Unfortunately, it does look like the current version being submitted by the planning commission moves away from that balance, and specifically I'm concerned about the setback height limits in the urban core and urban mixed areas.

Um it's well known that it's known that St.

Paul's long, beautiful riverfront is really underutilized asset.

Other cities like Seattle have created these really gorgeous urban um waterfronts with pedestrian walkways and shops and housing and community assets and parks and um things that really elevate, not detract from the river.

Um, and they become big draws for both residents and tourists alike, and we don't really have that.

Meanwhile, our city um, as was just mentioned, is continuing to struggle with property tax burden.

If you like me do not live in downtown, but live in north side or east side or frogtown or wherever.

You should know that part of the reason your taxes are jumping is because of our struggling downtown and our ability to inability to secure investment there.

I'm concerned that these setback height limits are not only restrictive, but maybe even more importantly, hard to calculate and confusing.

The river curves and changes and rises, and um you need accurate and legally defensible measurements, and this is not only gonna impact developments in the pipeline like River's Edge, but also like the West Side Flats and proponents say you can get a cup, but I don't think this city council wants to spend all the time looking at conditional use permits and um banks don't really trust those either.

So this is gonna negatively impact development in St.

Paul's downtown.

Um I hope we don't set back downtown with setbacks.

Uh please amend this to be more in line with city staff's original recommendations.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Oh, I thought you were talking to me.

Yes.

You're also welcome to take your two minutes, but I get it.

All right, thank you.

Welcome up.

Good afternoon, Council President Acre and members of the council.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.

My name is John Perlich, and I'm the Vice President of Government Affairs at the St.

Paul Area Chamber, representing more than 1,600 employers, nonprofits, and civic partners committed to the future of this city.

I'll start with our enthusiasm.

Downtown St.

Paul is at an inflection point that increasingly looks like possibility.

We're starting to see real momentum, new vision, new partners, new capital, new development opportunities, and a chance to reshape the heart of the city.

We cannot afford to slow that momentum down.

That is why the chamber is urging you to exempt the urban core from proposed height restrictions and conditional use permit language in the Merkel ordinance.

Height limits in the urban core, the urban core being an appropriate, logical, and sustainable location for increased density and heights, would directly undermine the city's own stated priorities of 20,000 new downtown residents, a stronger and more resilient tax base, and housing variety that attracts workers, families, and employers.

There is also a matter of regular regulatory uncertainty and competitiveness.

The Merkel ordinance, as drafted, creates additional barriers and risk for projects.

At the exact moment, developers, lenders, and investors are deciding whether St.

Paul is a yes city or a maybe city.

We need to be a yes city.

And St.

Paul doesn't need to reinvent the wheel.

Twenty-five other river communities, including major regional peers, have adopt adopted Merkel ordinances that closely align with the DNR's model language, showing we can protect the river through consistent land use planning while supporting growth and revitalization.

Our urban core deserves that same balance.

So I'll close with this.

Momentum is fragile.

Policy shapes perception.

Let's send a clear signal.

St.

Paul wants to drive growth, welcome investment, and is open to a stronger future.

Please exempt the urban core from height restrictions and remove CUP language.

Thank you for your time today.

Thank you.

That was perfectly timed.

Make sure you sign in.

Welcome up.

Greetings to the council.

My name is Braden Holmes, a cabinet maker, Ward II resident, and member of Sustained St.

Paul.

I would like to ask the council to amend the proposed changes to the MRCCA in order that they would more closely reflect the city staff's original recommendations, particularly as regards the height limits in the urban core.

I'm concerned that the limits put forward by the Planning Commission are unnecessarily baroque and would require a conditional use permit for most new developments.

If St.

Paul is interested in reviving downtown and growing its tax base, then proposed barriers like these should be heavily scrutinized and weighed against their future costs.

The Mississippi does need protection, but part of that protection is keeping cities dense and concentrating development away from the suburbs.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Thank you, Council President and then Council members.

My name is Daniel Kennedy.

I'm at 2259 Summit.

I I don't want to talk about downtown, although there may be reasons why downtown and a built environment is a different and desired uh view from the natural look that is aspired for other parts of the river.

I want to talk about section 68.234 specifically.

That's about building heights and uh additional height being allowed in some sections, and I have two issues to raise.

One, a CUP that's being re required in this section, there are certain standards that are laid forth for that that they have to meet.

Uh it should be clear in the ordinance that people who already have a CUP that was fashioned decades ago, under different sensibilities about environmental protection and bird pathways and shadowing and the effect of height on the visual environment.

Uh that a CUP that meets the current standards be applied for and obtained.

Um otherwise, people would use an old CUP to say, oh, well, I can just build what I want, even though the new ordinance says specifically that you have to meet those standards.

The other issue is that it really should be a variance and not a conditional use permit uh for a couple of different reasons.

First, by its nature, a conditional use permit takes a permitted use and puts conditions on it.

It doesn't expand what you can do, it limits what you can do.

Whereas a variance takes what is permitted and allows you to do something extra that you're not allowed to do.

And this exceeding the building height requirement would allow them to do something extra.

So it should be described as a variance that is obtained instead of a conditional use permit.

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Hi, I'm Wendy Noor.

I'm a long-time city of St.

Paul resident for a decade employee of St.

Paul and a brand new grandma of an East Cider.

I'm here for him.

This is the great majestic Mississippi River Corridor.

It's not owned by the City of St.

Paul.

This is a wholly sacred Native American area that stretches nationally.

This ordinance had started in 2015 being drafted.

It had been stalled.

It is very intentionally written by some of the best people at PED.

Now it was tweaked with certain things to be considered.

But it is not a haphazard.

It is very deliberate.

You, all of you sitting here now, have a place in history.

Will you go to protect the Great Mississippi River Corridor, or will you sell out the environment for overdevelopers, such as the corner of Highland Parkway, Mississippi River Road, took down a pristine church and wanted to build close to 50 feet tall luxury apartment building right on the Mississippi River corridor to have an infinity pool, a dog park, and a fire pit.

My grandson, your grandchildren, your children deserve better than that.

They should be able to walk, bike, or drive the Mississippi River Road corridor without overdeveloped apartment buildings like Trump Towers.

Thank you, elected officials.

Thank you very much.

And make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Good afternoon, everybody.

My name is Joe Byrle.

I live at 406 Wakuda in Lowertown.

My wife and I have lived there for seven years.

We retired there in 2020.

Planning to stay a long time.

I mean, we look forward to being a part of a multi-income, multi-age, multi-ethnic, multi-multi-community for a long time.

And I think we all know that St.

Paul needs more people to be that, and we need more housing to achieve that.

And so I'm here to speak on behalf of the amendment to enable more and more and more.

I don't think we're in a position where we're building Trump towers on the riverfront.

I am confident in you in the incoming mayor, county and state, to do whatever happens on that riverfront tastefully and well, and to get there faster.

I urge your support of the amendment.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Now on Torstenson, 1555 Branston Street.

Merca rules have maximum height standards that additionally require lower structure heights closer to the river and bluff lines.

Defined tiering slopes in the draft ordinance are not more restrictive than this.

They don't change base height standards set in Merkel rules and don't limit height.

Rather, they define slopes for areas close to the river and bluff lines under which almost all likely development would automatically be approved for conformance with Merka tearing requirements.

Without defined tearing slopes, a subjective decision on conformance with a vague tearing requirement would always be needed, creating unnecessary difficulty for staff.

Clear language creates predictability in the development process, deter deters legal challenges, simplifies administration, and saves time for everyone.

For these reasons, a model Merkel ordinance provided by the DNR suggests replacing the vague tiering language with specific permitted height standards based on distance from the river.

It's important that there would be a cup process for planning commission review when a subjective decision is needed for tall structures above the defined tiering slopes.

The cup process is our standard often used best way to permit additional height where subjective review is needed.

The CUP process is not onerous, especially for the few large projects to which the Merca cup language would apply.

We commonly require cups for much smaller projects.

The tiering requirement and the rules can't be eliminated by city ordinance.

The question is whether to provide for automatic approval of almost all development for conformance with the tiering requirement and a cup process for the few remaining cases where a subjective decision would be necessary.

Thank you so much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Good afternoon, Council members.

I'm Colleen O'Connor Toberman, the land use and planning director at Friends of the Mississippi River.

Our full comment letters in your packet, along with a separate petition signed by 262 St.

Paul residents.

I want to commend the staff for making many improvements to this draft ordinance in response to feedback.

However, we're still disappointed that the staff removed the bird safe requirement that was in the 2023 draft.

We're concerned that the proposed separate bird safe study may never be completed, given the nearly five year delay in completing this ordinance.

There is a loss of trust.

The council could instead restore the bird safe glass language from the city's 2023 Merca draft.

The language is in FMR's letter and complies with State B3 sustainable building regulations.

I also want to speak to River's Edge, which FMR has supported since 2019.

We appreciate the county's commitment to bird safe glass at this site as well as the creative design that creates a new public park stretching down to the river.

We all share the same goal here.

The Merka ordinance that's proposed does not pose any conflict with this project.

It is the best way for the city to thread the needle on meeting the DNR requirements for tiered building heights, creating clear policy that allows almost all riverfront development by right without subjective review and offering a flexible pathway for unique projects like River's Edge.

Even if the numeric height limits in the ordinance were removed for the urban core area, River's Edge would not be able to comply with the ordinances requirement for tiered building heights, which again are required by the DNR.

River's Edge will be taller than the buildings behind it.

Given that, the ordinance needs to include a straightforward CUP path for exceptions.

River's Edge should have no difficulty meeting this criteria if it delivers on the promised public realm.

Eliminating the numeric height standards will not solve the river's edge tiering issue.

And to achieve that non-result for one project, the rest of downtown Merca district would suffer under a more vague policy that makes it harder for developers to predict what would be allowed and reduces the city's leverage to hold all future projects on the downtown riverfront to a high standard.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Hello, I'm Kiki Sanan, 1758 Hewitt Avenue.

I uh am speaking for the St.

Paul Bird Alliance.

A billion birds die each year in the United States from window strikes.

Most all collisions are fatal.

Even those birds who are stunned or appear stunned and come to and fly away.

They usually die soon after from concussion, brain bleed, and trauma.

Why do birds fly into windows?

They can't recognize glass the glass windows or highly glazed building walls as obstacles.

