Oh.

Don't look at the room with the room that we will look forward to.

No, no, no, no, no.

If someone would not look in the room, we don't know.

City Council to order.

Roll call, please.

Kim.

Here.

Yang.

Here.

Bowie.

Here.

Coleman.

Here.

Johnson.

Here.

Joast.

Here.

Council President Naker.

Here.

Seven present.

None absent with Council Member Kim being remote.

Welcome everyone.

Thank you so much for joining 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 two there are public.

Ms.

Bowie.

Oh no.

Okay.

Alright, seeing that I'll take a motion for Ms.

Ruby for the balance of the consent agenda.

All in favor say I.

Oh, roll call, please.

So we will do a roll call because we have a member remote today.

Um and I will also forget that almost every time.

So just let it everyone know in advance.

Roll called Member Kim.

Hi.

Yang.

Hi.

Bowie.

I.

Coleman.

Hi.

Johnson.

Hi.

Joe.

Hi.

Council President Naker.

Aye.

Okay.

That's seven in favor, none opposed.

The consent agenda is adopted.

As amended.

Item fifteen, resolution twenty six-seven ninety-791 approving the mayor's appointment of Melanie McMahon to serve as the city city's director of planning and economic development.

Thank you, Council President.

One I want to just share, I'm really uh excited about seeing this come through.

I want to be able to share that over the last several months as a council member.

I've had an opportunity to work really closely with Director McMahon, both on the HRA as the Housing Redevelopment Authority chair.

And I think one of the things that has been really important to me continuing, and you've heard me echo multiple times, has been the council partnership, the um with our city directors, but also in this regard, the dedication to housing to economic development and to revital revitalization here in our city.

One of the things that has become really clear to me is that in order to be able to have that direct partnership, we also need to describe and have plans for what that looks like.

We've had several conversations, which I've sincerely appreciated every time we've asked for Director McMahon to have a conversation with us.

She is mad at us with, um, you know, and meeting with us in person, which I've appreciated the time, and through those conversations have been a lot of pain points that have come through as well about what partnership can look like and continue to look like within the housing redevelopment authority, but also within the partnership within council and uh the director of one of the most important departments here in our city.

And from that, we are so currently in the process of what that uh partnership piece will look like.

We're still in the planning phases, and I think it requires a lot of time and effort, um, but also just intentionality.

As the chair of the housing redevelopment authority, I want to be in a space to be able to support this uh to support this appointment.

I'm not in that current position at this time, and I'm asking for a two-week layover, a layover until May 27th to be able to talk through this directly with Director McMahon.

I've shared that through multiple conversations with her with the assistant mayor, Summer Langer as well, because I think when you are rushing something, it's really important to make sure that if you're gonna do an appointment that you do it well, and I have all the utmost respect for the mayor's ability to appoint.

I also have the utmost respect for the council's ability to consent.

And I think when we're looking at our authority in our space, it's full within our right to ask for time and intentional collaboration, and I'm very confident in director McMahon's ability to do that.

I'm asking for that time to be able to do that in conversation and deliberation that we have not had up until this point.

And so that is my motion.

I would like to actually lay this over for two weeks pending that discussion with the anticipation and the commitment to come back to my colleagues about what that plan for communication looks like, what the deliverables look like, and also with the trust that at that time, with that commitment from Director McMahon, I'm happy to stand with beside her in her appointment process at that time.

Great.

So the motion is for a two-week layover.

Is there discussion of the motion?

Oh, okay.

We'll go Ms.

Bowie, Vice President Yang, Ms.

Coleman, Ms.

Joost.

Thank you, Council President.

Um, and also I just want to say I just appreciate your your thoughtfulness and your courage, honestly, Chair Johnson.

When I think about, you know, the day when we were um appointed to you as a chair, voted for you to be chair.

I'm just really appreciative in terms of how you are bold and also um very authentic and genuine and dedicated to the priorities that you set um straight in terms of housing economic development and revitalizing and understanding that uh this role for a PED director um has had its challenges, not um personally to who's um been in the role, but we understand as a city, we have seen quite a few turnovers um in this role, and when we think about the relationship that we have with this new administration, mayor her and her vision and making sure there is alignment with our priorities.

I appreciate you having um our motioning for this layover because I do think much needed conversation needs to be had.

Um I also want to just say um to Director McMahon, I appreciate our relationship.

Um, McMahon has um shown her um great ability to be able to manage um large development projects, been able to secure, you know, some really incredible deals when it comes to the city of St.

Paul.

Uh my support for a one leak one week layover is not um a reflection of I don't think that McMahon is, you know, not ready for the job.

Um, it is more so a reflection around my leadership in terms of requiring both courage and openness and the courage to ask those hard questions.

The openness to continue the conversations to work towards alignment.

If I had to vote today, I will be similar to Chair Johnson.

I don't think I will be in a comfortable place to accept this appointment.

And I just want to just say, you know, I think it's important for the administration to have conversations with this body that's rooted in trust, accountability, and you know how there is alignment with our wards.

When we make appointments, especially of this magnitude, when I think about just the needs of our constituents, whether it's uh support for our small businesses, um housing, um, accessibility, um, someone who can really speak to um, you know, our our tenant rights um and economic justice is really important.

Um, I think the city council members really deserve a process that is thoughtful, transparent, and like I mentioned, rooted in in accountability.

Um, it is my responsibility, you know, to my residents to represent them in the best way forward, um, which is why I cannot confidently say that my community concerns, um, our priorities have been fully addressed, and I think you know, using this two-week layover will give us that time to get into alignment.

Thanks, Ms.

Bowie.

Vice President Yang.

Thank you, Council President.

Just a couple of things for me.

I um first I want to share that I am supportive of the appointment.

I'm supportive of the the two-week request for the layover, um, and my preference would have been one week.

