Saint Paul HRA Meeting: Environmental Covenants and Commercial Corridor Guidelines - January 21, 2026
Saint Paul Housing & Redevelopment Authority Meeting - January 21, 2026
The Housing & Redevelopment Authority (HRA) Board of Commissioners met on January 21, 2026, at 2:00 PM in City Hall Council Chambers. Vice Chair Saura Jost chaired the meeting in the absence of Chair Cheniqua Johnson and Commissioner Molly Coleman, who were excused. The board discussed two items: a resolution authorizing the executive director to execute environmental covenants and easements without prior board approval, and an update on the Saint Paul Commercial Corridors program guidelines. The meeting adjourned at 2:33 PM.
Discussion Items
-
RES 26-125 – Authorizing Executive Director to Execute Environmental Covenants: Interim Executive Director Melanie McMahon explained that the resolution would allow the executive director to consent to and execute environmental covenants and easements required by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) after remediation on projects where the HRA is a lender. Commissioner Anika Bowie asked for examples of projects and sought clarification on oversight, noting the board's environmental justice goals. Commissioner Nelsie Yang asked if there were any concerns about approving the delegation. McMahon and Vice Chair Jost described the item as a technical streamlining measure, noting that the board had never denied such covenants and that the MPCA mandates the forms. The resolution was adopted by a vote of 5-0 (Commissioners Noecker, Yang, Bowie, Jost, Kim in favor; Commissioners Johnson and Coleman absent).
-
SR 26-8 – Saint Paul Commercial Corridors Updated Program Guidelines: Senior Project Manager Annie Byrne presented recommended changes following the 2025 pilot year. Key proposals included:
- Extending the boundaries of three corridors (Ford Parkway, Como and Dale, Smith Avenue) to capture additional businesses.
- Removing the Smith Avenue corridor from the program due to its small commercial base (38 businesses, 74% residential land use).
- Adjusting award sizes based on number of businesses (medium: <300 businesses; large: >300 businesses) rather than a flat rate, with higher amounts for corridors in areas of concentrated poverty (ACP).
- Removing operational support as an eligible use of business subgrants, though staff noted this was under review following guidance from the city attorney's office.
- Adding flexibility for minor programmatic changes via the CAO amendment process, moving from annual to program guidelines, and renaming the program to the “St. Paul Commercial Corridors Program.”
Commissioners discussed the metrics for categorizing corridors. Commissioner Rebecca Noecker questioned whether business density, vacancy rates, or corridor length might be better metrics than raw business count, and suggested an index. Commissioner Bowie emphasized cultural corridors and partnerships with organizations like Springboard for the Arts. Commissioner Yang raised concerns about the removal of operational support, noting that businesses are struggling due to Ida construction and revenue loss, and asked if a legislative change or alternative funding (e.g., the Business Assistance Fund) could be used. Director McMahon clarified that the city attorney's office would provide a memo by the end of the week detailing the legal basis for operational support eligibility. Commissioner Noecker cited a prior memo from the city attorney's office confirming that economic development STAR funds could be used for operations and requested consistent guidance. The board received the report and filed it, with the next discussion scheduled for February 11, 2026.
Key Outcomes
- RES 26-125 adopted (5-0): The executive director is authorized to execute environmental covenants and easements without prior board approval for projects where the HRA is a lender.
- SR 26-8 received and filed: The board will revisit the guidelines on February 11, 2026, after receiving additional information from the city attorney’s office on operational support eligibility and further analysis of corridor categorization metrics.
- No public comments were received.
Meeting Transcript
Yang? Here. Johnson. Vice Chair Jost. Here. There are five present and two absent, that being Commissioners Johnson and Coleman, and they are excused. Item number one for discussion is resolution RES twenty-six-125. Authorizing the execute authorizing the executive director of the City of St. Paul Housing and Redevelopment Authority to consent and to execute without prior HRA board approval any environmental covenants and easements concerning projects for which the HRA is a lender citywide. Is there any discussion? Yeah. Discussion and also is it open for questions? No. Just excuse me if there was like a briefing prior to this. I um was not aware of it, but I do want to just ask the question, particularly around, so we just kind of know in the context of how we're voting. Um, you know, oversight is really important. We all know that we have some really strong environmental justice goals and climate justice goals, uh, particularly with this. Can you give an example of like how like how this item an example of like a project that came before us? Because I'm just trying to just understand like what we are streamlining, streamlining, and like if this is just a um uh a fix to a technical problem, or if you know also just sharing what is the level of oversight for certain um projects that you know require a change in the covenant. Sure. Chair Joseph, Commissioner Bowie. Um, I'll give maybe more of a general and see if the attorney maybe has any specific examples. Um not thinking specific, I think, because there are so many generals. So after a project has happened on a project, perhaps we're we're involved in the financing. We have to approve that. So that's a lot of the oversight that this board does is approving the financing and improving our investment in that redevelopment project. That project then would complete remediation, and PCA again is the oversight and jurisdiction body for that. As a matter, again, uh to me, it's more of a tech, I would categorize it as more of a technical thing. As an end to that remediation, they might require a covenant on the land. The covenant would go through the city attorney's office, they would review and approve it for additional oversight, and usually it's something that that type of thing often the executive director can sign to authorize. We previously have been going to the board for them individually and thought it made a lot more sense to give that authority to the executive director to sign. Um Council Marine, did you have a question? Oh, things, Chair Joles. Yeah, I do have a question. I think those are really great questions, Councilman Blue. So thank you for asking them. Um like I'm the type of person where examples are really helpful, and so I appreciate the question. I I also was just wondering, Director McMahon, if you can share, like, is there is there any reason why we shouldn't approve this? Are there any concerns at all that that we should know about before we make a decision? I do remember um if the environment requests around the environmental covenants and eastern easements coming our way, and I don't think we've ever um I don't think we have ever not approved them, you know, and so I I don't see an issue with it, but just want to make sure I understand more. Yeah. Director Vice Chair Josephs, Commissioner Yang. Um, I don't have any issues with it. It's really for an ease of operations to be able to have them after remediation is completed. These are often required by the MPCA and the form is required. We don't really have a choice. The remediation is completed, it's simply one of the mechanisms that the MPCA uses. Thank you. Thanks, Councilman. Yeah, and thank you for your thank you for your questions.
openpublica.com