They see the reflections and fly right through them full speed and hit the window head on.

We invite you today to stand up together for bird safe measures in our community.

We're blessed to live in the area of the Mississippi River flyway where over 325 species migrate north in the spring and south in the fall.

Hosting these birds on their journey brings responsibilities to all of us.

We need to preserve critical habitat and uh up and down the river and for, and just like people, birds need clean water, clean air, green space, secure resting places, safe transportation routes, and bird safe buildings.

We're responsible to do what we can to make our building safe for birds.

Minnesota law now requires bird-safe glass in all new construction using state bond bonding funds.

Many cities across North America already have bird-safe building codes like Toronto, Madison, Wisconsin, Austin, Texas, New York City, Washington, D.C.

Many of our city problems do not have clear feasible solutions, providing meaningful benefits to the city and to people.

Bird collision problems have an easy solution.

Put bird safe features in our zoning and building codes.

On the back of this that we passed out here is the language to do that, just that.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

And at this point, I would invite anyone else who plans to testify on this item to line up just so we have a sense of who is remaining to testify.

Good evening, Tom Diamond, uh Highland Park.

What I'd like to speak to you about is what the city stands for and has stood for.

We just had uh uh veterans uh day here, and this building is Statue of Peace.

It has the uh uh soldiers who have uh died on behalf of uh uh having peace in this world uh in this building, and the park that uh uh is along the river that allows everybody to see the river had buildings there, was developed before, but the city decided that it would honor um Kellogg, who's a St.

Paulite, who is also the Secretary of State for the U.S.

who uh helped bring us uh United Nations that he worked in the League of Countries, and uh later be uh became the United I'm losing my uh track there, but uh uh anyways.

This is a significant event in our uh history and very important in all of our lives today.

Oh, what is that?

The plan for the park goes from uh uh just uh west of Roberts or east of Robert Street to Seven Corners as the plan and keep it open.

Um to give you I'll speak to two specific parts of this right across the street here.

This was part of the park, uh as modest as it was.

There's grass and stuff right across the street here from us, and the uh county came along and said we'd like to build a uh uh jail there, and said, Okay, well, we'll we'll when we said no wait a minute, no, that's parkland.

And that is time, so I'm gonna have to ask you to say one more sentence and then close.

You'll we'll put a patio there, and now they want to take it over entirely for their development.

This is also true on uh where the Civic Center ramp is.

The reason why that doesn't go above there is to protect the views of uh uh the the river.

Thank you very much.

I need you to stop there.

Thanks so much.

And you can always submit testimony in writing if you'd like to further thank you.

Welcome up, make sure to sign in.

Hello, City Council members, thank you deeply for your service.

I'm here to support the positions of the St.

Paul Bird Alliance and the um Friends of the Mississippi in terms of restoring the January 23 2023 language to the ordinance.

Um secondly is your name and where you're coming from, Storm.

For heaven's sakes, I didn't, I wasn't at all presumptuous, believe me.

Um Jane Prince, and I live in Ward 7 near Mounds Park.

Um, so first of all, I'd like to restore that amendment from 2023.

Secondly, I have talked to some of you about PED's advice that a study be done.

And it was my and I did talk to uh council president uh Naker yesterday about it, and we both said, well, a year is just simply too long.

But what I've learned in the interim is that a year is probably not long enough for the simple reason that you don't get accurate bird counts.

They have to be seasonal.

So if you only do a six-month study, something that excludes seasons and migrations won't provide accurate statistics.

So be aware.

The other thing about it, I can't imagine who's gonna do the study.

You want somebody who's gonna have the birds in mind, you're gonna want somebody that has development in mind, it's gonna be very expensive.

There's a lot of stuff out there.

Thirdly, and this is I I hope you don't think that this is a little too poignant.

But um, I was out at the vigil this morning at in um council member Coleman's ward after you were on site yesterday when terrible things were happening at Rothis LLC.

So I was out there this morning, and there were about 200 people that had come to support each other, and we were in front of a mural, and the title of the mural is a child being carried by a parent and looking off at the sky.

The title of it is if only I were a bird.

And the artist Pablo Kalaca, who was hired by the Creative Enterprise Zone, said his work is about migration and borders.

And bird safe glass is not a huge sacrifice for people who want to develop here.

Thank you.

Thank you, colleague.

Make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Hello, my name is Adele Benning.

I live at 812 Cherokee Avenue, right across the high bridge, kind of.

I'm here in case I go too long.

Let me say the message is we have an opportunity to do this right and not have to redo it.

And 2023's wording was the right way to word this ordinance, I believe.

Here are two quick case studies, McCormick Place in Chicago.

If you've been to Chicago, you may be familiar with that building in their downtown.

On October 5th, 2023, uh 1,000 birds were killed by McCormick Place's windows.

The following year, after they retrofitted it at a big cost for retrofitting, 48 birds the whole year were killed by those windows at McCormick Place.

It clearly made a difference.

And this is from the Cornell University's Macaulay Library and uh uh lab of ornithology.

This is good data, and I could provide it to you.

Second case study.

My daughter is in was studying to be a landscape architect.

She got the opportunity to work in Switzerland, where cities have been around a long, long time, longer than here.

And I said, What are you working on?

And she said, Well, I'm working in Bern, which is about the same size, it's a bit larger than St.

Paul.

I'm working on their green spaces.

They have a river that runs through it just like St.

Paul does.

And this is what she's saying.

It had just like St.

Paul.

It's this beautiful river, but the thing is that when they developed it hundreds of years ago and every year since they realized that they have developed the nature out of it, and the people want the nature back in it.

So they're redoing the whole city of Barnes Green Spaces to get to where we are right now.

We can do it the right way, or we can come in another hundred or two hundred years and redo it completely.

My botany professor always said there's never enough time to do it right the first time, but there's always enough time to do it again.

So I leave you with that.

Let's do it right the first time.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in.

And I think you're our last speaker, so welcome up.

Best for last.

I'm sure not.

I'm Kathy Glover from St.

Paul.

I live on Selby Avenue.

And I just want to say you guys do a really good job of listening, and that's hard work.

You're all breaking a sweat working to take in this testimony.

So thank you for that.

I want to support the work that the St.

Paul Bird Alliance has done.

And I also support going back to the language in January that was that offered more protections for our avian neighbors.

Um it's hard to really put into words.

I think, and people who work in the environmental field for a long time have tried to come up for with reasons why.

Why should we protect other animals with whom we share this world?

And some say, well, you know, they eat the insects.

That's a that's a plus for us.

And some feel joy when they see them.

And some feel kinship and some feel wonder at the fact that these birds are the ancestors, the descendants of dinosaurs.

Um but I don't think any of those are really working, because we still have to keep asking each other if other living things are important.

So maybe the point is that we do it because we can, and that we're moral beings, at least we strive to be, and that there's something important about acting like that.

Um we might not think we need birds, but they most assuredly need us.

Um I came here in the spring, and I offered a rent to I share with you that the white-throated sparrows are going along the river heading up north.

Well, now they've I I'm now back, having migrated back downtown here.

And so I'm gonna need you to I'm gonna finish up with my with what the right white-throated sparrow would say.

Okay, ready.

Thanks for listening, thank you so much.

That was amazing.

Make sure to sign in.

All right, uh, that brings us to the end of our public hearing on this item.

Uh at least for today.

Um, I am going to well, first of all, I want to thank everyone uh for your testimony.

This is obviously a complicated issue with a lot of lenses with which to look at it.

And while I said earlier that all ordinances have three readings, I also said sometimes they have more because we want to take in what we've heard, we want to think about whether or not we want to propose amendments and we want to come back, and if we have substantive amendments, um then there will be another public hearing.

Um so I will just preview coming attractions and say that I'm going to move to uh keep this public hearing open and lay this item over till December 3rd for either final adoption or for the opportunity for folks to introduce amendments, depending on what they've heard today and what they're interested in doing.

Um I'll also open it up if sometimes it's a bit anticlimactic because people come for the public hearing and don't necessarily come for the next vote, although I of course encourage you to.

But to my colleagues, if anyone has any comments or any reactions to share while folks are here, I also uh welcome that as discussion on the motion.

Ms.

Yang.

Thanks, Council President.

Well, I really appreciate everybody who uh came and testified today.

I really sounds like everybody came from uh came for something you are really passionate about for me personally.

I am I I really empathize with all of the people who came and advocated in support of restoring the bird safe class, uh bird safe glass language.

I am um I'm wondering if we have a staff member who can answer some more questions about the study that's being proposed.

Is anybody here?

Johnson is okay.

Thank you.

Come on up.

Yeah, I'm I'm just curious, like what um what is the reason why the study is being proposed, and and um what are you all hoping to get out of it?

Uh so regarding bird safe glass.

The study.

Yep, sure.

Uh thank you the voice activated projector.

Yep.

Just give it a moment.

It's there.

Uh well, anyway, so there's uh a lot of questions that uh came up with when uh we had bird safe glass in the 2023 ordinance.

Um and so these are questions that we're trying to answer with another study.

Um so what are the cost implications of mandating bird safe glass?

Uh what geographic areas would benefit most?

Uh is zoning the most appropriate regulatory tool.

Uh how would these requirements interact with historic district guidelines?

Uh could other alternatives or standards complement bird safe glass?

Uh, and then very importantly, uh, is the draft provision legal in its current form.

Okay, thank you.

And do you have an idea of who like I'm maybe you know, well, obviously there isn't an RFP that has gone out for it yet, but who would be leading the study for this?

Well, PED staff will do the study in-house.

Uh it's been assigned to my colleague, Nelly Jarome.

Okay, and um the what I'm seeing here is that it's a one-year study.

Like some we did hear um uh testimony from former council member Jean Prince about how a one-year study wouldn't be enough time.

So do you have uh any response to that?

Sure.

I mean, we can try to go faster, but the big issue with the timelines is our notice requirements.

Uh so we have to notice public hearings, and that adds months on to any uh zoning provision.

Um so that's something that we can't change.

It's just built into the law.

We have to notice public hearings and then uh wait some time.

And in our city right now, we do we not uh do we currently not have any language around the bird safe um windows.

We do not.

Um there's bird safe glass requirements as a part of uh the B3 code, which is a state code.

So if uh development projects take state bonding money, they'll need to do bird safe glass, but there's nothing at the local level.