Uh however, I want to be respectful of the ask from council colleagues who are still in the midst of discussion with the director, um, the interim director, and want to be really clear too that I wouldn't be supportive of any future layovers for this item.

Thanks, Vice President.

And so, Miss Coleman.

Thank you, Council President.

Um, and thank you for the motion, Councilmember Johnson, and we'll be supporting the layover at this time.

Um, and I'm very enthusiastically supporting the nomination.

I think other couple of things with, you know, in my consideration of the layover.

We've made many appointments, you know, voted on many appointments in this body over the last couple of months, and I feel you know, many of those I've had the opportunity to have maybe a brief conversation with the person who's being considered in advance.

They're generally somebody who's been new to the city, but I trust the mayor who is appointing them.

I trust you know what I've seen from their experience, their values alignment, etc.

And so have felt comfortable making the decision to move forward with their appointment.

In this case, I think we're in the incredibly fortunate position to have so much more information than we've had with many of those appointments over the past couple of months.

I've had the opportunity to work with Director McMahon, I think, since maybe like two weeks after I started on the city council when she came into the interim director role.

In that time, we've worked on a whole host of challenges and opportunities in Ward 4 from really big development opportunities to small day-to-day things that really deeply impact the quality of life for our residents when we're thinking about what is development need uh mean.

What does housing look like?

How are we meeting the goals of the city while still respecting the opinions and perspectives of the constituents and residents of St.

Paul?

And I've just had nothing but positive experiences.

I think that all of those conversations have been handled with such nuance and care and intentionality.

I have seen one of the things that I hear about a lot with the city is like St.

Paul is really quick to get to a no and really hard to get to a yes on.

And one of truly the first meetings that I had with Director McMahon, I we sat in this meeting and it was like how can we get to a yes?

That doesn't mean we're going to get there immediately.

That doesn't mean we're going to throw caution to the wind or throw the rules and the laws out the window.

But we need this development to happen.

We need this housing to happen, and so we have to figure out a way to get there.

And so, how are we going to work a little bit harder, think a little bit more creatively, do a little bit more in order to move our city forward.

And I think it's the type of energy that again I have heard time and time again from the residents of Ward 4 that they are looking for in the city.

And I was just so thrilled again to have that.

Maybe I'm exaggerating, but I really do think it was like our first meeting where I was like, this is this is what we want.

This is what people want our city hall to look like, to be working like, and so I'm very supportive.

Um, you know, it sounds like there's a good chance we'll be laying this over today.

So I'll share similar comments in two weeks, but look forward to voting for confirmation whenever that happens.

Thanks, Ms.

Coleman.

Ms.

Joost.

Um, thank you, Council President.

Um, I am also very supportive of this appointment today, um, and I do not support a layover on this item.

Um, I'll my reason for um not supporting the layover.

I of course support this appointment, but also I feel really strongly that um the charter is very clear about uh who here has the power to um to appoint our department directors and you know the the mayor is the one that does that.

We've had several, as councilmember colon said we've had several appointments come before us, and it's the charter is very clear that the mayor does that, and the mayor also directs department department heads um and the decisions we make on appointments are with the advice and consent of the council.

Uh we have known about this appointment since about April 15th.

Um I have had several conversations with uh with um director McMahon about about this, and I've also worked very closely with her.

I think that to um delay or deny the mayor uh on these matters and her power to make this appointment.

There has to be very specific and clearly be able to enumerate why we would do that.

Um, and I just I don't fully agree with um the reasoning to to lay over because as I mentioned, we've had a lot of time, and so that's why I won't be supporting the layover today.

I also really want to make sure that you know we have had a mayoral transition, we've had department directors that have been transitioning, and I really want to think about the stability and being able to move forward with the really important work of the city and the important work that the planning and economic development department does around revitalizing downtown, um, making sure that we're developing our buildings and projects across the city, our economic vitality, um, doing what we can to expand our property tax base, all of those uh important things is what I really want us to focus on.

Um, and again, I'll just say that I also worked, like I said, very closely with Director McMahon.

Uh, we worked together on the Highland Bridge project, which is something that my constituents care a lot about, um, and we would not be where we are on that project, which is on track to complete the vision that our community wanted to see if it weren't for Director McMahon.

And so I trust her in this role.

I don't need to wait two weeks to do that, so I won't be supporting the layover.

Um, I trust the folks that have also put their trust in her, former mayor Melvin Carter and now our new mayor, Kali Her.

I appreciate her taking the time to evaluate um all of our department roles, and I fully agree with uh the decision that she has come to that director McMahon is the best person to lead this department and to lead uh our city and the development of its future.

Thanks, Ms.

Joest.

Uh further discussion of the motion.

Ms.

Kim.

Thank you.

Um yeah, I'm going to be supporting this motion.

I hear that there is readiness.

I am also ready.

Um, I guess my inclination is to support my colleagues when they request additional time to have further conversations.

I personally spoke to um interim director McMahon today to talk about both my concerns but also my hopes for this position.

Um, and so just to be very clear, I'm going to be supportive of the appointment, and I'm also supportive of our HRA chair Johnson, that is just requesting additional time to have additional conversations.

Recognizing that this person is both um PED and will also be our HRA director as well.

So I'm very supportive of the layover, and I appreciate the candor at the table.

Thanks, Ms.

Kim.

Um, I will just add and then go to Ms.

Bowie that I share the enthusiasm that I'm hearing around this table for this appointment.

Um I could not be more thrilled at this choice by Mayor Her, um interim director McMahon, I think is everything we would want in a PD director, smart, focused, um, dedicated to getting to yes, and able to de-personalize a lot of things.

I think that that's a really important skill in a planning and economic development director.

As Ms.

Coleman said, I do feel fortunate that we've had the chance to get to know Ms.

McMahon in a way that we haven't for many other folks that we have approved, uh, pretty much on site.