Um I'll also add that none of the other communities that uh were required to do Merca added bird safe glass provisions as a part of their Merka ordinances.

Uh the only other city um in the state that has bird safe glass provisions is Minneapolis.

Uh but they just apply it to their skyways and not uh development as a whole.

Okay, thank you.

Yeah, I I just want to be really frank and sharing that when I did um hear about the one year study to me, it just seemed like it it was gonna be too long of a time frame.

Um I as um I was listening to the testimonies earlier.

I just I had like this recollection that I actually have seen a bird crash into a window before.

I was having lunch with my my um family, and we were at a Panera, and all of a sudden there was this loud thump.

And it's not only to me like I'm pretty sure it was very traumatizing for the bird.

Um and I don't know if they made it, but also it was really terrifying for for me and all the people who were at the restaurant too.

And I think there's like this moment of okay, like you process what happened, and then afterwards it's uh you even think about what do you do in the aftermath of that too.

And I actually didn't have the answer at the time.

Um I reached out to to Jenna, who is an expert um and in animal care.

Um and it was really helpful, you know, to know like what the next steps were.

So I I think that you know, for me, like I mean, just thinking about that.

Um, I it just it was growing to me like how important it is for us to be moving in a direction where we do adopt this type of language, and I will definitely be thinking some more about this.

Thanks, Ms.

Yang.

And actually, Mr.

Johnson, while you're while you're up here, one question and one comment.

Would the study uh apply beyond you mentioned Minneapolis has bird safe glass requirements in its skyways, which obviously don't only exist within the Merca area.

Um would this study look at bird safe glass beyond Merca?

Yeah, potentially.

Um so if we do it outside of Merca, then we have the ability to create whatever boundaries or geographic restrictions we think make sense.

Whereas adopting the amendment within Merca, it applies in Marca.

Just the Merca, yep.

So most of downtown where there's a lot of glass wouldn't have this requirement.

Um other areas where bird safe last might might make sense, wouldn't have this requirement.

So it ties us to the Merca geographies.

Okay.

Thank you.

And the comment I wanted to make, and then I see Ms.

Johnson, um, I think what we all heard here today is distrust being expressed about a study.

And I think we really need to think about what that means, because normally when we initiate a study, that's showing that's progress toward something, right?

We initiate a study of our of our T zoning districts, and that means we're gonna change our T zoning districts.

And in this case, we're initiating a study, um, and that's being met with distrust and concern.

Um and I think that that has to do with how this process has unfolded to this point, um, which I think we have to own, and it has taken far too long.

And I'm not Mr.

Johnson, this is not about you.

I'm I'm I'm owning this.

Um, and so I think we as we do the the study has been initiated by the planning commission already, so it is underway.

Um I think what we maybe need to think about is the appropriate time for that study, and also regardless of the endpoint, appropriate checkpoints along the way and and benchmarks, so that things don't just drop into a black box and the community is wondering what happened, and it takes far longer than it should, but that we're really being transparent and holding ourselves accountable for that because I think a study is a good thing.

I think getting more information about policies before we adopt them is a good thing.

But what I'm hearing is that that's that seems like it is a delay tactic or some sort of obfuscation, and that's concerning to me.

And I think we need to do everything we can to fight to fight that.

Um so I say that only while you're here, Mr.

Johnson, because I think Ms.

Johnson has a question for you that is again not directed at you.

Uh Ms.

Johnson.

Well, thank you, Mr.

Johnson.

Um, for being able to uh also be here to kind of provide some clarity.

I was reflecting too as well on the public hearing comments and um from all the entities, including the county.

And I was also wondering just if you could talk a little bit about the height, um, because something that came up multiple times is the differences around the height changes around the language that was proposed either at the commission, planning commission or just the language changes from 2023 as well.

But in particular around the height restrictions, this is something that has been flagged as well uh to to me and in our office from our county commissioner.

I just wanted to touch on that piece, and then also um hear kind of like the Russian of the language is presented.

Yeah, sure.

Um so the the current um zoning provision that you have before you uh in terms of the UC district would set uh a 35 foot height limit at the river's edge, and then you could increase it uh five or one foot for every five feet that you step back from the river.

Um so to get to a height that would match the bluff, which would be this line, you'd have to set it back this far, and to get to a height where it'd be a hundred feet, you'd have to get this far, uh, etc.

All the way back to the end of the district.

Um and so with the scale of the River's Edge project, essentially, if we were to do uh the uh provision as is before you, uh, they would likely need a conditional use permit to exceed the maximum heights.

Uh but under the state marker rules, we have the ability to just use the underlying zoning in downtown St.

Paul as the height limit.

Um, and so that's what folks at uh the county and others are advocating for in terms of a uh change.

And that sorry, his follow-up, just to clarify it's um the language that's embedded now is the conditional use permit language.

Or is it the language to mirror that of what so the way the language is now, and sorry I don't have it in front of me, but it's basically it would uh yeah, it would allow you to increase heights uh one foot for every five feet, you're from the river, but then if you wanted to go over that, you could get a conditional use permit.

I'm sorry I don't have it in front of me, but it's basically it would uh yeah, it would allow you to increase heights, uh one foot for every five feet, you're from the river.

But then if you wanted to go over that, you could get a conditional use permit.

Um, and that's how it is, kind of either way.

Uh, but in the text that they're advocating for, you wouldn't need a conditional use permit because it would uh default to the to the heights in downtown, the maximum height limit.

If that makes sense.

So then I guess we have a follow-up but separate conversation.

I just wanted to make sure I touch on that, the other piece around the bird save class.

Um, and to the piece of the study.

I think I actually kind of heard a little bit more of an interest for more the longer study.

So just kind of going off of the feedback too that we're receiving in that regard.

But I I am wondering the current projected timeline for that that has been commissioned is for a year.

Yeah, we think it'll take about a year.

Um, that's typically what it takes.

And again, a lot of that is just waiting because of notice requirement.

So in St.

Paul, we have two public hearings, so one at the planning commission, one at city council, and we have to legally notice those in a certain way.

Um, and so that adds months on to the any study timeline.

Um, but it takes us a couple months to do the research to be able to answer these questions and then provide you guys with the information.

And is that like so I guess in that regard?

Is it just to bring up so if the findings are gone?

Let's say they're done in the year, they're currently done internally.

The feedback that is provided is to with the intent of uh adjusting the like ordinance at a later date, or what it like I guess.

I'm just wondering what is the findings the purpose of the findings due and like what's sure.

Yeah, so there can be adjustments, there often is.

So this, for example, changed along the way.

So at the planning commission, we held a public hearing, we made changes, and then bringing it to you, and there may be changes.

So you know, things can adjust and change along the way with any study um at different public hearing times.

And I guess sorry, the last follow-up is just around.

Um guess what avenues are you gonna take and over the next year then for ensuring that what is happening internally is conveyed out externally to community and all when we do the we do have an external process or on a study RFP or something public.

There's multiple, there's a lot of pressures on on not only the vendor that's conducted with to ensure the community is brought alongside it.

Um, and in many ways that's you know, we have several studies that happen within the city.

This one being internal.

How does that how would like what milestones I guess are you setting up to ensure that that is the same?

Yeah, sure.

Um, I mean, we can try to do communication on the website, we can send stuff out, do the EMS.

Um, you know, we're happy to work with you guys on external communication as we uh go through the study.

Okay.

I'll I have I will follow up with separately, thank you.

Uh thank you so much.

Mr.

Gervais, you do you have other comments?

Or just taking a walk, that's also fine.

No, uh Anthony Jubi long range planning manager, so my team would be in charge of uh doing the study.

Just wanted to add a little more detail.

We're refining the scope right now since we just initiated.

Um, but we'd happy to be share that with uh uh city council to get your comment on it, including uh outreach process.

I would also recommend just we have a lot of folks in the room who have a lot of knowledge and expertise on this topic.

Um and no PED staff are generalists and often rely on partners, so it sounds like there's a lot of a lot of resources to draw on and would encourage you to do that, especially to the extent that it um either makes the study more efficient or more effective.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, any other comments for now, knowing that we will be coming back to this topic.

Not seeing any.

All right, so with that, the motion is to uh continue the public hearing, lay the matter over till December third.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The public hearing is continued to December 3rd for final adoption.

Item number 27 is ordinance 25-77, amending section 220.05 of the legislative code to set rates for base level garbage service to be effective January 1st, 2026.

This is a public hearing.

Is there anyone here to speak on this item?

Seeing none I'll take a motion from Ms.

Coleman to close the public hearing and approve.

All in favor, is that a basic approval today?

This one is uh this one no I'm so sorry to close the public hearing and lay the matter over till December 3rd.

Thank you, Ms.

Yang.

All in favor say aye.

All opposed?

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The public hearing is closed, and the ordinance is laid over to December 3rd for final adoption.

Item number 28 is resolution public hearing 25-232, amending the city's capital improvement budget and operating budget to correct a bond proceed transfer for fighters cardiac monitors.

This is a public hearing.

Is there anyone here to speak on this item?

Seeing none I'll take a motion from Ms.

Jose to close the public hearing and approve.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed?

Seven in favor, non-opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item number 29 is resolution public hearing 25-5-250, amending the financing and spending plan in the Department of Parks and Recreation in the amount of 195,000.

500 195,597.33 cents to utilize parkland dedication funds for the Taylor Park Improvements Project.

This is a public hearing.

Is there anyone here to speak on this item?

See none.

I'll take a motion from Ms.

Johnson to close the public hearing and approve.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed?

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item number 30 is resolution public hearing 25-251.

Amending budgets for the energy projects financed through the $5 million Green Energy Program.

This is a public hearing.

Is there anyone here to speak on this item?

Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Vice President Kim to close the public hearing and approve.

All in favor say aye.

All opposed.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item number 31 is resolution public hearing 25-256 authorizing the city through its fire department to amend a joint powers agreement with the state of Minnesota through its state fire marshal division to provide a hazardous materials response team and to amend the 2025 financing and spending plans for the fire department in the amount of 360,000 dollars.

The suspense was killing us.

This is a public hearing.

Is there anyone here to speak on this item?

Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Ms.

Jost to close the public hearing and approve.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed?

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

I will take a motion from Ms.

Yang to suspend the rules.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The rules are suspended.

SR 25-260 is the Port Authority's 2026 budget presentation.