Um, so I do respect my colleagues' desire for more time.

I am ready to vote today, so I'm gonna vote against the layover.

Um, but it sounds like we will all be coming back to this table potentially in a couple of weeks uh to confirm this appointment, which I look forward to.

Ms.

Bowie.

Thank you, um, council president.

I just wanted to share as like a nugget of wisdom, you know, representing a war that you know the most racially diverse, socioeconomically diverse, when we think about just, you know, our goals and aspirations, especially coming from the PED department.

Um, I heard today that you know uh the city is interested in how do we get to a yes.

We wanna make sure we can get to a yes, right?

We're really slow to get to that yes.

Um, but what's really important um is thinking about how do we get to the yes together, and you know, some of the values that I um hold.

There's this African principle that says if you want to go fast, go alone.

But if you wanna go further, go together.

And I think this two-week layover, I just wanted to say not that I'm not enthusiastic about um Director McMahon's ability to really drive for that department, but it's important that we can all go together as a council, and we all represent uh a body, a diverse body of communities that wanna make sure that they're also included in the vision and the values and the goals for that department.

So just wanted to share that.

Ms.

Johnson, and I think we'll call for a vote.

Yep, and I will just simply share that I you know I'm really thankful to hear about um just some of the experiences folks shared across the table.

Um, one thing I didn't share during my time was just around like my uh opinion around the appointment.

What I shared was my position on the appointment today.

Uh, but what I think that is really important is each of us represent um almost 46,000 people, especially on the east side, and I really do hope that in the future the partnership conversations look like what Councilmember Coleman shared today was her experience.

When we are coming to the table with priorities for our ward, what we do expect to hear is how do we get to a yes and how can we do that in partnership?

And that just hasn't been my experience.

And so one of the things that I wanna be very clear about in my, you know, desire for this two-week layover is I have an obligation as well to ensure that when I'm putting a vote behind it, it's because I can do so confidently that that will represent and reflect my community, the priorities that I hold.

I agree with some of the comments that have been made, especially around Highland Bridge, especially as one of the most important developments that we have here in the city, and I also see the investment on the east side and east side businesses uh to be important.

I think it's really important to think about affordable housing as it relates to all across the city.

Um, and I just want to make sure that you know when we are talking through these appointment processes and procedures that they are are just that a discussion.

And I've heard, you know, just comments as well about authority.

Um, you know, I think I have a lot of respect for for me or her and me or her's leadership.

I have a lot of respect from Director McMahon and her leadership as well.

And while we have an opportunity, especially because we've had a chance to get to know Director McMahon better because we've had direct working relationships with her, and I'd say probably argumentatively on the table, we've had a way a lot more FaceTime weekly um with Director McMahon that it's not a discussion necessarily about her personally, but definitely around the partnership that I aim to see moving forward.

And I don't think that we should have to negotiate for that for the sake of unanimity or for the sake of just being able to consent some, you know, to say to yes to a consent agenda.

So I appreciate my colleagues today that are supportive of the two-week layover.

I plan to make good time with it and good discussions with Director McMahon as well as leadership.

It's an open invitation to anyone who wants to be a part of that discussion, um, or not.

But I do appreciate my colleagues' support um today for that layover and for that time.

And uh I hate that my back is torn to most of the PET team today, but I'm happy to further explain if there are questions, but genuinely appreciate that time, and so thank you to those who've said that they'll support a two-week layover, and thank you to the comments of our colleagues as well, either way.

Great.

Thank you so much to everyone for the discussion.

Uh, we'll take a roll call vote on the motion for a two-week layover.

Kim.

I.

Yang.

I, Bowie.

Yes, Coleman.

No.

Johnson.

Aye.

Jost.

No.

And Council President Acre.

No.

Um the resolution is laid over to May 27th.

Item 18, resolution 26532, approving adverse action against the liquor on sale, 100 seats or less, liquor outdoor service, liquor on sale Sunday, location license held by AM Bar and Grill, DBA St.

Paul Saloon for the premises at 1045 Hudson Road, and imposing the recommended presumptive matrix penalty and amended license conditions.

Welcome up.

I forget it's Shaffer Schaefer.

Schaefer.

Schaefer.

Okay, you're so good.

Don't worry about it.

Welcome and Schaefer.

Thank you.

I'm going to try and not set the land speed record for the fastest proposal I can do today, but I appreciate you sticking with me on past attempts.

Third time's the charm.

We don't mind if you want to set that record, but go.

Thank you.

I appreciate your faith and belief in me.

So my name is Monica Schaefer.

I am an assistant city attorney, and I am here representing the Department of Safety and Inspections today.

Thank you so much, Council President Naker and council members for hearing this item.

So the purpose of today's agenda is because or addenda item is because the department has recommended an adverse action be imposed against this business license, and the license holder has admitted to the facts but is challenging the specific penalty recommended.

And so I am here to present that penalty and explain how the department got there.

So this is about the St.

Paul saloon, which is located at 1045 Hudson Road.

The license holder is Alex Rivero.

There are four licenses at this build at this business.

There is a liquor on sale 100 seats or less, liquor outdoor service area patio, liquor on sale Sunday, and a gambling location license.

The matter here comes from the events of November 1st, 2025, and all of the facts and law that you need are in exhibit one.

I'm going to just walk through those facts really quickly for you.

So around 11 45 p.m., the St.

Paul Police Department received call that there were shots fired inside the bar.

And they responded, and sure enough, there were two reports of two different men who were firing guns within the bar, and there was one man was wounded.

There were also casings then found outside on the street and more inside the bar.

So I'm gonna use the voice activated projector just to show a couple photos that are relevant.

Voice activated projector go.

Voice activated projector.

You can do it.

I find that just being positive and supportive of technology sometimes.

There we go.

Nice.