We are uh sorry that we were not able to include the Port Authority in our normal budget calendar, but I'm really glad that we were able to work together between our budget chair and vice chair and myself to make sure we would have some time to hear from a very important partner.

That does not mean that the other partners that we are not hearing from are not important.

Welcome, Mr.

Hurley, and we look forward to hearing your 10 minute presentation.

I've heard 10 minutes several times today from others.

Um I say 10 minutes.

I've got a PowerPoint uh that we're getting ready to um put on the screen, but in the meantime, I would like just to take the opportunity to thank Council President Naker and members of the City Council for welcoming us to the uh city council meeting today.

Again, I am Todd Hurley.

I'm the president and CEO of the St.

Paul Port Authority.

I brought with me today uh the some finance members, finance team members from the Port Authority.

I've got our CFO Mike Solomon, our senior vice president of finance Holly Houston, and our chief development officer uh Christine Williams here today.

Uh in case there are questions that I can't uh answer.

Um I'll start while we're trying to get the PowerPoint up.

But uh by introduction, the St.

Paul Port Authority is proud to be an economic development partner uh in the city of St.

Paul and in the state of Minnesota.

We work in three primary areas.

One, we redevelop underused land uh in the city of St.

Paul for the purpose of creating jobs and tax base.

Uh secondly, uh we work throughout the state of Minnesota and in the city of St.

Paul with to um provide financing tools for energy efficiency projects uh throughout the state, and third, we manage the St.

Paul Harbor.

We will eventually figure out our password.

Don't worry.

Our passphrase.

We now have very long passwords.

The second slide is talking about is really talking about our connection to the city of St.

Paul.

Um I know the council is aware of our connection.

Uh we are a partner with the city of St.

Paul.

We are an economic development um partner uh formed by state law in 1929.

Uh we uh I report to a board over at the St.

Paul Port Authority.

That board is uh selected by the mayor but approved by the city council.

Uh and of that there are seven members of that board.

Two of those members are city council members.

Uh currently our council, our board members are Council President Naker and Council Member Johnson.

However, in December, we will switch back to Council President Naker and Councilmember Yang.

So again, um they've heard me talk about the Port Authority several times in our our monthly but uh board meetings.

Um so the the uh first slide that I have in front of you today is just really showing you the the the makeup of the Port Authority team.

Uh so the St.

Paul Port Authority, we are we are a small team.

We have 20 uh employees at the St.

Paul Port Authority.

You can see the lines of business on this slide.

In finance and operations, we have 8.5 FTEs in the development office.

We have six FTEs.

Our general council makes up two and a half FTEs, and our vice our communications and external affairs is a total of three FTEs.

And again, purpose of that is just to uh let the city council know again about the lean makeup of the St.

Paul Port Authority as a results as it relates to the work that uh we do in the City of St.

Paul.

I mentioned uh earlier that we are the St.

Paul Harbor Manager, and up on the screen I have a map of the barge terminals that the St.

Paul Port Authority manages.

Uh you can see by the map we have uh four terminals on the Mississippi River, and really uh by the numbers, uh these these terminals uh manage five to eight million tons of commodities annually running to and from the city of St.

Paul uh from throughout the state of Minnesota uh to the rest of the world.

Again, we are an economic engine not just in St.

Paul but through in Minnesota and throughout the rest of the world.

Uh we manage over 500 acres down on the river with 21 tenants providing over 700 jobs in St.

Paul and 2.3 million dollars in annual uh tax revenues.

Just uh a couple of uh projects that are going on down on the river, and again, so on Barge Terminal One, and some of you may have saw that if you joined us on the Harbor Tour, uh we have two projects going on currently down on uh Barge Terminal One.

The first one is a barge receiving system, and that is an $8 million project.

The second one is a materials uh storage and transfer system over at uh Barge Terminal One, and that is a 10 million dollar project.

Something important to know about these projects also is that these are not uh City of St.

Paul dollars that are used to fund these projects.

These are in partnership with the state, with the federal government, and also with our private tenants on the river.

Again, providing jobs and tax pays on the river.

Uh on Barge Terminal 2, we have a major project going on uh right right across the river here, and that is the dock hall rehabilitation and the first responders boat ramp.

Um big project for us at in St.

Paul.

Uh in order to get on the river for any type of an emergency, you had to go down at uh West the Marina uh down the river, and here now we'll have one right here in downtown St.

Paul.

Again, that's a 17 million dollar project funded by our partners uh and not the city of St.

Paul and not the St.

Paul Port Authority.

And finally, another project we have going on that we're overseeing and managing is this on the Southport terminal, and that is the grade separation study.

Uh there are some traffic situations that we are trying to work through.

We were received a $800,000 grant from the federal government in order to study this to find solutions to the uh train and uh road crossings down on Southport.

And uh there's a lot of work ahead of us there, uh including the community engagement that we are now beginning.

Um we talk about uh the being the uh developer of underutilized land in St.

Paul.

This map in front of this uh in front of the city council talks about the ports business centers.

Right now we are uh at 24 business centers in the city of St.

Paul and counting, I'll say.

Uh when you look at the numbers uh on these, these are over a thousand acres of redeveloped land in the city of St.

Paul.

Over 500 businesses uh in St.

Paul live in these uh business centers.

Over 22,000 jobs and 38 million dollars in property taxes are generated uh from these business centers.

Um the the slide I have in for you for the for the expediency of time.

Every one of these projects, our current projects that we are working on at the at the at the St.

Paul Port Authority.

Each one of these is a separate uh presentation talking about these projects, but at a very high level.

Things that are we are currently working on.

Uh we are working on a project at the St.

Joe's Fairview site here in downtown St.

Paul.

Uh I've got more work to do uh with the St.

Paul Port Authority Board and actions that will uh probably happen in December, and we'll be back to the city council to discuss that more.

Uh the Kmart project, a big project that is years and years in the making.

Uh my former role as the CFO of the uh city of St.

Paul eight years ago.

This was a project we had been talking about, and I'm happy to say it's here now.

And we are right now working on Kmart.

Uh we talk about the MinPAES program, that is our energy efficiency program.

Uh, we have several hundred loans out in the state of Minnesota creating energy efficiency projects in St.

Paul and throughout the state of Minnesota.

Uh I'd be remiss to not mention the heights.

The heights is our biggest redevelopment in the city of St.

Paul, 112 acres on the east side.

Uh, we are well under underway in that project uh with the goal of delivering a thousand jobs and a thousand housing units to the city of St.

Paul on the east side.

Uh another project, uh, the sandbox.

You may be familiar with the sandbox.

This is a piece of Port Authority land just north of the Capitol.

We were fortunate to be in a fortunate opportunity ready situation to partner with the local 49ers uh labor union and the City of St.

Paul School District to create a sandbot sandbox project where high school kids in the city of St.

Paul will learn through their curriculum in their high schools to be heavy equipment operators and create a great job, great future for uh for them and their families.

Another project we're working on now, uh recently awarded a million dollars through the state of Minnesota uh in the uh legislation last year, which is called the Core Grant Program.

This is a million dollar program in which we are going to make small business grants uh to uh businesses within the Capitol Region area.

Uh this is something we'll be presenting uh next Tuesday to our board uh and rolling it out in January of next year.

Um one other project on here is the Treasure Island Center in downtown St.

Paul.

Again, the St.

Paul Port Authority is the majority owner.

Um, and we are also the um uh managing partner of that joint venture for Treasury Island and St.

Paul.

Uh one final slide that I'll talk about uh before I get to our budget is again our really in asking how many do the city council and asking for additional funds in our operating uh levy is for us to continue to be oper uh opportunity ready in St.

Paul.

Uh we we know there are needs in St.

Paul, we know there are needs on Rice Street, we know there are needs downtown, we know there are needs on the east side, and we know there are needs on the midway.

Uh and I'd like to make sure that the St.

Paul Port Authority is ready to assist the city when if and when we can, and that comes with uh a small increase on our operating levy.

Our budget.

Uh so our proposed budget, and again, this has not been in front of the St.

Paul Port Authority Board yet.

This will be here uh next Tuesday, but at a very high level, our operating budget is $7.5 million.

Our revenue sources in there are really just two sources of money.

I have property taxes, and we have income that we make as in operating the port authority, and that's around our development fees, our fiscal uh and administrative fees, interest on loans we make, interest on investments we make, uh, and any land rentals that we can get.

Our expenses are largely personnel.

Uh, they're people uh and there are professional services in addition to some money that we use in the in the on the development team as we uh go out to try and work with property owners to acquire property to do studies uh and things like that.

Um really this slide is just meant to show that um out of a seven and a half million dollars, only three 30 percent of that is provided through uh the property tax levy in the city of St.

Paul, um, a little bit of all the property tax levies in our in the port authority.

This slide uh talks about three levies we have.

We have a general obligation levy, and that is for debt service that the St.

Paul Port Authority has issued.

That is for projects like Beacon Bluff, Hillcrest, the EAB project that we partnered with the city on a few years ago, and Kmart, uh, and looking again uh to hopefully at some point reestablish that so we can continue to be opportunity ready.

The mandatory levy is really here what I'm here to asking for uh assistance today.

Uh we are looking for a two and a half million or two hundred and fifty thousand dollar increase in our mandatory levy.

This is the levy that helps support our operations, uh, and then a hundred and five thousand dollar uh discretionary levy.

One thing I would mention about the mandatory levy, the mandatory levy, uh, is authorized through state law, and we have the opportunity to go up to 0.01813% of that, uh, which would be our capacity, which is similar to how the HRA operates their levy.

Um, and in this slide I talk about the history of our mandatory levy.

Uh if we were uh going to that full capacity, you can see that we would be nearly seven million dollars in that operating levy.

Uh we right now are really at $3 million, uh, so there is a lot, there is capacity there.

We're not asking for that capacity, just a $250,000 uh increase.

Uh how do we pay for that?

So I wanted to add this slide and really just um talk about this.

I know that uh the city council is aware of decertifications of a TIFF district uh at the St.

Paul Port Authority.

Uh and just to put this uh kind of in summary, uh we had two two port authority TIFF districts that decertified.

The first one was Williams Hill, and I just put before and after pictures on here so you can see the success of Williams Hill, which was a tax increment district, decertified in 2023, uh, and then the Westminster TIFF district decertified, actually uh uh Port Authority, uh Port Authority resolutions uh passed to decertify this TIFF district last month.

So this district will be now decertified, the certified by the end of the year.

What this will do in addition to the unbelievable success of creating jobs and tax base in St.

Paul in these two districts, um, when everything is said and done and we return funds to the to Ramsey County here, uh both from Williams Hill and again, Williams Hill, because it was 2023.

Uh, we needed to keep some of the funds on hand for any pending petitions.

Those pending petitions have now been closed, uh, and then the Westminster money.

So we'll return that money, and of that money, uh, right now, uh, and we have communicated with council staff $932,000 will be will be available to the city of St.

Paul uh in 2026.

It was not a number we knew about uh during the mayor's proposed budget, so this is new information to the city council during the council process.

Uh and our request then is to utilize some of that money uh to help us with our operating levy, and then all also what's happening too is a return of tax base uh that is actually equal to generating 1.5 million dollars in property taxes.

Um again, another um good thing for the city of St.

Paul, and I'm what I'm hopeful is helped to support the city uh St.

Paul's port authority as we continue to try to work in partnership with the city to create job and tax base in St.

Paul.

Was that 10 minutes?

Pretty well done.

It was 12, but I'm very impressed.

Uh nice job, Mr.

Hurley.

Thank you so much.

Uh questions for Mr.

Hurley or comments.

I see Ms.

Yang.

Thanks, Councilor President.

Well, President Hurley, I want to say thank you for your time today.

I'm really glad that you were able to put you into the schedule.

So thank you to all the council members for your support and bringing the port under suspension.

I mean, I I just can't say enough about how um amazed I am at the work of the port.

You all are a small but truly mighty team, and I really love how you mentioned uh how you described um the port as being an economic engine because you all truly are that for the city.

I um shared this morning that I am supportive of the 250,000 dollar um increase to the port, and uh I know that you're proposing for that to come from the the uh excess and TIFF, and I um it would be remiss of me to not mention that you know you all are already bringing going to be bringing in um more dollars that expand our our tax base, and those are ongoing dollars.

And I know that it's an ongoing expense that you are proposing, but that the you all are in a unique position where you are expanding that tax base for us, and a lot of the things the other amendments on our table um that the is under consideration by the council members.

Some of those things you know um don't necessarily expand our tax base, but they are things that we want to make an investment in because we care um for the city and for the residents, and so I just wanted to really highlight that, and I really believe that an investment like this is really where our residents do want the council um to be putting our dollars.

So thank you for your work.

Thank you, Ms.

Yang.

Ms.

Johnson.

Yeah, I echo similar um thoughts as Council Brigang and the sense that uh one really excited and glad that we were able to get this put through.

Um, even if it's under a suspension item at a council meeting, it's great to be able to hear directly from the port.

I know I kind of we touched on this a little bit earlier, but just so folks are aware.

Can you just share the last how um how long has it been since there's been some sort of increase in the St.

Paul Port Authority's city allocation?

There's a uh council president acre, council member Johnson, the slide that I can bring back here shows the actual mandatory levy from the St.

Paul Port Authority dating back to 2008.

Uh so you can see from 2008 essentially through 2021, the levy for the St.

Paul Port Authority was either flat or decreased.

Uh, and then uh back in 2022, moving forward through tools like the certification of TIFF districts and working with the city council and the mayor, we have been able to get very minor increases around 100 or 125,000 trying to assist us with keeping up inflation and trying to help us keep up uh with the costs of our services that we um incur.

Uh so you can see that we we've had minor increases um, but the proposal in front of us today is really what I've been proposing is to help us with our inflationary costs and to add a project manager in the development team because we have been stagnant at the number of employees uh for longer than I've been at the St.

Paul Port Authority, which is now seven years.

So thank you, Mr.

Hurley.

And I think just that to that note, like in addition to building our tax base up, this revenue source coming to the city is coming to the city because of the work that the St.

Paul Port Authority and this is certification process, and there are other amendments throughout the city budget where we've done that the same, where maybe we've increased uh uh fee and as a result giving it back to the department that is bringing in that work, and this is kind of an example of like that, where I feel like it's a comparison to be made.

Um, but I do appreciate uh the chance to hear from you all and um in this body been able to see the presentations and hear from from them around their requests at the actual port meetings themselves, but it does raise an important uh piece to consider.

So just want you to know that we all um we're we clearly have uh at least in the members of the port have heard this and see the need for it and are strongly considerating it.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Any uh final comments or questions?

Otherwise, I know we will continue to discuss this during our budget process.

I echo my colleagues' thanks, and I especially appreciate the before and after slides showing the effect of uh judiciously applied tax increment financing.

Um, Mr.

Hurley.

Thank you.

With that, that brings us to our legislative hearing agenda.

Welcome up, Ms.

Mormond.

Legislative hearing consent agenda items 32 through 45 are before you for your consideration.

Welcome up, Ms.

Mormon.

I usually say it after you die.

We're still getting our act together.

Okay.

Council President Maker, Council members.

Uh I ask that you um pull item number 35 uh from the agenda to be read in.

Item number 35 is RLHRR 25-28, ordering the rehabilitation or raising and removal of the structures at 430 Dale Street North within 15 days after the October 22nd, 2025 City Council public hearing.

Ms.

Marmond.

Council President, uh, council members.

This uh is a building I have it up on screen right now.

Uh on Dale close to university.

It is uh kind of a parallel situation to a case you heard a couple of weeks ago, the CVS at 499 snelling.

So kind of different cross streets for university, but still in that corridor.

In May of 2023, there was a fire at the property.

The property was condemned, the certificate was revoked, and it entered the vacant building program two and a half years ago.

The uh insurance company uh has been reportedly very difficult to work with during this time period in order to release funds to repair the building.

However, in the past two and a half years, this building has become a deepening problem for the city and the community in proximity to it.

And as you know, um what I bring to you at council is always the statement that fire damage structures are worse than other kinds of structures and the impact that they have on their neighbors.

It is a particularly um deep cut to a neighborhood to see a structure continue on for this length of time in a charred condition.

It is the ultimate show of disinvestment in an area.

The conditions here include not only that the building is significantly fire damaged, but also that there are the new other nuisance conditions present.

The property maintenance has been poor to non-existent by the owners.

Uh there have been 18 work orders, including uh ones that went through during the legislative hearing process.

I had three legislative hearings in the last six weeks on this property.

With respect to maintenance otherwise, uh Camp for United Methodist does report that its crews go and clean the property when they go to clean their own property, and so the uh situation is more dire than um even what the city work orders would have portrayed.

So there's the nuisance conditions that the orders need to be written for, and I want to say that that includes things from boarding and graffiti and so on, but it also includes you know the fact that needles and human waste need to be cleaned up at this site, and that those behaviors which are reflected in a large number of police calls.

Uh, I believe there were in 24 after the or 23 after the fire, there were um about a dozen calls.

There were two dozen calls in 2024 and 35 calls so far this year uh for that structure and bringing police out.

Finally, um with those police calls with the need to undertake all that action, even with the neighbors working, it it continues to be uh blight, and I would say when there's that much work that needs to be done, it is evidence of abandonment by the property owner.

Indeed, when we started the hearing process, property taxes had not been paid for the previous year, they were paid during the hearing process.

Other things, I do not have a performance deposit on record.

There is no application for uh an inspection on this property.

Uh, there could have been or could still be uh plans developed by an architect to come in uh basically gut the space and completely build it out again, not do just the simple code corrections.

None of those things, however, have been forthcoming during the hearing process.

Coupled with the inability or unwillingness of the owners to take action over the two and a half years and the lack of participation in doing things that need to be done at this point.

I would say the prospect for managing the substantial nuisance the council's reviewing is not uh what I would hope that it would be.

That's present.

And I can stand for questions now or after testimony.

Thanks, Ms.

Mormon.

Are there any questions before we have the public hearing?

Ms.

Bowie.

Thank you, Council President Eager.

Um, thank you so much.

Ms.

Mormon, I do have questions, and I do want to say I do appreciate that they're all just kind of review, um, you know, understanding that like you know, we're reviewing this through the the ordinance, um, so it's very limited in its scope.

Um, I my question, particularly was um on the ordinance.

It says it's within 15 days after October 22nd.

We're well over that time frame.

Can you explain um some of the justification behind the extension?

The title of the resolution that's in front of you is the title that it had the first time it was in front of you.

The city clerk does not change the titles of resolutions once they have been published, and so it will continue to reflect that.

However, within the resolution, it indicates that it becomes effective on the day of its you know, um, adoption and signature from the mayor.

So that is the day from which the 15-day count comes.

So, in all likelihood for these, I would say it's 15 days from Friday.

Uh, and that would be counted out then with, you know, either day one is Friday or day one is Monday.

Thank you.

And my follow-up um question, um, if you can explain just kind of what are the options that the owners have, and particularly, you know, this is not a residential vacant program or vacant building program.

Um, it being uh uh I don't know if it's commercial considered commercial, but what are the options?

Um, particularly, I'm just asking if there is awareness around the options to well, we know for sure there is uh the the option and the requirement to rehabilitate, but is there an option to actually sell?

Um have that been conveyed to the owner.

Yes, um, the options always when these come forward to you would be the option for removal, and that would be done by the owner.

It could be that it's rehabilitated, or in either case, if it's removed or demolished, the parcel can transfer to another owner.

This is a commercial property, so there are no restrictions on it, as there would be if it were a residential property.

And can you just walk um counsel through in a situation that there is a transfer of owner?

Um, it would still the conditions and everything would still remain.

Um, would that uh give any, I guess, a possibility for extension or with the new owner, there's more I guess wiggle room or flexibility.

Um, I'm just curious.

The order the council would issue attaches to the property, not to the owner themselves.

Okay.

So the when you're doing an abatement, it is just the property, regardless of who owns it.

So the order would carry forward.

Okay, thank you, Miss Marcia.

Thanks, Ms.

Bowie.

I appreciate the questions, especially since we have folks who are listening, paying attention who don't know the mechanics of this, and um it's it's really helpful.

So thank you.

All right, so with that, we will open up the public hearing.

Um, we will give five minutes to the uh owner of the property, um, and then anyone else who's here to testify on the matter, we will give two minutes.

So we'll invite the property owners up first.

Um please remember to start with your name and where you're coming from, and then you'll have five minutes total.