Okay.

So this is one um photo of what the inside of the bar looks like.

So here you can see this is the entrance that the patrons are using.

Um this part around it is a metal detector.

And then sitting here at this table is a security officer.

So the bar is required to have a security officer on the site from about 9 p.m.

until close.

Um, and that person needs to be identifiable.

Um, but as you can see in these photos, he is not.

So in this next photo, you can see a patron is entering through the metal detector, and these red buttons these red lights are going off, which means that the metal detector has identified something that is possible to be a weapon.

Um, this photo, this patron is one of the men who had a firearm that he then shot inside the premises.

As you can see, the security officer is looking at his phone and does not engage with this patron.

Here's the patron again walking away, and the security guard is continuing to look at his phone and not engage with that patron.

Then another violation is seen of two patrons smoking or vaping inside of the bar, which is a violation of the Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act, the St.

Paul Code, as well as the equivalent Ramsey County ordinance.

Um here again is another patron coming through with a lot of lights, which means there's likely multiple possible weapons on this person.

The security guard is not engaged.

And here we see that patron that is a gun that he has pulled out and started shooting inside of the bar.

This photo is from the other side of the bar from another camera view.

Back here in this corner, you can see these are the two, it's really tiny, but these are the two men who are exchanging gunfire inside of the bar.

And I'm done with the voice activated projector.

So, essentially, so the Department of Faith and Inspections has identified several of these as those are all violations of either the city code or of the license conditions.

So essentially, um, we can, the department can pursue an adverse action whenever there is a basis for such, and a basis is a violation, can be a violation of the license conditions, or it can be a basis is also when the licensee has created a serious danger to the public health, safety, or welfare, or the licensee performs or has performed their work in an activity that is on safe in a way that is unsafe.

And so that's what we see here because the licensee does have a metal detector that has identified likely weapons and has not acted on that identification, and that is an unsafe business practice.

So the department is recommending the imposition of first of all the matrix penalty.

That is standard.

It is about $500.

I think Mr.

Welms has something to say.

Thank you, Council President.

Sorry to interrupt.

But I've been made aware that council member Kim is not able to see the voice activated projector.

So I will need to take a copy and send it to her so she can see this.

Yes, so they are the photos that I showed.

Thank you so much.

I'm sorry about that.

The photos that I showed are in exhibit one that is attached to the resolution.

The photos are on pages 17 through 20 of that exhibit.

The photos are numbered five through 12.

Looks like we're getting the thumbs up from Miss Kim.

So awesome.

Good to proceed.

Thank you.

So those photos, so those photos identify the violation of a license condition, which provide one's basis.

Then the second legal basis is this unsafe manner.

So the license code is really clear that a first violation, which this is, is $500 matrix penalty.

The department also has the ability and the discretion to recommend the imposition of additional or amended conditions, and that's what they've done here.

They've recommended three conditions be amended for the license.

The amendment of a condition can take place during an adverse action, which is what this is, and the amendment of a condition is appropriate when the amendment is reasonable, and the purpose of the amendment is to promote the public health, safety and welfare, or advance the public peace and eliminate conditions or actions that constitute a nuisance or a detriment to the peaceful enjoyment of urban life, or promoting security and safety in nearby neighborhoods.

So it's a pretty broad basis, right, to try and protect our communities.

So there are three amendments recommended, and those are all in exhibit two.

So the first amendment is to condition number one, and that is what we call a camera condition.

So a camera condition is on a lot of licenses, and it requires surveillance, like we have here from this footage that I showed you stills from.

And it allows us to see what's happening in the bar, but especially it's useful for the police officers when there is a report of a crime, or again, if there's a report of license violations, the Department of Safety and Inspections can pursue that.

Ultimately, the amendment to this condition brings this condition in line with updated modern video surveillance systems, and also what is on most other bars like this.

So essentially, it requires that the cameras be surveilling 24 hours a day, that the footage be maintained for about 30 days or more, so the department or the police can ask for it in case they're alerted to something that's happened.

And it also requires that there be a camera plan.

So the plan is approved by the Department of Safety and Inspections and the police.

So that way we can ensure that there is no blind spot and that there's not that we're not gonna miss something right in the identification.

And this is reasonable and the condition promotes public safety, security, and peace to ensure accountability.

The second amendment is to condition two, and that is requiring that that is improving the security condition.

So currently the security officer has to be present, as I told you.

However, we are amending the department is recommending that the council amend that condition so that it requires the proper use of that metal detector, so that when an alert goes off that there might be a weapon, the security officer needs to respond accordingly to that.

Then it also is going to impose that the security officer ID using photo IDs of anybody who comes to the bar.

And that connects to the third amendment, which is condition number seven, has a photo ID requirement.

So this is requiring the licensee to scan all of the photo IDs that are coming in.

It's a state or federal ID so that there is a photo ID to match that, and then keep that access, keep that information again so that if there is an incident that happens, they the police or the department can go and obtain that data from the bar to make sure that they are able to obtain witnesses or um identify burp traders or things like that if there are crimes that might be suspected or other violations around.

So all of these conditions are reasonable.

The department asserts that they are reasonable and that they all will promote public safety, security, and peace for the neighborhood.

So for that reason, the department respectfully requests that the council impose the $500 matrix penalty and these three condition amendments.

Thanks so much for Schaefer.

Not too long, not too short.

I think just right.

Um, in my own personal opinion.

Like Goldilocks, Goldilocks, right?

Questions from a Schaefer before we hear from the uh licensee.

Doesn't look like it.

All right, thank you so much.

Don't go too far.

Um we will now have it's not a public hearing, but we'll give the licensee five minutes to speak to us on their own behalf.

So if you are the licensee and you're here, please come on up.

Start with your name and where you're coming from, and then you'll have five minutes to testify to the council.