And everyone who's representing the property should plan to be part of that five minutes.

So welcome.

Uh my name is Amano Dube.

Um president of the Islamic Center.

Um, thank you for uh this opportunity.

Um this Islamic center on 430 Dale Street was vandalized and burning down in the spring of 2023, which was a cause of hate and um terrorism.

We can say domestic terrorism.

Um that um the pursuit for the damage coverage uh from our insurance led us in entanglement with the insurance company that has been drugged all the way until now.

Um and the community has been always and in the future too, have no intention to sell that place, and the community has been in fact pushing us to renovate and upgrade and use it because it's of it has historical significance.

Uh but the insurance and our lawyers, because of the insurance litigation advised us, which was sent also to the city.

Um nothing to do with it until this litigation is settled because it will have significant impact on the outcome.

So we have been trying to wait for that settlement, after which our first uh step is to renovate and upgrade and make use of that place, which has been the demand from the community all the way.

So my ask as a president and on behalf of Tohid is to s to tackle this issue and give us a time until that litigation is finalized, which is I'm sure it's in the process, but I don't know exact time.

That is my ask from the community.

Thank you.

And anyone else from the property.

We have three minutes left if anyone else wants to testify.

Uh my name is Omar Robe, and uh I serve as uh board uh secretary of Tawhid Islamic Center, and I'm here today as uh both community member and someone who cares uh deeply about the neighbor neighborhood.

Even though we're currently operating from another location, this building remains incredibly uh important to our congregation.

It was our home, a place of prayer, youth activities and community gatherings.

After the attacks, we last uh more than a structure.

We last uh central space that kept our families connected.

I wanted to make this clear.

Uh we have a heavy intention of restoring this building.

We have never walked away from it.

However, after the incident, we were legally prohibited from making uh reapers due to the ongoing insurance litigation.

Our attorneys specifically instructed us uh not to touch the building until the case concludes.

This process has been long and frustrating, but it but it is not something we initiated or kind of speed up.

Our community has always taken pride in being good neighborhood.

We have supported and uh cared for this area for many years, but the attack and the legal restrictions that followed placed us in a very difficult position at times.

It has felt like a process overlooked the reality that we are the victims of the crime, trying our best within a strict legal limits.

It has been painful to hear uh discussions that suggest taking the center away from us.

This building represents the sacrifices of hardworking families who contributed what they could, so their children would uh always have place for being to belong.

All we're asking for is fairness, transparency, and opportunity to move forward once the legal constraints are resolved.

We're also requesting for resources such as loan to facilitate the rebuilding process.

We remain committed to this neighborhood and hope the city will stand with us and not against us as we work to rebuild the essential community space.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And we still have 49 seconds left from the from the property owners, and then community members can have two minutes.

So not sure who's community members.

Okay.

All right.

Uh we welcome up community members then um to testify.

And uh we'll have two minutes.

Please start with your name and where you're coming from.

Hello, all right.

My name is David Abdi.

Um with care.

I'm director of community safety with care.

Uh Tawheed Islamic Center was a target of a domestic terrorist attack since that moment.

The center has received almost no support from the neighborhood, from the state or from the city.

The mayor visited once, but the governor refused our healing event with almost no one outside the Muslim community.

Yet we continue serving one of the min one of Minnesota's poorest neighborhoods where 75% of residents live below the poverty line.

We are not a wealthy institution, we are a community lifeline.

Despite several financial limits and ongoing insurance case, we did not choose.

We have continued paying taxes, fees, and bills.

Our attorney explicitly advised us not to disturb the building while the claim is in litigation, which goes to trial in December.

Demolition now would destroy our legal position and undermine our ability to rebuild.

We asked the city not to use land use laws in a way that harms a minority religious community still healing from a hate motivated attack for the city to demolish our building before the court resolves the insurance issue would be to punish the victim, not the proper traitor.

We request that the council table demolition until the trial concludes and we can move forward responsibly.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you very much.

And make sure to sign in.

Welcome up.

Thank you for your time.

My name is Malik Davis.

Been in the city for 40 plus years.

I'm here to speak from perspective as an investor, business owner.

It would be a shame for you guys to make a decision to demolish this building before the insurance claim process goes through.

Imagine making a decision, and then the insurance comes through to pay for the repairs of a building that's no longer there.

That would be a shame.

Had a different spin I was going to take, but I'll counter with uh the lady started with 24 calls to the police department or fire department.

I've made more than 24 calls to the building that I own and run a business out of.

I've had human feces outside of my building that's currently occupied.

Now, if we're talking about 24 calls to the building that's vacant, that's not that bad in my eyes.

What is bad is the area that they were in.

That corridor was horrific.

Note about the problems at our library and our in our ward.

But since the city's made a concerted push to change that area, the traffic's gone, the blight is gone.

We talk about a building that's burnt, being an eyesore to the building.

It's my humble opinion that that building is no more of an eyesore than a library that sits on university close to Lexington that's been sitting there for over a decade.

Same boarded up building, same vandalism, just doesn't have the fire.

So to hold a civilian to a higher standard than we represent as a city, sends a wrong message in my eyes to potential investors and business owners that are looking to do business.

So a business that has made an investment over $750,000 to buy a building, plus whatever they had to do to outfit it.

Our response as a city is gonna fast track the demolition of a community that's come here from wherever they've came and say that you're no longer welcome to be here, and we're gonna fast track the demolition of your building before the insurance process plays out.

I would encourage you to table it to the spring or summer.

Thank you very much.

Make sure to sign in and welcome up.

And anyone else who's here to testify on this item, please line up at this time so we know you're here.

And thank you to our students from St.

Paul Academy.

Uh we want to appreciate you for being here today.

All right, welcome.

I'm Anita Alexander, and I'm a member of Camper Memorial United Methodist Church, the church that is directly east of this property that we're speaking on.

And it is um myself and many other members of the church who have done a lot of work in trying to keep uh the sides of the property together by picking up the trash by making sure that the needles and the foil and all of that is taken out of there.

Um that has not been done by the owners.

We have been working on this building since 2023 ourselves.

This isn't some company, we don't hire somebody to do all this trash and feces and all of that, and that's stuff that I just don't like to do.

But that's what we have to do.

And what you might not know is that the just uh north of or south of the property is both a head start center and a regular daycare, and then all of the other businesses around there, the library and whatnot.

And we are all impacted by this, and I'm very disappointed that there hadn't been any work.

Granted, maybe they're not able to rehab a building, but there's nothing that stops people from keeping it, keeping the grass and the and the and the trees and the weeds and everything, all the everything other things out of there.

There's nothing that stops prevents that from occurring.

And so even though we would have hoped to see progress on this, it hasn't happened since 2023 in any way.

And at this point, we support the raising and removal of the property.

Um, so that then we can at least function as a church without functioning as the as the trash removal company.

Um, just trying to keep our you know properties and everything around there, and the community is suffering from it.

Um, it attracted anybody and everybody, and uh we all know that.

And we all know that.

So it's been tough for us to keep it together.

And we have separated the we have ended up with broken windows and everything else.

Thank you very much for your testimony.

Make sure to sign in.

Yeah, sir, come on.

Your turn.

Welcome.

Hello, Councilman members.

My name is Michael Wright, lifelong resident of Rondo, Aurora St.

Anthony area.

And I drive that by this place quite often.

I frequent a coffee shop, flavor cafe in the area.

And have seen quite a bit going on there.

And the water finds its way to the least resistance.

And we have to speak up more about it.

And I'm 67 years old, and that's my community.

So no one's called me out of my name.

And so just to reiterate to the time that we've been given to get this under control, at least to do your part in keeping it up and have the pride and respect of our community.

And so I just want to speak on that.

I'm not against anybody, but it is my community.

And I want to see it not so blighted and want to see the area turn around.

And as also an investor in the community, business person and other things.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you so much.

And make sure to sign in.

All right, our last testifier, welcome up.

My name is Jay Lanius, I'm the executive director of care of Minnesota.

In here in support of the Islamic Center.

40 plus in the last four years.

Last year alone, 16 separate incidents that have happened in 2024.

The next state to us was California with five.

When Towid Moss was attacked, I was there.

Literally an hour after I was invited, I came, and within a matter of an hour and a half, we actually were able to identify who committed it.

And later that day, uh St.

Paul Police Department acted quickly and was able to apprehend the individual.

Who told the St.

Paul Police Department that he was planning to attack the neighboring church and a mosque as well.

So we avoided a mass arsonist because of the quick actions of our team and as well as the mosque.

But the reason why we're here today is the oldest story that impacts people of color, systemic racism.

In this case, we have a center that actually has insurance that had a plan.

Before it was blight, it was a community center.

It was a place where children came.

Before he was abandoned for the last two years in this fight, it was a place that I think most residents in the neighborhood could be proud of.

Today it's not because of the fact of this limbo.

And unfortunately, instead of this community feeling a sense of support and empathy, we did not see that.

As I mentioned earlier, or my staff mentioned earlier, Governor Worlds didn't visit any of the mosques that have been attacked.

We haven't seen most people even come support.

That's the reality.

But here we have an opportunity to support this community and recognize yes, there are rules in the books.

We do not want any blight building sitting around and not serving the community.

Nobody wants that.

In fact, the communities that suffer the most are the ones who have the least amount of space, including this community.

What we're asking for you is to table the matter and give this community a chance to resolve this issue.

And yes, if there are other issues, we're gonna meet with the church and others and ensure that the neighborhood is entrusted that there's gonna be support around the building.

But unfortunately, they cannot do anything right this moment.

Thank you very much.

Please sign in.

All right.

Uh I will take a motion for Ms.

Bui to close the public hearing.

All in favor say aye.

Hi.

All opposed.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The public hearing is closed.

Um and before I turn things over to Ms.

Bowie, I just want to thank everyone for your testimony.

Um, I want to uh apologize for what happened uh to you.

Islamophobia has no place in our community.

Um, and that actor and act of hatred, regardless of what we talk about here is completely wrong and unacceptable.

So I just want you to know that from from all of us.

Um now we'll move to the more mundane matter that is in front of us.

Ms.

Booty.

Thank you so much, Council President.

And I just want to just say I just tremendously appreciate everyone taking time out of their day to come here and testify um and also just demonstrate the deep care um for this intersection and for not only this community, um, but also just for the people who have made this community so vibrant and and so safe.

We heard here today that we have people who are good neighbors, right?

In a place that there was a terrorist attack.

We have a church, a neighboring church that were good neighbors and continuing to make sure that they have upkeep in a situation when you know the members really had to find a relocation, a permanent relocation.

I also want to mention that this mosque faces the same problems that Rondo Library faces.

Yet they don't have the same privileges, resources, our agency.

And you know, the testimony that was given today is really valid.

There was a there was a huge um coming together of local leaders.

Um, but then you you didn't really see that consistency.

Um I want to be really, really, you know, um straightforward that what I'm going to walk through right now is really what is the public process and what is the vote before us.

Um because in this uh um uh vehicle in terms of how we are actually interpreting what is nuisance, we have to review the facts in the findings in this case and to review if this building actually does meet the conditions of what's considered nuisance, and it does.

Um, and to also review the owner's due diligence and making a good faith effort to ensure that there's necessary repairs to ensure that council um in the city can track a progress of compliance.

Um, this order is in place to ensure that vacant buildings are safe and well maintained, and that it is the responsibility of the owner to ensure that grass is well kept, um, that there's not people trespassing or doing illegal activity.

Um also there's been a widespread of public testimony from neighbors, um, not even public testimony, but even just really just in in general around shared dissatisfaction, particularly around the neglect that's been happening in this area.

So I just want to um conclude by saying the purpose of this ordinance is to ensure that Bacon Buildings are still good neighbors.

Um we've heard from members of the Canford Church, from patrons from the Ronda Library.

Next door, you have Head Start, you have a dog daycare, you have the Wendy's parking lot, and there has been dozens of police calls that have resulted in arrests, assault, drug dealings, and break-ins.

And I do want to make sure on the record there is proper context.

Uh, we've heard that this building have had dozens of calls when we have also heard that the library has had hundreds of calls.

Um, I think if there was active people, if there were people here, that we probably would be seeing um uh a more of a response rate from from um from our police officers.

So there has been substantive evidence that this property is under a lot of challenges and that the the owners have a shared lacking critical investments.

You know, unfortunately, this vote is very limited.

Um and you know, you all have heard from me.

My my vision of ensuring that we can have like investments and also regulations, but that is not the case in this vote.

So I will be motioning to amend the language to order that the owners get an inspection um by December 15th.

So that gives them one month.

Because I do think it is really critical if you are um dedicated and committed to ensuring that you are um getting a proper scope of how much um the renovation costs will be.

You do that in a fashion of actually getting an inspection, making sure that you have uh a report of like what to actually get in compliance.

That has not been done.

Um so I do think it would be important that this amendment takes place to have clear directives to the owners to actually apply and issue an inspection so you understand what the scope is for the renovations that are necessary and required.

Um, and I will be laying this over December 15th, um, particularly for um for this item to come back to council to see if there is an inspection that's given.

I do want to open it up to um not only council members, of course, right, as we're voting for this, but open this up to Marcia to share if that is uh if that is reasonable time frame for a um building owner to actually apply for an inspection and what you know what is the the usual turnaround time for when someone is applying for an inspection and um when they can actually get that report Ms.

Um you raise a few questions and I'll try to tackle them individually with respect to an inspection report.

It could have been ordered from the day after the fire through the present.

So that opportunity has been available in all of the big and building registration forms that are mailed out on an annual basis, as well as the order to bait of nuisance building and the notice scheduling this hearing do indicate explicitly that a co-compliance inspection is required to rehabilitate the building.

If an if an inspection is applied for tomorrow and we asked the Department of Safety and Inspections to expedite that inspection, presumably it could be done within the next couple of weeks with respect to other items.

The council um I'm never recommended to the council, and the council has never taken action to lay a matter over without the owner posting the performance deposit and ordering the code compliance.

That those are key pieces to a demonstration of good faith that we're looking, you know, that we want to move forward with this.

Uh, those were critical elements that I first discussed in my staff report, and had they been present, that shows the intention to move forward.

Uh the cost you mentioned, the cost is generally determined not by the inspection report per se, but rather by a general contractor, engineer architect moving through the building and outlining what they believe it would take to bring it into compliance and what they would bid for that.

You know, so I would say the cost would be there.

The department, I think, said uh they believed it would be in excess of 200,000.

We don't have any individual bids to verify that.

Finally, with uh property that has been ill-maintained and managed, I think that um similar to the council's process dealing with CVS and with the Burger King both on West 7th and on the West Side, the council asked for a nuisance abatement plan.

So very clear explicit expectations about how to maintain that site, how to secure it from future problems that have been happening, and that has included things like lighting, cameras, um regular visits like every other day, you know, getting in there and taking care of business.

So that those kind of commitments I would say the council would be wise to look for this.

Like I said, there were even cleanups happening by the city and by the church next door during the legislative hearing process, and the property is in under a microscope during that time, as you know.

So I would look for the inspection to be applied for immediately the $5,000 performance deposit and a nuisance abatement plan if you continue it.

And I would definitely be happy to look over any and all of that.

Ms.

Bowie, I know you haven't made that motion yet, but um just for what it's worth, I would support a layover till I think it's December 17th would be our last meeting of the year.

Um the condition that to give time for the performance deposit, the inspection, and the nuisance abatement plan to to take effect, and I think that shows good faith on the part of the applicants, and it gives us something to evaluate as we move forward.

I I have been moved by the testimony about not tearing down a building that is on the cusp of an insurance um trial and settlement.

Um, I want to not let the insurance company off the hook.

But I do also hear you and the neighbors that it should not be on the neighbors to be picking up anything.

It should be on the owners, and as good neighbors, um that is something that I think is a bare minimum to ask of the property owners who I know also want to be good neighbors.

So there seems to me to be a distinction between requiring that the building be torn down and requiring that the property outside the building be maintained in good condition and being an amenity to the neighborhood and not a blight.

Um so I I would take in a motion like that a good balance of those things.

Um and I am seeing lots of our colleagues so now um Ms.

Johnson, then council vice president, then Ms.

Yang.

And Councilmember Bowie, is that the motion that you're making?

Huh?

Is that the motion you're making?

I I haven't made the motion yet.

Just still for up for discussion.

I just in terms of in terms of like I had gave my recommendation or my motion in terms of getting feedback from Marcia regarding like that timeline, but I still have not officially made my motion.

Okay, so there's not a motion on that.

There's not a motion right now.

Okay, I'm happy to defer to see if there's a motion before I make a comment.

I'm happy to make a discussion after the motion is made.

If you're making a motion.

Well, I guess we couldn't have more discussion if you want to.

Are you don't you?

Why don't you say your comments, Ms.

Johnson?

And then what you think and then Yeah, I'm kind of at a place where I feel like we're we're almost there, we're landing the plane.

Um, but I so one thing that I want to be able to share.

Um, I did we I heard that there was like communication between the attorneys um in public testimony and sharing to not touch the building or not do any renovations and things of that nature.

Um, and I just want to be I think that I think it's important that the attorneys are also brought up to speed in what you're hearing here for the property owners is that the the not doing anything to the building, I don't think is any for is no longer an option if um this is put together.

So I'm inclined to support the layover, but and I think that the layover though to the point of council member Bowie and the council president is really important that like this layover is not a layover to have nothing changed a month later.

The layover is to be able to begin to address it, and I think that communication um needs to be had with the attorneys as well.

But we have certain city standards that are now being talked about for your the for this property.

And so two years have passed.

I I think we also heard during Prabhu testimony that the trial dates are beginning in December.

Um I think there's a lot of of things there that are going to be really nuanced in approach.

Um we just had a presentation from the Promise Act earlier today.

This particular building uh is in the Promise Act neighborhood.

I don't know if you have explored if other folks have explored opportunities, but this is where I would just say like the time um we've had several different types of scenarios here, but as a councilmember, what's uh Islamic center in our ward that was foundalized, not to the level of this nature, but we did have um doors best in and one of our Islamic centers in Ward 7, and this is clearly a direct result of a hate crime.

That doesn't necessarily mean that some of the standards that we inquire for other places across the city won't be invoked here.

So I would just encourage um, you know, there to be a clear understanding that at this particular juncture I'd be supportive of a layover, but not in the event that nothing will change between now and December 17th.

And so I hope that with the property owners that you heard some of the testimony today.

I know I did.

I'd be inclined to support that motion, uh, Councilmember Bowie, in part because I don't think we're at a place of needing to act on this today.

But I do think that um the time to sit on it has passed.

And so that's my and that's my genuine you know, feedback for you all as members of the community and having three masks in my ward.

If this were to happen in my community as well, I would also be very um adamant about seeing community members uh get the support and the justice that they need.

And I recognize that you know there's different clocks here.

Uh, but we also have different city rules and guidelines that require us to be able to take certain things like this head on.

So supportive of the layover, would hope that there would be progress made between this time and December 17th.

Thank you.

And I won't be here for that vote, so I wanted to make sure that that is noted.

Um, because I think if it was a if this was brought to a vote today, I'd have a hard time supporting it.

Um so I appreciate being able to see the layover.

Thank you, Ms.

Johnson.

I saw council vice president.

Oh, sorry.

Um, I would also be very supportive of a motion that introduced some contingencies regarding the sort of abatement aspect, but I was also very compelled by the testimony.

I the only thing that I heard was that they're just asking for more time for it to complete the insurance process.

And I also heard a very clear intent from them to re-establish their their mosque for their community.

So to me, the intent to re-rehab and like be present in this building was very, very clear.

So I would absolutely support a motion that would include a contingency for the abatement of the property, but to give them more time to let the insurance process go through.

And I for me personally, and um, you know, I know what the vote is before us, but the deference that I have in this moment is really important.

Like CVS is a corporation.

Burger King is an independently owned organization, right?

But that we're talking about a faith organization that is serving folks across the city and giving them a safe space to have prayer and have community.

So my deference is maybe a little bit different, maybe not entirely about the scope of what's before us today.

Um, but for that reason, I would absolutely support um support the labor, and I'm excited to see.

I'm excited to see the new the rehabilitated mosque.

So thank you for being here today.

Thank you, Vice President.

Sounds like we're getting close to a motion, and we've also had a lengthy meeting.

Um, I'd look to see if there are other comments on this.

Ms.

Yang.

Thanks, Council President.

Well, I share the same thoughts as you both, Council Vice President and Council President.