Hello, counsel, Alex Rivero, owner of St.

Paul Salone.

Um there was just a lot that was taken.

I'm not as prepared as she is.

Um, there was just a lot of facts that weren't given to you guys that aren't accurate.

She said there was multiple shootings in the bar, but there wasn't.

I've never had an issue for the time that I've owned the bar, the whole 10 years I've owned it.

Um, the guy that came in, which the pictures don't show, once he went in, my actual security guard would usually have is a badge, which after I talked to the city guy that came to talk to me, which he actually noticed in the actual video when I slowed it down on my own camera.

But with that being said, the guy comes into the thing, the metal detector that I put up is something that when Jane Prince was a council member, I used to work very closely with, so we used to have meetings monthly that kind of went out the window when she was gone.

I used to get a lot of support from the police.

That's been gone.

Um three weeks before this incident even happened.

I had called again, because usually I had a number downtown, which nobody answers apparently no more.

Where I would say, hey, can you guys send squads in?

Since we got that new train bus thing put in there, it's been chaotic.

Like we've gotten a lot of traffic coming in from definitely from different bars, different places, uh, borns being closed.

That didn't help our situation any.

So we had to, I found myself closing on Sundays.

I haven't open on Sundays for over three months.

Uh I closed my bar at 12 o'clock at night instead of one, like I'm required.

Um my security, I did get them a security best to wear.

The metal detector that I put in on my own is because I felt that the community needed safety and protection.

It's not really a metal detector.

The lights and stuff that go off is more for a show because I couldn't afford to get a high-class metal detector.

So the one I got is anything you wear, if you have keys, anything you have, it'll just ring.

So when this guy rushes in, is what the video that's the picture she has doesn't show.

He literally pulls out a gun, which jams.

He doesn't get a shot off.

The guy that was on the other side of the bar, which I had they had the video footage, and I don't see it here either.

He comes in through the side of the patio, I'd say a half hour before this guy even shows up, was sitting there, he fires two shots at the other guy that came in to shoot them, it hits my machines.

This guy runs out, this guy runs after them to shoot outside.

My security runs to the door, slams the door shut, locks it.

After they're having whatever altercation, the same guy that did the shooting that shot two shots inside, runs.

You can see him on my video footage trying to get into the camera through the front door, runs down the street, therefore the other guy on jams is gun apparently, shoots shots outside.

That's where he gets hit.

So he never got hit in the bar.

He it never was multiple shooting back and forth.

I mean, it was ugly situation because it not only did I lose staff behind it because it was it's just a bad deal all the way around.

Can I can I just pause you, sir, for one second, and we'll stop your time, which I know you can't see, but we are timing over here.

Um, Ms.

Schaefer, I thought that you had said that the uh licensee did not contest the facts, but was contesting the penalty.

I just want to clarify because it sounds like sir, you're contesting some of the facts that were shared, and we expected that you were acknowledging the facts and contesting the penalty that we're talking about, and so I just because there's two different paths, and I just want to make sure.

Yeah, the email that I received from the DSI was that you were admitting to the facts, the challenging the penalty itself.

Yeah, what I literally told him because he came to my office, because I've always had the same camera footage.

I was like, hey, I can go through this with you and we can sit down, and we both agreed that the whole situation that she just said that there was multiple shootings, that's not exactly what just happened.

So I don't know if I'm just being strayed one way, and that's the only option I have.

I just know I got a paper saying, hey, they're trying to penalize you, they're trying to have you buy this scanner thing that costs 4500 bucks.

I'm like, dude, we don't have that kind of resources.

I have a security guard that's at the front door.

The incident happened because the guy got through the back.

I've locked the gates and chained them since then.

Like I've took my own steps already.

And when she says to have a plan for the camera, like my camera system is one of the best camera systems down there.

Like the police have come and said, hey, every time we come to your place, we can see if somebody has a penny that's been dropped.

So if they need license plates, I've never had like the issue with the plan.

So I think the plan of the camera system has always been in place as far as I was aware of.

So it's one of those things where I don't have a lot of help, I guess, to figure out where which way to go, or if I even have an option.

I was just coming down and say, yes, the incident that happened happened.

The guy shot off two shots, but it wasn't like she just explained.

It wasn't a shootoff, like that never happened.

The guy's guy, you can clearly see on the video, his gun jams, he runs out out of fear, and then it just got uglier after that.

But police got we got names.

I had to go to testify for this thing already, where the guy admitted, you know, our camera footage, he's been locked up.

The other guys, they're still looking for because he's on the run.

I'm I was just told.

I don't really know what I can do at this point.

I just know they were trying to give us, you know, penalties.

Uh, it just seems like I was getting everything thrown at us, and it was nothing that we could really control.

Like, I don't know what to do at this point, I guess.

So, sir, first of all, thank you.

I I totally hear hear what you're saying and hear the confusion.

Um what I'm gonna suggest with my colleagues' uh permission is I think it would be really helpful to give you and Ms.

Schaefer time to talk outside about the different options here because we are not actually in the position of being able to evaluate the fact claims that you're making, and if there is a question about what actually happened, um that goes through a different process, and I want Ms.

Schaefer to be able to have time to explain that to you sort of outside of this room right now, this formal process, and then come back and decide what you want to do.

Because in this particular room, all we can do is take facts that have been agreed upon and decide what the penalty should be.

And it sounds like we're not there yet.

So, with my colleague's permission, I think I'd like to um pause on this item essentially, give you both time to talk, and then we'll come back to it.

Yeah, if that's okay.

Okay, if that's okay.

Yeah, that's absolutely fine.

Okay, so thank you.

Thank you so much.

Yep, thank you all.

Okay, good.

Yeah, okay.

Yeah, okay.

Move on.

Item 19.

Or should we though?

Yeah, okay.

I'll make a motion to pause the item.

Is it being withdrawn from today or is it just I think they'll just come back in a minute once they talked?

Okay.

Uh, and and reorder the agenda.

I guess it's my motion.

Okay.

Roll call, please.

Yes.

Kim.

I.

Yang.

Aye.

Bowie.

Hi.

Bowie.

I'm sorry.

Coleman.

Hi.

Johnson.

Jost.

Yes.

Council President Naker.

Aye.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The item is paused and the agenda is reordered.

We'll move on to item 19, ordinance 26-25, amending chapter 66 of the legislative code to correct a scrivenor's error related to allowing additional lot coverage for providing functional green roof space.

And for our millions of viewers at home, and for those who are here today, anyone who doesn't follow us every week, we have three weeks at least to adopt an ordinance.

We have a first reading where we get a staff report, a second reading where we have a public hearing, and at the last week we or subsequent weeks, we finally adopt the item.

So anything here before us for final adoption has already been heard and considered at least twice before.

This item is before us for final adoption.

I will take a motion from Ms.

Jose to approve.

Any discussion of that motion?

Seeing none roll call, please.

Kim.

Hi.

Yang.

Hi.

Hi.

Coleman.

Aye.

Johnson.

Aye.

Jost.

Yes.

Council President Naker.

Aye.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The ordinance is adopted.

Item 20, ordinance 26-26, updating chapter 310 of the legislative code pertaining to uniform license procedures to extend payment of license renewal fees owed in calendar year 2026.

And I will move approval of this item.

I want to thank my legislative aide, Megan Jackett, and all of the small business owners who came out to testify about this before, and basically advocate for this to happen.

This is yet another one of the actions this council is taking in response to Operation Metro Surge.

The fact that so many of our small business owners, our immigrant-owned businesses, were deeply impacted, and that those impacts are continuing to be felt, will continue to be felt.

And one of the asks to the city was at least don't be part of the problem.

At least don't impose these thousands of dollars of like renewal fees at a time when we're already suffering so much.

And so I'm glad that we are getting to this point where today we'll be able, hopefully, with my colleagues' support, to extend the payment of these renewal fees and essentially not require those fees to be paid throughout this calendar year until next year.

So hoping that this can be another small step that the city can take to mitigating the impacts that these business owners are experiencing.

So I'll move approval.

Any discussion of the item?

Seeing none, roll call, please.

Kim.

Aye.

Yang.

Aye.

Bowie.

Coleman.

Aye.

Johnson.

Aye.

Joast.

Yes.

Council President Acre.

Aye.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The ordinance is adopted.

Item 21 is resolution public hearing 26-105.

Approving the petition of the Department of Parks and Rec on behalf of the City of St.

Paul to vacate the public right of way Morton Street in Baker Playground.

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

When I call your public hearing, come on up and stand between the two microphones.

You'll have two minutes to testify, and please sign in when you're done.

This is a public hearing on item 21.

Is there anyone here to speak on this item?

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

Roll call, please.

Kim.

Aye.

Yang.

Bowie.

Coleman.

Aye.

Johnson.

Aye.

Joast.

Council President Naker.

Aye.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item 22, resolution public hearing 26-11.

Authorizing the Department of Parks and Rec to accept additional grant funding in the amount of 43,745 from the state of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to support St.

Paul's Tree Planting Program.

This is a public hearing.

Is there anyone here to speak on this item?

I will say Yay Trees.

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

Joast to close the public hearing and approve.

Roll call, please.

Kim.

Aye.

Yang.

Bowie.

Coleman.

Aye.

Johnson.

Aye.

Joast.

Council President Naker.

Aye.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item 23, resolution public hearing 26-112.

Approving the application of OSP events for a sound level variance in order to present amplified sound for the Lower Town Sounds event series on Thursdays in June with the potential addition of Thursdays in August at 221 Fifth Street East Mears Park.

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.

Roll call, please.

Kim.

Aye.

Yang.

Aye.

Bowie.

Aye.

Coleman.

Aye.

Johnson.

Aye.

Joast.

Council President Acre.

Aye.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Item 24, resolution public hearing 26-116, authorizing the police department to accept the donation from the Ramsey County Chiefs of Police Association, which is designated for officer travel costs when representing the police department at the National Police Week in Washington, D.C.

This is a public hearing.

Is there anyone here to speak on this item?

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

Johnson to close the public hearing and approve.

Roll call, please.

Yang.

I'm sorry, Kim.

Aye.

Yang.

Bowie.

Aye.

Coleman.

Aye.

Johnson.

Aye.

Joast.

Council President Naker.

Aye.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

That brings us to the legislative hearing consent agenda section, which I will let Ms.

Linder actually read.

Legislative hearing consent agenda items 25 through 32 are before you for your consideration.

Welcome.

Thank you.

It's about the same as Mormon.

It flows very naturally.

Good afternoon, Council President.

Council members.

As of right now, I'm not aware of anyone here to testify on a legislative hearing item.

Alright, thank you.

In that case, we will hold a public hearing on any and all of the legislative hearing items.

If you're here for items 25 through 32, this is your public hearing.

Please come on up.

Seeing none, I'll take a motion from Vice President Yang to close the public hearings and approve the legislative hearing items with all amendations and recommendations of the legislative hearing legislative hearing officer.

Uh roll call, please.

Kim.

Aye.

I Yang.

Aye.

Bowie.

Aye.

Coleman.

Aye.

Johnson.

Aye.

Joost.

Yes.

Council President Acre.

Aye.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The legislative hearing consent agenda is adopted as amended.

Brings us to the end of our agenda.

Doesn't look like our guests are back quite yet.

So we have to do what?

Oh, when we when we get to it.

Or you're saying just do it later.

Okay.

Are they coming?

Are they ready or not?

Okay.

Why don't we do any news from the wards while we wait?