I was just wondering, Marsha, like logistically, can you explain because I do believe the nuisance abatement plan is really important.

Does that like does the discussion for that happen here where we need to hear from the property owners about what their plan is, or does it take place with you and outside of the council meeting here?

Council President, Councilmember, ideally we would be able to look over the plan on the Department of Safety and Inspections and myself prior to it coming forward to the city council.

Uh I can look at the um call reports and the nuisances that have been abated and say that certain things do need to be included, and I think in this particular case, um, making sure that the site is appropriately lit, that there um is um uh cameras present uh in signage indicating that uh and that there is regular, very regular um presence by the owners of the building to ensure that it is maintained and not the responsibility or the assumed responsibility of the neighbors.

So, how to put together those expectations?

It could be embedded into the resolution, or I think what's easier is to have a plan put together and come back before you uh in December, and I can deal with that in legislative hearing process.

Okay, great, great.

Thank you.

Thanks, Ms.

Yang.

I would look to Miss Bowie for a motion.

Yes, well, thank you so much for the discussion and the contribution.

I I think it really is it's fair for us to um give the owners and the community uh members, you know, really a good faith effort um for them to demonstrate a good faith effort to come for to council.

Um so I will be motioning for the inspection um for the performance uh payment and also uh to work with uh the hearing officer and designing um a nuisance abatement plan.

Um I also will be laying this over to December 17th.

Um, and I believe that is when we will get a I believe uh Marcia will uh work to expedite that inspection.

Um that is something that is really important to me.

I I do think as although they're going through um um litigation with the uh insurance company that an inspection should still take place um and that um a performance payment should take place and that a good maintenance um of that property should still take place as well.

So I think this is a good opportunity to support them and to a successful um pathway forward.

All right, so the motion is to require the performance deposit, the inspection, and the nuisance abatement plan to come back to us to be done and come back to us by December 17th and to lay over until that.

Any further discussion of the motion?

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye aye, all opposed.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The item is laid over until December 17th.

Ms.

Mormond, are there any other items to come before us for separate consideration?

I would ask that item number 45 be read into the record.

Item number 45 is RLH CO 25-14, appealing appeal of William Acker to a correction notice at 610 Western Avenue North.

Ms.

Mormons.

Uh for this particular case, uh, I am asking for an amendment.

Uh what we're looking at is a correction order for the removal of vehicles and having them parked on the correct surfaces and so on.

Uh there were 12 cars originally, and now we're down to nine cars that need to be dealt with.

And of those, I learned today that an additional three are off the property down to six and an additional two are gonna go tomorrow or Friday, based on that and um some family emergency issues that the owners dealing with.

I think it would be um good for the city council to grant an extension from December 1st to January 9th.

Bowie I support any discussion seeing none all in favor say aye aye aye all opposed seven in favor none opposed the resolution is adopted as amended anything else Ms.

Mormon for separate consideration not that I'm aware of all right we will hold a public hearing on all of our legislative hearing agenda items from 30 two to 45 if you're here for to testify in those this is your time come on up seeing none I'll take a motion for Ms.

Joest to close the public hearing and approve the items as amended by the legislative hearing officer all in favor say aye aye all opposed seven in favor none opposed the legislative hearing consent agenda is adopted as amended that brings us to the end of our agenda I want to recognize that we had students in attendance from St.

Paul Academy here today.

I think we have one left you are the few the crowd who made it so if you are interested and willing this is your reward um we'd love you to come on up and just tell us your name and uh something you love about St.

Paul and anything anything you observed about the meeting today there are five cameras on you at this moment so you can tell your teacher you were definitely here and all the other guys were not saying you're empty just kidding hello my name's Murray Goff I use see him pronouns I'm a senior at St.

Paul Academy and Summit School um I am currently taking part of a government and citizenship class run by one of our history teachers there are two periods um part of the requirement to pass the class is to I think it's five hours and in within those five hours two separate activities of view and government in action and so this is the first one that I did.

So anyway I'm just kind of you almost got your five hours in right I gotta I gotta go somewhere after this I was but I just um I just was interested because some people there's a whole group here were just interested in coming to one of these events and I was sort of they're talking about I was like hey can I tag along I think it would be interesting especially because I don't have anything to do this Wednesday afternoon um I thought it would be kind of fun and I have really enjoyed it and I found it really interesting to learn more about how my city runs because I think I live it's right on the line between like ward I think it's ward four but it's right next to Ward.

It's uh the the Hamlin Midway area right next to Hamlin University.

Yeah oh really that's that's really nice anyway I have uh followed the mayoral race uh very closely um just because I every day I walk to Snelling and take the A-line bus to uh St.

Paul Academy or I think it's around Highland and so seeing the CVS building unoccupied and living there during the George Food riots I think it's really interesting to hear what you guys have to say about uh abandoned buildings and just making our city better.

So thank you.

Thank you so much for being here.

Yeah everyone work for the city of St.

Paul or run for office talk to us about that thank you for being here really appreciated and seriously thank you for sticking it out with us.

No one else got to come up and be on camera because of because they left uh that brings us to the good news section of our agenda is there any good news around the table uh I saw Ms.

Yang and then Ms.

Johnson yeah I wanted to share about the Eastside Environmental Justice Group uh hosting a free food and local resource um they're partnering with mom's food shelf and it's uh they're doing a mutual aid event this Saturday um providing free food local resources and there's gonna be conversations about clean air community health and environmental justice on the east side it's on Saturday November 22nd 130 to 330 p.m at the district council for office and that's on 804 Margaret Street in St.

Paul Minnesota 55106 so they are encouraging people to bring shelf staple foods uh goods to contribute to no canned goods please and there are some recommendations on what you can bring a coffee detergent dish soap pasta oil beans and many more so you can check them out on their um I'm sure their Facebook thanks Ms.

Yang Ms.

Johnson thank you I just wanted to take a minute and say um I wanted to thank everyone uh all the council members and the council staff and my team who put together a beautiful baby shower for me earlier this um this week I know it was like a challenging day on Tuesday for a lot of reasons but I did really I just wanted to say it brought a sincere smile to my face um and also as I head on leave um I'll be remote for the next council meeting on the third so this will be my first this will be my last meeting in person for a little bit um but I just have appreciated the support and thank you to uh council president Naker for staying on to the port authority in my stead and thank you to Vice Chair Joe so we'll be chairing the HRA meetings as I leave um and I do sincerely appreciate the partnership and I appreciate being able to have um have a couple of weeks with my baby um so I'm looking forward to that and just wanted to put that out there thanks so thank you uh we were very impressed by the party planning skills of your office and uh we cannot wait to welcome the newest member of the family so uh can't wait Ms.

Um so I'm looking forward to that and just wanted to put that out there.

Thanks, Ms.

So thank you.

Uh we were very impressed by the party planning skills of your office, and uh we cannot wait to welcome the newest member of the family.

So uh can't wait.

Ms.

Bowie, or is that a uh both of the things?

Okay, yeah, sorry, I'm just leaning on here.

Um there every Thursday at Hallie Q Brown, there's a partners and prevention clinic.

So it's free.

Um healthcare, uh, they have free dental screenings, free um flu shots, free blood pressure education and support.

Um inside of the canteen room.

We've been there for um um um certain events.

So that's every Thursday between 12 and 3 p.m.

at Halle Q Brown Community Center.

Um this Thursday, well, tomorrow the St.

Paul and WACP will be hosting a a town hall.

Um particularly they'll be hearing from the police chief and also from oh my gosh.

Whoa, well, Halle Kee Brown.

Yeah, they'll be hearing from Halloween Brown at um at the Halle Heat Brown community center, and that's gonna be between 6 and 8 p.m.

If you want to uh go there and just kind of learn more about how the St.

Paul's in partnership with our SPPD and all the great work that they do.

So awesome.

Thanks, Ms.

Bowie.

Then back to Miss Johnson.

Oh, is that a call it?

No.

Oh, okay.

Ms.

Coleman.

Thanks.

I just wanted to share about the Hamlin Midway Coalition Annual Meeting and Community Festival that's taking place tomorrow night at Hamlin University at the Anderson Center from 6 to 8 p.m.

Really looking forward to that, particularly after the events yesterday that were in our Western Midway, South St.

Anthony Park neighborhood.

Just looking forward to being in community and celebrating all of the really amazing work that's been done this year and also all of the work that is to come.

Thanks, Ms.

Coleman.

Um, I got a text message from my team like you're supposed to say the turkey.

So the this we don't have a Thanksgiving um uh Thanksgiving Council meeting Saturday on November 22nd at 10 a.m.

There's two St.

Paul locations that um are all a part of this Twin Cities All-Star Get Back um give back that's gonna be giving out free turkeys to families that need it at um starting at 10.

It'll be at the Molly Center, um, 576 Front Avenue, and then also in Ward 7 at the Conway Community Center.

Um we do it every like they the Sana Foundation does it every year at some capacity, and there's plenty of places that do it, but for sure those are two stops in St.

Paul that if you if you or your family needs a turkey or you know someone who might benefit from having a free turkey giveaway, um that is there.

Thanks, Ms.

Johnson.

Ms.

Bowie.

So sorry, but I really I'm going to like regret not sharing this because it's such an exciting, exciting good news.

So um I'm gonna be hosting this Friday at the Ordway uh performance center around the night where they'll have the the notebook musical.

So um, and they're celebrating this year their 40th year anniversary.

So they are offering 40 tickets to go to um to watch the the notebook musical.

You can use this code for any of the days.

Um, but particularly Friday is when I'll be there um hosting a roundal night was open for everyone.

Um but I'm super excited.

I love the notebook, and I'm really my goal is trying to like not cry, you know.

Um I find it very impossible every time I watch the movies.

So it's a Broadway musical, and it's really you know a great opportunity.

And um Yeah, so I appreciate it.

Thanks, Ms.

Bowie.

Glad glad we got that was good.

So we glad to get that one in.

Uh well, with that, just a reminder, as Ms.

Johnson reminded us, uh, we don't have a meeting next week.

I hope everyone has taxation.

We do have truth in taxation.

Yes.

Ruins my whole ending.

I was gonna say I'm grateful for all of you.

And I'm happy Thanksgiving.

But I am still grateful for all of you and happy Thanksgiving, even though we'll see each other on Tuesday.

All right, with that, we are journal.

Just wanted to make sure that's