And then if we get to the point where we oh.

Yes.

Hi.

Hi.

Alright.

So I'm gonna take a motion for Ms.

Johnson to recall.

Take out of order recall.

To take out of order number 18.

Uh roll call, please.

Kim.

Hi.

Yang.

Here.

Aye.

Bowie.

What is this?

We're recalling this item.

Oh, recalling.

Okay, I.

I.

Thank you.

Coleman.

Hi, Johnson.

Hi.

Jost.

Council President Acre.

Aye.

Okay, so there's a couple different options for how to proceed.

So Mr.

Rivero agrees to the essential pieces of this that there was gunfire that happened in the in the bar on this evening.

And that the security officer was not wearing visible was not visibly identifiable.

And so my understanding is that essentially he's challenging any monetary impacts that these conditions are going to have on his business.

Yes.

And that's what he objects to about these conditions.

So unfortunately, we can't really negotiate conditions at this point.

So he has a couple options.

He can choose to ask if the city council would be willing to lay this over for him to try to talk to DSI some more about these particular conditions.

I've also told him that he has also, even if these conditions are imposed, he can still work with DSI to come into compliance with these new conditions if that's what happens.

And then the city council, he can also argue that any one of these possible penalties, right?

The $500 fine or amendments to one, two, or seven, not be imposed.

So then he could ask city council to, for instance, not impose the amendment to condition number seven that requires the um ID scanner that you said is like 4500 dollars or something like that.

So um, so I think those are really his options.

He seems, I think in this hallway you said you didn't want to go to an ALJ.

What's that the court thing?

Yeah, well that's not expensive.

We definitely don't have that.

Yeah, so that is unfortunately.

So those those are the options that are.

I guess I just put it in your guys' hands.

I at this point I don't really know what to do.

I've taken, I feel like I've taken actions like a poll Sundays.

I have uh try to make it as safe as I can.

I just I don't know what else to do at this point.

Thank you.

Thank you both.

I think we'll look to Ms.

Johnson for any questions or a motion, and we can step aside and we will.

Yes.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Yes, but don't go too far.

Um, so uh because just to understand, I um one of the things that I had a question about was around the comment earlier that was like you had not had an issue with this before.

Um, and I'm just wondering if you've seen issues with weaponry since, and if you've had struggle, if you've had a problem or had someone had not no incidents, um, since they put that bust thing in there, it's been a nightmare.

So you've had no instances where weapons have been seen or discovered or police calls about weapons.

No.

Oh, because I've lived there myself pretty much now since that happened.

Okay, so one of the things that I think was really important to kind of share with you is just like um, it is my understanding, however, that there has been some challenges around weapons on site um with police calls since this happened in November, um, as early as March of this year.

Um, that that the call that was there was not.

I'm so sorry, we're we're not gonna have a back and forth.

I think please just wait until Ms.

Johnson asks you a question.

Thank you.

Yes.

Um, and then I guess I just wanted to know a little bit more about um you shared that your metal detector that you have on site is more so for show and does not currently operate.

Is that correct?

Yeah, like it operates, but it operates where if you have anything keys, you have whatever, it just goes off.

And it kind of alerts the bartender and all, like, hey, somebody who's walking in, uh, besides having an ID in the morning, because we even do it in the morning time.

You ask for ID, I raise the right the scale from 21 to 25 plus.

Like if unless you're 25, you still can't get in the bar.

Okay, and then as a um, one of the things that I think uh that came up in the public comment section as well on this this item is quasi-judicial, so I think it's really important to share what what is in the record as well.

Um, security guards do or do not respond even when it goes off around keys or any other thing.

The way he's got it set up or the way that it was set up is if it's got lights on the side, it makes a sound.

If it's four, four more light ups, then you know it's something very heavy.

So then technically it could be either weapon or something, you know, that could cause a problem.

If it all lights up twice, then you know it's usually keys.

So he kind of knows how it works now because I've been there with them.

I've done it security myself, and I know if it's lights up like all the way up, you know, there's a problem.

Like some is either trying to get in with something really heavy or a weapon or something of that sort.

And that's something that I found on social media, Facebook marketplace myself just to implement because I just felt like the little wand thing that we usually use is something people can just get past.

You know, if you gotta make first and you're checking through, they can hide it in so many different places.

Okay.

Thank you.

And then Miss Schaefer, um, those are all my questions for you.

Thank you so much.

Um, Miss Schaefer, I just have a question around the uh the different add-ons to the conditions.

Is this would you said the the conditions that are imposed are conditions that are standard for places, or is this as a result of the issue that's happened that is why they're being put in place, or is this something that you might require, say of that of a bar opening nowadays uh as well?

Yeah, so the camera condition, which is condition number one, the amendments, the proposed amendments to that condition are standard for any bar.

That's what I usually see on these licenses now.

Um, as for the metal or the security condition, and the um, thank you, the ID condition, condition seven.

So the can the security condition is almost completely standard.

The change is because there is a metal detector here that he chose to put in is just really requiring that that be used properly.

Um, and then the sec the seventh condition for photo IDs.

Um, I can't say it speak to how that's being used because I have not um I didn't write that condition, and I don't know um how that works.

Um, but I know that especially like tobacco shops require things like that.

Um, and that's so I'm not sure unfortunately about whether it's been used on other bars.

Thank you.

Um, yes, I I think uh one of the things that I I understand just kind of what has been shared, and I do appreciate you both being here um today to talk about this and you all having conversations as well, uh, just to ensure that our um, you know, all of our business owners, I think should know exactly what is what is happening and what their next steps should be, kind of understanding the conditions.

I think those are really important.

And um, you know, I think uh what I will share with you is that as a council member, it's my job also to represent the community in which your business is located.

Often I have heard and been a part of um conversations and community discussions about the saloon.

And I want to be transparent with you just with what is shared.

What's concerning is you have a metal detector that's in place, it was going off the facts that are here, show a security guard on site not responding to a situation.

If I'm going just off of what is factually agreed upon with the two of you, that's concerning to say the least.

And so when I hear the opportunity for Department of City inspections to work with you on this matter, I also appreciate being able to do so after this is put forward uh as the council member in the area, because you mentioned just having a prior relationship with council member prints.

Um I represent the ward now, and I'm looking forward to uh hearing then speaking with you, especially around just some of the challenges that you've uplifted.

Cause I do think that there has been several community conversations prior to the gold line.

I was still hearing those same concerns.

And since you've owned the building since 2016, um that's even before the gold line.

I think there's an opportunity to hear what you've done in the past and then what we can do now to prevent something like this from ever happening in your business again.

That was very concerning for a lot of folks that live nearby.

But also, um, you know, what is even more so, I think something to think and consider about any time there is aggravated assaults, disturbance calls, harassment phone calls, uh weapons on site, um, or other things that have been brought up post that incident.

Um I think that that is just something that we should be in better partnership overall with the city on, including the St.

Paul Police Department and the Department of Safety and Inspections.

So with that, I will move approval of uh the recommendation and of the resolution as is um with the conditions imposed.

Okay.

So the motion is for approval of the recommendation of the uh city attorney's office on behalf of the Department of Safety Inspections.

Um discussion on that motion.

Doesn't look like it.

Okay, um, roll call.

Kim.

I.

Yang.

Aye, Bowie, aye, Coleman.

Hi, Johnson.

Hi, Joast.

Yes, Council President Acre.

Aye.

Seven in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

All right, thank you all for the reordering.

Um, that brings us to the end of our agenda, and I'm looking to my colleagues to see if there is news from the wards.

And I see Ms.

Coleman is ready.

I'm ready.

I pulled this up like 10 minutes ago.

I look like I've been on Instagram forever.

Um, the Hamlin Midway Coalition is hosting the Mighty Midway Festival event this Saturday, uh, May 16th, 1 o'clock to 4 o'clock.

It'll be at Hancock Rec Center, also using uh the Hamlin Elementary Field.

It's free, rain or shine, afternoon of entertainment, food, games, a bake sale, community expo, and more.

So looking forward to that.

Exciting.

Vice President.

Thanks, Council President, the Elders Lodge and my ward is hosting their spring swing.

They're inviting community members to join them in celebrating and blessing their community garden.

There will be food, a musical quartet, connection time with neighbors and friends, and time to welcome the spring together.

Also a shared moment of gratitude for the renewal and growth of the garden.

So this is on Thursday, May 21st from 5 p.m.

to 6 30 p.m.

in their backyard.

Ms.

Johnson.

And our office will be it's this time of the year where we have provided uh last year as well as this year a Hamsbury redevelopment update.

So our office will be hosting that in um coordination with the developer of the site, JB Ving and his team on Monday, May 18th from 5:30 to 7 at Hope Academy.

Uh, we did a similar event last year, and so we look forward to being able to provide an update on the largest redevelopment project in our ward.

Very exciting.

Miss Bowie.

Thank you, Chair Johnson.

Or Chair Johnson, excuse me.

Um, President Acre.

Uh for news from my ward next week, actually on Tuesday, May 19th from 5 to 7 p.m.

I believe I'll be in um President Acre, your ward, ward two.

For we are in this together as a town hall on uh protecting residents um and also the election.

So police chief Alex Henry, um, St.

Paul Mayor, uh uh Mayor Her.

Also, we have Ramsey County Attorney John Choi and myself will be joining a panel just talking about election protection um in the midst of Operation Search.

So that would take place.

I'm looking for it looks like you have to register for the address, um, but it's also on my newsletter, and I'll be sharing it on social media.

Great.

Um, Miss Kim.

Thank you.

Um Ray Slarpender is hold hosting in bloom this Saturday at McCarran's 1 to 3 p.m.

There's also the Como community garage sale that's happening the 14th through the 17th.

And hot off the press, uh, the state legislature approved uh 40 million dollars of rental assistance today, in fact, in a supermajority of both chambers.

So um, Chair Johnson, I'll be reaching out to you uh right now to see how we help position the city to ensure that we receive some funds for residents in St.

Paul.

That is the best news I've heard all day.

Um I will share that this Sunday from 12 to 2 at Harriet Island, new location this year.

The St.

Paul Summer Choice Fair is happening.

This was something that um Parks and Rec department and I worked on to try to get more young people aware of all the different amazing opportunities available in the summer, and all of the different providers who come not only come to talk about what they have, but they also commit to saving spots so that uh in case your parent or guardian wasn't online on December 25th at like midnight trying to get you a spot this summer.

Um, you can still have lots of fun things to do, and it's amazing how many things are available in our community.

So please spread the word 12 to 2 free fun and a great way to learn about stuff going on this summer, and I'll be there.

Ms.

Johnson, did you have another question?

Yeah, I was just gonna share that this time tomorrow the tenant protections ordinance will be in place and um one of the things that has come from a whole year of implementation has been the partnership um between the city and multiple departments and ensuring that when this is this ordinance kicks off that it's able to do that and uh full ability and so we had our community event last week on tenant protections but the ordinance itself goes into effect tomorrow folks want to get more information on that they can just go to St.

Paul dot governant protections and so that's where the website is and you can also see the information about the ordinance folks can you know ask any questions that they have that is there and they also hired a uh tenant protections staff member who was present at the community event um but who uh will also be a part of the team when it comes to enforcement so super excited about that and it's been a long time waiting but tomorrow is the first day of it being in effect.

With 45 40 million dollars of emergency rental systems from the state.

Great lots of good news around the table and a lot of good news that correlates to each other so with that thank you all so much for a good meeting we are adjourned.